Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007/12/05 - Agenda Packet1C~ r~ lb x ,~ 10500 Civic Center Drive ~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730-3801 city office: ~sos~ an-2700 AGENDAS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETINGS 15~ and 3rd Wednesdays ~ 7:00 P.M. DECEMBER 5, 2007 MEMBERS MAYOR MAYOR PRO TEM COUNCIL MEMBERS Donald J. Kurth, M.D. Diane Williams Rex Gutierrez L. Dennis Michael Sam Spagnolo CITY MANAGER CITY ATTORNEY CITY CLERK Jack Lam, AICP James L. Markman Debra J. Adams, CMC ORDER OF BUSINESS CLOSED SESSION Tapia Conference Room............ 5:30 P.M. REGULAR MEETING Council Chambers ........................ 7:00 P.M. `~: INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC - RANCHO ~ ~ CUCAIdONOA TO ADDRESS THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY. FIRE BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL The Agency, Fire Board and City Council encourage free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the Agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Agency, Fire Board or City Council by filling out a speaker card and submitting it to the City Clerk. The speaker cards are located on the wall at the back of the Chambers, at the front desk behind the staff table and at the City Clerk's desk. During "Public Communications,' your name will be called to speak on any item listed or not listed on the agenda in the order in which it was received. If you are present to speak on an "Advertised Public Hearing" item, your name will be called when that item is being discussed. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. The public communications period will not exceed one hour prior to the commencement of the business portion of the agenda. During this one hour period, all those who wish to speak on a topic contained in the business portion of the agenda will be given priority, and no further speaker cards for these business items (with the exception of public hearing items) will be accepted once the business portion of the agenda commences. Any other public communications which have not concluded during this one hour period may resume after the regular business portion of the agenda has been completed. Any handouts for the Agency, Fire Board or City Council should be given to the City Clerk for distribution AGENDA BACK-UP MATERIALS Staff reports and back-up materials for agenda items are available for review at the City Clerk's counter, Public Library and on the Citys website. A complete copy of the agenda is also available at the desk located behind the staff table during the Council meeting. LIVE BROADCAST Agency, Fire Board and Council meetings are broadcast live on Channel 3 for those with cable television access. Meetings are rebroadcast on the second and fourth Wednesdays of each month at 11:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. The City has added the option for customers without cable access to view the meetings "on-demand" from their computers. The added feature of "Streaming Video On Demand" is available on the City's website at www.ci.rancho- cucamonga.ca.us/whatsnew.htm for those with Hi-bandwidth (DSUCable Modem) or Low-bandwidth (Dial-up) Internet service. The Agency, Fire Board and City Council meets regularly on the first and third Wednesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers located at 10500 Civic Center Drive. Members of the City Council also sit as the Redevelopment Agency and the Fire District Board. Copies of the agendas and minutes can be found at http:llwww.ci.rancho-cucamonga.ca.us ® If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, Please contact the City Clerk's office at (909) 477-2700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, - FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND CITY COUNCIL AGENDA C~°oxcn DECEMBER 5, 2007 A. 5:30 P.M. -CLOSED SESSION CALL TO ORDER - TAPIA ROOM 1. Roll Call: Mayor Kurth Mayor Pro Tem Williams Councilmembers Gutierrez, Michael and Spagnolo CLOSED SESSION CALLED TO ORDER AS THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY B. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM S C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM S D. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSION 1. CONFERENCE WITH PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8 FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD BETWEEN HERMOSA AVENUE, AND CENTER AVENUE. LINDA D. DANIELS, RDA DIRECTOR, NEGOTIATING PARTY-RDA E. CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTS F. RECESS CLOSED SESSION TO RECESS TO THE REGULAR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING AT 7:00 P.M. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT CITY HALL, LOCATED AT 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, - FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND CITY COUNCIL AGENDA C~oNC~ DECEMBER 5, 2007 2 G. REGULAR MEETING CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS THE REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND CITY COUNCIL WILL BE CALLED TO ORDER. IT IS THE INTENT TO CONCLUDE THE MEETINGS BY 10:00 P.M., UNLESS EXTENDED BY CONCURRENCE OF THE AGENCY, FIRE BOARD AND COUNCIL. 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call: Mayor Kurth Mayor Pro Tem Williams Councilmembers Gutierrez, Michael and Spagnolo H. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS 1. Presentation of a check to the City in the amount of $6,500.00 for the Pacific Electric Trail Enhancement Program. I. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Redevelopment Agency, Fire Protection District and City Council on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Agency, Fire Board, or City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Agency, Fire Board, or City Council may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Agency, Fire Board or City Council, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. The public communications period will not exceed one hour prior to the commencement of the business portion of the agenda. During this one hour period, all those who wish to speak on a topic contained in the business portion of the agenda will be given priority, and no further speaker cards for these business items (with the exception of public hearing items) will be accepted once the business portion of the agenda commences. Any other public communications which have not concluded during this one hour period may resume after the regular business portion of the agenda has been completed. 1. Presentation from Bill Postmus, San Bernardino County Assessor. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, - FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND CITY COUNCIL AGENDA C~' oNCn DECEMBER 5, 2007 3 J. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS CITY COUNCIL & FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT The following items have been advertised andlor posted as public hearings as required by law. The Mayor will open the meeting to receive public testimony. 1. CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ~ DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540 - PITASSI ARCHITECTS FOR THE NORTHTOWN HOUSING AUTHORITY CORPORATION - A request to develop 225 workforce apartment units on 12.87 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 units per acre), located at 13233 Foothill Boulevard, west of the Etiwanda San Sevaine Flood Control Channel, and east of the Southern California Edison Transmission Line Corridor -APN: 0229-041-10 CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT DRC 2007-00119 -PITASSI ARCHITECTS -Review of proposed Density Bonus Agreement (also referred to as Housing Incentive Agreement) to implement Development Review DRC2006-00540 allowing a density bonus and modifying specific development standards for the construction of 225 workforce apartment units on vacant property in Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located at 13233 Foothill Boulevard, west of the Etiwanda San Sevaine Flood Control Channel, and east of the Southern California Edison Transmission Line Corridor-APN: 0229-041-10 RESOLUTION NO. 07-269 256 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO APPROVE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540, THE DESIGN REVIEW FOR 225 WORKFORCE APARTMENT UNITS AND A COMMUNITY BUILDING ON 12.87 ACRES OF LAND IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED AT 13233 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, IN THE AREA BETWEEN THE ETIWANDA SAN SEVAINE FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL ON THE EAST, AND THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR ON THE WEST; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0229-041-10 RESOLUTION NO. 07-270 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO 270 CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING AN APPEAL AND APPROVING DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT (ALSO REFERRED TO AS HOUSING INCENTIVE AGREEMENT) DRC2007-00119, TO IMPLEMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540, ALLOWING A DENSITY BONUS AND MODIFYING SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF 225 WORKFORCE APARTMENT UNITS ON VACANT PROPERTY IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED AT 13233 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, IN THE AREA BETWEEN THE ETIWANDA SAN SEVAINE FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL ON THE EAST, AND THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR ON THE WEST -APN: 0229- 041-10; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, - FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND 4 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA C~ oNC~- DECEMBERS, 2007 2. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DECLARING ANNEXATION OF 283 TERRITORY (SANDOVAL PIPELINE ENGINEERING - APNS 0229-181-03 & 11 - ANNEXATION NO. 07-9) TO AN EXISTING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT. CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION AND AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS RESOLUTION NO. FD 07-064 285 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY (ANNEXATION NO. 07-9) TO AN EXISTING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (CFD 85-1 ), CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION AND AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS 3. CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION DECLARING ANNEXATION (ARROW RANCHO 292 PARK - APN 0229-171-23 -ANNEXATION NO. 07-10) TO AN EXISTING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION AND AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS RESOLUTION NO. FD 07-065 294 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY (ANNEXATION NO. 07-10) TO AN EXISTING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (CFD 85-1 ), CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION AND AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS 4. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DECLARING ANNEXATION OF 301 TERRITORY (CALEAST PHELAN 8 & VINEYARD, LLC - SUBTPM18794 - ANNEXATION NO. 07-8) TO AN EXISTING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT, CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION AND AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS RESOLUTION NO. FD 07-066 303 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY (ANNEXATION NO. 07-8) TO AN EXISTING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (CFD 85-1), CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION AND AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, - FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CU~OONC,- DECEMBER 5, 2007 5 THE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND THE CITY COUNCIL WILL JOINTLY CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC HEARING ITEM (#5): 5. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF THE 2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODES AND THE 2007 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE 310 312 ORDINANCE NO. 784 (Second Reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTERS 15.04, 15.12, 15.16, 15.20, 15.24, 15.28 AND 15.32 OF TITLE 15 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE, INCORPORATING THE "INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE, VOLUMES 1 AND 2," 2006 EDITION, INCLUDING APPENDICES THERETO; THE 2007 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE, INCORPORATING THE "UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE," 2006 EDITION, INCLUDING APPENDICES THERETO; THE 2007 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE, INCORPORATING THE "UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE," 2006 EDITION, INCLUDING APPENDICES THERETO; THE 2007 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE, INCORPORATING THE "NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE,' 2005 EDITION, INCLUDING APPENDICES; TOGETHER WITH CERTAIN AMENDMENTS, DELETIONS, ADDITIONS AND EXCEPTIONS CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH FINDINGS OF FACT WITH RESPECT TO LOCAL CONDITIONS WHICH MAKE CERTAIN MODIFICATIONS AND CHANGES TO THE 2007 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS CODE NECESSARY 325 RESOLUTION NO. 07-271 326 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, SETTING FORTH FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO LOCAL CONDITIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA WHICH MAKE CERTAIN MODIFICATIONS AND CHANGES TO THE 2007 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE, THE CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE, THE CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE, AND THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE NECESSARY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, - FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND CITY COUNCIL AGENDA C~°oN~ DECEMBER 5, 2007 6 ORDINANCE NO. FD 46 (Second Reading) 330 333 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2007 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE, WITH ERRATA, TOGETHER WITH CERTAIN CHANGES, MODIFICATIONS, AMENDMENTS, ADDITIONS, DELETIONS, AND EXCEPTIONS; PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF PERMITS AND COLLECTION OF FEES; AND REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH FINDINGS OF FACT AS REQUIRED BY HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 17958.7 387 RESOLUTION NO. FD 07-061 388 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, SETTING FORTH FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO LOCAL CLIMATIC, GEOLOGICAL, AND TOPOGRAPHICAL CONDITIONS WHICH MAKE CHANGES, MODIFICATIONS, AMENDMENTS, ADDITIONS, DELETIONS, AND EXCEPTIONS TO THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE REASONABLY NECESSARY K. AGENCY/FIRE BOARD/COUNCIL RESPONSES TO PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the Agency, Fire Board or City Council to respond to comments made by the general public. L. CONSENT CALENDAR-REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. They will be acted upon by the Agency at one time without discussion. Any item may be removed by an Agencymember for discussion. 1. Approval of Minutes: November 7, 2007 (Special Meeting re Anti-Smoking Regulations -Spagnolo absent) November 7, 2007 (Regular Meeting -Spagnolo absent) November 8, 2007 (Special Meeting -Fire Strategic Plan) November 21, 2007 (Cancellation of Regular Meeting) November 26, 2007 (Special Joint Meeting wIPRC - Tour of aquatics centers) REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, - FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND ^] CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Cot°c~ DECEMBER 5, 2007 2. Approval of Check Register dated October 31 through November 27, 2007, for the total 394 amount of $4,218,490.45. Authorization to reject all bids for "Epicenter Stadium Seat Replacement and Cross Aisle Waterproofing," and authorize the City Clerk to re-advertise the "Notice Inviting Bids" for 396 Epicenter Stadium Seat Replacement and Epicenter Cross Aisle Waterproofing as separate projects, to be funded from RDA Stadium Complex Capital Improvement Fund and RDA Public Improvements Fund. RESOLUTION NO. RA 07-027 A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR "EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT' AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS RESOLUTION NO. RA 07-028 A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR "EPICENTER CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING" AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS 4. Approval of Plans and Specifications for Stadium Outfield Fence Replacement and authorize the City Clerk to advertise the "Notice Inviting Bids" to be funded from RDA Public Improvements Fund. RESOLUTION NO. RA 07-029 A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR STADIUM OUTFIELD FENCE REPLACEMENT AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS 5. Approval of an Architectural Services Agreement with RRM Design Group (RA 07-024) for architectural services for the Base Line Fire Station (178), located on Base Line west of Spruce, in the amount of $393,210.00, authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $39,320.00, funded from Acct. No. 2505801-565011645505-6311, and approval of a transfer of $432,530.00 (Architectural Services Agreement award not to exceed $393,210.00 plus 10% contingency in the amount of $39,320.00) from Fire Bond Reserves in Acct. No. 2660801-9505 to Acct. No. 2505000-8660 and an appropriation of $432,530.00 to Acct. No. 2505801-5650/1645505-6311. 6. Approval of modifications to Regulatory Agreements for properties located at 10244 Arrow Route (Monterey Village Apartments); 8837 Grove Avenue (Rancho Verde Village Apartments); 9181 Foothill Boulevard (Mountainside Apartments); and, 7127 Archibald Avenue (Sycamore Springs). 399 402 416 417 421 423 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, - FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND CITY COUNCIL AGENDA C~orv°cn DECEMBER 5, 2007 8 M. CONSENT CALENDAR -FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. They will be acted upon by the Fire Board atone time without discussion. Any item may be removed by a Boardmember for discussion. 7. Approval of Minutes: November 7, 2007 (Regular Meeting - Spagnolo absent) November 8, 2007 (Special Meeting -Fire Strategic Plan) November 21, 2007 (Cancellation of Regular Meeting) 8. Approval of Check Register dated October 31 through November 27, 2007, for the total 425 amount of $183,442.62. 9. Approval of a boundary map showing Parcel Number 0209-211-41 (6`" & Hermosa JPIDF, 431 LLC), located on the northwest corner of 6`" St. 8 Hermosa Avenue, to be annexed into CFD 85-1. RESOLUTION NO. FD 07-062 433 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACTING AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1, ADOPTING A BOUNDARY MAP (ANNEXATION NO. 07-11) SHOWING PROPERTY TO BE ANNEXED TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1 10. Approval to adopt a Resolution of Intention to Annex Territory referred to as Annexation No. 435 07-11 (APN: 0209-211-41; 6`" & Hermosa JP/DF, LLC), into Community Facilities District No. 85-1, specifying facilities and services provided, to set and specify the special taxes to be levied within the annexation and set a time and place for a public hearing related to the annexation. RESOLUTION NO. FD 07-063 437 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACTING AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO AUTHORIZE THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY (ANNEXATION NO. 07-11) TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, - FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND CITY COUNCIL AGENDA C ~oNCn DECEMBER 5, 2007 9 N. CONSENT CALENDAR -CITY COUNCIL The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time without discussion. Any item may be removed by a Councilmember for discussion. 11. Approval of Minutes: October 22, 2007 (Special Jt. Meeting wIPC -Kurth absent) November 7, 2007 (Special Meeting re Anti-Smoking Regulations - Spagnolo absent) November 7, 2007 (Regular Meeting - Spagnolo absent) November 8, 2007 (Special Meeting -Fire Strategic Plan) November 21, 2007 (Cancellation of Regular Meeting) November 26, 2007 (Special Joint Meeting wIPRC - Tour of aquatics centers) 12. Approval of Check Register dated October 31 through November 27, 2007, and payroll 446 ending November 27, 2007, for the total amount of $8,902,629.17. 13. Approval to authorize the advertising of the "Notice Inviting Bids" for the Highland Avenue 495 and Fairmont Wav Street Improvements from San Benito to Kenvon Wav and Highland Landscape north of Highland from San Benito to Deer Creek Channel, to be funded from Transportation and Capital Reserve Funds. RESOLUTION NO. 07-272 497 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE "HIGHLAND AVENUE AND FAIRMONT WAY STREET IMPROVEMENTS FROM SAN BENITO TO KENYON WAY AND HIGHLAND LANDSCAPE NORTH OF HIGHLAND FROM SAN BENITO TO DEER CREEK CHANNEL" IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS 14. Approval to authorize the advertising of the "Notice Inviting Bids" for the Landscape Improvements of the MWD Parkway at the southeast corner of Bluegrass Avenue and 502 Wilson Avenue, to be funded from Transportation and Beautification Funds. RESOLUTION NO. 07-273 504 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE "LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS OF THE MWD PARKWAY AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BLUEGRASS AVENUE AND WILSON AVENUE" IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, - FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ~oNCn DECEMBER 5, 2007 10 15. Approval of a resolution to request authorization from CaIPERS to provide Medicare 509 Eligibility to Non-eligible employees. RESOLUTION NO. 07-274 511 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, TO REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FROM THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM ("CaIPERS") TO DIVIDE THE RETIREMENT SYSTEM INTO TWO SECTIONS PURSUANT TO TITLE 2, CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, ARTICLE 3, DIVISION OF RETIREMENT SYSTEM FOR MEDICARE COVERAGE PURPOSES 514 16. Approval of an agreement with the Chaf(ey College Foundation (CO 07-223) to broadcast the "Chaffey College Foundation Telethon" on RCN-3. 17. Approval of a request from the American Cancer Society for the Waiver of Central Park 520 Room Rental fees for once per month committee meetings through April 7, 2008, for the Relay for Life event. 18. Approval of review and acknowledgement of a Sublease between J. Filippi Vintage 522 Company, Inc. and Saffron Catering & Event Services, Inc., for space within Regina Winery as being consistent with the terms of the Ground Lease between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and J. Filippi Vintage Company. 19. Approval of a resolution authorizing the City's Finance Director to file and sign a claim for 534 reimbursement of Local Transportation Fund, Article 3 Funds that the San Bernardino Associated Governments had set aside for construction of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, Phase 3. RESOLUTION NO. 07-275 535 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY'S FINANCE DIRECTOR TO FILE AND SIGN A CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND, ARTICLE 3 FUNDS THAT THE SAN BERNARDINO ASSOCIATED GOVERNMENTS HAD SET ASIDE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC INLAND EMPIRE TRAIL, PHASE 3 20. Approval of a resolution of the City Council adopting a Solar Rebate Program for the 537 Municipal Utility Area pursuant to California Solar Initiative as required by Senate Bill 1. 539 RESOLUTION NO. 07-276 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A SOLAR REBATE PROGRAM PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF SENATE BILL 1 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, - FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND j j CITY COUNCIL AGENDA C~otv°cn DECEMBER 5, 2007 21. Approval of release of Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement for Parcel 2 541 of Parcel Map 7891, located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, east of Hermosa Avenue (previously Turner). RESOLUTION NO. 07-277 543 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RELEASING OF REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FOR PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP 7891, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD EAST OF HERMOSA AVENUE (PREVIOUSLY TURNER) 22. Approval of a request to vacate a 5-to-10-foot wide by 500-foot long excess drainage 544 easement, V-212 by Alex Ma, along the east side of Alta Loma Channel, located between Hellman Avenue and Beryl Street (6928 Hellman Avenue) -APN: 0202-041-62. RESOLUTION NO. 07-278 548 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE VACATION (V-212) OF A PORTION OF ALTA LOMA CHANNEL LOCATED BETWEEN HELLMAN AVENUE AND BERYL STREET (6928 HELLMAN AVENUE) 23. Approval of map and ordering the annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 6 and 549 Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 1 and 5 for Parcel Map 16884 located at 6433 Puma Place, submitted by BLU Croix, LTD, on behalf of Verizon California -APN: 0225- 271-49. RESOLUTION NO. 07-279 I 551 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 16884 RESOLUTION NO. 07-280 I 552 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 5 FOR PARCEL MAP 16884 24. Approval of map and monumentation cash deposit for Parcel Map 17866, located on the 560 east side of Rochester Avenue, south of Foothill Boulevard, submitted by Rochester Park Group, LLC. RESOLUTION NO. 07-281 562 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP 17866 AND ACCEPTING THE MONUMENTATION CASH DEPOSIT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, - FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND CITY COUNCIL AGENDA C~ot°c~ DECEMBER 5, 2007 12 25. Approval of map and monumentation cash deposit for Parcel Map 18579, located on the 563 west side of Haven Avenue, north of 6'" Street, submitted by Havenpointe, LLC. RESOLUTION NO. 07-282 565 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP 18579 AND ACCEPTING THE MONUMENTATION CASH DEPOSIT 26. Approval of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Software Master License Maintenance 566 Agreement No. 2007M4585 between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Environmental System Research Institute Inc. (ESRI) (CO 07-224) in the amount of $28,942.23, to be funded from Administrative Services Department GIS Division 1001207-5300 in the amount of $24,792.23 and Special Districts Administration Fund 1100202-5300 $4,150.00. 27. Approval of the contract (Agreement #07-900) from the Board of Supervisors, Second 568 District, County of San Bernardino (CO 07-225), to fund with the cost of installing sidewalks around Stork Elementary School, in the amount of $250,000.00. 28. Approval of the Project Development Cooperative Agreement (District Agreement No. 8- 570 1354) (CO 07-226) for the new interchange at I-15/Arrow Route and approval of the attached resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign said Agreement. 573 RESOLUTION NO. 07-283 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT (DISTRICT AGREEMENT NO. 8-1354) FOR THE NEW INTERCHANGE AT I- 15/ARROW ROUTE AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN SAID AGREEMENT 29. Approval of a Reimbursement Agreement (DRA-37) for construction of 9'" Street storm drain 574 and related improvements in connection with development of Parcel Map 16141, submitted by HC Vineyard, LLC, (CO 07-227). RESOLUTION NO. 07-284 576 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT (DRA-37) FOR CONSTRUCTION OF 9T" STREET STORM DRAIN AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS 30. Accepting the improvements, release the Faithful Performance Bond and file a Notice of 577 Completion for improvements for 5938 Etiwanda Avenue, located north of Banyan Street, submitted by Pacific Crest Communities, Inc. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, - FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND 13 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA C~oNG„ DECEMBER 5, 2007 RESOLUTION NO. 07-285 579 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR 5938 ETIWANDA AVENUE AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK 31. Accepting the improvements, release the Faithful Performance Bond, accept a Maintenance 580 Bond and file a Notice of Completion for improvements for Parcel Map 16009, located on the southeast corner and southwest corner of Sixth Street and Charles Smith Avenue, submitted by Chase Back Bay, LLC. 582 RESOLUTION NO. 07-286 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR PARCEL MAP 16009 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK 32. Accepting the improvements, release the Faithful Performance Bond, accept a Maintenance 583 Bond and file a Notice of Completion for improvements for Parcel Map 16139, located on the north side of Sixth Street between Rochester Avenue and Charles Smith Avenue, submitted by Chase EI Monte, LLC. RESOLUTION NO. 07-287 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO 585 CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR PARCEL MAP 16139 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK 33. Accept improvements, release the Faithful Performance Bond, accept a Maintenance Bond 586 and file a Notice of Completion for improvements for Parcel Map 17609, located on the southeast corner of Church Street and Victoria Gardens Lane, submitted by Bass Pro Shops. RESOLUTION NO. 07-288 588 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR PARCEL MAP 17609 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK 34. Release of Maintenance Guarantee Bond for Parcel Map 16815, located on the north side of 589 Mission Park Drive between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue submitted by Rancho Mills, LLC. 35. Accept Public Street Easements for portion of Tract 16324 located north of Wilson Avenue 591 and west of Wardman Bullock Road, submitted by Granite Homes. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, - FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND 14 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA C~1Oa ~~ DECEMBER 5, 2007 RESOLUTION NO. 07-289 594 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC STREET EASEMENTS FOR A PORTION OF TRACT 16324 36. Approval of Improvement Agreement extension for Tract 16324, located at the northerly end 595 of Wardman Bullock Road, submitted by Rancho 2004 LLC. RESOLUTION NO. 07-290 598 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 16324 37. Release of Faithful Performance Bond No. 8793405 which was held on November 15, 2006 599 as a Maintenance Guarantee Bond in the amount of $6,811, 643.70, for the Haven Avenue Street Widening and Storm Drain Project, Contract No. 05-034. 601 38. Release of Faithful Performance Bond No. 08814042, which was held on November 15, 2006 as a Maintenance Guarantee Bond in the amount of $73,780.00, for the Solar Speed Detection Sign Project, Contract No. 06-068. 39. Release of Faithful Performance Bond No. PRF7583032, which was held on November 15, 603 2006 as a Maintenance Guarantee Bond in the amount of $144,850.00, for Highland Avenue Tree Screen, east of Milliken to Rochester, Contract No. 06-077. 40. Release of Faithful Performance Bond No. 104735648, which was held on November 15, 605 2006 as a Maintenance Guarantee Bond in the amount of $276,947.00, for Base Line Road Pavement Rehab, Carnelian to Lion, Contract No. 06-080. 41. Accept the Heritage Park and Windrows Park Baseball field Renovation Improvements, 607 Contract No. 07-092 as complete, release the Faithful Performance Bond, accept a Guarantee Bond, release the Labor and Material Bond and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and approve the final contract amount of $107,798.95. RESOLUTION NO. 07-291 609 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE HERITAGE PARK AND WINDROWS PARK BASEBALL FIELD RENOVATION IMPROVEMENTS, CONTRACT NO. 07-092, AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK 42. Accept the Heritage Park Emergency Sewer Retrofit Improvements, Contract No. 07-138, as complete, retain the Faithful Performance Bond as a Guarantee Bond, release the Labor and 611 Material Bond and authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and approve the final contract amount of $117,129.84. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, - FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND CITY COUNCIL AGENDA C~oNCe DECEMBER 5, 2007 15 RESOLUTION NO. 07-292 614 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE HERITAGE PARK EMERGENCY SEWER RETROFIT IMPROVEMENTS, CONTRACT NO. 07-138, AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK 43. Approval to award a contract to Mega Lighting, Inc. (DBA Mega Way Enterprises) (CO 07- 228), in the amount of $546,943.50 (plus a 10% contingency) from Park Development Acct. 615 No. 1120305-5650/1605120-0 in the amount of $601,637.85 for the construction of the Central Park Playground Project. 44. Approval to award the purchase of VMWare Software and Maintenance to Computek in the 620 amount of $88,022.00 to be funded as follows: Account No. 1714001-5152 ($67,286.00) and Account No. 1714001-5300 ($20,736.00). 45. Approval to amend contract with DMJM+Harris, Inc. (CO 04-188) in the amount of $100,000 621 from Transportation Fund Account No. 11243035650/1361124-0 to provide Paleontologial Report, Noise Abatement Design Report, Air Quality Analysis, NEPA Delegation, and life Cycle Cost Analysis for pavement for the Base Line Road at I-15 Freeway Interchange Project. 46. Approval of a resolution committing to a State Bicycle Transportation Account Grant Match 625 for the construction PF Phase IV-B of the Pacific Electric Trail, "Rails To Trails", from Vineyard Avenue to Amethyst Avenue. RESOLUTION NO. 07-293 627 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A LOCAL MATCH TO A POTENTIAL STATE OF CALIFORNIA BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNT FUND GRANT -FOR PHASE IV-B OF THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL, "RAILS TO TRAILS", FROM VINEYARD AVENUE TO AMETHYST AVENUE O. CONSENT ORDINANCES The following Ordinances have had public hearings at the time of first reading. Second readings are expected to be routine and non-controversial. The Agency, Fire Board, or Council will act upon them at one time without discussion. The City Clerk will read the title. Any item can be removed far discussion by an Agencymember, Boardmember, or Councilmember. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, - FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND CITY COUNCIL AGENDA C~coNCn DECEMBER 5, 2007 16 1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT - DRC2005-00523 - CREATIVE DESIGN ASSOCIATES - A request to change the Development District Map from Medium Residential to Low-Medium Residential to bring the site into conformance with the General Plan, located on the west side of Archibald Avenue and 150 feet north of Monte Vista Street -APN: 0202-131-27, 0202-131-61 and 62. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17444, Development Review DRC2005-00250, Minor Exception DRC2005-00522, Tree Removal Permit DRC2005-00521 and Preliminary Review DRC2004-00331. ORDINANCE NO. 783 (Second Reading) 628 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT DRC2005-00523, A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT MAP FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL TO LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL TO BRING THE SITE INTO CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN FOR 2.17 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE AND SOUTH OF 19T" STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -APN: 0202-131-27, 61 AND 62 P. COUNCIL BUSINESS The following items have been requested by the City Council for discussion. 1. COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS (Comments to be limited to three minutes per Councilmember.) 2. LEGISLATIVE AND REGIONAL UPDATES (Oral) Q. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING R. ADJOURNMENT I, Debra J. Adams, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on November 29, 2007, seventy-two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. P1 _ ~~~ ~\. T H E C I T Y O F R A N C H O~ C U C A M O N G A Staff Report DATE December 5, 2007 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: James R. Troyer, AICP, Planning Director BY: Michael Diaz, Senior Planner SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540 -PITASSI ARCHITECTS FOR THE NORTHTOWN HOUSING AUTHORITY CORPORATION - A request to develop 225 workforce apartment units on 12.87 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 units per acre), located at 13233 Foothill Boulevard, west of the Etiwanda San Sevaine Flood Control Channel, and east of the Southern California Edison Transmission Line Corridor - APN: 0229-041-10. CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT DRC2007-00119 -PITASSI ARCHITECTS - Review of proposed Density Bonus Agreement (also referred to as Housing Incentive Agreement) to implement Development Review DRC2006-00540 allowing a density bonus and modifying specific development standards for the construction of 225 workforce apartment units on vacant property in Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located at 13233 Foothill Boulevard, west of the Etiwanda San Sevaine Flood Control Channel, and east of the Southern California Edison Transmission Line Corridor - APN: 0229-041-10. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council review the issues raised by the appellants, open the public hearing, take public testimony on the matter, close the public hearing, and approve or deny the attached draft resolutions upholding the Planning Commission's approval/recommendation and adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts. Further, the appeal pertains to the Planning Commission's approval of a project that is a permitted land use on the subject site. Consequently, the City Council's review of the matter is limited to whether the environmental documents properly analyze and mitigate the project impacts and whether the criteria for granting development review approval of the project and approval of the density bonus agreement has been satisfied. P2 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS December 5, 2007 Page 2 BACKGROUND: On July 25, 2007, after a public hearing, the Planning Commission reviewed and unanimously approved the proposed San Sevaine Villas, a 225-unit workforce apartment community at the southwest corner of the "T" intersection of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue. At that time, the Commission also forwarded to the City Council a recommendation to approve the associated Density Bonus Agreement (Planning Commission Staff Report, resolutions and subsequent meeting minutes are shown as Attachment A, B, and C). On August 6, 2007, the project approval and recommendation was appealed by area residents. In their appeal letter (Attachment D), the appellants indicate 22 points as the basis for their concerns and action. Since then, a number of additional letters (individually written and signed forms) and petitions, both in support and opposition to the project, have been submitted. Copies of these items have been compiled by staff (Attachment C provided under separate cover). PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY: Northtown Housing Development Corporation has proposed to develop 225 workforce apartment units on an undeveloped 12.87-acre site that is situated on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between the existing Etiwanda San Sevaine Flood Control Channel on the east and the Southern California Edison Corridor on the west (Attachment F). The apartment community will consist of a mix of two and three-story structures arranged across the site. The apartment mix will include one bedroom (20 units), two bedrooms (136 units), and three bedrooms (68 units) ranging in size from 708 to 1,287 square feet, / respectively. A two-story community building is proposed which includes approximately 6,679 square feet on the ground floor and a 2-bedroom Manager's unit (1,792 square feet) on the second floor. A community pool is also proposed and will be located near the main entrance. Other on-site recreational amenities include a basketball half-court, tot-lots, picnic tables and BBO grilles, and two large lawn areas for open play. Required parking for the project is 430 spaces. A total of 469 unattached parking spaces will be provided; including 225 covered carport spaces (see project plans in Attachment G). In order to meet the desired goal of providing affordable units for families and make the proposed project economically feasible, the project also includes a Density Bonus Agreement (DRC2007-00119) that requests a 25 percent density bonus and modifications to some specific development setback standards described therein. The plans presented for Planning Commission review were designed with the modified standards identified in the draft Density Bonus Agreement. The final approval of the subject project at the requested density is contingent upon City Council approval of the associated Density Bonus Agreement (Attachment H). A. Project Zoning and Density: The General Plan and Development District (zoning) land use designations for the property are consistent in that both classify the site as Medium (M) Residential (8-14 units per gross acre). The Medium esidential land use designation permits by right (no Conditional Use Permit is needed) single-family and multiple-family dwellings such as the proposed apartment complex. Under State law, cities are required to offer incentives such as extra density and/or relaxed development standards in exchange for the creation of affordable units in an economically feasible manner. The intent of these incentives is to facilitate the development of affordable housing and to implement the goals, objectives, and policies of the Housing Element of the General Plan. P3 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS December 5, 2007 Page 3 The applicant has submitted an application requesting City Council approval of the proposed Density Bonus Agreement that also identifies a few specific areas where development standards will be amended for the project. The proposed 25-percent project density bonus will increase the number of units from 180-units to 225-units overall with a corresponding increase in density from 14-units to 17.45-units per acre. Included with the Density Bonus request are reductions in distances between: building to curb, building to property line, and building to building (see response below). The maximum density increase allowed by the City's Affordable Housing Incentives/Density Bonus Provisions (Section 17.40 of the Development Code) is 35 percent for projects offering affordable housing units at the prescribed ratios contained therein. If the Density Bonus Agreement is approved by the City Council, the project will be able to proceed as proposed. If the Council seeks to modify the incentives other than what is specified in the Density Bonus Agreement, the project may have to be revised. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Undeveloped Land; General Commercial and Edison Utility Corridor; Open Space South - Undeveloped Land; Low-Medium Density (4-8 dwelling units per acre); Etiwanda Specific Plan East - San Sevaine Flood Control Channel\Single-Family Residential; City of Fontana\Unincorporated San Bernardino County across Ilex Avenue West - Edison Transmission Lines; Open Space and Single-Family Residential; Low Density Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) C. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) North - General Commercial South - Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) East - City of Fontana and unincorporated areas of San Bernardino County West - Open Space and Low Density Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) D. Site Characteristics: The project site is approximately 12.87 acres in size and is characterized as a large open undeveloped area between a concrete lined drainage channel on the east and the high voltage transmission line corridor in an easement in favor of the Southern California Edison utility. Currently, the site has a gradual slope to the southwest and is marked by the unlined streambed of the East Etiwanda Creek that generally transverses the property from northeast to southwest. The East Etiwanda Creek is fed by seasonal water flows from the north via culverts below Foothill Boulevard at the northeast corner of the site, and from a storm drain outlet and man made earthen V-ditch located at the northwest corner of the site. Small scale shrubs and grasses are present across the site with some trees, mostly Eucalyptus, near the center of the site. The site is completely fenced, although some portions are down or have been removed. APPEAL ISSUES/RESPONSES: Since the filing of the appeal, staff has received a large number of written comments from the public expressing both support and opposition to the project. These comments have been received in the form of independent letters, form letters, and petitions. To adequately respond to the issues raised in the appeal, staff has identified a number of common and recurring themes that have been synthesized and formatted into the following responses. The majority of the following responses are directly based on the 22 comments made in the original appeal letter. P4 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS December 5, 2007 Page 4 Prlect Size/Density/Population: The primary concerns made by the appellants in regard to the project are size, density, and potential overcrowding. The project does not require an amendment to the land use designations of either the General Plan or the Development District Map to accommodate the project. Both the General Plan and Development District (zoning) land use designations for the property are Medium (M) Residential (8-14 units per gross acre). The Medium Residential land use designation permits by right single-family and/or multiple-family dwellings such as the proposed apartment complex. Section 17.08.020.C of the Development Code defines Medium Residential District (M) as follows: This district is intended as an area for medium density multiple family use, with development regulations that assure development compatible with nearby lower density residential development. Residential densities are expected to range from 8-14 units per gross acre maximum. Permitted density is the number of dwelling units allowed for a project site per the established density range of the applicable land use classification. The maximum number of dwelling units per gross acre of land that may be allowed on a given site is ultimately determined by considering at least the following four factors: • Allowable Density Range of the District (Medium District is 8-14 units gross acre); and • Overall lot size (minimum 3 acres required for Medium District); and • Lot shape and physical constraints; and • Compliance with applicable development standards of the district. At 12.87 acres in size, the project site is four times larger than the minimum required lot size of 3-acres) which allows for development of the site at the highest number (14 dwellings per acre) of the density range for the Medium District. As a permitted use and without the requested density bonus, the maximum of number dwelling units (single- family or multiple-family) allowed for the subject site would be 180 dwelling units. With the density bonus request (pursuant to the Affordable Housing Incentives/Density Bonus Provisions of the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code), the total number of units is increased to 225, resulting in a density of 17.45 dwelling units per gross acre. Lower density via conventional lot-by-lot subdivisions is not necessarily synonymous with high quality and higher density is not synonymous with inferior design. Density is not the sole means to determine a project's quality as a well designed, functional, and pleasant living environment. Ultimately, quality and livability is determined by how a developer puts together a project and then maintains the property thereafter. To address livability and quality goals, Rancho Cucamonga relies on a combination of factors such as requiring careful site planning, high quality building design, provision of open space and landscaping, and on-site recreational amenities. The proposed project complies with these requirements and does not reduce the quality level of design. It avoids the unimaginative institutional look typically associated with old style apartment communities. P5 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS December 5, 2007 Page 5 As to the issue of overcrowding, the appellants note that at least 1,000 new residents will live in the project. The 1,000 person number is based on information provided by the applicant that reflects the sum total of persons allowed per unit using Fair Housing standards. As such, it represents a maximum estimate for overall population at the complex. Amore likely number may be deduced using California Department of Finance statistics for persons per household within the City. According to their statistics provided in the City/County Population and Housing Estimates (1/1/2007) the average number of persons per household in the City is 3.197 (Attachment G). Using this factor the estimated population for the project (225 units) would be approximately 719 persons. Further, when the City's apartment vacancy factor (4 percent) is considered into the equation, population could drop to an estimated 691 persons. Tenant Mix and Transient Characteristics: The appellants have expressed concerns regarding the tenant mix and constant turnover of tenants. As with market rate apartments, to rent a unit in an affordable apartment community, applicants are required to have an income. Residents are likely to be a mix of single person households and family households, including seniors. As with any apartment community, some residents will be long term tenants while others will stay for a shorter timeframe. However, most affordable housing projects have long waiting lists due to low turnover. These characteristics are likely to be the case for the San Sevaine Villas project. 3. Project Location: The appellants believe that this project concentrates too many affordable housing units at this location which should be spread out to other areas in the City. The subject site is relatively large, zoned appropriately, and allows for correspondingly larger scale development whether single-family or multiple-family development of any type (e.g., condos, town homes, apartments). Multi-family districts and developments are typically located on or near major arterials and at associated major intersections where they can take advantage of access to public transit, are in proximity to job opportunities, schools, parks and open space, shopping, services, etc. It is not uncommon for multiple- family zoning districts and developments to be located either adjacent to or across the street from single-family districts/uses. The San Sevaine Villas project has the appropriate zoning designation to allow for amultiple-family development. Currently, there are 17 workforce housing projects in the City (see Attachment H) with three more in the review process (including San Sevaine Villas). These workforce housing developments range in size from as few as 14 units to as many as 230 units. The number of units in each project is largely dictated by the respective size of the site, underlying zoning designation, and any applicable Density Bonus agreement as approved by the City. 4. Devaluation of Property Values: Appellants assert that affordable housing projects drive down property values. According to a report prepared by the California Department of Housing and Community Development, Myths and Facts About Affordable and High Density Housing 2002, no study in California has ever shown that affordable housing developments reduce property values. An Internet search for information on affordable housing and property values revealed that there is no official consensus about the effects affordable housing has on property values, although most seem to point to neutral or slight positive impacts. P6 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS December 5, 2007 Page 6 More importantly, factors such as good architectural design, landscaping, and properly maintained properties are better predictors of property values for both single-family and multiple-family (e.g., apartment) communities. The Design Review Committee found the project to be well designed and a good example for architectural design and use of quality exterior materials. Moreover, the project will have on-site management to monitor activities at the complex and assure the property is properly maintained. 5. Lack of Recreational Amenities: According to the appellants the project does not provide a sufficient amount of on-site recreational amenities to keep children occupied. The project provides the amount of on-site recreation amenities as required by the Development Code. The project includes a 6,679 square foot community building, a swimming pool, wading pool, tot-lots, basketball half-court, two open turf areas, 'picnic benches/BBOs, pergolas, etc., for use by the residents. The intent is to encourage recreational activities that one might be able to experience at home. Active sports such as soccer, football, and baseball are organized sports that occur elsewhere in the City in facilities specifically designed to properly accommodate those sports activities. The amount and type of recreation amenities at the San Sevaine Villas are similar to the amenities at other multi-family developments within the City. As noted in the Initial Study prepared for the project, a new 5-acre public park on Garcia Drive (north of Foothill Boulevard) is about to begin construction. The project applicant will be required to pay park development fees to help fund other park projects throughout the City that will be accessible to project residents as well as all members of the general public. 6. Building Height: The proposed 3-story buildings included in the project are too high in relationship to the single-story homes in the neighborhood to the west, and will result in an invasion of privacy. Seven (7) of the 15 total buildings proposed for the site have a portion or are entirely 3- stories tall. These buildings are located in the south and southwest areas of the subject site. The Development Code does not address building height in terms of stories but as an overall height measurement. Structures within the Medium District are limited to a total maximum height of 35-feet. A 35-foot height limit will allow for no more than 3-stories. The height limit for the Very Low (VL) and Low (L) single-family districts is also 35-feet. The proposed heights of all the buildings in the San Sevaine Villas project comply with the maximum allowable building height for the district. Further, to address potential adverse impacts by multiple-family projects on adjacent or nearby VL and L-District neighborhoods, a height limitation is imposed for projects within Medium (M), Medium-High (MH) and High (H) Districts. Pursuant to the Basic Development Standards Table (Section 17.08.040-B) multiple-family dwellings in the M, MH, and H-Districts are limited to one story when within 100 feet of a Very Low (VL) or Low (L) Residential District. The project complies with these standards in that the west boundary of the subject site is approximately 225 feet away from the L-District neighborhood to the west. Moreover, the nearest apartment building is an additional 65 feet from the property line (as measured from property line to balcony) for a total distance P7 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS December 5, 2007 Page 7 of approximately 290 feet. Furthermore, the single-family developments in the City of Fontana and unincorporated San Bernardino County are located approximately 260 to 280 feet from the northeast corner and east boundary of the site and across Foothill Boulevard and the existing San Sevaine Channel. Given these distances and considering the site is more than adequately separated from any adjacent single-family uses by a utility corridor on the west, Foothill Boulevard to the north, vacant land to the south, and the San Sevaine Flood Control channel on the east. There are no significant impacts to privacy, loss of views, access to sunlight, etc. 7. Criminal Activity: A common concern expressed in most of the comments and letters submitted to the City have been about criminal activity at affordable/worMorce housing projects. According to the appeal letters received, many assume the source of crime in the area is directly attributable to the San Bernardino County's West Valley Detention Center (WVDC) located at Etiwanda and Fourth Street (approximately 1.5 miles south of Foothill Boulevard). In connection with the above concern is the assertion that affordable/workforce housing will be either the source of, or a magnet for crime, which then will spill over into adjacent neighborhoods. At this point, no evidence has been presented to directly substantiate the assertion that the cause of crime in the area is directly attributable to the WVDC or to affordable housing projects. Crime can occur anywhere, to anyone, and at anytime. Ongoing criminal activity is usually a byproduct of a lack of surveillance, vacancy/abandonment, and/or poor property maintenance. The San Sevaine Villas will have on-site management (two on-site managers) and will participate in the Sheriff's Department program designed to prevent and/address crime issues for all multi-family developments in the City. In addition, the project will contract with a security firm to assist in the enforcement of community rules. According to the Police Department, the project does not require additional officers if the project is built. Existing department staff can adequately patrol the project and surrounding area pursuant to standard policing practice and procedures. A related issue raised against the project is in regard to the proposed `Pence" around the perimeter of the project. To some, the proposed combination retaining wall/fence is not adequate and allows for an invasion of privacy on adjacent properties. As noted elsewhere in this report, the project site will be significantly separated from its neighbors so as not to pose a direct invasion of privacy. In regard to the fence design, the architect's original design reflects an attempt to balance the need to provide a secure boundary for the project with aesthetics. The current design avoids the creation of a tall solid wall plane along the boundaries of the site. The Design Review Committee reviewed the plans including fence design and found it to be well done and appropriate. In addition, the Police Department is generally supportive of open fencing because it reinforces natural surveillance (or visibility) to and around the area where people and their activities can be readily observed. The Police Department has reviewed the plans and did not identify any critical areas of concern. Street lights will be located in the Foothill Boulevard public right of way adjacent to the site. In addition, the project will have on-site lighting as required by the Development Code. Illumination will be provided by building mounted and freestanding fixtures distributed P8 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS December 5, 2007 Page 8 around the site in parking areas, along walkways, and in activity areas. Freestanding fixtures are limited to 15-feet in height and designed to control glare. According to Section 17.08.080 of the Development Code, no operation, activity, sign, or light fixture shall create illumination which exceeds 5-foot candles on any adjacent property, whether the illumination is direct or indirect. light from the source. There are no plans and no requirement to illuminate the area beyond the boundaries of the site. Finally, the project site is in an area of the City that is undergoing change. Underutilized/vacant land is being developed with new commercial and residential uses including multi-family condominium and apartment communities. As the surrounding area steadily develops and improves with quality commercial, residential, and public works projects, the number of vacant and underutilized areas/properties will be reduced and thereby reduce potential criminal activity. 8. Traffic Impacts: Appellants asked whether traffic impacts to the local roadways were adequately addressed particularly as if concerns traffic generated by the proposed project. In the Initial Study prepared for the project, the Engineering and Planning Departments concluded that the impacts to the local circulation system would be insignificant because the project included appropriate right of way improvements to Foothill Boulevard and the collection of traffic fees to tie used in improving traffic impacts around the community. After the Initial Study was initially circulated and in response to public comments received that questioned staff's conclusion, LSA Associates, Inc. was commissioned to prepare a focused Traffic Study (September 2007) for the project. The Traffic Study examined traffic operations in the vicinity of the project and analyzed impacts at opening year with and without project conditions. The Traffic Study found that under the existing conditions, the intersection of East Avenue/Foothill Boulevard operates at an unsatisfactory LOS (Level of Service) during a.m. and p.m. peak hours. After accounting for annual growth, the Traffic Study concluded that a new traffic signal at East Avenue/Foothill Boulevard is necessary for the studied intersections to operate at satisfactory levels of service. When the revised Initial Study was re-circulated in October 2007, a mitigation measure was added to require a traffic signal at East Avenue and Foothill Boulevard, prior to occupancy of any residential units in the proposed development. The traffic study also confirmed that the proposed project will be consistent with the General Plan and its associated EIR as staff had originally determined. A second issue raised by some residents is that the Cornwall/Chestnut neighborhood is being used as a short cut by commuters to get around the intersection at Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue. According to the City Traffic Engineer, engineering staff made observations on April 17, 2007, and on October 15, 2007 to collect traffic count data. The traffic counts on April 17, 2007 were made before the new traffic signal at the intersection of Foothill Boulevard and Cornwall was installed (August of 2007). Based on the data obtained, the City Traffic Engineer concluded that the traffic volumes observed did not indicate a significant number of drivers are using Cornwall and Chestnut as a short-cut to get from Foothill Boulevard to Etiwanda Avenue. A second survey was conducted to observe and collect traffic count data for vehicles from Etiwanda Avenue using Chestnut Avenue as a short-cut to Foothill Boulevard. The traffic volumes observed during this traffic count indicated higher numbers of vehicles in the neighborhood during P9 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS December 5, 2007 Page 9 peak hours (123 vehicles). The majority of these vehicles (101) continued through to Foothill Boulevard while 22 were local residents. A likely reason for the higher count of short cuts in the second survey is because Etiwanda Avenue from Arrow Route to Chestnut Avenue has only two northbound traffic lanes. However, when approved development at the southeast corner of the intersection of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue is completed, Etiwanda Avenue at Foothill Boulevard will be widened and improved to provide northbound traffic (on Etiwanda Avenue) with 2-left turn lanes, 2- through lanes and a separate right turn lane. According to the City Traffic Engineer, these improvements to the intersection will likely eliminate the northbound cut-through traffic that is currently turning right at Chestnut Avenue (Attachment I). Finally, since the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted the San Bernardino County Measure I, the project is required to pay a Transportation Development Fee based on land use and number of units. The Transportation Development Fee must be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of Building Permits. Fees are used to fund roadway improvements necessary to support. adequate traffic circulation. 9. Infrastructure/Public Improvements: Appellants cite existing infrastructure and roadways as being inadequate to support the proposed project. With new development comes physical changes and improvements that are most notable in changes to the streetscape and either installation and/or improvement to the local infrastructure. As part of the review process for this project, existing field conditions were evaluated to' determine what improvements were necessary to support the project and remedy any deficiencies to the greatest extent possible. If approved, the San Sevaine Villas project will be conditioned to provide the following public improvements: .Roadway dedication along the project site frontage to widen Foothill Boulevard (south side) to allow for public improvements consistent with the Foothill Visual Improvement Plan. New curb/gutter/sidewalWstreetlights/street trees will be installed from the border with Fontana along the entire street frontage (approximately 900-feet) of the project site. The applicant is also conditioned to make a good faith effort to obtain right-of- way from the adjacent property owner (Ameron) to the west (where SCE lines are located) so that curb/gutter/sidewalk/street trees can be extended westward from west boundary of the San Sevaine site to the east side of Cornwall Avenue. As standard practice, all sidewalks on-site and in the public right-of-way will be required to comply with the applicable provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). • A center median within Foothill Boulevard from East Avenue to Cornwall Avenue to improve traffic safety by eliminating the possibility of unregulated turn movements between the existing signal at Cornwall and the new signal at East Avenue. A new traffic signal and crosswalks at the intersection of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue are to be installed prior to occupancy of units. Safe left or U-turn movements will be made possible via protected green arrows. P10 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS .December 5, 2007 Page 10 The project will be connected to existing water and sewer systems provided by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). As noted before, changes are occurring in the area, including other private developments and public improvement projects. The following improvements in the area are presently underway or scheduled for construction in the near future: • Completion of the San Bernardino County's Flood Control District San Sevaine Creek Water Project. When completed (est. summer of 2008), natural water flows across the site will be permanently diverted into the concrete lined flood control channel already existing adjacent to the east side of the site. • Storm drain improvements on Foothill Boulevard from Etiwanda Avenue to East Avenue currently under construction. • New Base Line Road/East Avenue/I-15 interchange (located approximately 1-mile north of the project site). The project is fully funded with construction scheduled to begin in 2010. • East Avenue Storm Drain -The city is currently working on the design for a new storm drain line to handle existing surface water flow that reaches the north side of Foothill Boulevard. Staff anticipates that construction of the new storm drain will be coordinated with the above mentioned interchange project. According to the project engineer for the project, surface water on East Avenue is directed eastward to the existing San Sevaine channel when it reaches Foothill Boulevard and does not pose a direct impact to the San Sevaine Villas project site. • Construction of a new 5-acre public park at east end of Garcia Drive (off Etiwanda Boulevard north of Foothill Boulevard). 10. School District Impacts: Appellants claim that 600 new students will be generated by the project and overwhelm local schools. The Etiwanda School District and Chaffey Unified School District have been notified and are aware df the project. According to the project architect, the pupil estimates were derived using factors obtained directly from the affected school districts. In addition, correspondence from the Etiwanda School District indicates approximately 37 elementary/middle school aged children are expected from the subject development. The letter also includes the District's analysis/justification to support their request for school facility fees that are always collected. before building permits are issued. A total of 19 high school age students are anticipated from the project. Further, Government Code section 65996(b) specifically prohibits local agencies from using the inadequacy of school facilities as a basis for denying or conditioning approvals of any legislative or adjudicative act involving the planning, use, or development of real property. School districts are limited to imposing only school impact fees authorized by State legislation. P11 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS December 5, 2007 Page 11 11. Impacts to Victoria Gardens: Appellants voiced concern about adverse impacts of an affordable housing project on the upscale Victoria Gardens Lifestyle Center. Victoria Gardens is located approximately 1-mile from the project site on the west side of I-15 Freeway. The center is designed as a regional destination point for retail and food uses, and as a destination point for City services/programs including the Cultural Center, public library, and Sheriff's Department substation. The Center is open to the public and all potential customers despite income status are welcomed. Victoria Gardens has its own security patrols and behavior standards that it enforces with assistance from the on- site Sheriff's Department when needed. 12. Air Quality and Pollution: Letters received in opposition state that the project will worsen air quality in the area. After the Initial Study was initially circulated, the City received (via fax and letter) a comment letter from the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), indicating that the City's General Plan analysis of air quality impacts was out of date and that the analysis should be based on their latest air quality impact model (URBEMIS 2007 version 9.2, released in June 2007). In response, LSA Associates, Inc. was commissioned to prepare a new Air Quality Analysis report for the project using the SCAQMD's latest testing methodology. The report was completed in September 2007 and concluded that long-term operational emissions associated with the project,. from both mobile and stationary sources both on-site and off-site, would not exceed any criteria pollutant emission thresholds established by the SCAQMD. In addition, these long term emissions would not exceed any of the District's localized significance thresholds. The San Sevaine Villas Air Quality Analysis of September 2007 includes several analyses of traffic-related air quality impacts, including a CO Hotspots analysis, a long-term regional impacts analysis and a localized significance threshold (LST) analysis. All three show that there will be no significant air quality impacts from the project. As such, the new air quality analysis confirms staff's original finding that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. Finally, a couple of letters were received that expressed concerns about air quality in the area based on Proposition 65 notification regarding TAMCO Steel Company on Arrow Highway. Proposition 65 is known as the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986. This State law was the result of an initiative voted upon by the people of California. The State of California created a list of chemicals that required public notification if they are produced, used or emitted by companies. TAMCO is required by law to notify the public that it emits these materials. Notification can be done by either an ad in a newspaper or by direct mail to affected parties. According to the TAMCO website This notification will appear in the newspaper every quarter. The newspaper notifications are similar to the Proposition 65 warnings seen at gasoline stations, paint stores or even at some restaurants or public places that allow smoking. Based on information obtained from the TAMCO website, lead and cadmium appears in emissions from the production of steel in an electric furnace. The exact amounts of these substances being released from TAMCO are unknown at this time. However, a Proposition 65 warning is required when levels reach 1/1000th of health based levels. Currently TAMCO is awaiting approval of an air quality compliance plan for monitoring P12 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS December 5, 2007 Page 12 the release of lead into the ambient air to ensure amounts are below legal and health- based limits. TAMCO has performed blood lead and cadmium tests on employees. The tests reveal that there are no elevated amounts of lead or cadmium in the employees' bloodstream. This means that whatever amounts of cadmium and lead that are emitted are well below any known health risk levels. The Air Quality consultant from LSA Associates will be at the meeting to answer any further questions regarding air quality. 13. Noise Impacts: The proposed project will be adversely impacted by high noise levels caused by Foothill Boulevard and the I-15 Freeway. An Acoustical Analysis (i.e., Noise Study) was prepared for the project. According to the Noise Study (Gordon Bricken & Associates, September 25, 2006) prepared for the project, the four buildings (No.'s 1, 10, 11, 12) closest to Foothill Boulevard would. experience slightly higher noise levels than allowed by the Development Code without mitigation. Two options for mitigating the impact were identified including the construction of a solid sound wall along Foothill Boulevard or the installation of a noise barrier at the affected patios and balconies. The architect chose the latter option and will install a solid sound barrier using plexi-glass integrated into the wall areas of the affected patios and balconies. This method of sound attenuation is a common way to address noise concerns in residential projects. In addition, all buildings will be insulated, have dual pane windows, solid core entry doors, and weather stripping. Finally, as with any construction project, there will be short-term noise impacts during the construction phase of the project, particularly at the on-set of activity that includes grading with heavy construction vehicles and equipment. To address these concerns, the Initial Study identified four mitigation measures to mitigate the short-term noise impacts including: limits to days and timeframes for construction, a requirement for the contractor to monitor (by means of a sound consultant) actual construction or grading noise levels as measured at the project boundaries, installation of project perimeter walls as early as possible in first phase, and time and daily trip restrictions for haul truck deliveries. These mitigation measures were incorporated as conditions of approval for the project. 14. Fire Safety: According to appellants the project is located in a high fire hazard area. The project site is not identified as being within a high fire hazard area by the General Plan or on current Fire District Maps. According to the Fire Risk Assessment Map in the General Plan the risk potential for the site is identified as Low Probability/Low Consequence because it is undeveloped and bordered by undeveloped land. Moreover, the area is not designated by the City Fire District as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone and is not subject to the special provisions (e.g. fuel modification) as for projects within hazardous fire areas. A recently completed statewide fire hazard mapping project prepared by CalFire has identified the subject site as a potential moderate to high fire hazard area. CalFire's map is an advisory document intended for use by cities as they develop and implement their own respective fire mitigation plans. P13 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS December 5, 2007 Page 13 According to the Fire District, this project is beyond the four-minute response area of any fire station. The typical mitigation when this occurs is to require fire sprinklers if they are not already required by the Building or Fire Codes. Under the current codes, fire sprinklers are automatically required for apartment buildings that are three or more stories in height or have five or more dwelling units. Additionally, a District ordinance requires fire sprinklers in any building that has more than 7,500 square feet of habitable space. The San Sevaine Villas project meets the above criteria and as such will be required to have fire sprinklers installed on all buildings. 15. Setback Reductions: The building setback and separation reductions allowed by the Density Bonus Agreement mean that required Fire Department setbacks will not be met. As part of the design review process the Fire Construction Services Division (FCS) of the Building' Department reviewed the proposed plans. FCS did not identify any issues . with respect to critical building separation and/or setback from adjacent property line requirements. The project is also conditioned to meet all applicable building code requirements before building permits are issued. The setback reductions proposed for the San Sevaine Villas project are in regard to those setback/building separation requirements in the Development Code administered by the Planning Department. The general purpose for these requirements is to provide open areas around buildings to accomplish a number of largely aesthetic objectives, such as access around the site, access to light and air, privacy, open space for landscaping and recreation, etc. Setback requirements can and do vary by zoning district, and there are exceptions to .accommodate a variety of particular lot circumstances. In this case, the requested reductions are for building-to-curb, building , to property line, and building to building in the locations shown on the attached site plan (see Attachment K). The building-to-curb and building-to-property line reductions, in the locations noted on the plan, do not have an impact on any other buildings-existing neighbors, or new apartment units. Further, the two building-to-building locations affected are in the center of the project site, visually and physically separated from the `surrounding' neighbors. The required 3-story building-to-3-story building separation of 40 feet, and the 3-story building to 2-story building separation of 30 feet have actually been met when measured from the exterior building wall (as opposed to measuring from the edge of the balconies). In short, none of the changes in building-to-building separations affect full compliance with the California Building Code requirements for life safety concerns. 16. Bio3 loay: Concerns were raised about the placement of housing in an open space area with adverse impacts on biological resources. According to the environmental consultant for the project, the site is not in a pristine condition and has noted evidence of illegal dumping (mostly broken concrete, asphalt and trash). Also, the site and the area around it have not been identified by the General Plan as a Scenic Resource, a Sensitive Biological Resource Area, and/or an Open Space Conservation Area. Nevertheless, given the presence of the San Sevaine Creek bed, trees, and other vegetation, several biological reports were prepared to assess and P14 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS December 5, 2007 Page 14 determine the potential existence of sensitive plant and animal species (e.g., Burrowing owl, Kangaroo rat, Slender-horned Spine flower, etc.) on the subject site. The reports identified the site as a composition of primarily non-native grassland with a small area of disturbed Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS), and possible habitats on the east side of the East Etiwanda Creek bed, and a small portion of riparian vegetation. Based on the results of the four (4) biological studies, no adverse impacts were found to occur to Federal/State listed plant and animal species. In regard to Burrowing owls, LSA provided the following comments: Burrowing owls reside in southern California year-round. Their nesting season begins between February and April and lasts until the end of August. The peak of the nesting season is from April 15 through July 15. The peak' of nesting season refers to the critical phases of nesting cycle (i. e.: mating, egg-laying, incubation). Fledglings and subsequently juveniles can be observed roosting at the burrow entrance from July through the end of August. Active burrowing owl burrows are those with feather, and/or white wash and/or pellet and/or prey remnants near the entrance of the burrow. No owl sign was found on the site. Evidence of owl occupation was highly probable during the five site visits due to lack of rain in the region. No active burrows or owls were observed during the August 2006 focused survey (5 site visits). Observations were made by both binocular and scope; therefore, if owls were on adjacent areas, they were detectable. Boundaries of the project site were observed through binoculars and scope for any foraging owls, none were observed. There is no set burrowing owl protocol. Focused surveys for this species in San Bernardino County are conducted using guidelines set forth in the Burrowing Owl Consortium Guidelines (April 1993) and California Department of Fish and Game's inter-office memorandum (October 1995). These guidelines were used in conducting the focused survey on the North Town Housing project. As set forth in these guidelines, a survey will need to be done within 30 days prior to the commencement of grading activities to determine if the burrowing owl has subsequently occupied the site and thus avoid any impacts to the owl (Attachment L). As for the on-site RAFSS, it was determined to be disturbed and not suitable for long term sustainability of associated plant and wildlife communities particularly when the San Sevaine Water Project is complete and natural water flow to the site is permanently cut off (for more detailed information see Biology Section of Initial Study). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) were notified of the project and sent copies of both initial studies prepared for the project. No response from either resource agency has yet to have been received. As reported in the Initial Study prepared for the project, the site has two major drainage features, the most prominent of which is the East Etiwanda Creek streambed that receives seasonal runoff and enters the site from the northeast. The other drainage P15 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-001 1 9 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS December 5, 2007 Page 15 feature is a storm drain inlet entering the site from the northwest which connects to the creek via aman-made earthen V-ditch. A Delineation of Jurisdictional Waters Report prepared for the project (LSA Associates June 19, 2007), identified approximately 0.51 acre of streambed and riparian vegetation impacts within the jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and approximately 0.2 acre of ephemeral and wetland waters of the U.S. within the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). LSA Associates, Inc. conducted a wetlands jurisdictional waters delineation study on the site on June 19, 2007, using ACOE protocols. Of the 0.2 total, 0.16-acre, meets the standards to qualify as a jurisdictional wetland under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and the remaining 0.04-acre was found to be non-wetland waters of the U.S. When the San Sevaine Creek Water Project and storm drain improvements on Foothill Boulevard are completed, water flow will permanently alter these drainage patterns and adversely affect the sustainability of the associated habitat on the site. Prior to the removal of any identified riparian habitat and/or blue line stream beds from the site, the applicant must comply with all mitigation measures identified in the Initial Study such as preparing additional surveys (e.g., for burrowing owl and nesting birds) and obtaining the appropriate permits from the Regional Water Quality Board, California Department of Fish and Game, and the Army Corps of Engineers, and comply with the requirements of these resource agencies. 17. Flood Hazard: The project is being built in a flood plain endangering future occupants. The General Plan does identify the site as being in a "Special Flood Hazard Area Inundated by 100-year Flood." This designation is based on the current field conditions of the site which makes it un-buildable until the potential impact by a 100-year flood event is mitigated. However, the San Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) has been involved in a long term effort to prepare fora 100-year event which includes the construction of debris basins, spreading grounds, and concrete channels along the eastern portion of the City and abutting the subject site. The purpose of the San Sevaine Creek Water Project (SSW P) is to provide 100-year flood protection, water conservation, regional recreation benefits, and habitat restoration. The SSWP project is nearly completed, and when completed (est. in the Summer of 2008) it will permanently cut off natural water flows which now cut across the site and permanently divert them off-site and into a concrete lined flood control channel already existing adjacent to the east side of the site. At that point the potential flood hazard will be mitigated and a new use for the site can be implemented. No development of the site can occur until after the flood control project is completed and the applicant has complied with all conditions of approval. 18. Inadequate Public Notice: The appellants contend that public notice regarding the project was inadequate. In keeping with State requirements and City policies, this item was originally advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper on July 5, 2007. The property was posted with two 4' x 8' notice boards and notices were mailed on the same day to all property owners at a distance beyond the required 660-foot radius as shown on the attached map and mailing list (Attachment M). Moreover, staff has confirmed that P16 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS December 5, 2007 Page 16 every property owner in the Chestnut/Cornwall neighborhood was sent notification. A total of 184 notices were mailed at that time. On October 29, 2007, the property was posted (on existing notice boards) notifying the public of the upcoming appeal hearing. As a courtesy, a written notice was mailed to those who were on the above mailing list and to all persons who sent in letters and signed petitions (approximately 19 persons left no address or insufficient addresses). On November 7, 2007, the regular written notice of the meeting was sent. When combined the total number of notices sent recently tb adjacent property owners, petition signers, and those who wrote letters and left mailing addresses was 368 notices. Because those commenting on the project are property owners, have sent in letters, or signed petitions, some individuals may have received multiple notices. On November 12, 2007, notice of the appeal hearing was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper. As standard practice, property owner information is collected from County Tax Assessor records. Although, this is the most efficient means for obtaining property owner information, tax records may not be completely up to date since there is a delay (6 months to a year) before recent changes in ownership are reflected in the County's database. Moreover, since notices are sent to property owners some renters may not have received notice of the project and/or meeting dates. Finally, three neighborhood meetings were also held with adjacent residents to discuss the proposed project. The meetings were held on April 12, 2005, (at Grapeland Elementary), March 5, 2007 (at Grapeland Elementary) and March 15, 2007, (at City Hall). At each meeting, local residents, primarily from the nearby residential tract to the west, attended and voiced opposition to the project. The same mailing list was used for the March 15, 2007 neighborhood meeting (Attachment N). PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION COMMENTS: On November 26, 2007, staff received a response from the State of California, Public Utilities Commission (PUC) regarding the project. In the letter (dated November 21, 2007), the PUC raises their concern regarding possible impacts to the safety of highway-rail crossings caused by increased traffic generated by the project. The letter is a standard letter issued by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) regarding highway-rail crossings throughout the State (Attachment J). The letter requests the City and applicant to consider improvements at highway-rail crossings for increased safety. The project site itself is not located adjacent to any railroad right-of-way. The nearest railroad right-of-way (Metrolink-San Bernardino Line) is located on Etiwanda Avenue approximately 1.5 mile west and south of the project site between Arrow Highway and 6`" Street. The railroad intersection is an at-grade railroad crossing that has been fully widened to ultimate street width and is currently controlled by lights, signs, cross bars, and road markings to comply with requirements for such crossings. These improvements are relatively new, being installed in 2002. While traffic volumes across this rail crossing may increase slightly, the project applicant has no feasible way to control the movement of pedestrians or vehicles outside the project limits. Therefore, in consideration of on-site railroad safety (including pedestrian circulation patterns) already in place and its distance from the project site, no direct impact is expected. P17 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-001 1 9 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS December 5, 2007 Page 17 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (Stewart, McPhail, Diaz) on March 6, 2007. The Committee found the proposed site plan and architectural design to be well done and concurred that the project be forwarded to the Planning Commission for approval. GRADING AND TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE: The project was conceptually approved by the Committee on March 6, 2007.. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, City staff prepared an Initial Study for the entire project that was released for public review on July 2, 2007 (Attachment O). Based on the findings of the Initial Study, staff determined that the project could have a potentially significant adverse environmental impact unless reduced to a level of less-than-significant by the implementation mitigation measures. Areas identified as subject to potential environmental impacts were in Biology, Cultural Resources, Hydrology and Water, Noise, Air Quality (short- term during site preparation), and Geology and Soils. Proposed mitigation measures have been included as conditions of approval for the project. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was proposed for the project. After the Initial Study for the project was initially circulated, the City received (via fax and letter) a comment letter from the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) indicating that the City's General Plan analysis of air quality impacts was out-of-date and that the analysis should be based on their latest air quality impact model (URBEMIS 2007 version 9.2, released in June 2007). As previously mentioned in this report, LSA Associates, Inc., was commissioned to prepare a new Air Quality Analysis report for the project using the SCAQMD's latest testing methodology. The report was completed in September 2007 and concluded that long-term operational emissions associated with the project, from both mobile and stationary sources both on-site and off-site, would not exceed any criteria pollutant emission thresholds established by the SCAQMD. In addition, these long term emissions would not exceed any of the District's localized significance thresholds. As such, the new air quality analysis confirms the finding that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. A revised Initial Study for the project was circulated on October 29, 2007 (Attachment P). The revised Initial Study incorporated the findings of the both the Air Quality Study and the Traffic Study prepared for the project. Staff has concluded that based on these reports and updated mitigation measures, that there is no significant change to the air quality or traffic conclusions reached in the Initial Study originally prepared for the project. Both studies are in project file and are available for review. CORRESPONDENCE & NOTIFICATION: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to adjacent property owners, petition signers, and those who wrote letters in regard to the project. CONCLUSION: The San Sevaine Villas project is well designed and consistent with the permitted uses allowed by the underlying General Plan and zoning land use designations for the site. Staff believes that the concerns raised by the appellants have been fully and adequately addressed and that all project impacts have been properly analyzed and mitigated. Further, the Planning Commission fully considered the project impacts and the proposed mitigation when they granted approval 'of the project and recommended approval of the Density Bonus Agreement. P18 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS December 5, 2007 Page 18 Respectfully submitted, f ~- Ja srr~er, AICP Planning Director JT:MD/Is Attachments: Exhibit A -Development Review DRC2006-00540 Planning Commission Staff Report dated July 25, 2007 Exhibit B -Development Review DRC2006-00540 Resolution No. 07-47 Exhibit C -Development Review DRC2006-00540 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated July 25, 2007 Exhibit D -Original Appeal Letter dated August 4, 2007 Exhibit E -Letters/Petitions in Opposition and Support of the Project (Provided under separate cover) Exhibit F -Location Map Exhibit G -Project Site Plan, Floor Plans, and Building Elevations Exhibit H -Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00119 Resolution No. 07-46 Exhibit I -City/County Population and Housing Estimates dated January 1, 2007 Exhibit J -Affordable Housing Projects in Rancho Cucamonga Map Exhibit K -City Traffic Engineer Memo on Short Cuts dated November 26, 2007 Exhibit L -Letter from Public Utility Commission regarding Highway-rail Crossings dated November 21, 2007 Exhibit M -Site Plan Showing Proposed Building Setback/Separation Reductions Exhibit N -Excerpt from LSA Associates Letter dated November 9, 2007 Exhibit O -Project Notification Area Map Exhibit P -Neighborhood Meeting Notice and Minutes dated April 12, 2007 Exhibit O -Neighborhood Meeting Notice, Minutes, and Mailing List dated March 5, 2007 Exhibit R -Initial Study Parts I through III Exhibit S -Revised Initial Study Parts I through III Draft Resolution Approving Development Review DRC2006-00540 Draft Resolution Approving Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00119 P19 ,~ F T H E C I T Y O F Rnncno Cocnrloncn Staff Report DATE: July 25, 2007 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: James R. Troyer, AICP, Planning Director BY: Michael Diaz, Senior Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540 - PITASSI ARCHITECTS FOR THE NORTHTOWN HOUSING AUTHORITY CORPORATION - A request to develop 225 workforce apartment units on 12.87 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 units per acre), located at 13233 Foothill Boulevard, west of the Etiwanda San Sevaine Flood Control Channel, and east of the Southern California Edison Transmission Line Corridor - APN: 0229-041-10. SUMMARY: Northtown Housing Development Corporation is proposing to develop 225 workforce apartment units on an undeveloped 12.87-acre site located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard near the City's eastern border with the City of Fontana/Unincorporated San Bernardino County. More specifically, the property is situated between the existing Etiwanda San Sevaine Flood Gontrol Channel on the east and the Southern California Edison Corridor on the west. In order to meet the desired goal of providing affordable units for families and make the proposed project economically feasible, the project also includes a Density Bonus Agreement that requests a 25 percent density bonus and modifications to the specific development setback standards described therein. The plans presented for Planning Commission review have been designed with the modified standards identified in the draft Density Bonus Agreement. Final approval of this project will be contingent upon City Council approval of the associated Density Bonus Agreement (also referred to as Housing Incentive Agreement). PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Project Zoning and Density: Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre). With the requested 25-percent project density bonus, the proposed density of the project will be at 17.4 dwelling units per acre. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Undeveloped Land; General Commercial and Edison Utility Corridor; Open Space South - Undeveloped Land; Low-Medium Density (4-8 dwelling units per acre); Etiwanda Specific Plan East - San Sevaine Flood Control Channel\Single-Family Residential; City of Fontana\Unincorporated San Bernardino County across Ilex Avenue West - Edison Transmission Lines; Open Space and Single-Family Residential; Low Density Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) ~xH~~~r l~ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00540-NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION July 25, 2007 Page 2 C. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) North - General Commercial South - Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) East - City of Fontana West - Open Space and Low Density Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) D. Site Characteristics: The project site is approximately 12.87 acres in size and is characterized as a large open undeveloped area between a concrete lined drainage channel on the east and the high voltage transmission line corridor owned by Southern California Edison. Currently, the site has a gradual slope to the southwest and is marked by the unlined streambed of the East Etiwanda Creek that generally transverses the property from northeast to southwest. The East Etiwanda Creek is fed by seasonal water flows from the north via culverts below Foothill Boulevard at the northeast corner of the site, and from a storm drain outlet and man made earthen V-ditch located at the northwest corner of the site. Small scale shrubs and grasses are present across the site with some trees, mostly Eucalyptus, near the center of the site. The site is completely fenced, although some portions are down or have been removed. Dumping (mostly broken concrete, asphalt, trash) along the frontage of the site along Foothill Boulevard was observed. Parking Calculations: A total of 469 unattached parking spaces will be provided for the project including 22.5 covered carport spaces and 56 on-site visitor parking spaces. The total required parking amount is based on the development standards of Chapter 17.40.60 (Affordable Housing Incentive/Density Bonus Provisions). Although these provisions do not require covered or visitor parking spaces, the project will provide one covered parking space (in a carport) per unit, and 56 visitor parking spaces. The carports will be located near the apartment buildings and generally at the center of the site. The remaining uncovered parking spaces will be largely concentrated along the south and west boundaries of the site. Parking requirements for the apartment community project are indicated in the table below: •. - ~ .. lJnit `Size Parking:Standard* 'Number of'lJnifs "' Number of Spaces :Required;` 1-Bedroom 1.0 Space Per Unit 20 20 2-Bedroom 2.0 Spaces Per Unit 137 274 3-Bedroom 2.0 Spaces Per Unit 68 136 Totals 2251Uriits 430 space§:required Rarkin T e ~.. Re wired - '-- .Provided Covered -- 225 Uncovered 430 188 Visitor -- 56 Total 430 spaces 469:(+39 spaces) P20 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00540-NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION July 25, 2007 Page 3 ANALYSIS: A. General: The proposed San Sevaine Villas apartment community is intended to provide affordable alternative housing units in the City. Project implementation will follow the completion of the San Sevaine Water Project by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District. The water project is designed to control flood waters along the San Sevaine and Etiwanda Creeks and divert flood waters away from the site into the concrete fine channel already present along the east boundary of the site. When the project is completed in or around 2009, the potential impact of flood waters on the site will be resolved and the site can be graded for the proposed development of housing units on the site. The apartment community will consist of a mix of two and three-story structures arranged across the site. Apartment mix will include one bedroom (20 units), two bedrooms (136 units), and three bedrooms (68 units) ranging in size from 961 to 1,287 square feet, respectively. A 6,679 square foot community recreational building which includes a 2-bedroom Manager's unit and community pool is also proposed and will be located near the main entrance. On-site recreational amenities are provided including swimming pool, half basketball court, tot-lot, picnic tables and BBO grilles, and a large (100 feet by 40 feet) lawn area for open play. On-site parking will be more than adequate for the project and is evenly distributed around the site. In addition, the site is within close proximity to existing and/or future bus stops on Foothill Boulevard. The closest bus stop is at the nearby intersection of Etiwanda Avenue and Foothill Boulevard, approximately 1/4 mile to the west. The site will be secured with a 6-foot decorative metal fence with pedestrian and vehicle access being limited to a gated entry at Foothill Boulevard. A secondary "emergency only" access point will also be provided from Foothill Boulevard at the west end of the site. Along the Foothill Boulevard frontage of the site, the fences will be accented with stone clad pilasters. The contemporary interpretation of the Tuscan architectural style for the project is well done. The building design elements include fully tiled roofs, trimmed out windows and door openings, and walls clad in stucco and accented with fully grouted faux stone veneer. Staff finds the exterior materials and details to be appropriate and durable. The proposed landscaping palette is complementary to the architecture, with plant materials being well distributed around the site. When completed, the development of the site will result in an attractive apartment complex that will improve the current visual quality of the area consistent with the quality of new projects under construction in the nearby area. B. Design Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (Stewart, McPhail, Diaz) on March 6, 2007. The Committee found the proposed site plan and architectural design to be well done and approved that the project be forwarded to the Planning Commission for approval. C. Grading and Technical Review Committee: The project was conceptually approved by the Committee on March 6, 2007. D. Environmental Assessment: An Initial Study was prepared for the entire project and released for public review on July 2, 2007. Based on the findings of the Initial Study, staff determined that the project could have a potentially significant adverse environmental impact unless reduced to a level of less-than-significant by the implementation mitigation measures. Areas identified as subject to potential environmental impacts were in Biology, Cultural Resources, Hydrology and Water, Noise, P21 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00540-NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION July 25, 2007 Page 4 , Air Quality (short-term during site preparation), and Geology and Soils. Proposed mitigation measures have been included as conditions of approval for the project. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is proposed for the project. E. Neighborhood Meeting: Three neighborhood meetings were held with adjacent residents to discuss the proposed project. The meetings were held on April 12, 2005, (at Grapeland Elementary), March 5, 2007 (at Grapeland Elementary) and March 15, 2007 (at City Hall). At each meeting, local residents, primarily from the nearby residential tract to the west, attended and were opposed to the project. The public comments expressed by residents were based on how they felt the proposed affordable apartment complex would impact their property values and/or create security issues for their neighborhood. Others raised traffic and environmental concerns about the property such as the loss of open space, and why housing is proposed within a flood plain. The applicant, and City staff (including Police Department representatives), responded to their questions. A copy of the minutes from the March 5th and 15th meetings are attached. CORRESPONDENCE: Staff received one phone call from a neighbor regarding the properties to the north of the proposed project. He said he is not opposed to the project, but asked if there would be any zone changes that would affect the property to the north. PUBLIC NOTICE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Vallev Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within 600-foot radius of the project site. A total of 184 notices were mailed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the approval of Development Review DRC2006-00540 through adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval. Respectfully submitted, R. ate' Ja s R. Troyer, AICP Planning Director JRT:MPD/ma Attachments: Exhibit A -Project Plans Exhibit B -Neighborhood Meeting Minutes dated April 12, 2005, and March 5 and 15, 2007 Exhibit C -Initial Study Parts I and II Draft Resolution of Approval for Development Review DRC2006-00540 P22 P23 RESOLUTION N0.07-47 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540, THE DESIG N REVIEW FOR 225 WORKFORCE APARTMENT UNITS AND A COMMUNITY BUILDING ON 12.87 ACRES OF LAND IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED AT 13233 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, IN THE AREA BETWEEN THE ETIWANDA SAN SEVAINE FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL ON THE EAST, AND THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR ON THE WEST; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0229-041-10. A. Recitals. 1. Pete Pitassi Architects, on behalf of Northtown Housing Development Corporation, filed an application for Development Review DRC2006-00540, the design review of 225 workforce apartment units and a community building, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 25th day of July 2007, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on July 25, 2007, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 12.87 acres of land located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard near the City's eastern border with the City of Fontana/Unincorporated San Bernardino County. More specifically, the property is situated between the existing Etiwanda San Sevaine Flood Control Channel on the east and the Southern California Edison Corridor on the west; and b. The properties to the north are undeveloped commercial properties and the Southern California Edison (SCE) utility corridor in the General Commercial and Open Space zone, and to the south is undeveloped land in the Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. On the east side of the site is the San Sevaine Flood Control Channel and single-family residential uses in the City of Fontana. To the immediate west are SCE Transmission Lines in the Open Space zone and further west is asingle-family residential tract in the Low Density Residential (2-5 dwelling units per acre) District; and ExH~e~r 8 DRC2006-00540-NORTH WN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT COF )RATION July 25, 2007 Page 2 c. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and d. The applicant proposed the development of 225 workforce apartment units and a community recreational building center. The project also provides on-site parking and recreational amenities including a swimming pool, half basketball court, tot-lot, picnic tables and BBO grilles, and large (100 feet by 40 feet) lawn area for open play; and e. The project design generally complies with the development standards of the Medium-High Residential District as modified by the proposed Density Bonus Agreement (also referred as Housing Incentive Agreement) as described therein, requesting a 25 percent density bonus and modifications to the specific development setback standards; and f. The design of the new units is a contemporary interpretation of the Tuscan architectural style. The exterior design elements for the new apartment units include fully tiled roofs, trimmed out windows and door openings, and walls clad in stucco and accented with fully grouted faux stone veneer typically. associated with the proposed style. Moreover, landscaping and recreational amenities are well distributed around the site. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby specifically finds and concludes as follows: a. That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan in that the project will advance the goal of providing affordable housing units for the community; and b. That the proposed design is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located, in that the residential use of the site is consistent with the underlying residential zoning for the site; and c. That the proposed design is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code as modified for density and specific standards by the Bonus Density Agreement associated with this project; and d. That the proposed design, togetherwith the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The development of the apartment community at this location will contribute to the ongoing physical improvements in the area that currently consists of largely underutilized properties and substandard infrastructure (e.g., storm drains and roadway improvements). 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidencethatthe project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigated Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would P24 DRC2006-00540- NORTH' NN HOU5ING DEVELOPMENT COR; .RATION July 25, 2007 Page 3 have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. c. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. Pursuant to the requirements of California Fish and Game Code Section 711.4 and Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 753.5, the Planning Commission finds, based on the Initial Study, the Mitigated Negative Declaration, and considering the record as a whole, that there is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. The site has not been identified in the General Plan as potential location for habitat that is known to support sensitive biological species, and the very small areas of identified sensitive habitat and wetlands are isolated and will be permanently cut-off from water flows by the anticipated near term completion of the San Sevaine Flood Control Project being implemented by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District. Based on substantial evidence, the Planning Commission hereby makes a declaration rebutting the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in California Department of Fish and Game Regulation 753.5 (Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations Code, Section 753.5). e. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference: Plannino Deoartment 1) This approval is for the site plan, exterior building design, and landscaping fora 225-unit workforce apartment community and associated site improvements as described in this report and depicted on approved plans on file with the Planning Department. Final approval for the project shall be contingent upon subsequent City Council approval of, and execution thereof, the Density Bonus Agreement (DRC2007-00119). P25 DRC2006-00540- NORTH JVN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT COF ORATION July 25, 2007 Page 4 2) If the Density Bonus Agreement is approved by the City Council, all plans submitted for plan check shall conform to plans approved by the Design Review Committee on March 6, 2007, and the Planning Commission on July 25, 2007. 3) No exterior changes to the design of the project, including exterior materials,.shall be permitted without prior City review and approval. 4) The design and height of decorative metal fences, gates, railings, and perimeter walls shall be submitted for final Planning Director review and approval during plan check. All decorative exterior metal elements shall be finished with high quality powder coat paint and properly maintained by the property owner in good condition at all times thereafter. 5) Primary daily pedestrian and vehicle access to the site shall be only from Foothill Boulevard via the main entry gate nearest the Community Building. The use of the access gate on Foothill Boulevard at the western end of the.. project shall be limited to emergency vehicles/responders only. 6) On-site structures (e.g., buildings, carports, fences, walls, gates, exterior lights, recreation equipment, etc.) and facilities (including parking lots) within the complex shall be maintained in good and presentable condition at all times. Any damaged areas shall be promptly repaired and restored to original condition/appearance to the greatest extent possible. All graffiti shall be promptly removed when discovered by on-site management or as notified bythe City of Rancho Cucamonga. Engineering Department 1) Foothill Boulevard frontage improvements are to be in accordance with City "Major Divided Highway" standards starting from Cornwall Avenue up to easterly project boundary as required and including: a) Provide curb and gutter, curvilinear sidewalk, street trees (along development frontage only), 9500 Lumens HPSV street lights, drive approaches, R26(s) "No Stopping" signs and asphalt pavement, as required. b) Provide adeceleration/right-turn lane for the main entrance driveway. c) Proposed gated entrance is to be in accordance with City's "Residential Project Gated Entrance Design Guide" standard. d) Revise traffic signing and striping, as required. P26 e) Left-turn lane for eastbound Foothill Boulevard at East Avenue shall have a 250-foot pocket length. DRC2006-00540- NORTI-' WN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CO1 )RATION July 25, 2007 Page 5 f) Provide pavement transitions as needed per City Standards g) The drive approach on the Exit Access only shall be 35 feet wide, per City Standard 101, Type C. h) The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover cost for the construction of improvements from future development as it occurs from the south side of the street. If the developer fails to submit said reimbursement agreement within six months of the improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. For those improvements specified above that are outside the development frontage and require right-of-way from other properties, this development shall make a good faith effort to obtain the necessary right-of-way. If the property owner is unwilling to grant the right-of-way, then this development shall not be obligated to install the listed improvements. Appropriate transitions within the existing right-of-way will be required. 2) Construct Foothill Boulevard median island including landscaping and irrigation from Cornwall Avenue to East Avenue per City Standards, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover one-half the City adopted cost for the construction of the median island from future development as it occurs from both sides of the street. If the developer fails to submit said reimbursement agreement within six months of the median improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. 3) The Foothill Boulevard frontage shall be designed in accordance with the City adopted Foothill Boulevard Historic Route 66 Visual Improvement Plan including street lights. This designates a "Suburban Parkway Enhancement Area" featuring colored pavement emblazoned with the Route 66 logo, special sidewalk treatment, artwork and a historic post and a cable roadway safety barrier. Said enhancement within the parkway area shall be maintained by the developer and shall be included in the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs). a) This designates also the installation of the Entry Monument depicted as Exhibits C and E of the Visual Improvement Plan. 4) An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66KV electrical) on the opposite side of Foothill Boulevard shall be paid to the City prior to final map approval or building permit, whichever comes first. The fee shall be one-half the City adopted unit amount times the length of the project frontage. 5) The development proposes to drain via underground storm drain facilities to the eastern boundary of the project at the junction of City Master Plan Line 9 and the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Channel. The San Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) is currently P27 DRC2006-00540- NORTt-' 1 ` WN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT COf ,)RATION July 25, 2007 ~ Page 6 constructing the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Channel Project and is anticipating completion in December 2008. The proposed project cannot develop until the SBCFCD is completed or authorization from SBCFCD is obtained. In addition, the project will require completion of the portion of City Master Plan Storm Drain Line 9 from its existing terminus at the northwest corner of the project site easterly in Foothill Boulevard and southerly in the SBCFCD right-of-way to connect to the existing 120-inch diameter storm drain connection in the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Channel approximately 500 feet south of Foothill Boulevard. a) Drainage fees for the site shall be credited to the cost of permanent master plan facilities, in accordance with City policy. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover oversizing costs, in excess of fees, from future development within the same tributary area. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within 6 months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. 6) Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of the proposed 120-inch storm drain on the south side of Foothill Boulevard. 7) Prior to grading permit issuance, Best Management Practices (BMPs) identified in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be shown on the Gradirig Plan. 8) Maintenance of BMPs identified in the WOMP shall be addressed in the project CC&Rs. Environmental Mitigation Air Quality 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. Contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction. site for City verification. 2) Prior to the issuance of any Grading Permits, developer shall submit construction plans to City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South CoastAir Quality Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning Staff. 3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high volume, lovv-pressure spray. P28 DRC2006-00540- NORTH' NN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT COF ORATION July 25, 2007 Page 7 4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1106. 5) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. • Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads. • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. • Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. • Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 6) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily to reduce PM,o emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 7) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,o emissions. 8) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel-powered equipment where feasible. 9) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-Grading Plans include a statement thatwork crews will shutoffequipment when not in use. 10) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high-efficiencyllow-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 11) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. P29 DRC2006-00540- NORTh `WN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CO( )RATION July 25, 2007 Page 8 Biology 1) Prior to the removal of any Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS) habitat from the site, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) including approved mitigation forthe removal the extant RAFSS habitat from the site. 2) Prior to the removal of any Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS) habitat from the site, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) including approved mitigation forthe removal the extant RAFSS habitat from the site. 3) Priorto the issuance of grading and building permits forthe project, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and Regional Water Quality Control Board, for the removal and/or alteration of on-site riparian habitat within the jurisdiction of the abovementioned resource agency. 4) Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits forthe project, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), for the removal and/or alteration of on-site wetland waters. 5) Prior to the removal of any on-site heritage trees as define by the Rancho Cucamonga Tree Preservation Ordinance, the applicant shall apply for and comply with the provisions of said Ordinance including approval of a Tree Removal Permit. 6) Priorto any on-site grading/construction activity or the removal oftrees for which a Tree Removal Permit has been issued, the applicant shall perform apre-construction tree/nest survey to determine whether active bird nests are present. Study shall be performed no more than 30-days prior to construction activity and be made available to the Planning Director for City verification. 7) Prior to any on-site grading/construction activity on-site grading/construction, the applicant shall perform apre-construction nest survey to determine whether active Burrowing Owl nests are present. Study shall be performed no more than 30-days prior to construction activity and be made available to the Planning Directorfor City verification. Cultural Resources 1) Prior to issuance of grading permit, the developer shall retain a qualified archeologist to prepare an archeological resource assessment. If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a P30 DRC2006-00540- NORTI-. WN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT COt )RATION July 25, 2007 Page 9 qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will: • Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from demolition or significant modification without ah opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. • Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. • Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of the area. • Propose mitigation measures and recommend conditions of approval to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, following appropriate CEQA guidelines. Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. 2) Prior to issuance of Grading Permit,. the developer shall retain a qualified paleontologist archeologist to prepare a paleontological resource assessment. If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities. Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. P31 PLANNING COMMISSION :SOLUTION NO. 07-47 DRC2006-00540- NORTHI UWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION P32 July 25, 2007 Page 10 Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum. Geology and Soils 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) dailyto reduce PM,oemissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or replanted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PM,o emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM~p emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM~p emissions. Hydrology 1) Prior to issuance of Grading Permits, the permit applicant shall submit to Building Official for approval, Storm Water Pollutibn Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. PLANNING COMMISSION :SOLUTION N0. 07-47 DRC2006-00540- NORTH'i uWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION P33 July 25, 2007 Page 11 3) During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. 4) During construction, to remove pollutants, street cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. Post- Construction Operational: 5) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared by Dan Guerra & Associates (April 12, 2006) to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 6) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of Grading Permits. 7) Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project -description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP shall identify the structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. 8) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. Noise 1) Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall submit to the Planning Director and Building Official for review and approval, building plans that demonstrate compliance with the noise attenuation recommendations of the acoustical engineer as contained in the Acoustical Analysis prepared by Gordon Bricken 8 Associates (September 2006), and on file with the Planning Department. PLANNING COMMISSI01 .SOLUTION NO. 07-47 DRC2006-00540- NORTHI OWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION P34 July 25, 2007 Page 12 2) Construction or grading shall .not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. 3) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. 4) Any perimeter walls proposed with the project shall be constructed as early as possible in first phase. 5) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips (counting both to and from the construction site), then the developer shall prepare a noise mitigation plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. ' The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY OF JULY 2007. PLANNING CQMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: ATTEST: Chairman Jamq~ R. Troyer, AICP, I, James R. Troyer, AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 25th day of July 2007, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: HOWDYSHELL, FLETCHER, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE P35 City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Project File No.: Development Review DRC2D06-00540 and Housing Incentive Agreement D RC2007-00119 This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) has been prepared for use in implementing the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration fortheabove-listed project. This program has been prepared in compliance with State law to ensure that adopted mitigation measures are implemented (Section 21061.6 of the Public.Resources Code). Program Components -This MMP contains the following elements: 1. Conditions of approval that act as impact mitigation measures are recorded with the action and the procedure necessaryto ensure compliance. The mitigation measure conditions of approval are contained in the adopted Resolution of Approval for the project. 2. A procedure of compliance and verification has been outlined for each action necessary. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. 3.' The MMP has been designed to provide focused, yet flexible guidelines. As monitoring progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon recommendations by those responsible for the program. Program Management -The MMP will be in-place through all phases of the project. The project planner, assigned by the Planning Director, shall coordinate enforcement of the MMP. The project planner oversees the MMP and reviews the Reporting Forms to ensure they are filled out correctly and proper action is taken on each mitigation. Each City department shall ensure compliance of the conditions (mitigation) that relate to that department. Procedures -The following steps will be followed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 1. A fee covering all costs and expenses, including any consultants' fees, incurred by the City in performing monitoring or reporting programs shall be charged to,the applicant. 2. A MMP Reporting Form will be prepared for each potentially significant impact and its corresponding mitigation measure identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist, attached hereto. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. All monitoring and reporting documentation will be kept in the project file with the department having the original authority for processing the project. Reports will be available from the City upon request at the following address: City of Rancho Cucamonga -Lead Agency (Planning Department) 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 P36 Mitigation Monitoring Program DRC2006-00540 and DRC2007-00119 Page 2 3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staff's is needed, as determined by the project planner or responsibl e City department, to monitor specific mitigation activities and provide appropriate written approvals to the project planner. 4. The project planner or responsible City department will approve, by signature and date, the completion of•each action item that was identified on the MMP Reporting Form. After each measure is verified for compliance, no further action is required for the specific phase of development. 5. All MMP Reporting Forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off as completed by the project planner or•responsible City department at the bottom of the MMP Reporting Form. 6. Unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation measures. The project planner is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions. An MMP Reporting Form will be completed by the project planner or responsible Ciiy department and a copy provided to the appropriate design, construction, or operational personnel. 7. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to stop the work of construction contractors if compliance with any aspects of the MMP is not occurring after written notification has been issued. The project planner or responsible City department also has the authority to hold certificates of occupancies if compliance with a mitigation measure attached hereto is not occurring. The project planner or responsible City department has the authorityto hold issuance of a business license until all mitigation measures are implemented. 8. Any conditions (mitigation) that require monitoring after project completion shall be the responsibility of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department. The Department shall require the applicant to post any necessary funds (or other forms of guarantee) with the City. These funds shall be used by the City to retain consultants and/or.pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measure for the required period of time. 9. In those instances requiring long-term project monitoring, the applicant shall provide the City with a plan for monitoring the mitigation activities at the project site and reporting the monitoring results to the City. Said plan shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. The monitoring/reporting plan shall contorm to the City's MMP and shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to the issuance of building permits. MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III) Project File No.: DRC2006-00540 and DRC2007-00119 Applicant: SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Initial Study Prepared by: MICHAEL DIAZ, SENIOR PLANNER Date: JULY 25. 2007 • .. - .. ~ - . - . .. ,~ ~~ All construction equipment shall be maintained in good PD C Review of plans A/C 2/4 operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. Contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers'specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. Prior io the issuance of any grading permits, the PD/BO C Review of plans C 2 developer shall submit Construction Plans to the City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low-emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAOMD) as well as City Planning staff. All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed PD C Review of plans A/C 2/4 performance standards noted in SCAOMD Rule 1113. Pains and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high-volume, low-pressure spray. All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards BO B Review of plans A/C 2 noted in SCAOMD Rule 1108. All construction equipment shall comply with SCAOMD BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: 1 of 11 ~ w V ~ • • - • • - ~ Reestablish ground cover on the construction site 80 C Review of plans A/C 2/4 through seeding and watering. Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads. BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 areas to erosion over extended periods of time. r Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work. periods. Dispose of surplus excavated material in BO C Review of plans A 4 accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. Sweep streets according to a schedule established BO C During A 4 by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public construction thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon time of year of construction. Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., BO C During A 4 wind speeds.exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with construction SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements. Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils BO C During A 4 haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other Construction suitable means. The site shall be treated with water or other BO C During A 4 soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and construction Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily to reduce Particulate Matter (PM,v) emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. Chemical soil stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and BO C During A 4 RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,~ emissions. The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean BO C Review of plans A/C 4 alternative fuel-powered equipment where feasible. 2 of 11 v w - .. .. - - - - •. - The construction contractor shall ensure that BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 construction-grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. All industrial and commercial facilities shall post signs BO C Review of plans A 4 requiring that trucks shall not be left idling for prolonged periods (i.e., in excess of 10 minutes). All industrial and commercial facilities shall designate PD C Review of plans A/C 2/3 preferential parking for vanpools. All industrial and commercial site tenants with 50 or PD C Review of plans D 2/3 more employees shall be required to post both bus and Metrolink schedules in conspicuous areas. All industrial and commercial site tenants with 50 or PD C Review of plans D Z3 more employees shall be required io configure their , operating schedules around the Metrolink schedule to the extent reasonably feasible. All residential and commercial structures shall be . BO C/D Review of plans C 2/4 required to incorporate high efficiency/low polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water healers. All residential and commercial structures shall be BO C/D Review of plans C 2/4 required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. :sci` Csx'T S "-u„4 F'_'.~~~~" '~a..~.n ~4iG4..~~3`^^~ ~Bioldgicalf~dsdurclesf5~~ ~} sue, .y. ~ivLim~.eJ.ia~vtfi4 `Wra tiles. ~'r.'~ ~~~4.~ "J ~ rd"'+ ~ ~1~~` € ~ ~ T~ '~~_ er+~C~ +w .u ~ ,.'~ r _ ~-s a r~ ~~iyt jp ~L ~i. SC~5a~ ~a ~ - '~~ g j 4 !~w ~. Prior to the removal of any Riversidean Alluvial Fan PD B Review of plans B 2 Sage Scrub (RAFSS) habitat from the site, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) including approved mitigation for the removal the extant RAFSS habitat from the site. Prior to the removal of any Riversidean Alluvial Fan pD B Review of plans B 2 Sage Scrub (RAFSS) habitat from the site, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of California Department of Fish and ~, Game (CDFG) including approved mitigation for the removal the extant RAFSS habitat from the site. 3of11 ~ w cD .. .. - -. .. Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits for PD B Review of plans B 2 the project, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements . of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board, for the removal and/or alteration of on site riparian habitat within the jurisdiction of the abovementioned resource agency. Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits for pD B Review of plans B 2 the project, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), for the removal and/or alteration of on site wetland waters. Prior to the removal of any on site heritage trees as PD B Review of plans C 2 define by the Rancho Cucamonga Tree Preservation Ordinance, the applicant shall apply for and comply with the provisions of said Ordinance including approval of a Tree Removal Permit. Prior to any on-site grading/construction activity or the PD B Review of plans D 2 removal of trees for which a Tree Removal Permit has been issued, the applicant shall perorm a pre- construction tree/nest survey to determine whether active bird nests are present. Study shall be pertormed no more than 30-days prior to construction activity and be made available to the Planning Director for City verification. Prior to any on-site grading/construction activity on-site pD B Review of plans D 2 grading/construction, the applicant shall perform a pre-construction nest survey to determine whether active Burrowing Owl nests are present. Study shall be performed no more than 30-days prior to construction activity and be made available to the Planning Director for City verification. 4of11 a 0 .. .. - .. .. ~CWtufa(~Figsources,,"~''a~~=p~.,~"~~x__~s~~. ~. ~> ~:- '~^ ~~~~.u~j~ v ~?~'r°,x~J ~` ~'' ty.;ssM~" Prior to issuance of grading permit, the developer shall retain a qualified archeologist to prepare an archeological resources assessment. If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City , of Rancho Cucamonga will Enact interim measures to protect undesignated PD/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. • Consider establishing provisions to require PD/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. Pursue educating the public about the area's PD/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 archaeological heritage. • Propose mitigation measures and recommend PD/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 conditions of approval to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, following appropriate CEQA guidelines. • Prepare a technical resources management report, PD C Review of report A/D 3/4 documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area: Submit one copy of the completed report, with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. 5of11 ~ a .. - - .. . .. .: - Prior to issuance of grading permit, the developer shall PD B Review of report A/D . 4 retain a qualified paleontologist archeologist to prepare paleontological resources assessment. If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and PD B Review of report A/D 4 equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities. Should fossils be found within an area being cleared BO e/C Review of report AID 4 or graded, divert earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. • Prepare, identity, and curate all recovered fossils for PD D Review of report D 3 documentation in the summary report and transfer to , an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). • Submit summary report to City of Rancho PD D Review of report D 3 Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy [o the report to San Bernardino County Museum. # b I .d~Crt• f `'Kfl ~fi ~' k k ~Geblo+ ~~ Sotr~ ~~ ~ ~ `5d' ?~ .q EI , ~'~ t "kh f~ - y * ~~~v- _ ~§~' nrswa' r :F3_' ~ ! p .~ _ •. ~ ~~ mo gy a ~' , ;, ~ 3 :. w. 6of11 A N - .. ... -. . . . . . . . . .. . . . The site shall be treated with water or other BO C During A q soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAOMD and construction RW OCB) daily to reduce PM~o emissions, in accordance with SCAOMD Rule 403 or re-planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a BO C During A 4 schedule established by the City to reduce PM,o construction emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil oft-site. Timing may vary depending upon time of year of construction. Grading operations shall be suspended when wind BO C During A 4 speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PMro emissions construction from the site during such episodes. Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAOMD and BO C During A 4 RWOCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PMro emissions. ~_~jfdfol~O~j)`a~ti1~;1~Va~e~ ~ a rt}~`~` ~,-':~ . ~5 , ,~~~, < ,z ,,, t~ . „ . - ~~~-§ ~ ~ ~ ~`~,~ ~~r=~ n~ r ~.~`~c..i=;asZ..3-., _ _ _ 1..._ :~ ~ _ ... "- ' +tS39'.t ~ C~ ~, -~-~'- Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 shall submit to Building Official for approval, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SW PPP) specifically identifying Besl Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 7of11 ~ A W - ..- - An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on- site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in Southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through. a remediation or restoration program within a specifirsd time frame. During construction, temporary berms such as BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. During construction, to remove pollutants, street BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 cleaning will be pertormed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. Insert other specific BMPs from WQMP CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared by Dan Guerra & Associates (April 12, 2006) to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 8of11 ~ a .. Landscaping plans shall include provisions for BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the Cityfor review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 submit to the City Engineer for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WOMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WOMP shall identify the structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, applicant BO B/C!D Review of plans A/C 2/4 shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the Cily Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. '~' 9 T ..~ Cn. ,yZ S-"};`Vi k 4^,se~~'}"z y6 f C~x~ .. Jar( Yj ~'Neise yY~a~~g ~ ~~pj _ '4 F _ ~5~ '= A3Try.v-- =N~ `3r- 5 ~.5T+`~M1~[~-?.f~`-~~ ~ '$~~pj l 4 ~ L a ~ _-, ~.~ M1 ~ G, ~,'~"'i. '?'~1 ~ "l ' ~me..x~. ~i3~v'}~ 3 ~4~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ `_'=a ~:.i..t1..... _ ..~..al.-.2alu~~....c.. L~'!mw.. '~IL~..1T~.c.. ` ~ ~ ~i.~ ~'aPdo~u-0 Z$T" ~ { S ati',!' Y ^AK~~C~~ ` 'W '~ `3G n~~ ' ~. W ~ ~~ u ~4 9of11 ~ • -.. .. . _ - .. - Prior to issuance of Building Permiis, the applicant shall PD/BO B/ Review of plans C 2/3 submit to the Planning Director and Building Official for review and approval, building plans that demonstrate compliance with the noise attenuation recommendations of the acoustical engineer as contained in the Acoustical Analysis prepared by Gordon Bricken & Associates (September 2006), and on file with the Planning Department. Construction or grading shall not take place between the BO C During A 4 ~ hours of 5:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, construction including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the BO C During A 4 standards specified in Development Code Section construction 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Building Official within 24 hours; however, i( noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early PD C During A A as possible in the first phase. construction 10 of 11 ~ A m -. - .: Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the PO/BO C During A 4/7 . hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, construction including Saturday, or al any time on Sunday or a national holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips (counting both to and from the construction site), then the developer shall prepare a noise mitigation plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. Key to Checklist Abbreviations t+8f. B r ,r{n ~~ c- LJ' T" z+ '=ss. ~ `Responslble`Persdn~^~~',~ ,~'~~ WN.¢..:si0. i- ... mneFTf."~.Gne3§'d1 m'°~d h. CUD -Community Development Director or designee ;t '~ rr 's-P-"'rcr "°.F* '-" r~Vlonttdring~ ~e~C{LcncjFx.. &.t `rA 2•• A -With Each New Development _ ~ ~, " °! °~. r etF~~o~1F~~ifia`ah~ii '3 .vs~Y.YV'uS~t_• rYVIYr "`~ ~ A - On-site Inspection I-"' x~.'~'~ `~.e 'c' b c'~~. ~"ySSrtofis~r'f .;gym J ~d~~, 2:Y- l~-ib' - ~±•I 1 ~=Withhold Recordation of Final Map PD -Planning Director or designee 8 -Prior To Construction B -Other Agency Permit /Approval 2 -Withhold Grading or Building Permit CE -City Engineer or designee C -Throughout Construction C -Plan Check 3 - W ilhhold Certificate of Occupancy BO -Building Official or designee ~ D - On Completion ~ D -Separate Submittal (Reports/Studies/ Plans) 4 -SLOP Work Order PO -Police Captain or designee E -Operating 5 -Retain Depositor Bonds FC -Fire Chief or designee 6 -Revoke CUP 7 -Citation i:\planning\f final\cega\mmch klst-rev12-4-06f inal.doc 11 of 11 ~ A V P48 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540 SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR SAN SEVAINE VILLAS - 225 WORKFORCE APARTMENTS APPLICANT: PETE PITASSI FOR NORTHTOWN HOUSING CORPORATION 12.87 ACRE VACANT SITE LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD IN THE AREA BETWEEN THE ETIWANDA SAN SEVAINE FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL ON THE EAST, AND THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR ON LOCATION: THE WEST. - APN: 0229-041-10 ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements comoienoo oa~e 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its _/_/_ agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 07-46, Standard _/_I_ Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. B. Time Limits 1. Development/Design Review approval shall expire if building permits are not issued or approved _/_/_ use has not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval.. No extensions are allowed. C. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include ~ _/_/_ site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations. 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions _/_/_ of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. Project No. DRC2006-005~P49 Completion Dete 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 7. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be reviewed and approved ii by the Planning Director and Police Department (477-2800) prior to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. 8. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick-up shall be for individual units with all receptacles shielded from public view. 9. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. 10. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination. 11. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for Planning Director and City Engineer review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 12. Block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter as indicated on approved plans. If a double wall condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all contiguous property owner at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/ fences along the project's perimeter. 13. Access gates to the site shall be constructed from a material more durable than wood gates. Acceptable materials include, but are not limited to, wrought iron and PVC. 14. For residential development, recreation area/facility shall be provided as required by the Development Code. 18. .Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured products. D. Building Design All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning Department. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. Details shall be included in building plans. -/-/- -/-/- -/_/ -/-/- -/-/- -/-/ _/-/. -/-/- -/-/- -/_/- _/_/ -/_/ -/-/ -/_/. Project No. DRC2006-OO~P50 Completion Date E. F. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans) 1. All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 18 feet long. W hen. a side of any parking space abuts _/_/ a building, wall, support column, or other obstruction, the space shall be a minimum of 11 feet _ wide. 2. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall _/ / contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including curb). _ _ 3. Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across circulation aisles shall be provided ~_/ throughout the development to connect dwellings/units/buildings with open spaces/plazas/ _ recreational uses. 4. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, _/ / and exits shall be striped per City standards. _ _ 5. All units shall be provided with garage door openers it driveways are less than 16 feet in depth _/_/_ from back of sidewalk. 6. Parking and/or storage of recreational vehicles on this site shall be prohibited. _/_/_ 7. Plans for any security gates shall be submitted for the Planning Director, City Engineer, and _/_/ Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District review and approval prior to issuance of building _ permits. For residential development, private gated entrances shall provide adequate turn- around space in front of the gate and a separate visitor lane with call box to avoid cars stacking into the public right-oi-way. Landscaping 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting, shall be prepared bya licensed _/ / landscape architect and submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance _ _ of building permits. 2. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in _/ / accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on the grading plans. The _ _ location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods. 3. A minimum of 45 trees per gross acre, comprised of the following sizes, shall be provided within _!_/ the project: 0% - 48-inch box or larger, 10% - 36-inch box or larger, 10%- 24-inch box or larger, _ BO% - 15-gallon, and 0% - 5-gallon. 4. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three parking _/_/_ stalls. 5. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 _/ / slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion _ _ control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 6. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater _/_/_ slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1-gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 7. For multi-family residential and non-residential development, property owners are responsible for _/_/ the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on-site, as well as contiguous planted areas _ within the public right-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kept free from weeds and debris and Project No. DRC20D6-005~P51 Comoletion Date maintained in healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any damaged, dead, diseased, or decaying plant material shall be replaced within 30 days from the date of damage. B. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Department. fiL Eandscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 10. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. 11. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. G. Signs 1. The signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this approval. Any signs proposed for this development shall com ply with the Sign Ordinance and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Department prior to installation of any signs. 2. Directory monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment, condominium, or town homes prior to occupancy and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits. H. Environmental A final acoustical report shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuss the level of interior noise attenuation to below 45 CNEL, the building materials and construction techniques provided, and if appropriate, verify the adequacy of the mitigation measures. The building plans will be checked for conformance with the mitigation measures contained in the final report. 2. The applicant shall submit certification from an acoustical engineer that all recommendations of the acoustical report were implemented in construction, including measurements of interior and exterior noise levels to document compliance with City standards. Certification shall be submitted to the Building & Safety Department prior to final occupancy release of the affected homes. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the Planning Director in the amount of $ 474 prior to the issuance of building permits, guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forteit. Other Agencies The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location of mailboxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for mailboxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mailboxes and the design of the overhead structure shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. -~-~- -~-~- -~-~- -~-~- -~_/. -~-~- -~-~- -~-~- -~-~- -~-~- Project No. DRC2006-0054P52 Completion Date APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: NOTE: ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW(S) J. General Requirements 1. Submit five complete sets of plans including the following: _/_/_ a. Site/Plot Plan; b. Foundation Plan; a Floor Plan; d. Ceiling and Roof Framing Plan; e. Electrical Plans (2 sets, detached) including the size of the main switch, number and size of service entrance conductors, panel schedules, and single line diagrams; f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics, underground diagrams, water and waste diagram, sewer or septic system location, fixture units, gas piping, and heating and air conditioning; and g. Planning Department Project Number (DRC2007-0054D) clearly identified on the outside of all plans. h. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. 2. Submit two sets of structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and a soils report. _/_/_ Architect's/Engineer's stamp and "wet" signature are required prior to plan check submittal. 3. Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers' Compensation coverage to _/_/_ the City prior to permit issuance. 4. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. / / K. Site Development 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be _/_/_ marked with the project file number (DRC2007-00540). The applicant shall complywith the latest adopted California Codes, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of permit application. Contact the Building and Safety Department for availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential project or major addition, the applicant _/_/_ shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Transportation Development Fee, Permit and Plan Check Fees, Construction and Demolition Diversion Program deposit and tees and School Fees. Applicant shall provide a copy of the school fees receipt to the Building and Safety Department prior to permit issuance. 3. The Building and Safety Official shall provide the street addresses after tracUparcel map _/_/_ recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of B:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday _/_/_ through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays. 5. Construct trash enclosure(s) per City Standard (available at the Planning Department's public _/_/_ counter). Project No. DRC2006.OOSP53 Camoletion Dete 6. Submit pool plans to the County of San Bernardino's Environmental Health Services Department _/_/_ for approval. L. New Structures 1. Provide compliance with the California Building Code (CBC) for property line clearances _/_/_ considering use, area, and fire-resistive construction. 2. Provide compliance with the California Building Code for required occupancy separations. _/_/_ 3. Roofing material shall in installed per the manufacturer's "high wind" instructions: -/_/_ 4. Provide draft stops in attic areas, not to exceed 3,000 square feet, in accordance with CBC _/_/_ Section 1505. 5. Provide draft stops in attics in line with common walls. _/_/_ 6. Exterior walls shall be constructed of the required fire rating in accordance with CBC Table 5-A _/_/_ 7. Openings in exterior walls shall be protected in accordance with CBC Table 5-A. / / 6. Ii the area of habitable space above the first floor exceeds 3,000 square feet, then the _/_/_ construction type shall be V-1 Hour minimum. 9. Walls and floors separating dwelling units in the same building shall be not less then 1-hour _/_/_ fire-resistive construction. M. Grading 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with California Building Cade, City Grading _/_/_ Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to _/_/_ perform such work. 3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the ___/_/_ time of application for grading plan check. 4. The final grading, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, _/_/_ submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. A separate grading plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for _/_/_ existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The grading plan shall be prepared, stamped, and signed by a California registered Civil Engineer. N. Additional Requirements/Comments 1. The project shall fully comply with accessibility requirements of 2001 California Building Code _/_/_ Chapter 11A (Housing Accessibility). 6 Project No. DRC2o06-00'.Frj4 Comoietion Date APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 0. P Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from street centerline): As needed total feet on Foothill Boulevard. 2. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City. 3. Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right-turn lanes, to provide a minimum of 7 feet measured from the face of the curbs. Street Improvements Pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 88-557, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building service equipment which is regulated by technical codes and far which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building or unit, the development may have energy connections made to a percentage of those buildings, or units proportionate to the completion of improvements as required by conditions of approval of development. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings or units be connected to energy prior to completion and acceptarice of all improvements required by these conditions of approval of development. 2. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Street Name Curb & Gutter A.C. Pvmt Side• walk Drive Appr. Street Lights Street Trees Comm Trall Median Island Bike Trall Other Foothill Boulevard X X (c) X X X X (b) Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item. (e) All street improvements to be installed with reduced radius turnaround per City Standard No. 13, modified to fit existing right-of-way. (f) Remove and replace sidewalk as needed to join drive approach and terminate in reduced radius turnaround to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 3. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. -~-~- -~-~- _/___/- -~-~- -~_/. -~-~- -~-~- -~-~- -~-~- 7 I- Project No. DRC2006-005P55 Completion Date d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer Notes: 1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. 2) Conduit shall be 3-inch galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. t. Existing Ciry roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots. h. Sheet trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. i. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. 4. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street improvement plans. Street improvement plans shall include a line item within the construction legend stating: "Street trees shall be installed per the notes and legend on sheet_(typically sheet 1)." Where public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public landscape improvement plans. The City Engineer reserves the right to adjust tree species based upon field conditions and other variables. For additional information, contact the Project Engineer. Min. Grow Street Name Botanical Name Common Name Space Spaeing Size Oty. FOOTHILL BOULEVARD Activity Center tagerstroemia indica Crape Myrtle Hybrid- 3 ft. 15 tt o.c. 24-inch Fill-in "Muskogee" Lavender Triangular boz spacing FOOTHILL BOULEVARD Non-Activity Centers- Prunus blireiana NCN ~ 3 ft. 20 tt. o.o. t 5-gal. FilLin Accent Tree Informal ' ~ groupings not more than 25 of total frontage trees Non-ActiviTy Centers Platanus racemosa California Sycamore 8 ft. 35 tt. o.c, t 5-gal. Fill-in Informal groupings Provide Street Name Select appropriate tree from the approved street tree list for Rancho Cucamonga. Fill-in List each street as a separate line within this legend. _/~- -~-~- -~-~- -~-~- -/___/_ -~-~- -~-~- -~-~- Project No. DRC2006-OOS~P56 Completion Date Construction Notes for Street Trees:' 1) All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans. 2) Prior to the commencement of any planting, an agronomic soils report shall be furnished to the City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or n utrient deficiencies may require backfill soil amendments, as determined by the City inspector. 3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering Department. 4) Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. 6. Intersection line-of-sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines-of-sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines-of-sight plotted as required. Q. Public Maintenance Areas A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Public Works Standards shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. The• following landscaped parkways, medians, paseos, easements, trails or other areas shall be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance District: Foothill Boulevard median island. 2. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 3. All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the developer until accepted by the City. R. Drainage and Flood Control It shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone AE designation removed from the project area. The developer shall provide drainage and/or flood protection facilities sufficient to obtain an unshaded "X" designation. The developer's engineer shall prepare all necessary reports, plans, and hydrologic/hydraulic calculations. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) shall be obtained from FEMA prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMB) shall be issued by FEMA prior to occupancy or improvement acceptance, whichever occurs first. 2. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. 3. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. 4. Permits from the San Bernardino County Flood Control District and Southern California Edison are required to work within their right-of-way. 5. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe measured from the outer edge of a mature tree trunks. S. Utilities Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. -~-~- -~-~ -~-~ ~-/ -~_/. -~-~- -~-~- / / -~-~- -~-~- Project No. DRC2006-D06P57 Completion Date 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. _/_/_ 3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the / / Cucamonga Valley W ater District (CVW D), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the _ _ _ Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVW D is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 4. .Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. _/ / Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from _ _ them. T. General Requirements and Approvals 1. Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area Regional Mainline, Secondary Regional, and Master Plan Drainage _/_/_ Fees shall be paid prior to building permit issuance. 2. Anon-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all _/ / new streetlights for the first six months of operation, priorto final map approval or prior to building _ _ permit issuancerf no map is involved. 3. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shall / / be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if _ _ _ at least 50% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to the Engineering Department when the first building permit application is submitted to Building and Safety. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to the Engineering Department within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: U. Security Lighting 1. All parking, common, and storage areas shall have minimum maintained 1-foot candle power. _/ / These areas should be lighted from sunset to sunrise and on photo sensored cell. _ _ 2. All buildings shall have minimal sequrity lighting to eliminate dark areas around the buildings, with _/ / direct lighting to be provided by all entryways. Lighting shall be consistent around the entire _ _ development. 3. Lighting in exterior areas shall be in vandal-resistant fixtures. Provide catalog cuts of the _/ / proposed exterior light fixtures for City Planner review and approval. _ _ V. Security Hardware 1. A secondary locking device shall be installed on all sliding glass doors. / / 2. One-inch single cylinder dead bolts shall be installed on all entrance doors. If windows are within / / 40 inches of any locking device, tempered glass or a double cylinder dead bolt shall be used. _ _ _ 3. All garage or rolling doors shall have slide bolts or some type of secondary locking devices. _/_/_ W. Security Fencing 1. All residential communities with security fencing and gates will provide the police with a keypad _/ / access and a unique code. The initial code is to be submitted to the Police Crime Prevention Unit _ _ 10 Project No. DRC2D06-005P58 Completion Date along with plans. If this code is changed due to a change in personnel or for any other reason, the new code must be supplied to the Police via the 24-hour dispatch center at (909) 941-1486 or by contacting the Crime Prevention Unit at (909) 477-2800 extension 2474 or extension 2475. X. Windows All sliding glass windows shall have secondary locking devices and should not be able to be lifted from frame or track in any manner. Y.. Building Numbering Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for nighttime visibility. 2. At the entrances of commercial or residential complexes, an illuminated map or directory of project shall be erected with vandal-resistant cover. North shall be at the top and so indicated. Sign shall be in compliance with Sign Ordinance, including an application for a Sign Permit and approval by the Planning Department. 3. All developments shall submit an 6 ~'/z" x 11"sheet with the numbering pattern of all multi-tenant developments to the Police Department. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DEPARTMENT, FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: SEE ATTACHED _~-~. -~-~- -~-~- -~-~- 11 P59 ,..`a Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District ~g ~ Fire Construction Services STANDARD CONDITIONS January 18, 2007 Pitassi Architects/Affordable Housing Project 13233 Foothill Boulevard Multi-Family DRC2006-00540 THE FOLLOWING STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLY TO THIS PROJECT The RCFPD Procedures & Standards which are referenced in this document can be access on the web at htto://www.ci.rancho-cucamonaa.ca.us/fire/index.htm under the Fire Safety Division & Fire Construction Services section. Search by article; the preceding number of the standard refers td the article. Chose the appropriate article number then a drop down menu will appear, select the corresponding standard. FSC-1 Public and Private Water Supply Design guidelines for The Fire Protection water supply must be in accordance to RCFPD Standard 9-8: The following provides design guidelines for the spacing and location of fire hydrants: a. The maximum distance between fire hydrants in multi-family residential projects is 400-feet. No portion of the exterior wall shall be located more than 200-feet from an approved fire hydrant. For cul-de-sacs, the distance shall not exceed 150-feet. b. Fire hydrants are to be located. The preferred locations for fire hydrants are: At the entrance(s) to a residential project from the public roadways. ii. At intersections. iii. On the right side of the street, whenever practical and possible. iv. As required by the Fire Safety Division to meet operational needs of the Fire District, v. A minimum of forty-feet (40') from any building c. If any portion of a facility or building is located more than 150-feet from a public fire hydrant measured on an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, additional private or public fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. d. Provide one fire hydrant for each 1000 gpm of required fire flow or fraction thereof. P60 FSC-2 Fire Flow The required minimum fire flow for this project, when automatic fire sprinklers are installed is 1500 gallons per minute at a minimum residual pressure of 20-pounds per square inch. This flow reflects a 50-percent reduction for the installation of an approved automatic fire sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13 or 13R with central station monitoring. This requirement is made in accordance with the California Fire Code Appendix III-A, as adopted by the Fire District Ordinances. Public fire hydrants located within a 500-foot radius of the proposed project may be used to provide the required fire flow subject to Fire District review and approval. Private fire hydrants on adjacent property shall not be used to provide required fire flow. 3. Fire Protection water plans are required for all projects that must extend the existing water supply to or onto the site. Building permits will not be issued until fire protection water plans are approved. 4. On all site plans to be submitted for review, show all fire hydrants located within 600-feet of the proposed project site. FSC-3 Prerequisite for submittal of Overhead Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems Prior to submitting plans for an overhead automatic fire sprinkler system, the applicant shall submit plans, specifications and calculations for the fire sprinkler system underground supply piping. Approval of the underground supply piping system in accordance to RCFPD Standard #9-8 must be obtained prior to submitting the overhead fire sprinkler system plans. FSC-4 Requirements for Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Ordinance 15, the 2001 California Fire Code and/or any other applicable standards require an approved automatic fire sprinkler system to be installed in: Multifamily structures greater than 7,500 square feet. 2. Multi-family residential structures in excess of 4 units. 3. All structures that do not meet Fire District access requirements (see Fire Access). 4. When required fire flow cannot be provided due to inadequate volume or pressure. 5. When the building access does not meet the requirements of the 2001 California Building Code and the RCFPD Fire Department Access -Fire Lane Standard #9-7. 6. When any applicable code or standard requires the structure to be sprinklered. FSC-5 Fire Alarm System RCFPD Ordinance 15, based on use or floor area (or by other adopted codes or standards) requires an automatic and/or manual fire alarm system. Refer to RCFPD Ordinances 15 and 39, the California Building Code, RCFPD Fire Alarm Standard #10-6 and/or the California Fire Code. 2. Prior to the installation of the fire alarm system, Fire Construction Services' approval and a building permit must be obtained. Plans and specifications shall be submitted to Fire Construction Services in accordance with RCFPD Fire Alarm Standard #10-6. FSC-6 Fire District Site Access Fire District access roadways include public roads, streets and highways, as well as private roads, streets drive aisles and/or designated fire lanes. Please reference the RCFPD Fire Department Access - Fire Lanes Standard #9-7. 1. Location of Access: All portions of the structures is' story exterior wall shall be located within 150-feet of Fire District vehicle access, measure on an approved route around the exterior of the building. Landscaped areas, unpaved changes in elevation, gates and fences are deemed obstructions. 2. Specifications for private Fire District access roadways per the RCFPD Standards are: a. The minimum unobstructed width is 26-feet. b. The maximum inside turn radius shall be 20-feet. c. The minimum outside turn radius shall be 46-feet. d. The minimum radius for cul-de-sacs is 45-feet. e. The minimum vertical clearance is 14-feet, 6-inches. f. At any private entry median, the minimum width of traffic lanes shall be 20-feet on each side. g. The angle of departure and approach shall not exceed 9-degrees or 20 percent. h. The maximum grade of the driving surface shall not exceed 12%. i. Support a minimum load of 70,000 pounds gross vehicle weight (GVW). j. Trees and shrubs planted adjacent to the fire lane shall be kept trimmed to a minimum of 14- feet, 6-inches from the ground up. Vegetation shall not be allowed to obstruct Fire Department apparatus. 3. Access Doorways: Approved doorways, accessible without the use of a ladder, shall be provided in accordance with the 2001 California Building Code, Fire and/or any other applicable standards. 4. Access Walkways: Hardscaped access walkways shall be provided from the fire apparatus access road to all required building exterior openings. 5. Residential gates installed across Fire District access roads shall be installed in accordance with RCFPD Residential Gate Standard #9-1. The following design requirements apply: a. Prior to the fabrication and installation of the gates, plans are. required to be submitted to Fire Construction Services (FCS) for approval. Upon the completion of the installation and before placing the gates in service, inspection and final acceptance must be requested from FCS. b. Gates must slide open horizontally or swing inward. 3 P61 P62 c. Gates may be motorized or manual. d. When fully open, the minimum clearance dimension of drive access shall be 20 feet. e. Manual gates must be equipped with a RCFPD lock available at the Fire Safety Office for $20.00. f. Motorized gates must open at the rate of one-foot per second. g. The motorized gate actuation mechanism must be equipped with a manual override device and afail-safe or battery backup feature to open the gate or release the locking Mechanism in case of power failure or mechanical malfunction. h. Motorized gates shall be equipped with a Knox override key switch. The switch must be installed outside the gate in a visible and u nobstructed location.. i. For motorized gates, a traffic loop device must be installed to allow exiting from the complex. If traffic pre-emption devices (TPD) are to be installed, the device, location and operation must be approved by the Fire Chief prior to installation. Bi-directional or multiple sensors may be required due to complexity of the various entry configurations. 6. Fire Lane Identification: Red curbing andlor signage shall identify the fire lanes. A site plan illustrating the proposed delineation that meets the minimum Fire District standards shall be included in the architectural plans submitted to B&S for approval. 7. Approved Fire Department Access: Any approved mitigation measures must be clearly noted on the site plan. A copy of the approved Alternative Method application, if applicable, must be reproduced on the architectural plans submitted to B&S for plan review. 8. Roof Access: There shall be a means of fire department access from the exterior walls of the buildings on to the roofs of all commercial, industrial and multi-family residential structures with roofs less than 75' above the level of the fire access road. a. This access must be reachable by either fire department ground ladders or by an aerial ladder. b. A minimum of one ladder point with a fixed ladder shall be provided in buildings with construction features, or high parapets that inhibit roof access. c. The number of ladder points may be required to be increased, depending on the building size and configuration. d. Regardless of the parapet height or construction features the approved ladder point shall be identified in accordance to the roof access standard. e. Where the entire roof access is restricted by high parapet walls or other obstructions, a permanently mounted access ladder is required. f. Multiple access ladders may be required for larger buildings. g. Ladder construction must be in accordance with the RCFPD Roof Access Standard 9-9 Appendix A and drawings 9-9a and 9-9b. h. A site plan showing the locations of the roof ladder shall be submitted during plan check. 4 P63 Ladder points shall face a fire access roadway(s). FSC-10 Occupancy and Hazard Control Permits Listed are those Fire Code permits commonly associated with the business operations and/or building construction. Plan check submittal is required with the permit application for approval of the permit; field inspection is required prior to permit issuance. General Use Permit shall be required for any activity or operation not specifically described below, which in the judgment of the Fire Chief is likely to produce conditions that may be hazardous to life or property. • Battery Systems • Candles and open flames in public assemblies • Compressed Gases • Public Assembly • Flammable and Combustible Liquids • Spraying or Dipping Operations • Hazardous Materials • Tents, Canopies and/or Air Supported Structures • Liquefied Petroleum Gases • LPG or Gas Fuel Vehicles in Assembly Buildings FSC-12 Hazardous Materials -Submittal to Fire Construction Services Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction of buildings and/or the installation of equipment designed to store, use or dispense hazardous materials in accordance with the 2001 California Building, Fire, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical Codes, RCFPD Ordinances FD15 and FD39 and other implemented andlor adopted standards. FSC-13 Alternate Method Application Fire Construction Services staff and the Fire Marshal will review all requests for alternate method, when submitted. The request must be submitted on the Fire District "Application for Alternate Method" form along with supporting documents and payment of the $92 review tee. FCS-14 Map Recordation RECIPROCAL AGREEMENTS for Fire Department Emergency Access and Water Supply are required on this project. The project appears to be located on a property that is being subdivided. The reciprocal agreement is required to be recorded between property owners and the Fire District. The recorded agreement shall include a copy of the site plan. The Fire Construction Services shall approve the agreement, prior to recordation. The agreement shall be recorded with the County of San Bernardino, Recorders Office. Reciprocal access agreement -Please provide a permanent access agreement between the owners granting irrevocable and anon-exclusive easement, favoring the Fire District to gain access to the subject property. The agreement shall include a statement that no obstruction, gate, fence, building or other structure shall be placed within the dedicated access, without Fire Department approval. The agreement shall have provisions for emergency situations and the assessing of cost recovery to the property by the fire District. 5 P64 Reciprocal water covenant -Please provide a permanent maintenance and service covenant between the owners granting an irrevocable and non-exclusive easement, favoring the Fire District for the purpose of accessing and maintaining the private water mains, valves and fire hydrants (fire protection systems facilities in general). The covenant shall have provisions for emergency situations and the assessing of cost recovery to the property by the fire District. FCS-15 Annexation of the parcel map: Annexation of the parcel map into the Community Facilities District #85-1 or #88-1 is required prior to the issuance of grading or building permits. Chronological Summary of RCFPD Standard Conditions PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS -Please complete the following prior to the issuance of any building permits: Private Water Supply (Fire) Systems: The applicant shall submit construction plans, specifications, flow test data and calculations for the private water main system for review and approval by the Fire District. Plans and installation shall comply with Fire District Standards. Approval of the on-site (private) fire underground and water plans is required prior to any building permit issuance for any structure on the site. Private on-site combination domestic and fire supply system must be designed in accordance with RCFPD Standards # 9-4, #10-2 and #10-4: The Building & Safety Division and Fire Construction Services will perform plan checks and inspections. All private on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivering any combustible framing materials to the site. Fire construction Services will inspect the installation, witness hydrant flushing and grant a clearance before lumber is dropped. 2. Public Water Supply (Domestic/Fire) Systems: The applicant shall submit a plan showing the locations of all new public fire hydrants for the review and approval by the Fire District and CCWD. On the plan, show all existing fire hydrants within a 600-foot radius of the project. All required public fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivering any combustible framing materials to the site. CCWD personnel shall inspect the installation and witness the hydrant flushing. Fire Construction Services shall inspect the site after acceptance of the public water system by CCWD. Fire Construction Services must grant a clearance before lumber is dropped. 3. Construction Access: The access roads must be paved in accordance with all the requirements of the RCFPD Fire Lane Standard #9-7. All temporary utilities over access roads must be installed at least 14' 6" above the finished surface of the road. 4. Fire Flow: A current fire flow letter from CCWD must be received. The applicant is responsible for obtaining the fire flow information from CCWD and submitting the letter to Fire Construction Services. 5. Easements and Reciprocal Agreements: All easements and agreements must be recorded with the County of San Bernardino. PRIOR TO THE RELEASE OF TEMPORARY POWER The building construction must be substantially completed in accordance with Fire Construction Services' "Temporary Power Release Checklist and Procedures". 6 P65 PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OR FINAL INSPECTION -Please complete the following: 1. Hydrant Markers: All fire hydrants shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating the fire hydrant location on the street or driveway in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Standard Plan 134, "Installation of Reflective Hydrant Markers". On private property, the markers shall be installed at the centerline of the fire access road, at each hydrant location. 2. Private Fire Hydrants: For the purpose of final acceptance, a licensed sprinkler contractor, in the presence of Fire Construction Services, shall conduct a test of the most hydraulically remote on- sitefire hydrants. The underground fire line contractor, developer and/or owner are responsible for hiring the company to perform the test. A final test report shall be submitted to Fire Construction Services verifying the fire flow available, The fire flow available must meet or exceed the required fire flow in accordance with the California Fire Code. 3. Fire Sprinkler System: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire sprinkler system(s) shall be tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services. 4. Fire Sprinkler Monitoring: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire sprinkler monitoring system must be tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services. The fire sprinkler monitoring system shall be installed, tested and operational immediately following the completion of the fire sprinkler system (subject to the release of power). 5. Fire Suppression Systems and/or other special hazard protection systems shall be inspected, tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services before occupancy is granted and/or equipment is placed in service. 6. Fire Alarm System: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire alarm system shall be installed, inspected, tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services. 7. Access Control Gates: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, vehicular gates must be inspected, tested and accepted in accordance with RCFPD Standards #9-1 or #9-2 by Fire Construction Services. 8. Fire Access Roadways: Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, the fire access roadways must be installed in accordance with the approved plans and acceptable to Fire Construction Services. 9. The CC&R's, the reciprocal agreement and/or other approved documents shall be recorded and contain an approved fire access roadway map with provisions that prohibit parking, specify the method of enforcement and identifies who is responsible for the required annual inspections and the maintenance of all required fire access roadways. 10. Address: Prior to the granting of occupancy, single-family dwellings shall post the address with minimum 4-inch numbers on a contrasting background. The numbers shall be internally or externally illuminated during periods of darkness. The numbers shall be visible from the street. When building setback from the public roadway exceeds 100-feet, additional 4-inch numbers shall be displayed at the property entry. 11. Address: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, commercial/industrial and multi- family buildings shall post the address with minimum 8-inch numbers on contrasting background, visible from the street and electrically illuminated during periods of darkness. When the building setback exceeds 200 feet from the public street, an additional non-illuminated 6-inch minimum number address shall be provided at the property entrance. Larger address numbers will be required on buildings located on wide streets or built with large setbacks in multi-tenant commercial and industrial buildings. The suite designation numbers and/or letters shall be provided on the front and back of all suites. 7 P66 12. Fuel Modification: Please refer to RCFPD Summary of Fire Hazardous Area requirements. 13. Hazardous Materials: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant must demonstrate (in writing from the County) that the facility has met or is meeting the Risk Management Plan (RMP) or Business Emergency/Contingency Plan with the San Bernardino County Fire Department, Hazardous Materials/Emergency Response and Enforcement Division. The applicant must also obtain inspection and acceptance by Fire Construction Services. 14. Confidential Business Occupancy Information: The applicant shall complete the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District "Confidential Business Occupancy Information" form. This form provides contact information for Fire District use in the event of an emergency at the subject building or property. This form must be presented to the Fire Construction Services Inspector. 15. Mapping Site Plan: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, a B'/z" x 11" or 11" x 17" site plan of the site in accordance with RCFPD Standard #13-1 shall be revised by the applicant to reflect the actual location of all devices and building features as required in the standard. The site plan must be reviewed and accepted by the Fire Inspector. 8 P67 Design Review Committee for their review prior to being brought back to the Commission.. She cautioned the applicant that it had better not look anything like what was presented tonight. Mr. Ennis asked for the applicant's concurrence with the proposed motion. Mr. Noorzady indicated his understanding and concurrence. Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly, to give the applicant a 60 day continuance with the understanding that within that time period he would work with staff and his architect towards a more workable plan which would then proceed to the Design Review Committee for their comment and then to the Commission for their review and approval. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE -carried • w rt + F. ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENTANDDENSITYBONUSAGREEMENT DRC2007-00119- PITASSI ARCHITECTS -Review of proposed Density Bonus Agreement (also referred to as Housing Incentive Agreement) to implement Development Review DRC2006-00540 allowing.a density bonus and modifying specific development standards for the construction. of 225 workforce apartment units on vacant property in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located at 13233 Foothill Boulevard, west of the Etiwanda San Sevaine Flood Control Channel, and east ofthe Southern California Edison Transmission Line Corridor-APN: 0229-041-10. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts has been prepared for consideration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. ~G ~ ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540 - PITASSIARCHITECTS FOR THE NORTHTOWN HOUSING AUTHORITY CORPORATION: - A request to develop 225 workforce apartment units on 12.87 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 units per acre) located at 13233 Foothill Boulevard, west of the Etiwanda San Sevaine Flood Control Channel, and east of the Southern California Edison Transmission Line Corridor -APN: 0229-041-10. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts has been prepared for consideration. Mike Diaz, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. He noted he had received comments from two residents northeast of the site who indicated less than full support of the project. He said a third communication came from an investor interested in a property on the north side of Foothill Boulevard. He stated this person did not voice an objection. He added that he also received letters from the Inland Empire Utilities Agency with a suggestion to use recycled water, CVWWD with no comment, Etiwanda School District regarding school fees and from the SCAOMD which noted the air quality model used for the environmental documents. Commissioner Howdyshell asked if the exit from the development would allow eastbound traffic only. Mr. Diaz noted that there will be a signal at East Avenue with protected U-turns. Commissioner Howdyshell asked if prior to the signal being installed, would U-turns be allowed. Mr. Diaz stated that the signaling project is not likely to be installed until flood control completes their water project. He noted that there are other projects going in that will help with the costs of the infrastructure and therefore Foothill Boulevard will continue to improve. Commissioner Munoz asked for comment on the power lines. Planning Commission Minutes -9- July 25, 2007 ExNre~r C P68 Elizabeth Jernari, 7848 Fillipi Court, Rancho Cucamonga, stated she is a single mom of four. She is opposed because of her fear of crime stemming from a low income community. She reported that she fears her house would be broken into from someone at the apartment complex and those walking the streets. She expressed concern that her children would be exposed to gangs. She said the school district has too many students and therefore less attention is given to individual students. She suggested low income housing be placed somewhere else. Joseph Sibree, 8165 Cornwall Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, said he was not notified, that the terms 'low income and very low income' were not used. He asked what workforce housing is. He suggested they build condos and homes not apartments. He mentioned that endangered kangaroo rats, nesting raptors, and burrowing owls are on the property and that the project is on a streambed. He noted they plan to stop the flow of the stream. He cited concerns of traffic issues, property values and minimal notification of 173 households wherein his estimation was about 500 notices should have been mailed. He stated a new notification should be done. Emily Spinney, 8198 Cornwall Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, voiced opposition due to property values, and that her neighborhood has already struggled and they are trying to improve the surrounding homes. She expressed concern about the flood plane zone, ground stability, endangered species, and the site being an unsafe area where crime will occur. She said there are too many stores that are vacant. She said the schools are overcrowded. She asked if this project was good for the rehabilitation of Route 66. She said she obtained about 50 signed petitions. Anna Batista, 7915 Marshall Court, Fontana, said she is from the Field Stone community and her house was valued at $650,000. She said property owners do not want to live near an apartment complex. She said low income people will hang out. She mentioned traffic concerns in that she can't get into her driveway from East Avenue, that there are gangs and trouble makers. She expressed fear that property values will go down. Stephanie Estrada, 7961 Hemingway Court, Fontana, (Field Stone community) stated she was not notified. She said she is concerned about traffic, property values, gangs, and additional traffic and that it is dangerous with low income housing kids walking to school. She commented that she and her husband do not work in the neighborhood and her children need to be safe. She said she is horrified and feels violated, and disappointed. She said her alarm went off and it took 1 hour for Fontana Police Department to respond. She reported that in December, Fontana PD said they will not respond anymore to alarms because it is no longer a priority. Martin Perez, 7893 Marshall Court, Fontana, (Field Stone community) said he drives to LA to work. He said he is upset because he was not notified and his property value will go down. He is concerned about traffic and he is scared about turning left on East Avenue from Foothill Boulevard. He said with 220 units, there would be over 200 cars that will be traveling up East Avenue towards the 210 Fwy. He said he fears for his child's safety because of the traffic. He asked fora "no"vote or at the least a reduction of the number of units. Brian O'Connel, 13045 Ivy Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga. He stated he met with the ex-mayor. He said he called Irvine, Simi Valley, Valencia and Laguna Beach. He said the City Planners were all available to him. He said they were not in compliance either but they said do not do it this way; don't put in a huge apartment complex in one spot. He said there are different ways to accomplish this: 1) old apartment complexes can be refurbished, 2) convert apartment complexes to townhomes slowly and 3) spread out these projects. He said the City treats his neighborhood as second class. He said they do not have street sweeping, curbs, or street lights. He said he got numerous agencies to come out and investigate. He said they have no child molesters because they keep it that way; it is a tight knit community. He said the proposed project looks like a prison and it is. He reported that the condos have had to reduce their price because of the threat of the apartment complex. He said Lyon Homes is very angry because they were not notified and they may instigate a lawsuit. He Planning Commission Minutes -11- July 25, 2007 P69 in place for students attending their schools that they (Northtown Development) have to pay in accordance with State law. He noted there are over 1,000 workforce units in Rancho and no one would be able to say exactly where they all are because of the high development standards in place. He commented that there are many statistics regarding crime related to these projects in our immediate area. The meeting was disrupted at this point by an unidentified speaker (later identified as Joseph Sibree) who lashed out angrily because the Chairman allowed Mr. Pitassi to speak. She stated that she allowed it because of the technical issues that needed to be addressed and that the questions were brought forward by the public and the Commission needed answers to those questions and Mr. Pitassi would be able to address them. She said she would also ask the same questions of staff. She said it is within her discretion to let him speak and she takes the blame for it, but the questions needed answers anyway. She said she should have asked him to sit down and take him in proper order. She said she would not allow responding back and forth (from the gallery) but that she would allow him (the unidentified person) to have a one minute response and shewould also allow anyone else that wants to speak, a time to speak. She then brought the meeting back to order and proceeded to allow more testimony to be taken. Joseph Sibree, 8165 Cornwall Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, commented that the 660 sphere is mostly open fields with only a few residents and the residents are the ones that are concerned. He said the other residents passed out their own notification. He said that this is unique and they should have expanded the notification area. He said they did follow Council's direction but it is not fair. He said he asked for a response from Northtown and City Council and received no response. He said he had a lot of questions with no answers. He said for the 1st meeting he was not notified, the 2nd was at the school, and the 3rd meeting was at the City but it was a closed meeting and not a meeting for the public. He said no public notice was sent out for that meeting and that they were "duped" and only 6 residents were there; they talked with one another to find out about the meeting. Todd Brazoau, 13004 Ivy Avenue, Etiwanda, said he lives to the west of the proposed project. He said they are scared and are surrounded by negatives. He said the foot traffic from the detention center is being diverted. He said a more positive thing could be done on this property rather than apartments. He commented they have fought for their neighborhood for peace and they don't want to chance losing it. He said the project resembles a jail and it is. He noted traffic issues, transients, and that the neighborhood is scared. Gilbert Rodriguez, 13030 Ivy Avenue, Etiwanda: He noted past problems in the vacant field and they have thrown out transients. He said the low income people will bring drugs into their neighborhood. Emmylou Pablo, 13207 Lambrusco Court, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that the Commission is more concerned about keeping the restaurant open than about the concerns of their neighborhood. She said she moved to Rancho Cucamonga because of her son's education. She said these low income kids could lower the standards of the Etiwanda School District and ruin it for everyone. She remarked that Fontana Police only has nine officers on duty at a time. Mrs. Pablo commented Etiwanda School District was in the top 10 and she didn't want to hurt her son's education and/or lower the property values. Paul Valle, 13132 Riesling Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, said he has a personal history of law enforcement and he believes this kind of development will affect the community. He commented that traffic is a main issue as well. He asked that alternatives should be taken into consideration. Loretta Veylupek, 13039 Chestnut Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, asked for clarification of the access to the project from the gate. She said she agrees with everyone else in what they have said. Planning Commission Minutes -13- July 25, 2007 P70 Mr. Ennis commented that California has an affordable housing crisis and only a small percentage of people can afford to buy a house. He said that the State legislature has determined that cities over time have made preferences to build homes for higher income people thus excluding those with a lower income. This mandate came forth to try to remediate that. He reported that every city must provide a housing element document every 5 years with a plan showing how they plan to develop housing and to achieve their mandated allocation of affordable. The State expects the City to provide a rather large number of units and we are behind in achieving our goal thereby creating risks for us. He said there can be impacts on future development. The legislature also enacted a law that says a city can not base their approval decisions based upon the income of the people who would likely reside in that development. He noted that the city, if found guilty of this, could face the decision being invalidated and also suffer serious consequences and legal costs. He said denials could only be based upon design, the site, and other planning principles. He reported that from a redevelopment perspective, the City designated large areas for redevelopment projects therefore capturing additional revenues for the City however, 20 percent of those funds must be used for affordable housing and if they are not used, penalties will be imposed. He said the legislature is making it harder and harder for cities to control or deny these projects. Vice Chairman Fletcher noted that the City is "not on the take" as one speaker indicated and that the City is not just "cramming in" more housing and no'one is getting paid off; the Commissioners are volunteers. Mr. Ennis added that the State requires us to give the developer this bonus and other concessions on affordable housing projects in an effort to ensure the affordable housing goals are met. Commissioner Munoz asked council to comment on opposition that is based upon prejudice orthe concept of NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard). He remarked that these decisions are sometimes based on misinformation. He remarked that the law prohibits the decision making to be based upon income and we are not allowed to impose conditions that would make that development infeasible. Mr. Ennis said that is correct; someone could go to court and overturn that decision if it is shown that the decision was predicated on those factors. Joe Stofa, Associate Engineer commented on the concerns about traffic. He said the left turn pocket will be extended for a U-turn pocket to a 250 foot lane. He said since it is on the border of Fontana, coordination with them is occurring. He said a signal will be there and the City of Rancho will take the lead on that. Commissioner Howdyshell asked for clarification of the division of the various units amongst incomes such as low, very low, etc. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, reported that the income levels are based upon the number of people in a household (people occupying a unit) and the income levels are determined by HUD. He stated that'extremely lovv' for example for a single occupant is $12,000 per year, 'very low' is less than $20,000 and'low' is earning less than $33,000 per year. He said it varies depending upon the total income and number occupants a household and there is no moderate category. He added that It is not just working occupants, but the total income for all the occupants in the household; Chairman Stewart asked if he knew the median income for the County Mr. Grahn said he did not. Commissioner Munoz reported that the median income for the County is $57,500. Planning Commission Minutes -15- July 25, 2007 P71 affordable housing in Alta Loma near where she lives. She said so many of them are so well designed that you could not pick them out from any other apartment complex or market rate apartments. She stated that many people cannot qualify for homes including some of our own family members and it even includes some school teachers. She commented that there is not one study that says if you build affordable housing, you get crime. She said that one of the meetings about this project included a presentation by the Police Department which included statistics that showed in Rancho Cucamonga, more crimes were committed in the market rate housing over the affordable housing developments. She said the key is property management. She said if there are high calls for service, the residents can gather and become part of a program to address those issues. She said it is an award winning program and.it works. She said that the City has to find land to accommodate these developments and we are 90 percent built out. She said there are traffic problems all over the community, but that is how we get infrastructure through development. She noted that the commercial development was addressed in the General Plan years ago. She added that the streets in their neighborhood are not private streets, they are public and they cannot control who is walking through them unless they are doing something wrong and even then the police should be called . She said this project has been through a multitude of reviews. She remarked that not every project has a 220 foot Edison corridor next to it that will not be developed and that will offer some protection for the neighborhood. She commented regarding the gentlemen that left the meeting earlier and his remarks about talking with other various cities such as Irvine and Laguna Niguel. She commended him for doing the research. She commented that the speaker suggested conversions, spreading these developments throughout the city, senior housing, and qualifying 55 year olds for certain projects. She remarked that we have done all those things to accommodate affordable housing requirements and they have been done many times and all the options have been explored. Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Fletcher, to adopt the Resolution recommending approval of Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00119 which will be forwarded to the City Council for final action and to adopt the Resolution approving Development Review DRC20D6-00540 with the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts. The motion carried (5-0)by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE. -carried x w ~ • w DIRECTOR'S REPORTS H. CONSIDERATION TO INITIATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2006-00635 -RANCHO WORKFORCE HOUSING -A request to amend the General Plan land use designation from General Commercial (GC) to Mixed Use (MU) for approximately 17 acres of land, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard between Center Avenue and Hermosa Avenue. APN: 1077-601-02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 11, 13, and 14. Related Files: Development District Amendment DRC2006-00634, Development Review DRC2006- 00633. and Tree Removal Permit DRC2006-00636. CONSIDERATION TO INITIATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT DRC2006-00634-RANCHO WORKFORCE HOUSING -A request to amend the Development District from Community Commercial (CC), Foothill Boulevard District Subarea 3, to Mixed Use (MU) for approximately 17 acres of land, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard between Center Avenue and Hermosa Avenue. APN: 1077-601-02, 03, 04, O5, 06, 11, 13, and 14. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2006-00635, Development Review DRC2006-00633, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2006-00636. Planning Commission Minutes -17- July 25, 2007 - _..., rl'd~ciw~l cln o` Ra,rrr.H~ CUCAN1pNGA Dat cos-o4- 007 C^.i i 'Y ('~.` ~f( Page 1 of 5 lor~~pL~~ Planning Commision Aaaeal ~iCY.~~~S To: The City Of Rancho Cucamonga "City Counsel /Planning Director/ Commission" Regarding the Planning decisions of 07-25-2007. Items DRC 2007-00119 and DRC 2006-00540. Construction of 225 unit workforce apartments From: The Residents directly impacted and opposing the proposed San Sevaine Villas Development. For these reasons we aze appealing your approval of this project: 1. This apartment community is to lazge. We the citizens have not been satisfied that Northtown Housing development corp. will be able to control what will happens in our neighborhoods with the overbearing influx of pedestrians and auto traffic. Northtowns current lazgest development for affordable housing is Villa del Norte, located at 9997 Feron blvd. This project is only 88 units. Approximately two and half times smaller than this proposed project. Even with this smaller project they went through two different management companies before getting the John Stewart Co They were already having problems with crime and maintenance. As stated by Mike Diaz the head planner for this project at the 07-25-2007 public hearing for this project " we aze putting see through fencing around the complex so they can not do graffiti" and "we are putting see through fencing so the police can see in" By that statement alone he admits there will be crime. Also the head chairwoman said before they voted that we would get crime and the power line easement was our protection. Additionally Joshua Viso a County prosecutor said "More crime and hazd core gangs". By Northtowns own admission this project must take part in High Management Program with the police department to keep things under control. Northtown only refers to crime within its developments. The crime will spill out into our neighborhoods instead of inside the complex. How will you stop additional crime in our neighborhoods from this development? Rancho Cucamonga has never built such a large workforce (low-income) apartment complex. They do not know what the future will bring with 225 units and over 1000 people. Why aze you experimenting on our neighborhoods? What facts do you have that can back up the safety of our neighborhood aS there is nothing azound to compaze to? 2. We the citizens need to know if Foothill Blvd. (south side from Comwal] st to Etiwanda blvd) will be improved before occupancy of this proposed project. For these reasons: A. There are no curbs, gutters or side walks for residences to walk on foothill blvd.. This is very unsafe as the residences would have to walk to the bus stop that's on Etiwanda or would need to walk to Food 4 less, Wal-Mart ect. It will be inevitable that someone gets run over or killed. P72 Ewr~e~r D P73 Date 08-04-2007 Page 2 of 5 planning commission appeal DRC2007-00119 and DRC2006-00540 B. There aze no sidewalks on Cornwall or Chestnut ave. This is the short cut to Food 4 less. Residences would have to walk in the street to get there and jalryvalk across Etiwanda. This is unsafe and someone will get run over or killed also. C. Could the city be sued if someone gets hurt or killed because of this? It is public record now; we have ]et you know about this bad situation. ] . There will be over a thousand people in this complex when occupied. Northtown Housing dev. corp. has provided the residences with a 6,000 sq. ft. clubhouse and a pool. There is no ]azge grassy field for the kids to play soccer, football ect. There is no basketball court ect. Kids today don't need to sit in front of a computer they need exercise. They have designed it to big with buildings to close, not thinking about the kids. Where will the kids play out doors? Will the kids jaywalk across Foothill and use the private pazk in "Hertitage"? These residences aze paying high taxes for there own pazk. They moved in and paid 6~Ok - 750k because they wanted a safe private pazk. How will you guazantee Hertitage residerices that the apartment residences won't use their private pazk? 4. Traffic on East Street: This proposed apartment complex will only exit east on Foothill Blvd. due to a new median on foothill. The traffic will use East Street to go to the I S fwy. East Street already is very congested due to the high school to the north. All high school kids in fieldstone must walk to school (no bus service). Many parents drive their kids to school. This is another bad area where someone will get hit by a caz. How will you improve safety? S.Will the comer at foothill and East Street be improved before occupancy of this proposed apartment complex? What improvements will be done on East Street before occupancy to improve safety? 6. Traffic on Foothill Blvd, between Etiwanda and East Street: Already traffic in the morning backs up from Etiwanda to Cornwall. When this happens traffic diverts off foothill blvd, toms south on Cornwall st., right on Chestnut and exits at Etiwanda Blvd. Our neighborhood already has a unsafe condition as they speed down our streets. How will things be any better when the apartment resident make a u-turn at foothill and East Street, adding more traffic and doing the same? What statistic do you have to show making a u-tom at foothill and East Street will be safe when foothill is already backed up? Why is all the traffic diverted towards Fontana? 7. Etiwanda Schools: Our children currently go to Etiwanda schools and they are severely overcrowded. It is so bad they must take two lunches because they can't serve them al] in one. It is so crowded when you change periods you aze rubbing shoulder to shoulder with other students. This apartment complex will influx our schools with 600 or more new students. What proof do you have to show they will be able to withstand the additional students? We know the school district will get their money from the P74 Page 3 of 5 Date 08-04-2007 Planning commissions appeal DRC200Z-00119 and DRC 2006-0540 developer. Show us how the money will be used to remedy this situation. We need more high schools and middle schools now before any construction on this property. 8. Property Values: At the 07-25-2007 planning public hearing there were many realtors that spoke and they all agreed that property values would drop neaz workforce apartments. Are you going to compensate the residence for their lost value? What will you say to the resident who owes what his house is worth now, but after you build owes more than it's worth? Now he is upside down and can't even sell his house. Northtown has said they have proof that workfoce low- income apartments don't affect property values, show us the proof. 9. Right now our azea is a highly desirable place to live. We_aze neaz Victoria Gazdens, Freeways, and commerce. However if the aparhnents aze built we'll have a hazd time selling, as the realtors said there clients would not consider living by workforce apartments. Residences said if they knew about this they would not have bought. How will you make our neighborhoods attractive to future buyers? 10. What facts do you have to support that Victoria Gardens retail businesses won't Be affected by workforce apartrnent residence? They, like all citizens can go there to shop but will they be shopping? Victoria Gazdens is an upscale mall. As you stated at the planning meeting the lowest income level will be 12,000 a yeaz, then 20;000 a yeaz and then 33,000. 11. if Northtown Housing Development cannot fill the vacancies in the moderate- incomelevels or the low-inwme levels, would they be allowed to rent the units to the very low-income bracket? t2. The Planning Commission said they had one week to look at this project as recorded at the 07-25-2007 hearing. You also stated there was over 300 pages of information to review and you drove by the site one time. It is our opinion you did not spend enough time looking at the grave hazdships this project will cause our community. We the citizens request the planning commission look at our neighbor hoods, schools, street conditions, traffic conditions, pedestrian access, pazks and overall concept of this project again. We believe you will see it is much too lazge to put next to us and for our community to beaz. 13. The Planning Commission said at the hearing 07-25-2007 that Rancho Cucamonga is very behind on workforce apartments. They also said land was allotted years ago for this vary use. That way they could keep getting their tax credits. Why didn't Rancho Cucamonga keep up as time went on?Now instead of small sized workforce apartment being spread out among the community, you are trying to build this oversized workforce apartment by us. Trying to make up lost ground with the state. Now you want us the residences to pay the price for your poor coordination. It is only fair to treat our community with the same respect as the communities neaz existing workforce apartments. Build on a much smaller scale so you do not overwhelm us. There is nothing that says you "have to" build P75 Page 4 of 5 date 08-04-2007 Planning Commission Appeal DRC2007-001 ] 9 and DRC2006-00540 It this big, show us the law that says you "have to". Also show us the law that sa}~s you "have to" use the density bonus. 14. What will be done for the residences of this apartment complex for sound control? The noise level in this azea exceeds city standards V-13 Due to foothill blvd and the ] 5 freeway. A 14-foot sound wall would be required, yet the plans show rod iron fencing? 15. What is being done about the building separations? The current fire department required sei backs and distances between structures are not met? This is a high fire hazard area. What type of fire sprinkler system will be installed in these buildings? NFPA chap. 13 or 13R? Has the available water requirement been met for fire use at the site? How many gpm is required? ] 6. In the LSA summary of this land it is noted there is qualifying wetland. Is it lawful to build on wetlands in California? Is it lawful to build on stream beds? If so please provide codes, laws and/or other proof of this. 17. Focused Survey August 2006: A. Burrowing Owl: This animal is protected by an international treaty. The report states the nesting season for these animals is between February and April and could last till August. The focused survey was done in late August. They did not detect any Burrowing Owl at this time (no wonder!). The peak-nesting season is between April 15th and July 15~'. Why wasn't the focused survey done during peek nesting season? B. As stated it the LSA report there aze suitable burrows for Burrowing Owls along the banks of the east Etiwanda creek channel and adjacent banks within the center section of the site. Another Focused survey needs to be held at the peek-nesting season. C. The residences wish to use another company rather than LSA Associates, inc. This way the information can be cross-referenced for accuracy. The 150-meter zone of influence transects needs to be performed. Access to adjacent properties can be obtained by calling the property owners. Northtown has their phone numbers. Our residences will comply if property access is needed. D. San Bernazdino Kangaroo Rat: The San Bernardino Kangazoo Rat is known to exist in the Etiwanda Creek Channel Has a focused survey been performed yet? Please provide survey results, mitigation info ect. E. Slender-homed Spineflower: Will you be doing a focused survey between April and .Tune ,the spring blooming season? This federally listed plant would impact this project significantly. 18. Flood and Water Control: What studies have been preformed regazding the current water under mining East Street? This leads to the proposed site? How can you guarantee the safety of any future resident on that property? Even when the current flood control channel is finished there is still an underlying problem. What wrill be done? P76 page 5 of 5 date 08-04-2007 Planning Commission Appeal DRC2007-00119 and DRC2006-00540 19. Fontana residences north of this proposed work force apartment complex. They will not be provided with adequate police protection. Starting in December per. Mrs. Astroda the Fontana police dept, will not respond to house alarms. How will their children be protected if both parents work? 20. There is a 220-foot power line easement that is along the west property line of this proposed site. This would be the east property line of our residential homes. As many residences have said "this is a perfect place to commit violent crimes" as they would not be seen. This is also a place for transients to hang out. It is chain linked fenced, but there are sections cut out. They patch it up then it gets cut again. What measures will be done to permanently keep people out of the easement? 21. What kind of outside lighting will be installed azound the exterior walls/fencing of this proposed complex? What kirid of full time security will be provided for the surrounding communities? 22. This project is to Big. Yes there is a need for work force apartrnents, but this is to many units in one area. They need to consider planning 3 100 unit complexes spread out among the city in smaller more plentiful and available lots thus increasing ranchos quota without exceeding its infrastructure. In closing we the residents feel that the local infrastructure of the affected azea is inadequate to support a project of this magnitude. There would need to be significant changes in the local infrastructure as well as social infrastructure before the city of Rancho Cucamonga should even consider a vote on this development. Neighborhood Committee Represenitives: Kenneth Van Horn 909-463-6000 Joseph Sibree 909-646-0608 Eric Gail 909-646-7495 Brian J O'Conne11909-472-9441 P77 EXHIBIT E LETTERS/PETITIONS IN OPPOSITION AND SUPPORT OF THE PROJECT PROVIDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER .-. 5~ G~ ^~ W L a r r O O ti O O N U O 0 N O O Cfl N U O as .~ as c m E 0 m O zE a;LL ~~. ,os °Ec jmo cm ~c° w I'il SITE UTILIZATION MAN San Sevaine ~/illas Rancho Cucamonga, California f S~ Dan Gue ~rru & ~Asa~vciales ~„s ~Fl ;~;~ i PITASSI ARCHITECTSmc. N O O O O N 0 V tF I f ~j ~I ` i~ ~ 1.1.1 ti..a--~_ ~ ~~ --- - - -- ~' _ FOOTHILL BLVD" / ~_ t /[ a - .. .. ---]{~ n j - --- - - I I C r ~Ii / / 9 9 - _Z - -. -~_ _. _~, -. ~ - I T I~ II I 1 I~ Ij I I~ I? ~_ I~If .r i. ' ; / ~/ o ~ q . I .3 1 I r ~ ; ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~~ A 6m.•d- I ~i~ / I ~ I ~ I ~ I, J -I- ~9 ~ I t 1, I I ~ PROIECI' DATA: a..a » r .a,,, uNNMW _ ~ --_ I / 1 ~ Tcbl Slb NO: S61J6t tl.ll]d1]d Bulldlnp Cmxragc 9UROINGS: rtWdst aLLb NMh LM) pe1M I I9 I i `--~ ~ __ __. I / ~' / ~' - BLDG '9' ~ BLDy'B' - "'" I ~ i '/ . / ~~/ ~ d Tme a t C D nv _ I .. ~] l e 1 ~'/ / r OC ~ ~t _ i - 1 _. / ~ O c i DETAIL ~ lad USel M M1pasenelh- ICE,1I6 t1. 119Jq M- mTp~all Ual a n as abM sv ~ ' I TwI UnIR I]5 GnnmmM li^bs- 6,6)9 J. N- 5Mi]la)il all 5 n 1 Ina T ]a I,y15 abM n / 1 I I _ dlbwadeU 611 d.uHae M9inbnan[tlLal ~ 1,013 v1. - ~p. • ® 9 ]I rya;yAas 4T f f ~; as9m ~ e ~ i l ' ~ I OfYLM)feu-aIINIYIWrd •]S d.u /a[n ml 116,191 /. W.]{I O VMlyp~1),a,I16 Ilq aldnJ 9 ~ / I 7 I l II.S d.ulaae PaWIgC pe lIe,690LLV1.IL <'^^ey- wpalM III INa a61M urns OeYml ~ i I ~ ~ I I ~ SITE P LAN ,w~a'~a.~ sI.15d.axb 1ar,,~,p6 ~ ~ bfb ala u ` Qednp ~ ~ ,, \ PamPnio.- en)o tl. „y„a,„e ry I - _~ o \ Open Spam- }ee,006 J. 1159%1 ue.saaw~..+.aw n~rlenwa. " ° O art )66A>e tl.Il)sU whaa~.7waw.o. s~ e.enar~w ~~ ' O \ O ~ ~ Iui.auad•.a 'm~.a.- aa.~ r ~____________________ ______ ____________ lm..auwlw aaw.avadw .IV»- mp . ¢w. Iqp -~ l ~ a0 ILU ]00 NoM 1 sW~m '4nrlPaabPniaa yvyetl.. N ~ San Sevaine Vi//as ~=''°°~ ~ m~ ~° m ~ ~ ~~P.«1 ala~.._ P INc PITASSIARCHITECTS Rancho Cucamonga, California , .,,ae,,,...a...,..::: 0 l 9 p~E z6# :1i i e p ~gt4 ~~~~~~ f ~~~~ ~~-i ~~ ~ ~ ab (~ ~® ~~ ovsoo-sooz~na P81 '~ k~ ;' = iL^ - "':IItiJ `o oq B rj ium 5p( °~xaq G' w~ a `~ i~ ~••~ ~ 9i3 !P N Y~/ Q 5~ ~. g j§~ ~{ ~ ~ g~ b ~ ~ ~ ~e ~ ~ au ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~3~ €~ 9~ EI ~~ ~a ~~~ ~®Q®® O 'o ~' j: f §~~- ' 9S i a ~ Y 6 23gq P4 . ~il~s ~ ~ T ;;~ ~ ~; ~ iii ___._._ 5 ?i i f46 E ~ ~~+ ~ e 1 ~ 3 eE~ ~~~~~ji 3A C'~~g€ ~ ` 0 E q3 i Bq~ @ ~~ 4 E Edo £a Sp~~ £ pp //S~~ fC ~~~~d~E424~~F~~~.~322:EA2Q° P~~i ~\/ ooooo©®o o©®©® o© o® '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z U ~ 3 ~ ? - ~ O W gz ?• C s ~ i ~: ~~°~; ~~~ ~~~~6~ s ~ ~ ~ a-Lya ~€ a.~ ¢E ~ ~ ~ $~ i ~ i ¢ B~ 1 4 9€ S Hnr~r. g a ~ ~ Q 0 000 ~ o0 0®o0o Z f ° mogan~ H I '15- a3'll~ _ ObS00-900ZOtl0 P$'Z e?c i,y~ dlui_.. - .: Ei:.tmi ^ o SSa aafl ~ h -~ fie. N o G~ c ~ fY ;~ ~~ ¢ s~ a ~r a ,. 3t 73 33 d!9 l ~g;~ gg { ~~~~ 1 ~ ~~~ ® y ,~ ~ ~ ` o U ~ ~ ~ o $ ~ ~ b~ j ro g s ~ ~ ~€ € s m fl ~a ~ ~ < ~ ~ J .E~y -}g '~ F~ ~ ~ E ? 4k 6 3dq' s~ ~ i d ~ p ~+ S \ ~ 00900 0 0 00 < U ro~ ~~ 5 ,~mnre~rrr ~ ~ m a mo7an~ox•y mayawdwe FubMaurfa¢ Rptirrg awa xiNlencF 5'MdepaNwry EJlmlad pavNg CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE MASTER PLAN 3 HOUSING ~~ San Sevaine Villas ;~~ Rancho Cucamonga, California A EUR,DING'D' EMRY COURTYARD EM.ARGEMEM suLE r-tam INrp wall RuwrMlecnwb ~ ~ .. .~ :. .nm°naicuMt ~N AIR CONDII70N SCREEN ENLARGEMENC o srA~s F~ttmecsam+epFmnr n~vicvm.' N •mm veuewrm~xmxrun+numwl. p PITASSI A~ ITECTS dRC. ...~r,,.~w...,.. M.:,.~:~ O SHEEf:JOFF II III w w A MAPIENIRANCE ENLARGEMENT ^ POOL AREA ENLARGEMEM su ~t .ma' I' i0i-LOT ENLARGEMEM SULE I"-IVO' SUIE:1-_tvil' t1 COMMUNITY BUILUEJG COURTYARD ENLARGEMENT suLe r.tam A EUILDEJG'C'000RTYARD ENLARGEMENT SCREE t'-1Vtl orosoo-soozoaa pgq i..J~1~, `i11u .r CC R~ o e, G~vt ~3S E G' fr3 u B3$}$}• Q ~i N ~k F €~ a +z C ~ O ~ •- U ~ `~ c ~ ~ •~ o J ~ U z ~ < ~ U o N ~ L V ~ rr~~,, ~ vJ ~ 8 o ,„~ s ~„~~ ° ~ ~ zm~ oa b~oH.d~_ Second Level Floor Plan BUILDING IYPE'Al' (2 Story) R-1 OccupancyGmup Type V 1-hr. CanAmaian (fully sprinkleredl fIOUSING D~ a b San Sevaine Villas O z ~ a~„~~~„~,®~,>~ Rancho Cucamonga, California I I 0 9 Ifi b Unit Types Qty Uni[ 3 (g) 1 Bdml., 3 Bahl 961 ttl.fl. Uni[ 4 (el 2 Bdrm., 2 Bath 963 sq.rt roul 16 uni6 PITA551 ARCHITECTS.Ir+c O O 4 0 0 U 0 ao Exterior Elevation -Front View Exterior Elevation -Side View Partial Ground Level Floor Plan BUILDING TYPE'A2' (3 Story) R-1 Occupancy Group Type v I-hr. Conswction (fully spdnklered) 3 aousmr nE, G x San Sevaine Vil/as Q~~„ ~~~ Rancho Cucamonga, California o s se ao Unit Types Qty Unil 3 (12) 2 Bdim., 2 Bath 961 sa.fL Unit 4 (~ 2) 2 Bdrrn.,1 Bath 9fi3 aq.h hMal 24 units Partial Ground Level Floor Plan PITASSI A~ ITECTS lNc . ,.~,.,.ti,a~.,,....,,~....~ . O a N 0 0 O N 0 Third Level Floor Plan (2nd Level similar) Exterior Elevation -Side View txtenor tlevatlon -Front View Side View -Bldg. 'B' Unit Types Qty. Unil2 (4) t ear., t Bash l65 sq.R Uni[ 4 (4) 2 Bdrm., Z Bath 963 sq.B. total: 8 units Rear View -Bldg. 'B' Street View - Bldg.'B' BUILDING TYPE'B' 3 uousmrc t>F~ a~ ~~ °z ~g ~m~~~~ \2 Story) R-I Ocapanay Gm~p Type V Lhr. Consuuttion Ikrlly sprinklered) San Sevaine Vil/as Rancho Cucamonga, California o e is ao O a N O O 0 N U I1 ° PITASSI ARCHITECTS.Ir+c 00 V Ground Level Floor Plan Second Level Floor Plan 3 aousrnc °Ee z ~ San Sevaine Villas F~„m~ ~,~~ Rancho Cucamonga, California Unit Tvoes Units (3) Unit] (3) Unit9 (3) 3 Bdim., 2 Bath 3 Bdim., Z Batli 7 Bdim., ]Bath 957 sq.R 7,149 sq.fC I,/]7 sq.h Unit 6 (6) Uni[ 8 (4) 3 Bdrm., Z Balk - 3 Bdim., ]Bath 7,154 sq.h 1,781 Sq.h total: 19 units 0 8 16 a0 a N O 0 O N ~ ° PITA551 ARCHITECTS.e+c ..~.m._„~,~,,, . ... ~ ~., . w e.. .......... ....,.. b. s ~.. . W ao Ground Level Floor Plan ?7,1 aa~~ Side View Front View BUILDING TYPE'C' (2 Story/ 3 Story) R~1 OccupancyGraup TypeV l-hr. Camwnion (fully sprinklered) Pab "J a m~° Mlann M,m1 U.1,~ ~M^6~ ~m Bd,m t Z OINr~ 'ed ~~ Ground Level Floor Plan ~- m Pab 9dna 9d,m lMng ~j ptrlan Yra. aah KMvnV OIN,g a _~ nit4 E MBdmt BAm.E IMrg Palo Uni[ Tvoes Unit 1 (2) I Bdrrn., l Balh 708 sq.R Unit Z (2) 1 Bdrtn., l Batlr 765 q.fl. Unit4 (4) 2 Bdim., 2 Bath 963 sq.R. Unit 70 (2) 3 Bdrm., 2 Badt 1,189 sq.R tOtd(: to UUILS aunt view BUILDING TYPE'D' (2 Story) R-1 Occupancy Gmup TypeV 1-hr. Conswclian (lolly sprinkleredl HOUSING DE. 3 ~~ ~ San Sevaine Vi//as z ~~„~~ ®~,' Rancho Cucamonga, California aloe view o e is w O N 0 0 m O o. U O PITASSI ARCHITECTS ir+c M,.m,q,o„,~ . ...,,,.~,,,,.~.e.»m,.....ra.r.W.~...a . Second Level Floor Plan Programmed Areas: Maltiyuryme Room w/Full grchen Caxnrtanal Living Room . Fitness Center . Teen Reue#ion Room . Social5ervices IXfices Computer dassmom . Business Center . 4asing ORice Ground Floor 6,679 sq.h. Floor Plans COMMUNITY BUILDING & MAINTENANCE BUILDING 3 aousavc °Fe o ~ ~ San Sevaine Vil/as z $~ ~;y Rancho Cucamonga, California ~.~.~...a..., B/M3/R-I Occupancy Group TypeV l-hr. Construction bully sprinklend) Second Floor Manager's Unit z Bdrm., z Bath 1,792 sq.h. O 8 la rp Maintenance Building 1,04z sq.h. 0 a N O v; O N r U V ¢ L PITASSI ARCHITECTS.n+c. 0 South; ~` Y u I. f~ ~~ ~ ~~a"' . ~~. ~~= e~ ~-~ "~ .~.~r Rey 1 auidry Building East ~~ K __. _ ~ -- - __-:_. ~ _ .~~e- - Typical Gryort .a. ~c` ~.~ ~a< COMMUNIN BUILDING -Exterior Elevations 3 eousPrc n~, ~ San Sevaine Vi//as e~~oxn~~y Rancho Cucamonga, California West I u f o e ie w 0 0 0 N T V ~ r 1 PITASSI ARCHIT[CTS,~~~ J North (Project Entry) SEC ImN .. g.-p SEC-10N vg-G TYPICAL SECTIONS 3~ HOUSING O~ ~ San Sevaine Villas Fro ;,' Rancho Cucamonga, California SECTION H-N ~i~-` BEC'TO`N M-0 ~ Da, G~ & r4 ~IGI~, O ~ ~ ~ ~"""°'~ u _ ~, .. .e d ° o e ,., ..m 4 a n PITA551 ARCHITECTS.iNC. .....d..e«•,.~,A . . •...~,.~.,_a..~~...~,,,,,,_...__ . 1 V I .~. /~N ~ SECJION v~-8 SECTION C-C SECTION E-E SEC-IONN .~-I _ -_.~-~ Y 'I~' 1 ' f ( ~I -' ~~ I ' ~ ~' I i. ~V90 900ZOtl0 ~ vull ~ i ~I v i ~ J- ~I i II I_ / ~~~ ~ ~ ~ , ,. ',-- w _ •-`` _! \I\ ;^ ~ `,~a`j ~..~` ~\~3NNb~ 3NI V~3~; NVS' / 1~'INVM Il "---r-\ ~ ~__~ - / '\ "~/ d ~' _ `LI J _ ~ E7 __ ~~~ ~ !,~ I ~ ~~ .. ~ ~. _ p 1 ~ y_i ~ ~I ~ a ~ y13 p _, m \ ~ I O I .. ~. ~ . ~ I .. '~ ~~ Y ~_°V`° - -- o I _ i I Ij `' 1 I e~\ ' eo ~~\ i I ~I I: ~. Y 1~ ~' ~ I ~ v ~ n v~tv ~_•~ ~ ~ 3 ~. ~ I IIYI ~ .~.. F _ !!2 q . fpp eeG I I i i i I III I m/ .! ~\ \,J,~`~ \ `4~ ~` S S ffII pp II- ~f d` A Idl I ~I W \ \ zl O® oI ~ 4 I ',III',11~,~ 1%+TT-~ I ~ 1 J,'JO1B i ~ .. ~~ F ~' ~ ~ `+~ v `_ ~ ~\\ k `~ 1 .,: p. ~ti~ I ~ FTC ~ _ ~ ~ ~ _ {~'i JIB ~ r - 4C~ ~ ~T~' ._ _ q . \ 4 1` Y ~ O F ,~. .~ , ~/ \_ ~ / U _ II o ~ II .O~ 1 y~+ ~ ~ / aq ~~I~R \ r ` ~~~ I.\ lei `1 _ I W ~ • tI P r ~~.. y `"a / `~\\~`. ~~ I/ ~~ I _ 3 Q~g ~ / / / _ '~a v;. ~ bJ~ I / I I I ~- ~, ~ / '~ - ~~ I II I. / 5 III I I~I 1 -. ed ~ _ - ~ - Z 1/~I~`1 v ~~\ ~•I ( 1' it \ /.. ~ ! W ` J ~ V \ \\""\ Ail f ~ \ d fl. T I Iy = \ 1 \ ~4 ~ ~' ,. \ \ , ~0~ ~ ~ ~/, \./ \I 1{A~ ~~ I ~O21iJt ~\ -~' \~Y.y \~ ~_ ~ ~_ ~~ wxou®onb 'Z\ \ i P (-tee. Y = \\ ..5~ = ~ i / ~I EIAPMINf. 3 { ~~! i rIII I $1' I' r r~ ~ ___ ~~,aa ~` i _ °a \` \~ _ -O_ ~ _ <~~ I I I I I l~j! 1 I I __ ~ ~ ' M ~4~/'.\ , \ \` ~ ~ ~ ~ COL o+ I. I L JF 5 1, ~ 7 ~ ?~~!( ~ \ / T.~. I 1 ~ /' J~ ~__ _ I f d i ~i r ~ ~~~ U Woro~ ~_'.II I I ~, Ilty r t .\ ~.v ~ /h ~ i \\ i p ~\'\1'AfOIHT]ION P93 '~~' -'~ .5.../ ~:~~- ~_ ~ --_-- I~-_1---__--____ ------------ / I ~ ~ i ~ ~ ii ~, ~ y s `~.. -' f_ ._ .. -- __ -- -- - _~_,I.I ~I ii I' if l ~IIi d .... \ \ L°` I -~- San Sevaine Villas Rancho Cucamonga, California lam' PITASSI ARCHITECTS inc. ~~~,.~ . . ,.~._,,,.~A,.~,..~ . P95 RESOLUTION NO. 07-46 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT (ALSO REFERRED TO AS HOUSING INCENTIVE ' AGREEMENT) DRC2007-00119, TO IMPLEMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540, ALLOWING A DENSITY.BONUS AND MODIFYING SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF 225 WORKFORCE APARTMENT UNITS ON VACANT PROPERTY IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED AT 13233 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, IN THE AREA BETWEEN THE ETIWANDA SAN SEVAINE FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL ON THE EAST, AND THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR ON THE WEST - APN: 0229-041-10; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals 1. Pitassi Architects, Inc., on behalf of Northtown Housing Corporation, filed an application for Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00119, as. described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Density Bonus Agreement is referred to as "the application." 2. On July 25, 2007, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. The subject property of the Density Bonus Agreement is legally described herein. 4. A true and correct copy of the proposed Density Bonus Agreement is attached as Exhibit "A". 5. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. ~xN~e~r H B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on July 25, 2007, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 12.87 acres of the property located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between the Etiwanda San Sevaine Flood Control Channel on the east, and the Southern California Edison Transmission Corridor on the west, and is presently unimproved; and b. The properties to the north are undeveloped commercial properties and the Southern California Edison (SCE) utility corridor in the General Commercial and Open Space zone, and to the south is undeveloped land in the Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 07-46 DRC2007-00119 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING CORPORATION July 25, 2007 Page 2 District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. On the east side of the site is the San Sevaine Flood Control Channel and single-family residential uses in the City of Fontana. To the immediate west are SCE Transmission Lines in the Open Space zone and further west is asingle-family residential tract in the Low Density Residential (2-5 dwelling units per acre) District; and c. The application to which the Density Bonus Agreement applies contemplates the construction of 225 workforce housing units and associated improvements, on 12.87 acres of land at the above described location which are permitted within the Medium residential zoning district; and d. The design of the new units is a contemporary interpretation of the Tuscan architectural style, featuring fully tiled roofs, trimmed out windows and door openings, and walls clad in stucco and accented with fully grouted faux stone veneer typically associated with the proposed style. On July 25, 2007, the Planning Commission approved the project contingent upon City Council approval of the Density Bonus Agreement; and e. The Agreement proposes a 25 percent (45 units) density increase and modification of certain development standards for the construction of said workforce apartment units pursuant to California Government Code Sections 65915-65918 and Development Code Chapter 17.40. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the proposed project to which the Density Bonus Agreement is associated with is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan in that, if approved, the project will advance the goal of providing affordable housing units for families within the community; and b. That the proposed workforce apartment community and associated improvements are designed in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located, in that the new apartment community will be an attractive apartment complex that will improve the current visual quality of the area and be consistent with the quality of new projects under construction in the nearby area; and c. That the proposed workforce units will be in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code as modified for specific standards by the subject Density Bonus Agreement associated with this project; and d. That the proposed design, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The development of the apartment community at the subject location will have independent access to and from a major street, have secured boundaries, be constructed of durable exterior materials, and will provide adequate on-site parking and recreational amenities to support the residents. Moreover, the project is associated with public infrastructure improvement adjacent to the site that will result in an overall improvement to the appearance of the street in this gateway area of the City. 4. A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project to which the Affordable Housing Incentive Agreement applies, is in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said P96 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 07-46 DRC2007-00119 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING CORPORATION July 25, 2007 Page 3 Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Mitigated Negative Declaration with regard to the application. 5. This Commission hereby recommends approval of the Density Bonus Agreement attached to this Resolution. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY OF JULY-2007. PLANNING.CQMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: ATTEST: /~ ' Jam R. Troyer, AICP, Se etary I, James R. Troyer, AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 25th day of July 2007, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: HOWDYSHELL, FLETCHER, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY P97 NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE P98 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attn: APN: 0229-041-10 Exempt from recording fees pursuant to Gov[. Cod. Sec. 27383 (Space above for recorder's use) DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT This AFFORDABLE HOUSING AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into as of 2007, by and between the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation (the "City"), and NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation (the "Developer"), with reference to the following facts: A. The Rancho Cucamonga City Council has adopted a Density Bonus Ordinance (Ordinance No. 749 on November 2, 2005, codified in Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Chapter 17.40) (the "Ordinance") to conform with State Density Bonus Law (Government Code Sections 65915 and 65917), which allows a density bonus for the provision of housing affordable to very low income, lower income, moderate income, and senior households. B. Developer is the owner of certain real property in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"). C. Developer has received a discretionary approval from the City to construct a total of two hundred twenty-five (225) residential rental units known as San Sevaine Villas (the "Development") on the Property. Pursuant to the Ordinance and Government Code 65915, the Developer has requested that the City grant Owner for the Development a density bonus offorty- five (45) units (the "Density Bonus") and the following modifications to building sepazation and set back requirements (collectively, the "Concessions"): • Reduction of building to curb setback from twenty-five feet (25') to twenty feet (20') in five locations in the Development as shown on the attached Exhibit B (Conceptual Site Plan). • Reduction of building to property line setback from thirty feet (30') to twenty feet (20') in one location in the Development as shown on the attached Exhibit B (Conceptual Site Plan). 11244-0001~976247v2.doc tx+~ 141r A P99 • Reduction of minimum building to building separation from forty feet (40') to twenty feet (20') fora 3-story building to 3-story building separation and from thirty feet (30') to seventeen feet (17') fora 3-story building to 2-story building separation in the two locations shown on the attached Exhibit B (Conceptual Site Plan). In exchange, the Owner shall provide at the Development fifty-six (56) units which will be affordable and rented to Moderate Income Households, and seventy-four (74) units which will be affordable and rented to Very Low Income Households and thirty-six (36) units which will be affordable and rented to Extremely Low Income Households, al] as have particulazly set forth in that certain Regulatory Agreement between the Developer and the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") dated November 9, 2005; which was recorded on November 30, 2005 as Document No. 2005-0857344 in the Official Records of San Bernardino County, California (the "Regulatory Agreement"). The Owner shall provide an additional fifty- nine (59) units which will be affordable and rented to Low Income tenants for a term of 55-years, subject to a regulatory agreement under the State Tax Credit Allocation program, (collectively the "Affordable Units"). NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits received by the Developer and the City, the Developer and City agree as follows: Section 1. Definitions. Capitalized terms used herein but not defined shall have the meanings ascribed thereto in the Regulatory Agreement. In addition to those terms defined in the Recitals, the following terms are specially defined in this Agreement: (a) "Affordable Rent" means the maximum total chazge for a Unit.permitted by Section 2.4 of the Regulatory Agreement. (b) "Affordable Units" is defined in Recital C. (c) "Property" is defined in Recital B. Section 2. Grant of Density Botius and Concessions. In consideration for the Affordable Units being provided at the Development, and consistent with the Ordinance and the State Density Bonus Law, the City hereby grants the Developer the Density Bonus and the Concessions (as described in Recital C) for the Development. Section 3. Satisfaction of Ordinance Oblieation and Conditions of Approval. The requirements of the Ordinance shall be satisfied with respect to the Property if the Developer complies with the Regulatory Agreement, the Loan Agreement between the Developer and the Agency dated September 1, 2005 (the "Loan Agreement") and the documents described in the Loan Ageement (the "Other Loan Documents"). Section 4. Mazketina and Rental of Affordab]e Units. Developer shall comply with any and all applicable fair housing laws in the mazketing and rental of the Affordable Units. Developer shall accept as tenants, on the same basis as all other prospective tenants persons who aze recipients of federal certificates or vouchers for rent subsidies pursuant to the existing housing program under Section 8 of the United States Housing Act, or its successor. 11244-0001\97624iv?.doc P100 Section 5. Default and Remedies. Upon a default by Developer which is not cured after any applicable notice and expiration form applicable cure period expressly described in the Regulatory Agreement, Loan Agreement or Other Loan Documents, the City may terminate this Agreement, and the City may exercise any and all other remedies available to it at law, in equity, under the Regulatory Agreement, the Loan Agreement or any loan documents described in the Loan Agreement. Section 6. Remedies Cumulative. No right, power, or remedy given to the City by the terms of this Agreement is intended to be exclusive of any other right, power, or remedy; and each and every such right, power, or remedy shall be cumulative and in addition to every other right, power, or remedy given to the City by the terms of any sucfi document, the Ordinance, or by any statute or otherwise against Developer and any other person. Section 7. Attorneys Fees and Costs. The City shall be entitled to receive from the Developer or any person violating the requirements of this Agreement, in addition to any remedy otherwise available under this Agreement or at law or equity, whether or not litigation is instituted, the costs of enforcing this Agreement, including without limitation reasonable attorneys' fees. Section 8. Hold Harmless and Indemnification. Developer will indemnify and hold harmless City and its elected officials, officers, employees, and agents in their official capacity (the "Indemnitees"), and any of them, from and against all loss, all risk of loss and all damage (including expense) sustained or incurred because of or by reason of any and all claims, demands, suits, actions, judgments and executions for damages of any and every kind and by whomever and whenever made or obtained, allegedly caused by, arising out of or relating in any manner to this Agreement. The provisions of this Section shall survive expiration or other termination of this Agreement. Section 9. Notices. All notices required pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and maybe given by personal delivery or by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, to the party to receive such notice at the addresses set forth below: TO THE CITY: City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attn: TO THE DEVELOPER: Northtown Housing Development Corporation 8599 Haven Avenue, Suite 205 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attn: Executive Director Any party may change the address to which notices aze to be sent by notifying the other parties of the new address, in the manner set forth above. II244-0001~976247v2.doc P101 Section 10. Intep_rated Agreement. This Ageement and the documents referred to in this Agreement constitute the entire Agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter thereof. Section 11. Amendment of Aazeement. This Agreement maybe amended only upon the written consent of the City and the Developer. Section 12. No Joint Venture or Partnershin. Nothing contained in this Ageement or any document executed pursuant to this Ageement shall be construed as creating a joint venture or partnership between City and Developer. Section 13. Applicable Law and Venue. This Ageement shall be governed by California law. Venue for any dispute arising out of this Ageement shall be San Bernardino County. Section 14. Waivers. Any waiver by the City of any obligation or condition in this Agreement must be in writing. No waiver will be implied from any delay or failure by the City to take action on any breach or default of Developer or to pursue any remedy allowed under this Agreement or applicable law. Any extension of time ganted to Developer to perform any obligation under this Ageement shall not operate as a waiver or release from any of its obligations under this Agreement. Consent by the City to any act or omission by Developer shall not be construed to be a consent to any other or subsequent act or omission or to waive the requirement for the City's written consent to future waivers. Section 15. Title of Parts and Sections. Any titles of the sections or subsections of this Agreement aze inserted for convenience of reference only and shall be disregarded in interpreting any part of the Ageement's.provisions. Section 16. Multiple Ori>;inals: Counterparts. This Ageement maybe executed in multiple originals, each of which is deemed to be an original, and maybe signed in counterparts. Section 17. Recording of Ageement. The Parties shall cause this Ageement to be recorded against the Property, in the Official Records of the County of San Bernazdino. Section 18. Severability. In the event any limitation, condition, restriction, covenant, or provision contained in this Agreement is to beheld invalid, void or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction, or if any provision of this Ageement is rendered invalid or unenforceable pursuant to any California statute which became effective after the effective date of this Ageement, the remaining portions of this Ageement shall nevertheless remain in full force and effect. Section 19. Exhibits. The following exhibits aze attached to this Ageement: Exhibit A Legal Description of the Property Exhibit B Conceptual Site Plan 4 11244-OOOt\976247v2.doc P102 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the day and yeaz first above written. DEVELOPER: NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation By: Antonio I. Gracia, Executive Director CITY: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA; a municipal corporation By: Its: 11244-0001 V7624h2.doc J STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) )ss. COUNTY OF ) On , 20_, before me, Notary Public in and for the State of Califomia, personally appeazed personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) )ss. COUNTY OF ) (Seal) On , 20 ,before me, Notary Public in and for the State of Califomia, personally appeazed personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/aze subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature (Seal) P103 11244-0001~976247v2.doc P104 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY .4-1 11244-0001~976247v2 doc P105 Exhibit A Property Description ALL THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OP BSCTION 9, TOiINS}iIY 1 90UTR, RANDS 6 WBBT, 8AN HERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OP 871N B°O"*•~n72i0, BTATB OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO GOVERNMENT 6URVEY, LYZNO 0A8T OP T8B NSBT LIFD3 OF THAT CERTAIN BA8EM8NT COIPVSYED BY BANTA FS LAND ]3MPROVEM8lTT COMPANY TO 6DSTlF~RN CALIFORNIA SDI80R COMPANY. IN DEED DATED OCTOBER 14, 1940, AND RECORDED OCT088R ]8, 1940, IN BOOZ 1441 OP OFFICIAL RBCORDB, PACE 66. ~ ' EXCEPT THAT PORTION TNSR80P DBBCRIHED AB POLSAWB: COMMBNCING AT T8B RD)iTH8A8T CORNER OF T8B R08TAWEBT 1/4 OF 88CTZ0N 9, TOWRB82P Y BODTB, RANOB 6 WBBT, BAN BBRNARDINO MBRIDIADI; STD3NC6 ~SODTH 00. 30' 15• WEST 650.11 PBET TO THS TRUB POINT OP HBG1'AR7IIPG; THSNC8 ~80U17f 99• ]3' 35• NBBT 1071.37 PEST; THENCE NORTH 21. 16' O]• FART 616.6 PEST; TBBNCB BOOTH 89.93' 35• WSBT 169.40 PSET; T88NCE~BODTH ]1. 16', OZ: NEST ]758.36 PSBT; ~ ,' TH8NC8 NORTH B9. 73' 40• BAST ]089.40 PBBT; 'T88NCB NORTH 00• ;0' 15" EAST 1959.80 FSBT, TO TNB TRUE POINT OF BSGIIa7ING. AL80 RZCBpT THBRSFAOM ALL OIL, 07A8 AND OTNBR NYDROCARHON AND MIIPBR711. St188TA1iC88 (EXCEPT NATAA) LYING NOT LS68 THAN 100 FEET 881AW THE BUASACE 08 ~8AZD REAL PROPERTY, AB EXCEPTED ARD R888,RVBD IN THS D88D FROM SANTA P8 LAND INpROVB14sNT COMPANY, A CORPORATION, TO OLIVER A. JOANBON AND CRYSTAL M, JOHN60N, HIISSAND AND, WZFE, AB JOINT TBNADiTB, DATED MAY ]]', 1946 AND RBCCOtDSD JCHiR 7, 146, A8 INSTAOMSNT NO. 65, IN HOOK 1890 OP OFFICIAL RECORDS, PAGE 491, IN TAE OFFICE OP TNB COtTNTY RBCORDBR OP RAID COONTY, NtiIC71 RBCITBBt •PROVIDBD TRAT TRS FIA6T PARTY, ITS BUCCSBBOAB 1LRD ABBIGRB, BBALL NOT BAVE.~TRB RIGHT TO fiN'PER UPOR THE BURFACB OP RAID REAL PROPERTY 80A TNS POAPOBB OF EXTRACTING, AND REMOVING ANY OF SUCH RBBERVSD HUHBTANCBB, OR FOR ANY OTHHR PUAPOB88". ~ ~ ' i ' ... -. - ' I / ` / ., -`~ FOOTHILL BLVD ' . I ,° ' rc ei i3bs' i -e.:. rf' L...I. ... I.. -_. .. .._. .. ._ .. a.Y'iY• t ~ _ ~ _L -_I 1 __ ~~_ - -_ _ C -2_ < . . _ ~ I ~ , I II BLDG.'S' I ' ~ as-- - ' woo l ` ~ Rr - ~ _ ,,, BLDG B ~~ I ;.. _.,._, s l r ,_,=~ ° BLDG ~.~.o~.-l ~_ ^ B , r, -.~_ I i- I;,.. ...r. l ' BL 'Al' I ~ I ~ ,.., 3 f~19 (~ . d ~"III C I' r-r ~ ~ ~, \I' ~o. ~' r ~ L `/!) r. ~i~~F1 - BL 'A2' I I a•~• I- /I BLD 'AI' 61 . , I .7- ~\ f_t' ~"~-^+~ I~~~ I~7 .r - I s.~ ar'~ wu.. , ~. :l Vi ._ i~ .~' f ~.,da b 1 ~~~ i~ 'o. 5 '.yam ~/.-~\\\ .. ~/~ I i i6 f ~"rr"I~ - - ifi09 ~'-' ly.l o Q` .. ;. i r ~ I t ~ r Y .+, R) r ~e l-=• ~' i) ~ l_-i I I ~ i : ~ ~ 1 I' , 1- ( ~ ,. a ar . a _ BL 'n2' s•~ ,~'O , ~_• A,j I s ~ o r- T ~_' ru r ~~o - 4 - :~n I )nl ~tzr_t_~Ar~>rrlTrrr~ r__ a _rnTrrtr_r_n. t R - - - - ` ~~ 3 ~ x E •.'~ BLDG.'D' ~y f: i4~~" I I I I I I I I I I I I i'I 6 i' I I I I I ! I' ,. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I; o ':-~ -- - OB ' E uhf b ~ f' "~ rr A. REDUCE BUIIDINC TO CURB SETBACK : " ' (from 2S' to 2D') Conceptual Site Plan - DBHA Application B. REDUCE BUILDING TO PROPERTY LINE SETBACK San Sevaine Villas "'uml°''n2°'' C. REDUCE MINIMUM BUILDING TO BUILDING SEPERATION N ~ (from 40' al 3-story-lo-3-Story to 20'; and from )0' al ~ 3-story-lo-2-story In 17') O O K m~ ESCityCounty2007 Table 2: E-5 City/County Population and Housing Estimates, 1/112007 -----------POPULATION------------ ----•--°----------•------.------HOUSING UNITS --------------------------------~ PERSONS --------SINGLE -------- -----MULTIPLE ----~ PER HOUSE- GROUP ~ MOBILE OCCU- PCT HOUSE- COUNTYICITY TOTAL HOLD QUARTERS TOTAL DETACHED ATTACHED 2T04 SPLUS HOMES PIED VACANT HOLD San Bernardino County Adelanlo 47,199 26,(1511 ~ ~ 1,088 8 304 6,443 - 1481- ~ 382' ~ 823 - ~ 508 7 013 15 55' 3.715, _ .. Ir - _ -__. _ __ ...- Apple Valley 70,297 69,934 363 24,866 19,327 726 2,0891 1,686 1,0434 22 886 7 96 3.056 1 _ Barstow 23,9d3 __ 23,6131 330. ~ 9,949 _ 5,5241 3561 1,292 1,6fi21 1,115 8261 1697 2.858 Big Bear Lake _ 6,2071 6,1821 _ 251 9 444r 7,952} _ , ,_ 326 366{ 4101 ~ 3901 2 542 73 08 2.432. COnronHai115 788,6401 188083 11 5591 ,_48,075.. „-, 36242 ~ _ 1 2081 _ 1,66! 5,82101 - 1 7581, ., _.45544 52fi- 3976! p H2Sn efTaerraGe 85,866 - 85,545} .__334 _ 47,874 - 22557 ._.-~_ 893 ~ -11661 _1,958 1300! ~ 26071 ~ 647i~ 3.281 Highland 52,18614 51,94fiIy 240 16525 12,382 555 5981 2,129 Bfit` 14,991 928 3.4fi5 Needl2agnda 35,659~~ 35,07481__.. 6811 2892 _ 1,5331 __ _. _ 180J _ 12541 1~3fi71 628' 2?99~ 23964 2684 On(af10 172,701 171,fi03i _ 1:098 46,959____27_,530. 3649! 4,057_ 9,512 __2,211 45,2381_ 3.66 3.793 ---j Rancho CUCamOnga 172,331 168,705r 3,6261 54,412 35,139 3,059 1,942 12,892 1,380 52777 3.02 3.197~~ SaOBeanafdin0 ' ~ 205010' ~~198,398j„-, 6,616 ~., _66486_ 39,0841 ., ...-_27861_.._.5,733 14,467 ^^.4465, 59146 1504t~~, 3.35411 Y _ _ __ Upland 75,769 74,584 585, 26613 15,285 1770 2,677 6636 845'_ 25,655 360 2.9071 Viclorville 102,538 97,322 5,216 32 979 _26,190 _ 369 1,333 3,286 _ 7 7611 30,490 7 55 _ 3.192. Yucai a ne Palms t 57,8841 59 212 5 572' ~ 19,292 - 13,035! 1 3944 --- 1 743 ~ ~ 893 4,227(--7Q890 25 781 ~ ~ 2.8105 p ~ 1. _ __L_ .__ .__.}_____ _. .r_._.i ____ _a-__.~__..4__ _. __.....__ Balance O(COUnty ~ 295,978 288,O67Cry__ .7911 128,480L_703_334r_~ -4,2001_ 4084L,__2_2401 _ _14,62^92_1888r 2825'__ _-_ 3.125 nCOfpOfaled 1,732,035 1fie9,247 42,788 548,429 373,313 24,049 35,797 85,663 29,607 505,426 7.84 3.342 County 2,028,013 1,977,314 50,699 676,909 476,647 39,881 87,903 44,229 597,614 11.71 3.309 Page 1 of 1 California Department of Finance Demographic Research Unit ~ O v X bo "', }ZANCHO (,'.c.enwrcu I CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MULTI-FAMILY AFFORDABLE HOUSING LOCATION MAP 1 d ~ ~ 1 O W MEMORANDUM Date: November 26, 2007 To: Mike Diaz, Senior Planner From: Jon Gillespie, Traffic Engineer r RANCHO C,UCAMONGA Subject: COMMENTS ON STAFF REPORT FOR SAN SEVAINE VILLAS PROJECT In the comments received on the staff report for the subject project, some residents expressed concerns about traffic from Foothill Boulevard using Cornwall and Chestnut as a short-cut route to get to Etiwanda Avenue. In order to determine if there is acut-through traffic problem, City staff made observations and collected traffic count data at the intersection of Etiwanda Avenue and Chestnut Avenue. Traffic observations were made on April 17, 2007, and again on October 15, 2007. The traffic counts on April 17, 2007 were made before the new traffic signal at the intersection of Foothill Boulevard and Cornwall was installed. The traffic signal at Foothill and Cornwall was installed in August of 2007, Therefore, the traffic counts on October 15, 2007 were made after the new traffic signal was installed. The traffic volumes observed exiting Chestnut Avenue onto Etiwanda Avenue were as follows: April 17, 2007; 4:00 to 5:00 PM, Westbound Left Turn = 5, Westbound Right Turn = 13 April 17, 2007, 5:00 to 6:00 PM, Westbound Left turn = 3, Westbound Right Turn = 16 October 15, 2007, 4:45 to 5:45 PM, Westbound Left Turn = 11, Westbound Right Turn = 12 These numbers appear reasonable relative to the size of the housing tract adjacent to Chestnut and Cornwall. In the opinion of City staff, the traffic volumes observed do not indicate that a significant number of drivers are using Cornwall and Chestnut as a short-cut to get from Foothill Boulevard to Etiwanda Avenue. Staff also made observations and collected traffic count data for drivers turning from Etiwanda Avenue onto Chestnut Avenue irr order to determine if drivers are using Chestnut Avenue and Cornwall as a short-cut to get from Etiwanda Avenue to Foothill Boulevard. The traffic volumes observed for southbound left turns and northbound right turns from Etiwanda Avenue onto Chestnut Avenue were as follows: April 17, 2007, 4:00 to 5:00 PM, Southbound Left Turn = 51, Northbound Right Turn = 32 April 17, 2007, 5:00 to 6:00 PM, Southbound Left turn = 47, Northbound Right Turn = 30 October 15, 2007, 4:45 to 5:45 PM, Southbound Left Turn = 41, Northbound Right Turn = 82 On October 15, 2007, staff also noted how many of these drivers continued through to Foothill Boulevard, and how many drivers were local residents. The sum of left and right turning vehicles was 41 + g2 = 123. Of these vehicles, 101 continued on through the tract to Foothill Boulevard and 22 were local residents. P109 ~xN~e~r k P110 COMMENTS ON STAFF REPORT FOR SAN SEVAINE VILLAS PKOJECT PnGE 2 Novr•:Mae:x 2G, ?007 Etiwanda Avenue currently has two northbound traffic lanes from Arrow Route to Chestnut Avenue. However, the southeast corner of the intersection of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue has not yet been developed, and there is only one northbound traffic lane between Chestnut Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. The distance from Chestnut Avenue 1o Foothill Boulevard is approximately 400 ft. A new development project has been approved on the southeast corner of the intersection of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue. This project has been conditioned to widen Etiwanda Avenue and Foothill Boulevard to their full ultimate width. For northbound traffic on Etiwanda Avenue, this will include 2-left turn lanes, 2- through lanes and a separate right turn lane at Foothill Boulevard. In the opinion of City staff, the improvement of the southeast corner of this intersection will mitigate most of the northbound cut-through traffic that is currently turning right at Chestnut Avenue. City staff has met with Mr. Brian O'Connel and other representatives of the Chestnut and Cornwall neighborhood on March 15, 2007, on April 16, 2007, and in August of 2007. At each of these meetings, staff informed the residents that if they wanted the City to take action to mitigate the cut- through traffic that is currently using Chestnut and Cornwall that they would need to submit a petition. City staff has not received a petition from Chestnut and Cornwall residents regarding cut- throughtraffic. If you have any questions, please call me at extension 4051. C: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer P111 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 320 WEST aTM STREET, SUITE 500 LOS ANGELES. CA 90013 November 21, 2007 _~s .' CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIvi0N6A Michael Diaz City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 ~I D V ~ 6 2~~~ RECEIVED - r'LANNING Dear Mr. Diaz: Re: SCH# 2007101.129; Environmental Assessment and Development Review DR2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agmt DRC2007-00119 The California Public Utilities Commission (Commission) has jurisdiction over the safety of highway-rail crossings (crossings) in California. The Califomia Public Utilities Code requires Commission approval for the construction or alteration of crossings and grants the Commission exclusive power on the design, alteration, and closure of crossings The Commission's Rail Crossings Engineering Section (RCES) is in receipt of the Notice of Completion & Environmental Document Transmittal-Neg Dec from the State Clearinghouse. RCES staff is concerned that the new development proposed at 1322 Foothill Boulevard (lat= 34.106333, long= -117.516203) may increase traffic volumes not only on streets and at intersections, but also at the nearby Etiwanda Avenue (DOT# 026151P) crossing. This includes considering pedestrian circulation patterns/destinations with respect to Metrolink's San Bernardino Line right-of--way. Safety factors to consider include, but are not limited to, the panning for grade separations for major thoroughfares, improvements to existing at-grade highway-rail crossings due to increase in traffic volumes and appropriate fencing to limit the access of trespassers onto the railroad right-of--way. The above-mentioned safety improvements should be considered when approval is sought for the new developments. Working with Commission staff early in the conceptual design phase will help improve the safety to motorists and pedestrians. Please advise us on the status of the project. If you have any questions in this matter, please contact me at (213) 576-7078 or at rxm(a~cpuc.ca.COV. Sinc rel , ~` Rosa ~` noz, PE Utilities Engineer Rail Crossings Engineering Section Consumer Protection & Safety Division C: Rob Hams, Metrolink ~tHi~~r L ~__ --------------------------------_a_ w ~m mo x.w San Sevaine Villas g . ~ PITA551 ARCHITECTS.~ur- Rancho Cucamonga, California .__~.,.,___,,._..._..a._. v N P113 L /,~ " ~ LSA AStiOCIATES INC. RLR KELEY FURT COLLI NS POINT RICIIMONO ISIIO IOWA AV ENU fi. SUITE jUU 951.)81.9310 TEL Cw0.LS6AU 10.YINE ROCRLIN J RIVERSIDE, CALIFO RFIA 9j$O) 951.]81.6j)] f'AX COLMA Pw LM SPRINGS SAN LVIS ORISPO van xorn Pngc ll item 4A (See identified * item on Page 3 of attached letter) 1. Site is not in a "natural condition." The site had been disturbed by flood control maintenance, previous residential or commercial use, and illicit dumping. Alluvial fun sage scrub (AFSS) along the channel would persist through a dry season. The extenbof the AFSS plant community was as found. The creek had been scoured by previous Flooding and will colonize with AFSS over tune. The environtnen[al impact assessment is based on current site conditions. 2. Burrowing owls reside in southern California year-round. Their nesting season begins ben5leen Febn~a)y ar[d April and lasts until the end of August The peak of the nesting season is from .4pri1 IS through July 15. The 'peak' of nesting season refers to the critical phases of nesting cycle (i.e.: mating, egg-laying, incubation). Fledglings and subsequently juveniles can be observed roosting a[ the burrow entrance from July through [he end of August. Active burrowing owl burows are those with feather, and/or white wash and/or pellet and/or prey remnants near the entrance of the burrow. No owl sign was found on the site. Encountering evidence of owl occupation was highly probable during the five site visits due to lack of rain in the region. No active burrows or owls were observed during the August ?006 focused survey (5 site visits). Observations were made by both binocular and scope; therefore, if owls were on adjacent areas, they were detectable. Boundaries of the project site were observed through binoculars and scope for any foraging owls, none were observed. There is no se[ burrowing ow] protocol. Focused surveys for this species in San Bernardino County are conducted using guidelines set forth in the Burrowing Owl Consortium Guidelines (April 1993) and California Department of Fish and Game's inter-office memorandum (October 1995). These guidelines were used in conducting the focused survey on the Northtown Housing project. As set forth in these guidelines, a survey will need to be done within 30 days prior [o the commencement of grading activities to determine if the burrowing owl has subsequently occupied the site and thus avoid any impacts to the owl. van xorn Page JJ item aB & C (See identified item on Page 3 of attached letter) The delineation reports differ based on measurements of the graded Etiwanda Crcek channel width between the earthen levees versus the width of [he streambed likely to contain water by a typical storm event. An "Approved Jurisdictional lletermina[ion Form" will be completed by the Anny Corps of Engineers (ACOE). California llepanment of Fish and Game (CDFG) will review and comment on the repons. Mitigation obligations will be applied to the project prior to obtaining the necessary Clean Water Act (C'v'v'A) 404 penni[. CWA 401 water quality standards certification, and CDFG streambed altentation agreement. I1/(h)/0]IR:1NF3'000ItCornspontlenceVreepnnsc to comments 9nnvW mttllMt,drR') ~V ~'~'~ ~ I'I.ANNIAII F. n'\'IROI<M ENTLL ~ GP.~IGN P114 Page 3 of 7 sunrise over a mountaintop beyond. With proposed three story buildings our view and our privacy is lost. Page 5 item `1D", new source of substantial light or glaze. The report states lighting will be confined to the project. How can the lighting be confined when the project is surrounded by open style fencing? Page 6 item " 3B", Air Quality. With the steel plants near by it is known that they release lead and cadmium into the air. These cancer causing substances settle in the soil, there for a soil test must be done and removal of any toxic soil. Dust control is critical as our homes are 220 feet away. Air quality tests reflecting lead and cadmium must be performed as well. Pzge 7 item" 3D", Sensitive receptors, residences within a 1/4 mile of construction. Our homes are 220 feet away, as mentioned there are no block walls on this site and our neighborhood will be greatly affected. .~~ Page 11 item "4A", First of all this site maintains its natural composition, the dumping referred to is very very minimal and could be taken away easily. i he creek bed maintains its natural flow and usability. Although. the Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub is very minimal along the creek bed that is because we have had little rain this yeaz. When we do get rain it blooms back all along the creek. Second the state sensitive "Western Burrowing Owl" has suitable nests along the creek bed. The facts aze when the focus survey was done it was not done during the peek nesting period. Apre-construction nest survey no more than 30 days prior to grading means nothing unless it is done during the peek nesting period. .*..._._~ Page 11 item "4B & C", The LSA Delineation of Jtuisdictional Waters Report of June 19, 2007 shows much less environmental impact that the report of September 23, 2005. The property has not changed; down grading these figures would save the developer money but hurt the environment. Page 14 item "SB & C" Archaeological site and resources. Rancho Cucamonga has been inhabited by Native Americans, on site archaeological recourses aze very Iikely. It is recommended that some reseazch be preformed at the `Sacred Heart Catholic Church" down the street from this site. They have been known to keep records of this azea dating faz back. Also a qualified archaeologist should be on site at all times to retrieve any resources. This wait and see as proposed in the mitigations is not expectable as construction crews are not archeologists. Because this site is on a creek bed it is even more likely you will f nd archeologist recourses. Page 16 item "6B", Loss of topsoil. This project location gets strong Santa Ana winds, this yeaz they were in the 60 - 80 mile per hour zone. These last from September to April and can occur at any time during the day. Again with no block wails azound this project our homes will be inundated with dirt, sand and any other substances in the soil. No grading should be aloud if there is any wind at all. Deeelo~¢v~erof 63ebie~rs D~C2006-0050/®RC2007-00~ ~ ~ (Pro~ec~ ~lo~ification) OUTER Future Park e °: ~. Fontana n Cortamrcial Low (L) Resitlenttal Single-Fernly Residences -.~ 8° 7 Apartment a ® • %"5 '' n." 0 of 660' RADIUS MEASU THE PERIMETER OF THE ~., ,..~..u~x_..,.~ OUTER BOUNDARY P115 Unincorporatetl San Bernardino CounTy here of Influence -Fontana) ~~_ . sr_: s, ~' _~ '-r JUL-03-2007 12:40 From:PITRSSI RRCH 4.J To:4772847 NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING sPONsoRED sr NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION '~~.. Dear Neighbor; You are invited to attend a neighborhood meeting to discuss Northtown Housing Development Corporation's intent to develop a high quality apartment community located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The vacant property is approximately 13 acres and is located on the south side of Foothill Blvd. east of the power lines and west of Ilex Avenue. Northtown Housing Development Corp and the architect will be in attendance to discuss the concept and answer any questions you may have. See you there) SAVE THE DATE: TUESDAY, APRIL 12, 2045 TIME; ~ P.M. LOCATION: CRAPELAND ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 7171 Etiwanda Ave, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 DIRECTIONS: Grapeland Elementary is located on Etiwanda Ave. north of Baseline Rd. QUESTIONS: (909) 980.1361 P.2'4 P116 EXHIBIT. P JUL-03-2007 12:41 From:PITRSSI RRCH To:4772847 P.3~4 P117 Northtown Housing Development Corporation COMMUNITY MEETING AGENDA & MEETING MINUTES PATE: TUESDAY, 4/12/05 TIME: 7:00 A.M. - 8:00 P.M. Pete Pitassi introduced himself and his companyC]s involvement in architectural design with Northtown Housing Development Corporation (NHDC). Introduction of the development team staff present was announced. Nacho Gracie -Executive Director Jenny Ortiz -Development Director Paul Hernandez -Accounts /Asset Management Nora Brown- financial Consultant David Rosen & Associates Mary Roche -Soc. Service Director Dan Guerra-Civil Engineer Ida Perkins -Regional Supervisor Property Mgmt. Purpose of the neighborhood meeting was to inform community of Northtown Housing Development 3_.,. Corp's intent and proposal. Pete Pitassi introduced Exhibit 1, an aerial with zoning designations and property location. He provided a general description of the site and surrounding community. He presented the photos of Exhibit 2, demonstrating all site views from various angles and directions. Nacho Cracia talked about NHDC. He reviewed Exhibit 3, identifying pictures of all projects completed by NHDC and reviewed the brief history of Northtown Housing Development CorpOs accomplishments. . Pete Pitassi mentioned the 250-300[l separation between the project and housing tract' due to the Edison easement. Also, all vehicle/pedestrian access to the site would be only from Foothill Blvd. Residents mustwalk to and from the project via Foothill Blvd. He mentioned the concern of traffic congestion, and the possibility that a traffic signal may be required at Cast Avenue and Foothill Blvd. Pete introduced Ida Perfcins as a representative of the )ohn Stewart property management firm. Ida briefly introduced herself and khe )ohn Stewart Management philosophy. She emphasized the strict standards utilized to screen applicants for credit, criminal background checks and eviction history. SUL-03-2007 12:41 From:PITR55I ARCH To:4772847 P.4~4 - P118 Following Ida Perkins, Nora Brown was introduced as the Financial Consultant for Northtown Housing Development Corporation. Nora Brown mentioned that rents would range from $500 • $1,200 dollars and Section 8 applicants would be accepted if they qualified. The housing will be affordable for individuals who are currently not able to afford market rents. For example; a family of four earning an income up to $50,000 may qualify. Pete Pitassi mentioned that it would be the publics best interest to take some time to visit the current projects that are owned and managed by NHDC: Staff would be more than willing to facilitate these visits to demonstrate the high quality of design and housing with ample parking made available to residents. At closing, Pete mentioned that )eriny Ortiz, as the Development Director of NHDC, would be the point of contact if anyone had additional questions, comments or concerns to address. Three people of the nine individuals present generated all comments noted below. Two of those three individuals ware opposed to apartments being constructed near their community. The public comments during the meeting were: -~ - Traffic congestion on Foothill Blvd. - Foot traffic from the project site to the housing tract located on the west side along Etiwanda Ave. and Foothill Blvd. - The height of the block wall surrounding the proposed project. A suggestion was made to increase the hclght from 8^ to 1017 due ro the concern that people would jump over the wall to walk through their neighborhood in order to connect to the shopping mall located on the southwest corner of Foothill Blvd, and Etiwanda Ave. Concern with regards to the type of people that would be renting these units If they ware affordable. - A question regarding criminal background shacks and what type of screening processes are in plate for applicants that would apply to be residents of these apartments. • Concem about the rental apartment units called Victoria Woods located to the south side of the housing tract on Etiwanda. The concern of the trash dobris that residents claim collects between the wrought iron fence and strip of concrete between this project and housing tract. - The block wall surrounding the proposed project and how that would affect the housing tract on Etiwanda Ave. and what measures would betaken to control for graffiti. - How low the rertts would be and whethor it would be a Section B typo of housing - Concerns that these low rents would bring tenants such as those on Section 8 khat show no pride of ownership and that property values of existing single-family property would depreciate. Condominiums or houses would be better and bring homeowners as opposed to rentersQ. • Crther concerns were that renters would also increase crime and traffic congestion. 3599 Havc,. Avenue, Suite 205, Rancho Cucamong.^.:A 91730 P119 )09/980-0465 •909/481-7555 fax C1iY Or RAidi.HO CUCAiu1,~o:~::. MhR 0 8 2t1D7 RECEIVED - PLANNING NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING Development Review DRC 2006-00540 SPONSORED BY NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Dear Neighbor: You are invited to attend a neighborhood meeting to discuss Northtown Housing Development Corporation's intent to develop a high quality apartment community located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The vacant property is approximately 13 acres in size and is located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, east of the power lines and west of Ilex Avenue. Northtown Housing Development Corporation and the architect will be in attendance to discuss the proposal and answer any questions you may have. See you there! SAVE THE DATE: Monday, March 5, 2007 TIME: 7:00 p.m. LOCATION: Grapeland Elementary School 7171 Etiwanda Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 DIRECTIONS: Grapeland Elementary is located on Etiwanda Avenue, north of Baseline Road QUESTIONS: You may contact Peter ). Pitassi, AIA at Pitassi Architects, Inc. if you have any questions regarding this meeting. (909) 980-1361. Exy~~~r Q IA C.Iifmmin Nm-Kull, Cmpn.n,bn~ '~ i ` PITASSI ARCHITECTS, wc. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING REPORT SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Ch~YOFRANCHOCUCAMONGA Rancho Cucamonga, CA DRC 2006-00540 MAR p g 200P 1. Notification Method: RECF)VFD - PLAfVAl11U~' Direct mail flyer sent out on February 15, 2007.to all property owners within a 660 foot radius of Site boundaries, with additional property owners notified in nearby neighborhood to the west of the Project Site (see attached mailing list and copy of flyer). + Date: Monday, March 5,.2007 • Time: 7:00 pm • 'Location: Grapeland Elementary School . 7171 Etiwanda Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 2. Attendance: Northtown Housing Development Corp (NHDC) Board of Directors: Santos Fuertez, President Luis Gonzalez, Vice President Zar Hallberg, C.F.O. Julian Rircon, Director Staff: Nacho Gracia, Executive Director Paul Hernandez, Deputy Director Sally Hernandez, Administrative Assistant Pitassi Architects, Inc. Peter ). Pitassi, AIA, President Curtis Dahle, AIA, Project Architect P120 ^ 8439 White Oak Ave., Sre. 705 • Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 ^ ^ Tel. (909) 980-1361 • Fax. (909) 944-$A14 • ` P121 Neighborhood Meeting Report San Sevaine Villas Page 2 David Paul Rosen (Finance Management) CI IY 0't• RAfJCHO CUCAMt'~(d%;.: Nora Lake-Brown MAR 0 S 207 John Stewart Company (Property Management) Ida Perkins RECEIVED - PE.~tA~i~S~Wr~ Public 25 Households Represented (see attached Sigri-In Sheet) 3. Summary of Public C'oncern5/('nmmantc: a. Perceived decrease in value of surrounding properties due to proximity to an affordable housing project. b. Potential increase in crime in adjacent neighborhood(s). c. Concern over increased traffic volume in area (especially through Cornwall Avenue neighborhood). d. Request for clarification of building heights (number of stories) and distance between 3-story buildings. (Note: no comments expressed by public concerning the overall site planning or building designs.) e. Recommendation to build single-family houses instead of apartments. f. Anger at NHDC and City for proposing to develop "low-income housing project" in their area of the City. Requested project be constructed in different location. 4. Aonlirant Recnonsec to Public t^on~arn5[f'ommentc: a. Discussed how NHDC owns, manages, and maintains their properties in good condition, incompliance with the legal agreements they have with the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Recommended that individuals, who are concerned about an affordable housing project bringing down the value of their homes, should look into the track record NHDC has with their other projects here in town. b. Explained NHDC's vigorous screening process which includes not only credit check but also criminal background checks of all applicants. Clarified that this apartment community will have a resident manager on- site to address issues immediately, as well as a full-time maintenance person to promptly repair/resolve any maintenance needs that may arise. Management will not hesitate to evict problem tenants. Emphasized again that concerned individuals can check the status of any of NHDC's apartment communities with the local sheriff's office, which will confirm that the record of police activity is no different than in surrounding areas. Neighborhood Meeting Report san sevaine villas CI IY iJr RAPdCHt~ CU%AMu(JuA Page 3 MAi~ 0 ~ 2~~ i ~iEC~l11ED -PLANNING c. Commented that the City's Traffic Engineer as een a part of the development review process, and that their requirements have been incorporated into the project's design. Traffic currently cutting through the Cornwall Avenue neighborhood is not an issue which this project can address. We recommended that property owners bring this issue to the attention of the Traffic Engineer to seek a solution. d. Noted for the audience where 2-story and 3-story buildings occur on the Site Plan, and clarified the "building-to-building" dimensions at the 3-story Buildings #13 and #14 and between Building #14 and 2-story Building #15. e. Explained that due to numerous environmental and grading factors which need to be addressed prior to development to this Site, cost of development would be prohibitive to creating single-family houses which could be sold at a marketable price. Project Site is zoned for medium- density residential development (e.g. Multi-family housing). f. Clarified that the City of Rancho Cucamonga is mandated by the State of California to provide affordable housing units, and currently has a shortage of affordable housing stock. This project, and numerous others like it, should be developed for the greater good of the entire community. 5. Hand-outc: a. No information was distributed to the public. Colored exhibits of buildings plans and elevations, and Conceptual Landscape Plan/Site Plan were presented. It was noted that the Design Review drawings are part of the Public Record, and can be viewed by request at the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Planning Department. * Emphasis was made numerous times by the applicant to all in attendance that they can and should participate in the upcoming public hearings, and the City will notify them of the dates and times of these hearings. P122 CJD:cas Attachments A2!3Atl~9-008-1 uo~nysui,p war~Gat~e~NUnnrt ai!!aaF el m3l~-o? 0229-041-03 Santa Fe Energy Co Box 7764 Burbank, CA 91510-7764 0229-052-04 Noehren 13398 Chestnut St Fontana, CA 92335-2913 0229-052-08 Daniel Nieblas 8131 Ilex St Fontana, CA 92335-2538 0229-052-11 Jffrey Haire 1735 Holly St Brea, CA 92821-5951 0229-052-23 Noehren 13396 Chestnut St ~tana, CA 92335-2913 iuawa6~ey~ ap sr-S x.,pg65 ~,LZl3Atl uiege6 al H r ~a ad a sa u F 123 1 1 ~ S7~euuN~ 0229-041-09 0229-051-O1 Ameron Inc San 3ernardino Co Flood Con t~ 10681 Foothill G83'vd~~~a~~ll,^hS~ ~UVr~I~/~I~i„'3,Rd St Rancho Cucamo, CA 91730-3833 an Bernardin, CA 92915-1000 C~Al~ 0 s 2~a i 0229-052-OS 0229-052-07 Noehren r.. r n & Elentina Vielmas 13398 Chestnut St ~`~E11jTr " p~ ~~~0 Chestnut St Fontana, CA 92335-2913 Fontana, CA 92335-2913 0229-052-09 Versel ~ Versel Bell 9105 Juniper Ave Fontana, CA 92335-5702 0229-052-10 City Of Fontana 8353 Sierra Ave Fontana, CA 92335-3528 0229-052-14 Ramon & Elentina Vielmas 13360 Chestnut Ave Fontana, CA 92336 0229-052-24 Noehren 13398 Chestnut St Fontana, CA 92335-2913 0229-052-18 Cottonwood Apts Inc 2016 Riverside Dr Los Angeles, CA 90039-3707 0229-052-25 City Of Fontana 8353 Sierra Ave Fontana, CA 92335-5593 0229-061-01 0229-061-02 0229-062-07 San Bernardino Co Flood Conti San Bernardino Co Flood Conti Robert F & Rose Stricker 825 E 3Rd St 825 E 3Rd St 379 S Silverbrook Dr San Hernardin, CA 92415-1000 San Bernardin, CA 92415-1000 Anaheim, CA 92807-3709 0229-062-07-6-002 Selvin Caceres 8221 Ilex St 2 Fontana, CA 92335-2955 0229-062-07-6-007 Alameta N James 6221 Ilex St 7 Fontana, CA 92335-2955 0229-062-07-6-011 Gerry J Tunstead 8221 Ilex St 11 Fontana, CA 92335-2955 0229-062-07-6-024 Rebecca L Ritchey 6221 Ilex St 24 Fontana, CA 92335-2925 0229-062-A7-6-Ob4 Felix & Roger Peralta~ 8221 Ilex St 4 Fontana, CA 92335-2955 0229-062-07-6-009 Arthur Jenkins 8221 Zlex St 9 Fontana, CA 92335-2955 0229-062-07-6-012 Julie Patereau 8221 Ilex St 12 Fontana, CA 92335-2955 0229-062-07-6-025 Jose R Gomez 6221 Ilex St 25 Fontana, CA 92335-2925 0229-062-07-6-005 Angel Sandoval 8221 Ilex St 5 Fontana, CA 92335-2955 0229-062-07-6-010 Arthur Jenkins 8221 Ilex St 10 Fontana, CA 92335-2955 0229-062-07-6-018 George Hernandez 8221 Ilex St 18 Fontana, CA 92335-2925 0229-062-07-6-026 Karla Walkup 8221 Ilex St 26 Fontana, CA 92335-2925 ru0965®Aij3At(~ ° Tien ~caj^aan„ce3'ol jaded paajT ,~ .++0985 31V'IdW31®ILan~r asH A2IgAV-09908-L uo~nrlsw,p urcaXaaeurm~u~ elll~~ el ~l~Q? 0229-062-07-6-028 "~na T Morales 21 Ilex St 28 Fontana, CA 92335-2925 0229-062-07-6-034 Antenogenes R Lopez 8221 Ilex St 34 Fontana, CA 92335-2927 ~uawa6Dey~ ap sr-- ,,,0965 A83AV }ue e6 a -,-•••• ~ ®aalad ~ sa~nef.~P124~ 0229-062-07-6-029 0229-062-07-6-031 Minta J Simpson Mike P: & Tammy Gonzales 8221 Ilex St 29 6221 Ilex St 31 Fontana, CA 92335-2925 Fontana, CA 92335-2925 0229-062-~7~6 j~36"a1~U~~ 4U~~~i ~~1~ 0229-062-07-6-037 Donna M Ogle Susie Gonzalez 8221 Ilex St 36 ~til~e` Q ~ ~~~~ 135 S Campus Ave Fontana, CA 92335-2927 Upland, CA 91786-6830 s~E~~PJFi7 -PLANNING 0229-062-07-6-036 Agustin R Moreno 8221 Ilex St 38 Fontana, CA 92335-2927 0229-062-07-6-047 Isabel Bustamante 8221 Ilex St 47 Fontana, CA 92335-2927 0229-062-07-6-052 Hector B Hernandez 8221 Ilex St 52 itana, CA 92335-2956 0229-062-07-6-058 Lenin Hernandez 6221 Ilex St 73 Fontana, CA 92335-2924 0229-062-07-6-061 Bruce & Cherie Frederick 8221 Ilex St 62 Fontana, CA 92335-2956 0229-062-07-6-064 Hilda Contreras 6221 Ilex St 69 Fontana, CA 92335-2924 0229-062-07-6-067 Teodolu Delatorre 8221 Ilex St 80 Fontana, CA 92335-2924 0229-062-07-6-072 Arturo Trujillo 6221 Ilex St 63 Fontana, CA 92335-2956 0229-062-D7-6-039 0229-062-07-6-041 Consuela D Burns Joe Padilla 8221 Ilex St 39 8221 Zlex St 41 Fontana, CA 92335-2927 Fontana, CA 92335-2927 0229-062-07-6-049 Carol Peters 14580 Grandview Dr Moreno Valley, CA 92555-7034 0229-062-07-6-051 George & Antonio Hernandez 8221 Ilex st 51 Fontana, CA 92335-2956 0229-062-07-6-053 Roberta Mcdonnell 8221 Ilex St 53 Fontana. CA 92335-2956 0229-062-07-6-059 Alvaro Lopez 6221 Ilex St 74 _ Fontana. CA 92335-2924 0229-062-07-6-062 Juvenal Elias 8221 Ilex St 64 Fontana. CA 92335-2956 0229-062-07-6-065 Amparo Villanueva 8221 Ilex St 70 Fontana, CA 92335-2924 0229-062-07-6-068 Francisco J Cruz 8221 Ilex St 57 Fontana, CA 92335-2956 0229-062-07-6-073 Jean M & Stacy Mohelski 8221 Ilex St 66 Fontana, CA 92335-2924 0229-062-07-6-056 Coring Payne 8221 Ilex St 56 Fontana, CA 92335-2956 0229-062-07-6-060 Jose Duran 6221 Zlex St 60 Fontana, CA 92335-2956 0229-062-D7-6-063 Danny L Harris 30092 Carmel Rd Sun City, CA 92586-5206 0229-062-07-6-066 Alejandro & Jose Ruiz 505 5 Marvin Dr San Bernardin, CA 92410-5433 0229-062-07-6-071 Diane R Hoffman 8221 Ilex St 61 Fontana, CA 92335-2956 0229=062-07-6-074 Veronica Elias 8221 Ilex St 67 Fontana, CA 92335-2924 i ~., TaDnleajlaadlse3DOj Dade as T ~u096531b'7dW31 tiandasH ! suO965®/~tj3/tt{ ® ~ d P d i i F laauc umm~ncw aac ~.~.. ..._ . r___ ~tanv-o~-ooa-~ uon~n,uw,p woalNaAe'Mt~nnn aflma}eE zay~nsuo~ iuawa6iey~ ap sua5 ,,,0965 ®6213AV y,+ege6 a~ -=~^^n 125 r ~ +a~ad g sane; sayP 0229-062-07-6-075 0229-062-07-6-076 0229-062-07-6-077 Soya K Romero Alvaro & Simona Montes Gilbert R Estrada ?1 Ilex St 71 8221 Ilex St 72 6221 Ilex St 75 r~ntana, CA 92335-2924 - Fontana, CA 9233 -2924 ~ Fontana, CA 92335-2924 G fiY OF r~AN~Hp CUCAf~wf~~~~ .1 0229-062-07-6-078 0229-062-07-6-079 0229-062-07-6-080 Araceli Huerta Laura L & Devin SpeeceM~i7i (~ j 2~j~~'arlos E & Carmen Gomez 8221 Ilex St 76 8221 Ilex St 77 8221 Ilex St 79 Fontana, CA 92335-2924 Fontana, CA 92335-~IV~~ ana, CA 92335-2924 - PL ANw N~~ 0229-062-07-6-OBI 0229-062-07-6-083 0229-062-07-6-086 Daneth & Charles Hoffman Guadalupe G & Elena Duran Jimmy D & Alma Mckissen 8221 Ilex St 59 6221 Ilex St 76 8221 Ilex St 81 Fontana, CA 92335-2956 Fontana, CA 92335-2924 Fontana, CA 92335-2924 0229-062-11 0229-062-12 Cottonwood Apts Inc Cottonwood Apts Inc 2016 Riverside Dr ~ _ 2016 Riverside Dr Los Angeles, CA 90039-3707 Los Angeles, CA 90039-3707 0229-062-22 Cottonwood Apts Inc 2016 Riverside Dr -mss Angeles, CA 90039-3707 0229-301-02 Jey & Kathy Chung - 481 Workman Ave Arcadia, CA 91007-8454 0229-301-OS Cosme & Elizabeth Martinez 13060 Vine St Etiwanda, CA 91739-9616 0229-301-D8 Jose 6 Fredesvinda Valderramt 13034 Vine St Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9616 0229-302-01 Sharon L Eisenman 13015 Vine St Rancho Cucamo, CA 0229-062-23 Cottonwood Apts Inc 2016 Riverside Dr Los P.ngeles, CA 90039-3707 0229-301-D3 Antonio Magana 13080 Vine St Etiwanda, CA 91739-9616 0229-301-06 Joel E Navar 13050 Vine St Rancho Cucamo CA 91739-9616 0229-301-09 Joe L & Elizabeth Wariner 13022 Vine St Etiwanda, CA 91739-9616 0229-302-02 Thelma A Alexander 13021 Vine St 91739-9616 Etiwanda, CA 91739-9616 0229-062-13 Cottonwood Apts Inc 2016 Riverside Dr Los Angeles, CA 90039-3707 0229-301-01 Bernardo Duran ' 8116 Cornwall Ave Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9604 0229-301-D4 Marc Charbonneau 13068 Vine St Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9616 0229-301-07 Mori G Harper 13042 Vine St Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9616 0229-301-10 James Taft 13014 Vine St Etiwanda, CA 91739-9616 0229-302-03 P.rthur A b Candelaria Banuelc 13031 Vine St Etiwanda, CA 91739-9616 U229-302-04 0229-302-OS 0229-302-D6 Rogelio G & Maria Fonseca Terrence L & N,arylou Fisk Manuel & Blanca Rodriguez 13041 Vine St 13049 Vine St 13059 Vine St Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9616 Etiwanda, CP. 91739-9616 Etiwanda, CA 91739-9616 T fffc~~~rrrggq ~ ru0965®Arj~A~© ® T amlead ~aad ~Ise3 ~o} laded paadT ~! ^ w~0965 31v1dW31®tiany ash i ~ 1aa45 uo~ru3su~ aaS ~ ~ ~> awna. ~~~ <<s. A~13AH-O2-008-L ~ uocpru~sw,p wo3 etlan~'MIM~M1. eU!~al e1 ~~~ yuawa6~ey~ ap suac x.,0965 ~jAd3A77?~ege6 al >a~,~~+~ ~ Ja~ad @ ~IAef saiP126~ 0229-302-07 0229-302-DB 0229-302-09 Marc J Charbonneau Arturo & O1~! ~ ~~ArJ~I ~`' ry „ ,Kurt & Lirda Pankratz 4U~AI~ )67 Vine St 8156 Cornwall Ave '~~BOx 1 ,.ancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9616 Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-96 06 Etiwanda, CA 91739-0001 ~rR~ ~ 1 2~1~'f 0229-302-10 Ave Cornwall PO Box 582 Alta Loma, CA 91764 0229-302-13 Margo M Miranda 13042 Chestnut Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9685 0229-302-16 Rafael & Dolores Salgado 13014 Chestnut Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9665 0229-303-03 Maximiano & Estela Mercado 13005 Chestnut Ave ^-ncho Cucamo, CA 91739-9603 0229-303-06 Y.enneth L & Diane Chormicle 13031 Chestnut Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9603 0229-303-09 Joseph C & Emily Spinney 8198 Cornwall Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9607 0229-303-12 Socorro Jauregui 8220 Cornwall Ave Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9607 0229-303-16 Gilberto & Zenaida Jauregui 13044 Ivy Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9613 u229-303-18 Jacob A Gingerich 13026 Ivy Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739- 1 wi0965®/~3/~t/~ 0229-302-11 «y ~~~',~`~r - 0229-302-12 Anthony Milian rl pL~~~p~r enneth & Keith Van Horn 13060 Chestnut Ave 13050 Chestnut Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9685 Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9685 0229-302-14 Chestnut 1 Title PO Box 582 Alta Loma, CA 91739 0229-303-01 George & Joyce Martin PO Box 254 Etiwanda, CA 91739-0254 0229-303-D4 Juan M Hernandez 13013 Chestnut Ave Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9603 0229-303-07 Loretta & Russell Veylupek 13039 Chestnut Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-96.03 0229-303-10 Eugene P Costa 8206 Cornwall Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9607 0229-303-13 Arturo Carmona 8230 Cornwall Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9607 0229-303-16 John A Freeman 13038 Ivy Ave Rancho Cucamo. 0229-302-18 Martha J Cervantez 13022 Chestnut Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9685 0229-303-02 Pedro A & Hilda Yanes 12995 Chestnut Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9603 0229-303-06 Edith M Johnson 13021 Chestnut Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9603 0229-303-OB Ralph Sharp 13051 Chestnut Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9603 0229-303-11 Cornwall Ave PO Box 562 2 Title Holding Alta Loma, CA 91701-0582 0229-303-14 Gloria A Marquez 6236 Cornwall Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9607 0229-303-17 Gilbert G & Maria Rodriguez 13030 Ivy Ave CA 91739-9613 Etiwanda, CA 91739-9613 0229-303-19 Thomas Toy 13022 Ivy Ave 9613 Etiwanda, CA 91739-9613 a~, T a~ryeaj ~aad,(se3 ~o~ laay5 uolU~W aa5 ~ 0229-303-20 Julio & Claudia Arredondo 13018 Ivy Ave Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9613 Daded paajT ~~~,,, ,~ 0965 31tl1dW31®1Lany as0 ~ 1 ~l SIaOPI IaaJ Rcoa Aii3AV-C?9-O08-1 uo{~ru;su!,p uiw~Garrennnnn alllna} eI zal{nsuo? .0229-303-21 John C & Debra Norits 012 Ivy Ave nancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9613 0229-303-24 Joe D Yancey 12752 Foothill Blvd Etiwanda, CA 91739-9764 0229-304-03 Mario A Macias 8235 Emmett Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9608 0229-304-06 Mario & Gloria Renteria 13033 Ivy Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9656 0229-304-09 Brian J Oconnell 13045 Zvy Ave '-`iwanda, CA 91739-9656 0229-305-03 Don & Wanda Dixon 10210 Baseline Rd 256 Alta Loma, CA 91701-6059 0229-305-06 Dorothy M Hosmanek 8237 Cornwall Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9686 0229-305-09 Reed & Cathryn Gibbons 8211 Cornwall Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9666 0229-305-12 Fernando R Herrera 8191 Cornwall Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9605 0129-305-15 Joseph P Sibree 8165 Cornwall Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9605 T ruO9fi5®~3/~t(~ ;uawa6iey~ ap sip>S ,wp965 ®1.2!3AFl;uege6 a• ---•••;~ ~ as{ad a sa{pe} s~27y~ 0229-303-22 0229-303-23 Ave Ivy Fred Dowd PO Box 582 1 P ~i,~ 12994 Ivy Ave Alta Loma, t~InI eB 17ryc7~~'y~~~~ C~u~~~i~~wanda, CA 9173 9-9 613 0229-304-01 `Irt~ l'J 201 0229-304-02 Rodolfo Zacaula Dolores puintero 8255 Emmett Av~?Fv tlt/~j1 a_~~~+~`, 8245 Emmett Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-906 Rancho Cucamo, CA 51739-9608 0229-304-04 Billy R & Betty Sanders 13025 Ivy Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9656 0229-304-07 Juan Landeros 13037 Ivy Ave Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9656 0229-305-01 John Hernandez 8283 Cornwall Ave Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9686 0229-305-04 Don & Wanda Dixon 10210 Baseline~Rd 256 - Alta Loma, CA 91701-6D 59 0229-305-D7 Enrique & Esperanza Morales 8227 Cornwall Ave Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9686 0229-305-10 Ronald J & Ann Larson 9229 Verbena Rd Oak Hills, CA 92344-0494 0229-305-13 Florence R Stredwick 8183 Cornwall Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9605 0229-305-16 Aaron S & Terri Ebell 8157 Cornwall Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9605 Ea`,~ ,~ T a~n;eaj !aad Fse3;o} ! ;aaus uowruuui aac 0229-304-05 Worthy L & Minnie Curtis 13029 Ivy Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9656 0229-304-08 Kelly R & Trina Mc Kay 13041 Ivy Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9656 0229-305-02 Or to E Walters 8275 Cornwall Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9686 0229-305-05 Joe L & Elizabeth Bray 6245 Cornwall Ave Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9666 0229-305-08 Juan N,artinez 8199 Cornwall Rancho Cucamo, Ave CA 91739-9605 0229-305-11 Juan & Heidi Martinez 8199 Cornwall Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9605 0229-305-14 Phyllis M Zarzycki 8173 Cornwall Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9605 0229-305-17 Mauro Rodriguez 8149 Cornwall Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9605 jaded paadq .u0965 31V'IdW31®tiany asH lif3AV-O~J-008-L uoganµsui,p uim•IGanr~nnnnnn aipna! of ~11~a7 0229-309-18 Pedro A Lopez ~29 Cornwall Ave ..tiwanda, CA 91739-9605 0229-305-21 Victor R & Laura Mendez 8113 Cornwall Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9605 0229-311-03 Erlinda M Estrada 12986 Chestnut Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9602 0229-311-06 Thelma Kendall-Gore 12958 Chestnut Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9602 0229-311-09 John Sample 12932 Chestnut Ave -".iwanda, CA 91739-9602 luawafiley~ ap sw.c ,wO965 ®AH3Ab' 7!Wege6 aP~ 28~~ ~ ~a~ad a sane}. sa3Lanbp~ 0229-305-19 0229-305-20 Estevan Salas Agustin & Maria Vizcarra 8131 Cornwall Ave ~ 3184 Cosbey Ave Etiwanda, CAff917ryry39-9x605 n~h~q pBaldwin Park, CA 91706-4538 ~.+i e * Jf r1~1fdL ~i: ~ UL/'9~V1'JII~~°i.'- 0229-311-D1 0229-311-02 Amos J 5lovacek ~rhl~' ~ } ?(~~~ Michael Brown PO Box 324 12996 Chestnut Ave Etiwanda, CA 9ry~3p~p~- ~L~~Stq~~~tiwanda, CA 91739-9602 0229-311-04 Robert M & Rosinda Diaz 12978 Chestnut Ave Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9602 0229-311-07 Chris J & Gianina Overholt 12948 Chestnut Ave Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9602 0229-311-10 John A Gurney 12924 Chestnut Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9602 0229-311-14 0229-311-18 Frederick J Hanshaw Frederick J Hanshaw 10921 Westminster Ave 10921 Westminster Ave Garden Grove, CA 92843-4929 Garden Grove, CA 92843-4929 0229-313-02 James & Diana Hendricks 4681 Dapple Ln Riverside, CA 92509-3132 0229-313-03 Leo Q Martin 8235 Morton Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9615 0229-313-08 Joseph & Victoria Pigott 8219 Morton Ave Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9615 0229-313-OB Ernest F & Lucy Urena 6189 Morton Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9615 0229-313-06 Janis M Voogt 8209 Morton Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9615 0229-313-09 Jorge A & Violeta Lopez 6190 Emmett Ave Etiwanda, CP. 91739-9608 u229-313-11 0229-313-12 James & Teri Stevens Valaiphun Corhiran 6210 Emmett Ave 8216 Emmett Ave Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9606 Etiwanda, CA 91739-9608 T ~', ~ waO965®~3/~b~ ~ n T a~n;eaj ~aad ,(se3 ~oL ~ IM.~d !. ]Bauc umnnnau nay 0229-311-OS Roberto Escobedo 12966 Chestnut Ave Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-0032 0229-311-DB 12942 Chestnut Avenue PO Box 1718 Upland, CA 91785-1718 0229-311-11 Aurora B Miranda 12914 Chestnut Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9602 0229-313-01 Steven M & Gina Padilla 8255 Morton Ave Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9615 0229-313-04 Michelle M b Christine Hooves 8227 Morton Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9615 0229-313-07 Flora J Olagues 8201 Morton Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-4022 0229-313-10 Marlies M Videc 8200 Emmett Ave Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9608 0229-313-13 Philip T ~ Martha Alvarez 8228 Emmett Ave Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9606 jaded paajT ~ ni0965 311fidW31®tiany asD Aa3Np-Qg-p06-t uoµ~nmsw.P Woa/~aans~mrwm elL~a! el ~3lnsua, 0229-313-14 St Emmett ,Box 582 ,_.~ta Loma, CA 91701-0562 1100-091-21 Rodolfo Robles 8071 Jamestown Cir Fontana, CA 92336-3964 1100-191-04 Etiwanda 21 69 482 Cumbre St Monterey Park, iuawa6~ey~ ap sumac ~wp965 ®1,li3AV U~ege6 a~P129~ r ~a~ad € sa1Pe~. ~anhµ$ 0229-313-16 0229-313-16 Solema L Mamea Mildred Robillard 6246 Emmett Ave 6256 Emmett Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9608 Etiwanda, CA 91739-9608 1100-091-49 San Bernardino Co rr^lood Conti 825 E 3Rd St San Bernardin, CA 92415-1000 1100-091-46 Michael J & Melissa Duffey 7892 Marshall Ct Fon*_ana, CA 92336 1100-201-03 Emporia Investments Llc PO Box 638 Rancho Cucamo, CA 91729-0638 1100-201-02 Emporia Investments Llc 11755 Wilshire Blvd CA 91754-2115 Los Angeles, CA 90025-1506 1100-201-04 Inland Dev Corp Inc PO Hox 864 Helendale, CA 92342-6993 ++* 190 Printed *** C!~' 1r" RAPdCH~? iiICAM~~PJ~~. ~'~A12 0 ;~ 2QQ r ~ErcIV~C - P4Ad~Ji~ T ru0965®Atj3At/© ~ T amieaj ~aad ~se3 ao; jaded paajT ~ .u0965 31tl7dW31 ~,tiany asD V ! ~aauc uro.~n ......~...... A213nV-09-008-1 uo~~ru;sut,p utoayGaaerwnnn a~ls~aJ of m3E~~? 0229-312-01~ ~.rol & Darin Kluz .90 Morton Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9615 D229-312-D4 Michael Rocha 8218 Morton Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9615 0229-312-D7 Stanley R Nelson 8244 Morton Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9615 ;uawa6iey~ ap s~~- ,~.,Og65 ®Aa3nv wege6 aP~ 30;~ r +af~ @ salraef ~ant'p9 0229-312-02 D229-312-D3 Jeffrey & Elizabeth Martinez Juan A & Maria Cruz 8200 Morton Ave 82D6 Morton Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9615 Etiwanda, CA. 91739-9615 0229-312-OS Francisco J 6 Delia Hernandez 8226 Morton Ave Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9615 0229-312-D6 Maria T Gallardo 8238 Morton Ave Rancho Cucamo, CA 91739-9615 0229-312-08 Elsa Velazquez 8254 Morton Ave Etiwanda, CA 91739-9615 ~. r~ ar r~avcHO c~~aN~~~ru~a "~Ae° 0 J 2~Gr ~~~sE~~~~n - P~~,NPdd~1 a. *** B Printed *** T wa0965®/llj3Aty~ 6~ ,~ T a~n;eaj ~aad ilse3 ~o; jade a T ~ x.0965 31b'1dW31 tian as P131 NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT~CORP .. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING ~"r'~ LU~;AI'N~CNG March 5, 2007 ~~~~ SIGN IN SHFET ~dE AI~f~RFSS /PH(~NF Nn ~Q ~ ~ ~~-ua-r_1 ~~Z1 i<3o~ e~~.~r ~ ~-,.~~~= (YV 2 ~ 70~ ,}335' Lol.d~ ~,~ ~T ~~~ ~ ~~,-. c` r C~o9 \ X16 t~i~a~ I~ c, -o/- s3 qu, ~/~i~,J U`GdN~^el/ /3aYSTti'~/Jy~2_C 9/7~g 9a4-~~r9-Y~?~ - /^ ECiL f x4~ 1 p 1 1 O~Z ~~hLS T..wn ~.:rVG ~~i- ~~ ~ a~ ~ i .~~>~ C'~ ~'~~ 9i3~ r ~~~ ur IVCIiC CUCANItINrae I`~'~R 0 g ?EiCrE P132 ~il~ l~k ?~~,~vriu ~k~~~~CT~~~~ NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING~IAR O ~ ~~~~ March 5, 2007 CI(;N IN SHFFT NAME ~,+ P-~r PrJ ~~ ~ ~ A 3 ~ 13 l~f)RFSS C.o~S~,rgi I ~L PH(~NF N(7 ~ t~l- ~ y b 2 (( /~~{ nh L ~i "~r2. SSI~J l n(w~~~rii ~\ i~,l. / ~b~-~7~ j~ N_D M~' N ,~ L' 2 ~!!1 Cam, rW 7- / ~~TA~ V~`rW1~E~ ~~03`1(° ~-e~uT (,~6-4ifo~ f te~!ouv~~j o ~, ~ ~s 5~~es-ru~~ ~-,r ~°~j ~°-°3 -ri,~ 31 ggg2~~ 1 ~ C r" c~ 13030 Z, `-~i- ~3~1`1 ~-1`~/~ ~?~.~'~ x-15 ~-~~~~2 ~~~~ g r~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~7/~1~~s1~~ ~~ ~~ 3s~ ~~ tom. ~, ~~ ~~ c~ ~ I~ ~9Y ~ ~f~,,,; ~ ~ ~ ~ c~- ~~~ iyY~, + // / ~UD Q) ~nr(o s ~ iKoCa ~goo ~'I rt 1,~~~ t 8'49- ~9y9 P133 NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING -PETE PITASSI A neighborhood meeting was held on March 15, 2007, in the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department. There were several residents from the neig boyhood sdutheast of the proposed project in attendance. Also present were Nacho Garcia, Northtown Housing; Jan Reynolds, RDA Analyst III; and Jon Gillespie, Project Traffic Engineer. Project Planner, Doug Fenn opened the meeting by noting the topics of discussion including the assumption of affordable housing associated with crime, compliaride of. city policies and regulations for the project, the collaboration between Northtown and RDA on the project, the time limit and policy of City Council, and the notification process of property owners. Mr. Brian O'Connell, resident, expressed that the City of Rancho Cucamonga does not properly care for this portion of the city as it does other areas, and his neighborhood has received a bad reputation. He shared that over the past five years, residents worked together to remodel the neighborhood by making home improvements, clearing brush, and chasing out unwanted individuals such as prostitutes and drug dealers. Mr. O'Connell stated that while he is sympathetic to the needs of low-income residents, he feels that his neighborhood is too sensitive to handle the potential problems that could result from the. magnitude of the proposed project. He believes that this project will attract gang members and their families from surrounding cities. Mr. O'Connell said that he had contacted other cities such as Irvine, Simi Valley, and Laguna for their perspective of large low-income housing projects. According to Mr. O'Connell, these cities opposed low-income projects of this size because of the possible inability to control issues commonly associated with low-income housing. He, as well as other residents, felt that they will be sandwiched in between two problematic housing developments. Mr. O'Connell alleged that residents of The Victoria Woods Apartments that borders the area to the south have committed crimes such as burglary, drug dealing, and vandalism in the neighborhood and claims that the Police Department is unable to control it. He stated that this has caused him to have little confidence in the Police Department's ability to control criminal activity of the proposed project. Mr. Connell stated that he would like to compromise with the City on the use of the site instead of engaging in a legal battle. He and the other residents collectively suggested that the development instead be a Senior Housing development, with a 99-year commitment and secure use, which they believe would reduce criminal activity in the area and induce clean-up around the wash behind the project site. Joseph Sibree, resident, stated that this project could impact real estate values because residents will be unable to sell their homes without disclosing the existence of low-income housing in the area. Mr. Sibree complained that the City's notification process did not notify an ample amount of residents. He stated that because the project site is mostly surrounded by fields and power lines, at least 500 residences should have been notified, especially because of the size of proposed project. Mr. Sibree said that he was not notified in the first round of mailings for the project in April 2005, but learned of the project from signs posted on the site. Other concerns collectively shared by all residents present consisted of pedestrian safety, short-cuts by residents of proposed development through their neighborhood to access commerce in the Foothill Marketplace (namely, Food 4 Less), decline in property values, and overflow of school, and other City resources. Emily Spinney, realtor, stated that other areas, such as Heritage, within 600-foot radius were not notified. She said that she had talked to residents of those communities about this project and they are upset. Ms. Spinney stated that while showing a home in area to a client, a police officer asked her if she had seen a 20-year old Hispanic male in the area. The policeman informed her that this suspect had P134 solicited change for X100 from senior citizen. She said that the elderly need places to live in the City, but cannot find anywhere, which is why she believes the development should be Senior Housing. Loretta Veylupek, resident, stated that she is a member of Shepherd of the Hills Church, which is north of an affordable housing complex, Wood Haven Manor. She stated that the church has been burglarized and vandalized and believe that residents from that complex are responsible. Deputy Joseph Steer, Gang Expert with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Police Department, informed the residents of the Crime Free Multi-Housing Program, acrime-prevention partnership program between the Rancho Cucamonga Police Department and apartment complexes for safer communities. The program currently involves approximately 30 communities and consists of five phases: 1) Providing 8-hour classes for manager to identify and handle criminal activity, 2) reduction of crime through environmental design (i.e. cutting of trees/brush, providing proper lighting, etc.), 3) Posting of signs to indicate that a complex participates in the crime free program, similar to neighborhood watch signs, 4) conducting neighborhood meeting to encourage tenant involvement, and 5) complex receives certificate. In response to Ms. (Loretta's) comment regarding the Wood Haven Manor apartments on Lemon Avenue and Haven Avenue, and the burglary and vandalism of Shepherd of the Hills Church in relation to its proximity of the complex, Deputy Steers said that criminal activity has reduced in the complex by 70 percent because of this program. He said that as a result of managers working with the Police Department, they have committed'to evicting undesirable residents within three days of criminal activity being reported or observed. Deputy Steers added that he accompanies managers to eviction appeal hearings and, to date, has never lost a case. He further noted that residents in the area have noticed a huge reduction in criminal activity from the apartments since its participation in the program. He stated that four of the five apartment complexes in the City that often request police assistance are of market value and not low-income. He stated that more people does not necessarily equate to more crime. Deputy Steer commended the residents present for cleaning up their neighborhood. Linda Daniels, RDA Analyst III, City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency (RDA), informed the residents that cities must provide affordable housing per State mandate. She included that there are over 10 apartment complexes in the City that are part of the Affordable Housing Program and 1,000 affordable units. Ms. Daniels stated that, according to State regulations, cities are required to spend funds based on population, and at this point, affordable housing has become a main priority because of the city's unmet quota of 2,500 units for this type of use. Ms. Daniels said that RDA is adamant.to partnership with non-profit organizations, such as Northtown Housing. She added that the goals of RDA are to set and meet the best standards by providing affordable housing of high quality that are not distinguishable as such. She expressed that though she could not assure that no criminal activity will take place in the proposed project, it could be minimized through property design and on-site security, as well as other activities such as prompt graffiti removal. In'response to issues related to the Victoria Woods apartments, Ms. Daniels stated that RDA is not in partnership with that complex and was not involved in the leasing process, which could have reduced the amount of criminal activity in the area through stricter screening of applicants and eviction of problem residents. Ms. Daniels addressed the. residents' request of making the proposed project Senior Housing by stating that seniors are welcome to reside in the apartment complex. She informed residents that RDA has performed analysis during various stages of development and determined no decrease in property values. Lori Horn, John Stewart Company, said that she works with Northtown on various projects, and manages low-income properties in many cities such as Irvine (168 units) and Simi Valley (144 units), as well as 3 complexes in Rancho Cucamonga (Villa del Norte, Villa Pacific, and Olen Jones). Ms. Horne stated that the background of affordable housing renters is very diverse, ranging from school teachers to single-parent households and families of varying incomes. She added that resident screening for affordable housing is performed very carefully by verifying employment and income, performing credit checks and criminal background checks, and contacting previous landlords. She stated that residents could be evicted or asked to vacate a unit if a new occupant does not comply with the policy and house rules of the complex. Ms. Horne said that there will be three levels of income (based on a family of four): 45% units with maximum income of $30,855, 60% units with maximum income of $41.,140, and 90% P135 units with maximum income of $61,710. Mr. Horne included that an applicant's income must be at least double the rent of a unit to ensure that he/she is able to pay without financial difficulty. Jon Gillespie, Traffic Engineer, City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Department, stated that he is open to all suggestions from residents to improve traffic. He stated that on the southeast corner of the project, traffic improvements are goirig to be made with development that will prevent excess traffic from traveling through the residents' neighborhood. He added that the frontage and improvements will be completed along Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue; however, the Engineering Department must coordinate timing with the development to connect improvements on the southeast corner and entrances into the neighborhood. Mr. Gillespie explained that three lanes will be added on each side Foothill Boulevard, totaling six lanes, as well as a dedicated left-hand turn signal onto Cromwell Avenue. Further discussion between Mr. Gillespie and the residents included the possibility of closing off Etiwanda Avenue from Chestnut Avenue to prevent traffic into the neighborhood, thereby making it accessible by Cromwell Avenue only off of Foothill Boulevard. Mr. Gillespie explained that a consensus must be made amongst the residents in order to block off access from Etiwanda Avenue. Nacho Gracia, Executive Director, Northtown Housing Development Corp., stated that their company is targeting renters who want to live close to family members residing in Rancho Cucamonga, however, are unable to afford it otherwise. He added that Northtown will be willing to provide outreach programs that can remedy any problems that may arise from the complex. He stated that partnership with the City consisted of meeting high standards such as being tough on management of low-income apartments and confdrming to City rules and policies. Referencing an existing affordable housing project in the City, Villa• del Norte, an 88-unit townhouse community, Mr. Gracia said that management and the Sheriff's Department meet regularly for updates and further crime-prevention suggestions. He added that this project included amenities such as a day care facility and media computer room. P136 ~~a~ /s i Z°p ~ - ~~~~~~ - ~'i p 5.~~~t Si h(c~ -_5' ` I !~ . p ,.~ ~Q( ~~l'~i.J Ci7 Cv~i"~'l .. /lie ~a (,a~e-- ~3roWrn ~?~ Java ~1~~t~~.`c~ G~ ~~. ~~/~~C~ 11 ~~1=y~~Ic: ~ C~irrc l=.~cE ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ U , s~~.~~$ ~`~~ G~~L'c f~~ j L ` ~T~ T/fiSS ~/ ~j, ~ -~ / 1 ~ ~ I ~rklns ~S. Lour ,yoenJ 'l~G J G~~1 S-rt-Yv~r- Co~-~ i lY ~G/I{.1 I '~r~'IG~%Gl~~ "f~`q'~ ~t!'~G101 ,NOr~t fDt//I ~~~~ ~~ v ~~ E:' 1 ~ ENVIRONMENTAL - INFORMATION FORM _ (Part I -Initial Stud) CttyofRancho Cucamonga (Please type or prinf clearly using ink. Use the fab key to move from one line to the next line:! Planning Division - (909)477-2750 , P137 The purpose of this form is to inform the City of the basic components of the=proposed project so that the City may review the project pursuantto City Policies, Ordinances, and Guidelines; the California Environmental Quality Act; aril the City's Rules and Procedures to Implement CEQA. It is important that the information requested in this application be provided in full. Upon review of the completed Initial Study Part I and the development application, .additional information such as, but not limited to, tr•affc, noise, biological, drainage, and geological reports,may be required.'The projectapplicationwillnot-bedeemed complete unless the identified special studies/reports are suLimitted fior review and accepted as complete and adequate. The project application will not be scheduled for Committees' review unless all required reports are submitted and deemed complete. for staff to prepare the Initial Study Part ll as required by CEQA. In.addition to.the filing fee, the applicant will be responsible to pay or reimburse the'City, its agents, officers, and/or consultants for all costs .for the preparation, review, analysis, .recommendations, .mitigations, etc., of anyspecial studies or reports.. INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED. P/ease note that it is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the application is complete at the time of submittal; City staff will not be available fo perform work required to provide missing information. Application Number (or the project to which this form pertains: ~l `~ L` Zr}O ~o - i"~D S~ l7 a.y.~ ->~ezoa-l - ob ~ ~ ~i Project Title: San Sevaine Villas Name & Address of project owner(s): Northtown Housing Development Corporation 8599 Haven Avenue, Suite 205 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Name & Address of developer or project sponsor: Northtown Housing Development Corporation 8599 Haven Avenue, Suite 205 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 ` ' ~' ~'~ ~ 1 Study Partl.docPage 1 of 10 Rev. 3!17/04 P138 Contact Person&Address: Nacho Gracia, Executive Director Northtown Housing Development Corporation, 8599 Haven Ave., #205 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 -r- Name & Address of person prepahng this form (if different from above): Curtis Dahle, Pitassi Architects, Inc., 8439 White Oak Avenue, #105, Rancho Cuc Telephone Number: CA 91730 (909) 980-1361 Information indicated by an astehsk (') is not required o/non-construction CUP's unless otherwise requested by staff. '1) Provide a full scale (8-i/2 x i l) copy of the USGS Quadrant Sheet(s) which includes the project site, and indicate the site boundaries. 2) Provide a set of color photographs that show representativee views into the site from fhe north, south, east, and west; views into and from fhe site from the primary access points that serve the site; and representative views of significant features from the site. Include a map showing location of each photograph. 3) Project Location (describe): Vacant parcel on south side of Foothill Blvd. @ East Avenue; bordered on west by SCE transmission lines/R.O.W.; bordered on east by San Sevaine Channel (S.B. County Flood Control); vacant property to the south. 4) Assessor's Parcel Numbers (attach additional sheet if necessary): 0229-041-10 "5) Gross Site Area(ac/sq.R.): 14.2 acres/618,552 s.f. '6) Net Sife Area (total site size minus area of public streets 8 proposed dedications): 1 2.887 acres/-561 , 363 s. f. 7) Describe any proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect the project site (attach additional sheet if necessary): None. AIA I:\PLANNINGIFINAL\FORMS\COUNTER1lnitial Study Part~.docPage 2 of 10 Rev. 3/17/04 P139 8) Include a description of all permits which will be necessary from the City of Rancho Cucamonga and othergovernmental agencies in order to fully implement the project: A Section 404 Permit from the Army Corp of Engineers; a 1602 Permit from the CDFG; a WDR from the RWQCB; Development Review approval; an Encroachment Permit to widen Foothill Blvd.; Grading Permit; and Building Permit. 9) Describe the physical setting of the site as it exists before the project including information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, mature trees, trails and roads, drainage courses, and scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on site (including age and condition) and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of significant features described. In addition, cite all sources ofinformation (i.e., geological and/orhydrologic studies, biotic and archeological surveys, traffic studies): See attached. 70) Describe the known cultural and/or historical aspects of the site. Cite all sources ofinformation (books, published reports and oral history): No known historical or cultural significance is associated with this site. Source: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, dated 10/3/05 by RGS Enaineerincx Geoloav. I:\PLANNING\PINAL\FORMSICOUNTER\Initial Study Partl.docPage 3 of 90 Rev. 3/97/04 P140 11) Describe any noise sources and their levels that now affect the site (aircraft, roadway noise, etc.) and how they will affect proposed uses: Foothill Blvd. is a major divided highway and generates traffic noise. There are no other known scources of noise affecting the P 12) Describe the proposed project in detail. This should provide an adequate description of the site in terms o/ ultimate use that will result from the proposed project. Indicate if there are proposed phases for development, the extent of development to occur with each phase, and the anticipated completion of each increment. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary: See attached. 13) Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.) and scale of development (height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.): The property north of the site (across Foothill Blvd.) is a vacant grove of Eucalyptus trees. To the east is the San Sevaine Channel and single family houses/ mobile homes in the City of Fontana. To the south is an open lot vacant And to the west is the open space of the SCE corridor, with single family _ houses beyond. 14) Will the proposed project change the pattern, scale, or character of the surrounding general area of the project? It will provide medium-density housing in an area with single-family and multi-family neighborhoods, but buffered fromthem by the open space corridor and flood control channel. I:\PLANNINGIFINAL\FORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Partl.docPage 4 of 10 Rev. 3117/04 15) Indicate the type of short-term and long-term noise to be generated, including source and amount. How will these noise levels affect adjacent properties and on-site uses? Whaf methods of soundproofing are proposed? Short term moderate levels of noise will be generated from grading and construction activities. Hours of construction will be limited to that P141 allowed by City Ordinance. No long term noise generating uses are anticipated or proposed. '16) Indicate proposed removals and/or replacements of mature or scenic trees: proposed removal of existing Willow and Eucalyptus trees (no scenic or heritage value). No other trees present. Project wil include complete landscaping throughout site, with new canopy and accent trees provided as required by City Ordinance. 77) Indicate any bodies of water (including domestic water supplies) into which the site drains: The site currently drains into the East Etiwanda Creek bed, however, with re-grading and completion of City Master Planned Storm Drain at Foothill Blvd. and County Flood Control facilities, the Project site will drain into new San sevaine Flood Control 18) Indicate expected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further cfarification, please contact the Cucamonga Valley Water District at 987-2591. a. Residential (gal/day) 57,600 cp7./day Peak use (gal/Day) 115,200 gal/day b. Commercial/Ind. (gal/day/ac) 19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. Peak use (gal/min/ac) ^ Septic rank ~ Sewer. If septic tanks are proposed, attach percolation tests. if discharge to a sanitary sewage system is proposed indicate expected daily sewage generation: (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further cfarification, please contact the Cucamonga Valley Water District at 987-2591. a. Residential (ga!/day) 42, 750 gal/day b. Commercial/Industrial (gal/day/ac) RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS: 20) Number of residential units: 225 Detached (indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size: Attached (indicate whether units are rental or for sale units): Lower and moderate income rental units. IaPLANNING\FINAL\FORMSICOUNTER\Initial Study Partl.docPage 5 of 10 Rev. 3/17/04 P142 21) Anticipated range o1 sale prices and/or rents: Sale Price(s) $ to $ Rent (per month) $ 335.00 to g 1 , 281 .00 22) Specify number of bedrooms by unit type: Manager's Apt. - 2 Bedroom Unit type 1 - 1 Bedroom Unit type 6 - 3 Bedroom Unit type 2 - 1 Bedroom Unit type 7 - 3 Bedroom Unit type 3 - 2 Bedroom Unit type 8 - 3 Bedroom Unit type 4 - 2 Bedroom Unit type 9 - 3 Bedroom Unit type 5 - 2 Bedroom Unit tvoe 10 - 3 Bedroom 23) Indicate anticipated household srze by unit type: Unit types 1 & 2 2 persons Unit type 3.4 & 5 4 persons (maximum) Unit type 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10: 5 perons (maximum) 24) Indicate the expected number of school children who will be residing within the project: Contact the appropriate School Districts as shown in Attachment 8: a. Elementary.• 2 9 . 1 4 b. Junior High: 1 1.81 o, Senior High 19.13 COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL. AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS 25J Describe type of use(s) and major function(s) of commercial, industrial or institutional uses: 26) Total floor area of commercial, industrial, or institutional uses by type: 27) Indicate hours of operation; 28) Numbero(employees: Total: Maximum Shift Time of Maximum Shift: I:\PLANNINGIFINALIFCRMSICOUNTER1lnitial Study Part1.docPage 6 of t0 Rev. 3t~7/04 P143 29) Provide breakdown of anticipated job classifications, including wage and salary ranges, as well as an indication of the rate o/ hire for each classification (attach additional sheet if necessary): 30) Estimation of the number of workers to be hired that currently reside in the City: "31) for commercial and industrial uses only, indicate the source, type, and amount of air pollution emissions. (Data should be verified through the South Coast Air Quality Management District, at (818) 572-6283): ALL PROJECTS 32) Have the water, sewer, fire, and flood contra/ agencies serving the project been contacted to determine their ability to provide adequate service to the proposed project? If so, please indicate their response. Yes. Adequate services can be provided to this proiect (Flood control requires completion of scheduled Citv Storm Drain anti County Flood Control facilities.) 33) In the known history of this property, has there been any use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials? Examples of hazardous and/or toxic materials include, but are not limited to PCI3's; radioactive substances; pesticides and herbicides; fuels, oils, solvents, and otherflammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any ofthe above. Please list the materials and describe their use, storage, and/or discharge on the property, as well as the dates of use, it known. No known history of use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic material on subject property Source: Phase I Envornomental Assessment, dated 1()/3/nR by aFI Consultants. I:IPLANNING\FINAL\FORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Partl.tlocPage 7 of 10 Rev. 3(17/04 P144 34) lMlltheproposedprojectinvolvethetemporaryorlong-term use,storage,ordischarge of hazardous and/ortoxicmatenals, including but not limited to those examples listed above? /f yes, provide an inventory ofall such materials to 6e used and proposed method of disposal. The location of such uses, along with the storage and shipment areas, shall be shown and labeled on the application plans. No. I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for adequate evaluation of this project to the best of my ability, that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct tot he best of my knowledge and belief. /further understand that additional information maybe required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Date: June 20, 2006 Title: Proiect Architect 1:1PLANNING\FINAL\FORMSICOUNTER\Initial Study Part9.docPage 8 of 10 Rev. 3117104 ATTACHMENT "A" CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ESTIMATED WATER USE AND SEWER FLOWS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT (Data Provided by Cucamonga Valley Water District February 2003) Water Usage Single-Family Multi-Family Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Office Professional Institutional/Government Industrial Park Large General industrial Heavy Industrial (distribution) Sewer Flows Single-Family Multi-Family General Commercial Office Professional Industrial Park Large General Industrial Heary Industrial (distribution) 705 gallons per EDU per day 256 gallons per EDU per day 1000 gal/day/unit (tenant) 4082 gal/day/unit (tenant) 973 gal/day/unit (tenant) 6412 gal/day/unit (tenant) 1750 gal/day/unit (tenant) 2020 gal/day/unit (tenant) 1863 gat/day/unit (tenant) 270 gallons per EDU per day 190 gallons per EDU per day 1900 gal/day/acre 1900 gal/day/acre Institutional/Government 3000 gal/day/acre 2020 gal/day/acre 1863 gal/day/acre Source: Cucamonga Valley Water District Engineering & Water Resources Departments, Urban Water Management Plan 2000 P145 I:\PLANNING(FINAL\FORMSICOUNTER\Initial Study Partl.docPage 9 of 10 Rev. 3/17/04 P146 ATTACHMENT B Contact the school district for your area for amount and payment of school fees: Elementary School Districts Alta Loma 9350 Base Line Road, Suite F Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909)987-0766 Central 10601 Church Street, Suite 112 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909)989-8541 Cucamonga 8776 Archibald Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909)987-8942 Etiwanda 6061 East Avenue P.O. Box 248 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 (909)899-2451 High School Chaffey High School 211 West 5th Street Ontario, CA 91762 (909)988-8511 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\FORMS\COUNTERUnitial Study Panl.docPage 10 of 10 Rev. 3177/04 ~ P147 PITASSI ARCHITECTS,iNC. EXISTING PHYSICAL SETTING The proposed Project Site is vacant property that slopes an average of 2% from north to south, with an overall elevation difference of approximately 20 feet. Within the varied topography there are numerous man-made earthen berms- alongside two different drainage courses; near the westerly property line paralleling the SCE right-of-way, and adjacent to the southerly edge of Foothill Boulevard. Soils The soils present on site are gravelly loam sand consistent with broad alluvial fans. There are two drainage courses on the Site. The first of these is the East Etiwanda Creek, an intermittent stream that receives seasonal floodwaters and will be diverted by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District into the San Sevaine Flood Control Channel when the concrete channel is constructed sometime next year. The streambed crosses the Project Site diagonally from the northeast corner to the mid-point of the south property line in a dry channel approximately 25 feet wide and 12 feet deep. The sides of the channel have man-made earthen embankments. The second drainage course is outflow from an incomplete Master Planned Storm Drain, which crosses Foothill Boulevard and empties onto the northwest corner of the Project Site. The water from this outlet follows aman-made v-ditch south until it intersects with the dry creek bed. The storm drain ismaster-planned to connect up with the San Sevaine flood control channel also, thereby removing the source of water which has produced a minor riparian plant community. Plante The vegetation on Site has been disturbed by previous grading, construction activities, and asphalt/ concrete dumping. The predominant plant community present is non-native grassland, with burr-sage, telegraph weed, red brome, and mustard. Native species present within the alluvial fan sage scrub include buckwheat, scalebroom, and white sage. • 8439 White Oak Ave., 5[e. 105 ~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 97730 ^ ^ Tel. (909) 980-1361 ~ Fax. (909) 944-5814 • Part I -Initial Study Existing Physical Setting p. 2 P148 The narrow earthen v-ditch from the incomplete storm drain has a steady source of water from nuisance flows, and therefore supports a small community of riparian plant types (willow, mule fat, water knotweed, tall flatsedge, and other herbaceous wetland vegetation). The other drainage course receives only seasonal floodwater, therefore the riparian plant community is more sparsely vegetated (one willow tree, scattered mule fat, scalebroom, buckwheat, and other sage scrub species). There are several non-native trees (eucalyptus) present near the center of the Project Site. During a biological survey conducted by LSA Associates, Inc. typical wildlife observed, or other sign noted, include cottontail rabbits, jackrabbits, ground squirrels, lizards, mourning doves, and killdeer. Additional focused surveys will be conducted at the appropriate time to determine if burrowing owls, nesting raptors, or kangaroo rats are present, although the initial survey report considers their presence on this site to be unlikely due to the pre- existing disruption of the native site conditions. 1. Preliminary Geotechniral Inv stilt to ion, dated Oct. 6, 2005, by RGS Engineering Geology. 2. Delineation of Jurisdictional plat rc, dated Oct. 7, 2005, by LSA Associates 3. Biologi al RPCOnrr'PC R ~, dated Oct. 28, 2005, by LSA Associates 4. Phase I Fnvironm ntal Sit AGCeccment, dated Oct. 3, 2005, by AEI Consultants ~ ~~ ~ P149 PITASSI ARCHITECTS,~N~. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The scope of this project is the development of (225) one, two, and three bedroom family apartments in a gated community, with carports and open parking. A landscaped greenbelt will be created in the middle of the Site, with paved pedestrian paths linking the apartments to the on-site recreational facilities and a future regional trail system to the west of the Project (SCE corridor). Amenities will include the following: Courtyard type Community Bu_ ilrling, which will have the leasing office, social services/ counseling space, recreation room, multi-purpose meeting room(s) with adjoining full-sized kitchen, fitness equipment room, business center/ classroom, computer lab/ classroom, and a communal living room with fireplace, media center, and adjacent outdoor patio. There will also be atwo-bedroom Manager's Apartment on the second floor of this building; • Fenced swimming nol next to the Community Building patio area (with a children's wading pool instead of a spa), ample sun-deck area, outdoor showers, individual restrooms, and a pergola•shade structure; •. Baskethall half-rourt; I atge opal la~•m recreation space with pergola-type ip•rnir ga~Phns; • Barh~enue areas; • Rnse-,g ra den; • Three tot-lot~ygrnundc (two for toddlers, one larger play area) ^ 8439 White Oak Ave., 5[e. 105 • Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 ^ ^ Tel. (909) 980-13G1 . Fax. (909) 9445814 • P150 BACKGROUND Project Files: City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540 - PITASSI ARCHITECTS FOR THE NORTHTOWN HOUSING AUTHORITY CORPORATION: - A request to develop 225 workforce apartment units on 12.87 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 units per acre) located at 13233 Foothill Boulevard, west of the Etiwanda San Sevaine Flood Control Channel, and east of the Southern California Edison Transmission Line Corridor -APN: 0229-041-10. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT DRC2007-00119 - PITASSI ARCHITECTS -Review of proposed Density Bonus Agreement (also referred to as Housing Incentive Agreement) to implement Development Review DRC2006-00540 allowing a density bonus and modifying specific development standards for the construction of 225 workforce apartment units on vacant property in Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located at 13233 Foothill Boulevard, west of the Etiwanda San Sevaine Flood Control Channel, and east of the Southern California Edison Transmission Line Corridor -APN: 0229-041-10. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. 2. Description of Project: Northtown Housing Development Corporation is proposing to develop 225 workforce apartment units on an undeveloped 12.87 acre site located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard near the City's eastern border with the City of Fontana/Unincorporated San Bernardino County. More specifically, the property is situated between the existing Etiwanda San Sevaine Flood Control Channel on the east and the Southern California Edison Corridor on the west. Entry into the new apartment community will be from a gated entry at Foothill Boulevard. Secondary "emergency only" access will also be provided from Foothill Boulevard at the west end of the site. The project will be known as San Sevaine Villas. Buildings will include a mix of two and three-story structures arranged across the site. Apartment mix will include one bedroom (20 units), two bedroom (136 units), and three bedroom (68 units) ranging in size from 961 to 1,287 square feet, respectively. A 6,679 square foot community recreational building which includes a 2-bedroom Manager's unit and community pool is also proposed and will be located near the main entrance. Required parking for the project is 430 spaces, including 56 visitor spaces. A total of 469 unattached parking spaces will be provided, including 225 covered carport spaces at a rate of one covered space per unit. The uncovered spaces will be largely concentrated along the south and west boundaries of the site. The site has two existing major drainage features, the most prominent of which is the East Etiwanda Creek course that receives seasonal runoff. The site will require major grading including the filling in of the East Etiwanda Creek drainage course. The project cannot begin until the San Bernardino County Flood Control District completes its San Sevaine Creek Water Project which is designed to divert upstream (north of Foothill Boulevard) waters to the San Sevaine Creek Channel located on the east boundary of the subject site. P151 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 2 Affordable Housing Incentive Agreement (hereafter the Agreement) Under State law, cities are required to provide development incentives for the development of affordable housing units within its jurisdiction. In November 2005, the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted a Density Bonus Ordinance (codified as Section 17.40 of the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code) to conform to Siate law. The City's Density Bonus Ordinance allows applicants to request extra density and/or relaxed development standards in exchange for the creation of affordable units. The applicant has submitted an application (DRC2007-00019 Affordable Housing Incentive Agreement) requesting a 25 percent density increase amounting to 45 more units than would be normally allowed in the Medium Residential District (8-14 units per acre). The proposed density for the project will be 17.4 units per acre, and in exchange the applicant has agreed to set aside 55 units for lower income households and 109 units for Very Low Income households for a term of 30 years. In addition, the applicant is requesting to modify certain building to building, and building to property line setback distances as identified in the Agreement. The proposed agreement will be considered by the City Council, and if approved the project will be able to proceed as proposed. If the Council does not approve the agreement, the project will have to be revised or abandoned. 3. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Nacho Gracia, Executive Director Northtown Housing Development Corporation 8599 Haven Avenue, Suite 205 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 4. General Plan Designation: Medium Residential (8-14 Units per Acre) 5. Zoning: Medium (M) Residential (8-14 Units per acre) 6. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting (Briefly describe the project's surroundings): North -Undeveloped commercial properties and the Southern California Edison (SCE) utility corridor. South -Undeveloped residentially zoned land in the Etiwanda Specific Plan. East -San Sevaine Flood Control Channel and single family residential uses in the City of Fontana/Unincorporated San Bernardino County across Ilex Avenue. West -SCE Transmission Lines and an existing single family residential tract further west. The project site consists of a large open undeveloped area between a concrete lined drainage channel on the east and the high voltage transmission line corridor owned by Southern California Edison. Currently, the site has gradual slope to the southwest and is marked by the unlined streambed of the East Etiwanda Creek that generally transverses the property from northeast to southwest. The East Etiwanda Creek is fed by seasonal water flows from the north via culverts below Foothill Boulevard at the northeast corner of the site, and from a storm drain outlet and man made earthen V-ditch located at the northwest corner of the site. Small scale shrubs and grasses are present across the site with some trees, mostly Eucalyptus, near the center of the site. The site is completely fenced, although some portions are down or have been removed. Dumping (mostly broken concrete, asphalt, trash) along the frontage of the site along Foothill Boulevard was observed. P152 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006.00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 3 7. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 8. Contact Person and Phone Number: Michael Diaz, Senior Planner (909) 477-2750 9. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) • California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency GLOSSARY -The following abbreviations are used in this report: CVW D -Cucamonga Valley Water District EIR -Environmental Impact Report FEIR -Final Environmental Impact Report NPDES -National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NOx -Nitrogen Oxides ROG -Reactive Organic Gases PM,o -Fine Particulate Matter RWOCB -Regional Water Quality Control Board SCAQMD -South Coast Air Quality Management District SWPPP -Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan URBEMIS7G -Urban Emissions Model 7G P153 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2oo7-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 4 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than-Significant-Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. (/) Aesthetics ()Agricultural Resources (/) Air Quality (/) Biological Resources (/) Cultural Resources (/) Geology & Soils ()Hazards & Waste Materials (/) Hydrology & Water Quality ()Land Use & Planning ()Mineral Resources (/) Noise ()Population & Housing ()Public Services ()Recreation () Transportation/Traffic ()Utilities & Service Systems ()Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: (/) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be ignificant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by, or agreed to,~j the project pr~po nt. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. Prepared By: Reviewed By: Date: ~' ~' 0~ Date: ,~I /~~ P154 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 5 Less Than Sipnificam Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Pntenrany Slpnificarn wim Mitipafion man Sipnificem No nlDaq 1^CONOfdted Ifllpact 8c1 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial affect a scenic vista? () () () (/) b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but () () () (/) not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or () () () (/) quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, () () (/) ( ) which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Comments: a) There are no significant vistas within or adjacent to the project site. The site is not within a view corridor according to General Plan Exhibit III-15. b) The project site contains no scenic resources and no historic buildings within a State Scenic~Highway. There are no State Scenic Highways within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. c) The project site consists of a large open undeveloped area between a concrete lined drainage channel on the east and the high voltage transmission line corridor owned by Southern California Edison. Currently, the site has the unlined streambed of the East Etiwanda Creek. Small scale shrubs and non-native grasses exist across the site with some trees, mostly Eucalyptus, present near the center of the site. The site is completely fenced, some dumped debris (mostly broken concrete, asphalt, trash) have been observed along the frontage of the site along Foothill Boulevard. When completed, the development of the site will result in an attractive apartment complex that will improve the current visual quality of the area consistent with the quality of new projects under construction in the nearby area. Design review is required prior to final approval. The City standards require the developer to underground the existing and new utility lines and facilities to minimize unsightly appearance of overhead utility lines and utility enclosures in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution No. 87-96, unless exempted by said Resolution. d) The project will increase the number of streetlights and general illumination fixtures in the immediate vicinity and site as typically required for safety and security purposes. The design and placement of light fixtures will be shown on Site Plans which require review for consistency with City standards that requires shielding, diffusing, or indirect lighting to avoid glare. Lighting will be selected and located to confine the area of illumination to within the project site. The impact is not considered significant. P155 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119-SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 6 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Su ortin InfOrmatlOn SOUrces: PP g Pptentiany Significant Wnh Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorpomtetl Impatl Impetl 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or () () () (/) Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a () () () (/) Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, () () () (/) which, because of their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? Comments: a) The site is not designated as Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. There are approximately 1,300 acres of Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance within the City of Rancho Cucamonga, of which about one-third is either developed or committed to development according to General Plan Table IV-2. The major concentrations of designated farmlands are located in the southern and eastern portions of our City that is characterized by existing and planned development. Further, two-thirds of the designated farmlands parcels are small, ranging from 3 acres to 30 acres, and their economic viability is doubtful; therefore, they are not intended to be retained as farmland in the General Plan Land Use Plan. The General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR)= identified the conversion of farmlands to urban -uses as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. b) There is no agriculturally zoned land within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. There are no Williamson Act contracts within the City. c) The site is located at the edge of the City and is surrounded generally by residential development and a major east-west rail line. The nearest agricultural use is approximately 1.1 miles to the northwest of the project site at the Fillipi Winery. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 3. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? () () () (/) b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute () (/) () ( ) substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of () () (/) (_) any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? P156 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 7 Less Tnan Significant less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP 9 Fgranuelly Signiticant wiln Mitigalion rnao Sipnilicanl No Impacl Inco oratatl Im act Imnad d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant () (/) () ( ) concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial () () () (/) number of people? Comments• a) As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.6), continued development will contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and State standards. The General Plan FEIR identified the citywide increase in emissions as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. b) During the construction phases of development, on-site stationary sources, heavy-duty. construction vehicles, construction worker vehicles, and energy use will generate emissions. In addition, fugitive dust would also be generated during grading and construction activities. While most of the dust would settle on or near the project site, smaller particles would remain in the atmosphere, increasing particle levels within the surrounding area. Construction is an on-going industry in the Rancho Cucamonga area. Construction workers and equipment work and operate at one development site until their tasks are complete. They then transfer to a different site where the process begins again. Therefore, the emissions associated with construction activities are not new to the Rancho Cucamonga area and would not violate an air quality standard or worsen the existing air quality in the region. Nevertheless, fugitive dust and equipment emissions are required to be assessed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) on a project-specific basis. Therefore, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce impacts tc less-than-significant levels: 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. Contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. 2) Prior to the issuance of any Grading Permits, developer shall submit construction plans to City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCA~MD) as well as City Planning Staff. 3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed pertormance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high volume, low-pressure spray. 4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed pertormance standards noted in SCADMD Rule 1108. P157 Initial Study for City of.Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-0011.9 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 8 Less Then Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g aptamiaov Sipnificem wnn Mitigation Tnan Significant Np Irtpact Inca oralatl I act Impact 5) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads. • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. • Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. • Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 6) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water duality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily to reduce PMrp emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 7) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM~p emissions. S) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel-powered equipment where feasible. 9) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-Grading Plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. After implementation of the preceding mitigation measures, short-term construction air quality emissions would remain significant as noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.6). Based upon on the Urban Emissions Model (URBEMIS7G) model estimates in Table 5.6-4 of the General Plan FEIR, Nitrogen Oxides (Nox), Reactive Organic Gases (ROG), and Fine Particulate Matter (PM,o) would exceed SCAQMD thresholds for significance; therefore, would all be cumulatively significant if they cannot be mitigated on a project basis to a level less-than-significant. The General Plan FEIR identified the citywide increase in emissions as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. P158 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 9 Less Than Slpnilicant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g actaneanr Sipniticant wuh Mitigation Than sipniticant No Impatt Incoiporaletl Im act Im act In the long-term, development consistent with the General Plan would result in significant operational vehicle emissions based upon on the URBEMIS7G model estimates in Table 5.6-4 of the General Plan FEIR; therefore, would all be cumulatively significant if they cannot be mitigated on a project basis to a level less-than-significant. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 10) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 11) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. After implementation of the preceding mitigation measures, the General Plan FEIR identified the citywide increase in operational emissions as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. c) As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.6) continued development would contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and State standards. The General Plan FEIR identified the citywide increase in emissions as a significant and adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The project proposed is consistent with the General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. d) Sensitive receptors are defined as populations that are more susceptible to the effects of pollution than the population at large. The SCAOMD identifies the following as sensitive receptors: long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, retirement homes, residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers, and athletic facilities. According to the SCAOMD, projects have the potential to create significant impacts if they are located within 1/4 mile of sensitive receptors and would emit toxic air contaminants identified in SCAOMD Rule 1401. The project site is approximately 300-feet from residences to the east and west and approximately 1/2 mile south of the nearly completed Perdew Elementary School on Miller Avenue, a sensitive receptor. Potential impacts to air quality are consistent with the Public Health and Safety Super-Element within the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. During construction, there is the possibility of fugitive dust to be generated from grading the site. The mitigation measures listed under b) above will reduce impact to less-than-significant levels. e) Typically, the uses proposed do not create objectionable odors. No adverse impacts are anticipated. P159 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 10 Las: man Sipnihcent Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially spnilmam With Muipaupn Than sipnuicam Np Im act Incomoratetl Im act Impact 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or () (/) () ( ) through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat () (/) () ( ) or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally () (/) () ( ) protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Intertere substantially with the movement of any native () () () (/) resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances () (/) () ( ) protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat () () () (/) Conservation Plan, Natural Community conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? Comments• a) The project site is undeveloped but has been disturbed by previous grading, dumping, and other man-made activities over the years. A Biology Resources Report (LSA Associates, Oct. 2005) was prepared for the project to determine the potential existence of sensitive plant and animal species on the subject site. The report identified the site as a composition of primarily non-native grassland with a small area of disturbed Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS) on the east side of the East Etiwanda Creek bed, and small portion of riparian vegetation. RAFSS is considered a sensitive natural community by State and Federal resource agencies and private conservation organizations. However, the RAFSS habitat on the site is an isolated fragment of the original streambed and is soon to fully be cut-off from its water source as a result of the San Bernardino County Flood Control District's San Sevaine Creek Water Project. When completed the San Sevaine Water Project will permanently divert the waters of both the San Sevaine and East Etiwanda Creeks off-site and into a concrete lined flood control channel (the channel already exists adjacent to the east side of the site). P16O Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006.00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 11 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: pp g Fclantially Significem w~tn Mitigation Tnan Significant No I ed Incorporatatl Irrgact Impact As a result, the on site RAFSS will not be suitable for long term sustainability of associated plant and wildlife communities. Since City staff was not able td document whether the subject RAFSS was accounted for and mitigated with San Sevaine Water Project the applicant will be required to ascertain and comply with California Department of Fish and Game requirements for mitigation. The following mitigation measure is proposed to offset the loss RAFSS habitat for this project: 1) Prior to the removal of any Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS) habitat from the site, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) including approved mitigation for the removal the extant RAFSS habitat from the site. Eight federally/State listed plant and animal species were also identified as potentially present on the project site. Seven of the listed species were considered to the absent from the site based on a lack of suitable habitat, or the project site is outside the known range of the species. The plant and animal species considered to have a low potential for occurrence on the site included the federally/state endangered Slender-horned Spine Flower (Dodecahema leptoceras), and the federally endangered Merriam's (or San Bernardino) Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys merriami parvus), and the State sensitive species Western Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia hypugaea). These specific species were the subject of separate focused reports (by LSA Associates 2006 and 2007), all of which concluded that the subject species were not encountered on the site. Thus, based on the Biology Resources Report and separate species focus studies, no adverse impacts to federally/State listed plant and animal species are expected. Although nc Burrowing Owls were found on the site, a preconstruction Burrowing Owl survey will be required prior to ground disturbance to confirm that no owls are present on the site before ground The following mitigation 2) Prior to the removal of any Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS) habitat from the site, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) including approved mitigation for the removal the extant RAFSS habitat from the site. b) The site has two major drainage features, the most prominent of which is the East Etiwanda Creek streambed that receives seasonal runoff and enters the site from the northeast. The other drainage feature is a storm drain inlet entering the site from the northwest which connects to the creek via aman-made earthen V-ditch. A Delineation of Jurisdictional Waters Report prepared for the project (LSA Associates June 19, 2007), identified approximately 0.51 acre of streambed and riparian vegetation impacts within the jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and approximately 0.2 acre of ephemeral and wetland waters of the U.S. within the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). As mentioned above, the San Sevaine Creek Water Project (when completed in the near future) will permanently alter these drainage patterns and adversely affect the sustainability of the associated habitat on the site. Moreover, development of the site with housing will not occur until after the San Sevaine Creek Water Project is completed. The applicant will be required to obtain a final determination on the status of the creek and riparian habitat on the site from both the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), and comply with the requirements of these resource agencies. The following mitigation measure is proposed: P161 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DF?C2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 12 Less T"an signillwnt Less issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g P°'°"IlauY Significant w"" Mitigation rnan significant Np Impact Incprppratetl Impeq I act 3) Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits for the project, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and Regional Water Quality Control Board, for the removal and/or alteration of on site riparian habitat within the jurisdiction of the abovementioned resource agency. c) LSA Associates, Inc. conducted a wetlands jurisdictional waters delineation study on the site on June 19, 2007. Using U.S. Army Corps of Engineers methodology, a total of 0.20 acres of the site was deemed to be the jurisdictional waters of the United States. A portion of this total, 0.16-acre, meets the standards to qualify as a jurisdictional wetland under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The remaining 0.04-acre was found to be non- wetland waters of the U.S. Final determination of jurisdiction is subject to verification by the Army Corps of Engineers. The following mitigation measure is proposed: 4) Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits for the project, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), for the removal and/or alteration of on site wetland waters. d) The majority of the surrounding area has been or is in the process of being developed with both commercial, residential, and public works projects, thereby presenting a disruption to intact wildlife corridors that may have existed previously. More importantly the project site lies in an area where habitat has been fragmented by developments, and as such the Biology Report prepared for the site finds that the site does not serve as a regional wildlife corridor. No adverse impacts are anticipated for this issue. e) At the center of the site are stands (not a windrow) of Eucalyptus trees that will be removed to accommodate the project. These trees appear to have naturalized on the site at the side of the creek bed. The size and height of the trees qualifies them as heritage trees per city ordinance, and to remove them will require a Tree Removal Permit. Moreover, these trees could be suitable nesting trees for raptors, foraging, and or other nesting birds. At the time the Biology Report was prepared no nests were observed during field surveys. Prior to the actual removal of the subject trees a nest search will be required to removal to avoid harm to protected birds which may be actively nesting at the time of construction activity. If nests are found in the trees, then the impact will be deemed significant. Under the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) Code, active bird nests cannot be disturbed. If nests with eggs and/or young are found, an avoidance buffer of 250-500 feet can be required by the CDFG until nesting is completed. The following mitigation measures are proposed to offset the potentially significant impact: 5) Prior to the removal of any on site heritage trees as define by the Rancho Cucamonga Tree Preservation Ordinance, the applicant shall apply for and comply with the provisions of said Ordinance including approval of a Tree Removal Permit. 6) Prior to any on-site grading/construction activity or the removal of trees for which a Tree Removal Permit has been issued, the applicant shall perform a pre-construction tree/nest survey to determine whether active bird nests are present. Study shall be performed no more than 30-days prior to construction activity and be made available to the Planning Director for City verification. P162 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 - SAN' SEVAINE VILLAS Page 13 Less 7nan Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Finanuauy Significant wnn Mitigation man Significant No Im act Inromoratetl Impact Im am 7) Prior to any on-site grading/construction activity on-site grading/construction, the applicant shall pertorm apre-construction nest survey to determine whether active Burrowing Owl nests are present. Study shall be performed no more than 30-days prior to construction activity and be made available to the Planning Director for City verification. The project site is not located within a conservation area as designated by the General Plan, Open Space and Conservation Plan, Exhibit IV-4. therefore there will be conflict with an established habitat conservation plan. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:. a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the () () () (/) significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the () (/) () ( ) significance of an archeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological () (/) () ( ) resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred () () () (/) outside of formal cemeteries? Comments: a) The project site has not been identified as a "Historic Resource" per'the standards of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 2.24 (Historic Preservation). There will be no impact. b) There are no known archaeological sites or resources recorded on the project site; however, the Rancho Cucamonga area is known to have been inhabited by Native Americans according to the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.11). Construction activity, particularly grading, soil excavation and compaction, could adversely affect or eliminate existing and potential archaeological resources. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 1) Prior to issuance of grading permit, the developer shall retain a qualified archeologist to prepare a archeological resources assessment. If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will: Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. P163 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 14 Less Tian signilicent Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: pp g aaanranr Significam wnn Mitigation Than Significant No Irtgect Inro oretetl I act I aM Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of the area. Propose mitigation measures and recommend conditions of approval to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, following appropriate CE~A guidelines. Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. c) The General Plan FEIR (Section 5.11) indicates that the Rancho Cucamonga area is on an alluvial fan, According to the San Bernardino County database, no paleontological sites or resources have been recorded within the City of Rancho Cucamonga or the sphere-of-influence, including the project site; however, the area has a high sensitivity rating for paleontological resources. The older alluvium, which would have been deposited during the wetter climate that prevailed 10,000-100,000 years ago during the Late Pleistocene epoch of the Quaternary period, when the last "Ice Age" and the appearance of modern man occurred, may contain significant vertebrate fossils. The project site is underlain by Quaternary alluvium per General Plan Exhibit V-2; therefore, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: , 2) Prior to issuance of Grading Permit, the developer shall retain a qualified paleontologist archeologist to prepare a paleontological resources assessment. If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: • Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full- time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities. • Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. • Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). • Submit summary report to. City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum. d) The proposed project is in an area that has already been disturbed by development. The project site has already been disrupted by construction on a portion of the site, P164 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 15 Less Then Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP 9 Fn,anuauv sivnulcant w~tn Mnipatien Than signuicam Ne I an Inco oratetl I ad I act surrounding developments, and probable annual disking for weed abatement. No known religious or sacred sites exist within the project area. No evidence is in place to suggest the project site has been used for human burials. The California Health and Safety Code (Section 7050.5) states that if human remains are discovered on-site, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. As adherence to State regulations is required for all development, no mitigation is required in the unlikely event human remains are discovered on-site. No adverse impacts are anticipated. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as () () () (/) delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? () () () (/) iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including () () () (/) liquefaction? iv) Landslides? () () () (/) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? () (/) () ( ) c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, () () () (/) or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table () () () (/) 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use () () () (/) of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Comments: a) No known faults pass through the site and it is not in an Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is it in the Rancho Cucamonga City Special Study Zone along the Red Hill Fault, according to the General Plan Exhibit V-1, and Section 5.1 of the General Plan FEIR. The subject site is approximately 3 miles to southeast of the Red Hill Fault, and 5 miles south of the Cucamonga Fault Zone. These faults are both capable of producing Mw 6.0-7.0 earthquakes. The San Jacinto Fault, capable of producing up to M„ 7.5 earthquakes, is approximately 11 miles northeasterly of the site and the San Andreas Fault, capable of up to M„ 8.2 earthquakes, is approximately 16 miles northeasterly of the site. Each of these faults can produce strong P165 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 16 Less Then Signiticam less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Pmannauy Sipnilicant wnn Mitigation Tnan Significant Np Im ect Inco orated Impact Impel ground shaking. Adhering to the Uniform Building Code will ensure that geologic impacts are less•than-significant. b) The proposed project will require the excavation, stockpiling, and/or movement of on-site soils. The Rancho Cucamonga area is subject to strong Santa Ana wind conditions during September to April, which generates blowing sand and dust, and creates erosion problems. Construction activities may temporarily exacerbate the impacts of windblown sand, resulting in temporary problems of dust control; however, development of this project under the General Plan would help to reduce windblown sand impacts in the area as pavement, roads, buildings, and landscaping are established. Therefore, the following fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels: 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RW~CB) daily to reduce PM,g emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or replanted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PM,g emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM,g emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RW~CB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,g emissions. c) The General Plan FEIR (Section 5.1) indicates that subsidence is generally associated with large decreases or withdrawals of water from the aquifer. The project will not directly withdraw water from the existing aquifer. The site is not within a geotechnical hazardous area or other unstable geologic unit or soil type according to General Plan FEIR Figure 5.1.2. Soil types on-site consist of Tujunga-Soboba association (TvC and SoC) according to General Plan FEIR Exhibit 5.1-3. No adverse impacts are anticipated. d) The majority of Rancho Cucamonga, including the project site, is located on alluvial soil deposits. These types of soils are not considered to be expansive. Soil types on-site consist of Tujunga-Soboba association (TvC and SoC) according to General Plan Exhibit V-3 and General Plan FEIR Exhibit 5.1-3. These soils are typically considered rapidly permeable with slow to very slow runoff and slight erosion hazard. No adverse impacts are anticipated. e) The project will connect to, and be served by, the existing local sewer system for wastewater disposal. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal is proposed. P166 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 17 Lass Than Significam Less Issues and Su ortm Information Sources: PP g Polamlany Significant Wah Mitipalion -Then Significant No Imoan Incomorafetl Imoad Impact 7. HAZARDS AND WASTE MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the () () () (/) environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the () () () (/) environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or () () () (/) acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 1/4 mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of () () () (/) hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, () () () (/) where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, () () () (/) would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an () () () (/) adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of () () () (/) loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Comments: a) The proposed apartment project will not involve the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. The City participates in a countywide interagency coalition that is considered a full service Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive that any other in the state. The City is in the process of developing an Emergency Operations Plan to meet State and Federal requirements. The City has approved a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan which has received State and Federal approvals. Compliance with Federal, State, and local regulations concerning the storage and handling of hazardous materials and/or waste will reduce the potential for significant impacts to a level less-than- significant. No adverse impacts are expected. b) The proposed project does not include the use of hazardous materials or volatile fuels. The City participates in a countywide interagency coalition that is considered a full service Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive than any other in the state. The City is in the process of developing an Emergency Operations Plan to meet State and Federal requirements. The City has approved a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan which has received State and Federal approvals. Compliance with Federal, State, and local P167 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 18 Less Than Significam Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Ppfanually Signilicanf wim Mifipation than Sipnificanf Np Im act InCp OrdfeO Impact Irtpdd regulations concerning the storage and handling of hazardous materials or volatile fuels will reduce the potential for significant impacts to a level less-than-significant. No adverse impacts are anticipated. c) Perdew Elementary School is located approximately 1/2 mile north of the project site on Miller Avenue just east of Etiwanda Avenue. The construction of residential units on the subject site will not create objectionable odors. No adverse impacts are anticipated. d) The proposed project is not listed as a hazardous waste or substance materials site. Recent site inspection did reveal the presence of discarded concrete and asphalt rubble. However, according to the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared for the project (AEI Consultants, 2005), the site has been undeveloped since at least 1938 and there is no evidence of any recognized environmental conditions (e.g., presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products posing to ground or groundwater contamination) on the site. As such, no impact is anticipated. e) The site is not located within an Airport Land Use Plan and is approximately 4.1 miles .northeast of the Ontario International Airport and is not in the direct flight path of its runways. No impact is anticipated. The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2 1/2 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated. g) The City's Multi-Hazard Disaster Plan, which is updated every two years, includes policies and procedures to be administered by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District in the event of a disaster. Because the project includes at least two points of public street access and is required to comply with all applicable City codes, including local fire ordinances, no adverse impacts are anticipated. h) Rancho Cucamonga faces the greatest ongoing threat from awind-driven fire in the Urban Wildland Interface area found in the northern part of the City according to the Fire District Strategic Plan 2000-2005; however, the proposed project site is not located within a high fire hazard area according to General Plan Exhibit V-7. 8, HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? () (/) () ( ) b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere () () () (/) substantially with. groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the () () () (/) site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? P168 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC20o6-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 19 Less Then Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Ppianoaoy Slpnificent wnh Mitigation man Significant No I ed Incorpore~atl Impact Imoed d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the () () () (/) site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed () () () (/) the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? () (/) () ( ) g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as () () () (/) mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures () () () (/) that would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of () () () (/) loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? () () () (/) Comments: a) Water and sewer service is provided by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). The project will be designed to connect to the existing water and sewer systems. The State of California is authorized to administer various aspects of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act. The General Construction Permit treats any construction activity over 1 acre as an industrial activity, requiring a permit under the State's General NPDES permit. The State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB) through the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Santa Ana Region, administers these permits. Construction activities covered under the State's General Construction permit include removal of vegetation, grading, excavating, or any other activity for new development or significant redevelopment. Prior to commencement of construction of a project, a discharger must submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to obtain coverage under the General Permit. The General permit requires all dischargers to comply with the following during construction activities, including site clearance and grading: Develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SW PPP) that would specify Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would prevent construction pollutants from contacting storm water and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off-site into receiving waters. Eliminate or reduce non-storm water discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters of the nation. Perform inspections of all BMPs. P169 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 20 Less Then Sipnilicant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Po:amially Sipnilicant wnn Milipetion Than $ignifcant No Impact IncomorateG Impact Inmeci Waste discharges include discharges of storm water and construction project discharges. A construction project for new development or significant redevelopment requires a NPDES permit. Construction project proponents are required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SW PPP). To comply with the NPDES, the project construction contractor will be required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SW PPP) during construction activities, and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for post-construction operational management of storm water runoff. The applicant has submitted a WQMP, prepared by Dan Guerra & Associates (April 12, 2006) that identifies BMPs to minimize the amount of pollutants, such as eroded soils, entering the drainage system after construction. Runoff from driveways, roads and other impermeable surtaces must be controlled through an on-site drainage system. BMPs include both structural and non-structural control methods. Structural controls used to manage storm water pollutant levels include detention basins, oil/grit separators, and porous pavement. Non-structural controls focus on controlling pollutants at the source, generally through implementing erosion and sediment control plans and various Business Plans that must be developed by any businesses that store and use hazardous materials. Practices, such as periodic parking lot sweeping can substantially reduce the amount of pollutants entering the storm drain system. The following mitigation measures would be required to control additional storm water effluent: Construction Activities: 1) Prior to issuance of Grading Permits, the permit applicant shall submit to Building Official for approval, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. 3) During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. 4) During construction, to remove pollutants, street cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. Post- Construction Operational: 5) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared by Dan Guerra & Associates (April 12, P170 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 21 Less Tnan Sipnilicant Lass Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g amanuany Signillcant wiN Mitipauon .non Sipnificent No Im ect Incur oretetl Impact Impact 2006) to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 6) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of Grading Permits. b) According to CVWD, 43 percent of the City's water is currently provided from the groundwater in the Cucamonga and Chino Basins. CVWD has adopted a master plan that estimates demand needs until the year 2030. The proposed project will not deplete groundwater supplies, nor will it interfere with recharge because it is not within an area designated as a recharge basin or spreading ground according to General Plan Exhibit IV-2. The development of the site will require the grading of the site and excavation; but this activity is not expected to pose any issue with ground water supplies as groundwater in the area of the city is estimated to be about 400 feet below the ground surtace. As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.9), continued development citywide will increase water needs and is a significant impact; however, CVWD has plans tp meet this increased need through the construction of future water facilities. c) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new buildings and hardscape proposed on a site. Although the project will be built over the East Etiwanda Creek bed; it will occur only after the San Bernardino County Flood Control District's permanently redirects water flow to the existing San Sevaine drainage channel adjacent to the east side of the site, as part of the San Sevaine Creek Water Project. When the San Sevaine Creek Water Project is completed in the near future, all runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. The project design includes landscaping of all non-hardscape areas to prevent erosion. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of Grading Permits. Therefore, the project will not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. The impact is not considered significant. d) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on a site. All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. A Grading and Drainage plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of Grading Permits. Therefore, increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on- or off-site. No impacts are anticipated. e) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on a site; however, all runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been desighed to handle the flows. The project will not result in substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. A grading and drainage plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of Grading Permits. Therefore, increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on- or off-site. No impacts are anticipated. P171 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 22 Less Than Signilicam Lass Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially slgnuicani With Mhigauon Then slgnlncan~ Np Impact Incorporated Im act Imgad f) According to the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared for the project (AEI Consultants, 2005), the site has been undeveloped since at least 1938 and there is no evidence of any recognized environmental conditions (e.g., presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products posing to ground or groundwater contamination) on the site. Moreover, the proposed apartment community will not utilize hazardous substances which can degrade ground water supplies. Grading activities associated with the construction period could result in a temporary increase in the amount of suspended solids in surface flows during a concurrent storm event, thus resulting in surtace water quality impacts. The site is for new development and must comply with provisions of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to minimize water pollution. The following mitigation measures "shall be implemented: 7) Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for approval of a Water Ouality Management Plan (WOMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WOMP shall identify the structural and non- structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. 8) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. g) The project site is located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Exhibit V-5. See response below. h) The project site is located within a 100-year flood hazard area as identified by General Plan Exhibit V-5. However, the San Bernardino County Flood Control District is currently in the midst of implementing its San Sevaine Creek Water Project that is designed to control tlood waters along the San Sevaine and Etiwanda Creeks. Flood waters from these two water sources will be redirected and controlled via a new concrete line channel (which already present on the site's east boundary) and a series of upstream levees and flood control basins. When the project. is completed in or around 2009, the impact of flood waters on the portion of the East Etiwanda Creek on the site will be controlled and there will be no further potential adverse impacts to the proposed development housing units on the site. The Rancho Cucamonga area is flood protected by an extensive storm drain system designed to convey a 100-year storm event. The system is substantially improved and provides an integrated approach for regional and local drainage flows. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City, spreading grounds, concrete-lined channels, and underground storm drains as shown in General Plan Exhibit V-6. See section above for response. P172 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 23 Less Tien Sipnilicam Lass Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP 9 Ppla"tlany Sipnillcant w"" MiliBalion Tnan Significant No Im ad Inco oralatl Irtpad Impact There are no oceans, lakes or reservoirs near the project site; therefore, impacts from seiche and tsunami are not anticipated. The Rancho Cucamonga area sits at the base of the steep eastern San Gabriel Mountains whose deep canyons were cut by mountain streams. Numerous man-made controls have been constructed to reduce the mudflow impacts to the level of non-significance within the City. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City and spreading grounds both within and north of the City. 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a). Physically divide an established community? () () () (/) b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or () () () (/) regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan () () () (/) or natural community conservation plan? Comments: a) .The project site is in an area of the City that is in transition from underutilized/vacant land to new commercial and multifamily uses. The new uses, including the proposed apartment community, are being developed consistent with the permitted uses of the present land use designations for the property. As such, the project is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. No adverse impacts to surrounding uses are expected. b) The land use designation for the site is Medium (M) Density and appropriate for the proposed development of multi-family (apartments). The proposed project is also consistent with the General Plan and does not interfere with any policies for environmental protection. As such, no impacts are anticipated. c) The project site is not located within any habitat conservation or natural community plan area as identified in the General Plan, pursuant to General Plan Exhibit IV-3. Moreover, the site is not identified as an area of sensitive biological resources per Section 5.3 of the General Plan FEIR. 10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral () () () (/) resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important () () () (/) mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Comments: a) The site is not designated as a State Aggregate Resources Area according to the City General Plan, Figure IV-1 and Table IV-1; therefore, there is no impact. P173 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119- SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 24 Less Tian Signiticent Less Issues and Su ortm Information Sources: PP g Pman+ially Slpnliicant Wittt Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incoraoretetl Impact Irtwap b) The site is not designated by the General Plan, Figure IV-1 and Table IV-1, as a valuable mineral resource recovery site; therefore, there is no impact. 11. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in () (/) () ( ) excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive () () (/) ( ) ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise () () () (/) levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in () (/) () ( ) ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a projectlocated within an airport land use plan or, () () () (/) where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, () () () (/) would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Comments: a) The project site is not within an area of noise levels exceeding City standards as indicated by General Plan Exhibit V-13 at build-out. The main roadway affecting the site is Foothill Boulevard. Interstate 15 is approximately 3/a -miles to the west and too far away to pose any noise impact on the project. According to the Noise Study (Gordon Bricken & Associates, September 25, 2006) prepared for the project, identifies the four buildings (No.'s 1, 10, 11, 12) which are closest to Foothill Boulevard as being subject to slightly higher noise levels than allowed by the Development Code without mitigation. In order to meet the City noise standards and reduce exterior and interior noise levels to less-than- significant levels, the Noise Study makes recommendations for mitigating roadway noise impacts, which are referenced in the mitigation measure below: 1) Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall submit to the Planning Director and Building Official for review and approval, building plans that demonstrate compliance with the noise attenuation recommendations of the acoustical engineer as contained in the Acoustical Analysis prepared by Gordon Bricken & Associates (September 2006), and on file with the Planning Department. b) The uses associated with this type of project do not induce ground borne vibrations. As such, no significant impacts are anticipated. c) The primary source of ambient noise levels in Rancho Cucamonga is traffic. The proposed apartment community use and will not significantly increase traffic noise on P174 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 25 - - - Less roan Sipnilicant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Fo+amiany SiBnilicem won MiriBalion roan Sipnilicant No Impen Into prefetl Irtgan Ingad Foothill Boulevard; beyond the anticipated ambient noise levels within the vicinity of the project. d) The General Plan FEIR (Section 5.7) indicates that during a construction phase, on-site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, and construction equipment, will generate noise exceeding City standards. The following measures are provided to mitigate the short-term noise impacts: 2) Construction or grading shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. 3) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section.17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. 4) Any perimeter walls proposed with the project shall be constructed as early as possible in first phase. The precedirig mitigation measures will reduce the disturbance created by on-site construction equipment; however, do not address the potential impacts because of the transport of construction materials and debris. The following mitigation measure shall then be required: 5) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips (counting both to and from the construction site), then the developer shall prepare a noise mitigation plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. e) The site is not located within an airport land use Plan and is approximately 4.1 miles northwest of the Ontario International Airport, and offset north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated. f) The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2 1/2 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated. P175 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 26 Less Than Sipnificam Lass Issues and Supporting Information Sources: sv~+~oe~ ~ M~ B~afon siQ ~Ifcant No Im en Inco orated Im ect I acl 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either () () (/) ( ) directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, () () () (/) necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace'substantial numbers of people, necessitating () () () (/) the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments• a) The project will result in the development of 225 affordable housing units on the subject site and a moderate increase in the local resident population overall from current levels. The project also provides the community with much needed affordable housing units for families. Moreover, the new units will be constructed where housing units have been anticipated by the General Plan, and in an area that is characterized by a mix of single family, multifamily, and commercial uses. No significant impacts are anticipated. b) The project will not result in the displacement of substantial numbers of existing housing units. The project site is vacant and contains no existing housing units on the site. With the development of new apartments on the site, there will be no adverse impact to housing within the City. c) The site is undeveloped. No significant population impacts are anticipated. 13. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other pertormance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? () (/) () ( ) b) Police protection? () () () (/) c) Schools? () () () (/) d) Parks? () () () (/) e) Other public facilities? () () () (/) Comments: a) The site is located adjacent to and has direct access from Foothill Boulevard, a major east west corridor through the City. Fire Station 173 will provide service to the site and is located approximately 13/< miles to the northwest near the intersection of Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard. Fire Station 174 is located at Milliken Avenue and Jersey Boulevard, approximately 2.5 miles to the southwest, and will provide back up service to the site. Finally, all new units will have fire sprinklers and be constructed in accordance with Standard condiiions of approval from the Uniform Building and Fire Codes. P176 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 27 Less Than Sipnificenl Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Pgtantially Significant With Mitigalign Than Significant No Impact Incorporetatl Irtgacf Irtnact b) Police protection is provided by the Rancho Cucamonga Police substation of the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department. The department conducts routine patrols of the area in which the site is located and will continue to do so after the new units are constructed. When the new apartment community is completed it will be gated and be secured by means of walls and combination fence walls along its boundaries. In addition, the applicanUdeveloper intends to participate in the Police Department's Crime Free Multi- Housing Program, a crime prevention partnership program between the Police and apartment complexes to created safer communities. Currently, the program has been established in 44 apartment communities in the City and has reported good success in reducing vandalism, burglaries, and in eviction of problem residents participating in criminal activities. No significant impacts are anticipated. c) The Etiwanda School District and the Chaffey Joint Union High School District serve the area in which the project is located. A standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay the School Impact Fees. With this standard mitigation, impacts to the School Districts are not considered significant. d) The area east of the I-15 freeway near the subject site does not currently have a public park. However, the City is planning to construct a new public neighborhood park (presently unnamed) approximately a Y<-mile north of the subject site on Garcia Drive (north of Foothill Boulevard and east of Etiwanda Avenue). The future park will add 5 acres to the City's inventory of parkland and will include an unlighted ball field, full basketball court, picnic tables/BBO's, tot playgrounds, open play areas, and a restroom building. Construction of the new park is scheduled to begin in late 2007. The anticipated park along with the on-site recreational amenities of the apartment community will provide open space and recreational opportunities for the new residents of the apartments. As a standard condition of approval, the developer will also be required to pay Park Development Fees to help develop new park facilities within the City. Thus, no significant impacts are anticipated. e) The proposed project will tie into existing public facilities. The site is adjacent to Foothill Boulevard and will be required complete roadway improvements (e.g., roadway paving, public sidewalk, street lights, etc.). Moreover, the project will not require the construction of any new public facilities or result in the alteration of any existing facilities so as to cause a decline in the levels of service. Cumulative development within Rancho Cucamonga will increase demand for library services. At the time the General Plan FEIR was adopted, it identified the cumulative impact on library services as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. Since the adoption of the General Plan, the City has opened a new library (2006) within the Victoria Gardens regional shopping center thereby adding approximately 23,000 square feet of library space in the community which also exceeds the projected need of 15,500 square feet at City build-out. No adverse impacts are expected for this issue area. P177 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 28 Less Tttan Signilicant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Fplantially Slpnillcem won Mitipetion roan Signilicant No Imean Incorporatetl Impact I ect 14. RECREATION. Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and () () () (/) regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or () () () (/) require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Comments: a) The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest park to the site will be the forthcoming park on Garcia Avenue approximately Yz mile to the north of the site, across Foothill Boulevard. Although, the development of 225 additional living units to the area, the result in a modest increased potential for use of public parks or other recreational facilities within the City, this project will not adversely impact parks or recreational facilities. In addition, the project will provide on-site recreational amenities that will directly benefit the residents of the new apartments. As indicated above, a standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay Park Development Fees for the new units and help off-set the costs of on-going park improvements in the City. No impacts are anticipated. b) See a) response above. 15. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in () () () (/) relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of () () (/) ( ) service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including () () () (/) either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards because of a design () () () (/) feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? () () () (/) f)~ 'Result in inadequate parking capacity? () () () (/) g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs (). () () (/) supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? P178 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 29 Less Than Sipnificent Lass Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Folanrany Signillcent wpm Milipation Tnan Sipnificent No Imoad Incor orates Im act Im act Comments: a) As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.5), continued development will contribute to the traffic load in the Rancho Cucamonga area. As a standard requirement of the project, the developer of the apartments will also be required to install all necessary street improvements (e.g., curb, gutter, and sidewalk) adjacent to the project that will improve roadway conditions. Based on the Rancho Cucamonga Traffic Model, the estimated traffic generation rate expected from the proposed apartment project was calculated at 1,372 Average Daily Trips (ADT). According to the Traffic Engineering Department, Foothill Boulevard is a major divided arterial and the traffic generated by the 225 units will not exceed its capacity. Level of Service (LOS) at the nearby intersections (Etiwanda Avenue and Foothill Boulevard) will be improved as development occurs in the area additional right of way will be obtained for new roadway improvements (e.g., lanes and signals) that will improve traffic flow and level of service at intersections. As such, the proposed project will be consistent with the General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated and not create a substantial increase in the number of vehicle trips, traffic volume, or congestion at nearby intersections. Finally, the project is subject to the Transportation Development Fee that must be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of Building Permits. Fees are used to fund roadway improvements. necessary to support adequate traffic circulation. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. b) The Rancho Cucamonga Traffic Model estimates that each apartment unit will generate an average of .67 two-way peak hour trips daily. As such, the total trips generated for all 225 apartment units will be approximately 151 two-way peak hour trips, which are less than 250 two-way peak hour trips for non-retail uses; therefore, is below the threshold of the San Bernardino Congestion Management Plan (CMP) criteria far requiring a traffic impact analysis. The project site is adjacent to Foothill Boulevard which is largely improved and will be enhanced with the proposed project. According the Traffic Engineering Department, the project will contribute to making improvements to traffic flow and LOS on adjacent streets. As such, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated with this project. c) Located approximately 4.1 miles northeast of the Ontario International Airport, the site is offset from the flight path and will not change air traffic patterns. No impacts are anticipated. d) The project is in an area that is steadily being developed. As a part of the project, new street improvements (e.g., roadway, curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along Foothill Boulevard will be installed. The project design does not include any sharp curves, dangerous intersections, or farming uses that would present a conflict or hazard with the proposed development of the site as proposed. The project will not create a substantial increase in hazards because of a design feature. No impacts are anticipated. e) The project is designed to provide access for all emergency vehicles and will, therefore, not create an inadequate emergency access issues. More specifically, primary emergency access to the new apartment community will be from Foothill Boulevard via the main entry. If needed, a second gated access point for "emergency fire access only" is provided on the west side of the site. Both entry points will have direct street access to Foothill Boulevard. No impacts are anticipated. The project will have adequate on-site parking in compliance with standards of the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code for multi-housing units and will, therefore, not create an inadequate parking capacity. No impacts are anticipated. P179 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 30 Less Than Slgnificam Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Fmeneaur Significant wan Mitigation man Significant No Impact Inco orafeE Impatl I act g) The project design includes, or the project will be conditioned to provide, features supporting transportation and vehicle trip reduction (e.g., bus bays, bicycle racks, carpool parking, etc.). Bus service is provided by Omnitrans and Foothill Boulevard is designated by the General Plan as Existing Fixed Route Transit Service Corridor, which interconnects with other fixed routes to provide access to major activity centers in the community including major shopping centers (e.g., Victoria Gardens, Terra Vista), major government offices (City Hall and San Bernardino Courthouse), and colleges (i.e., Chaffey College), etc. The site is within close proximity to existing and/or future bus stops at the nearby intersection at Etiwanda Avenue and Foothill Boulevard, approximately 1/4 -mile to the west of the site. No impacts anticipated. 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the () () () (/) applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or () () () (/) wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm () () () (/) water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the () () () (/) project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment () () () (/) provider, which serves or may serve the project, that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted () () () (/) capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and () () () (/) regulations related to solid waste? Comments: a) The proposed project is served by the Cucamonga Valley Water District sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant located within Rancho Cucamonga. The project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. No impacts are anticipated. b) The proposed project is served by the Cucamonga Valley Water District sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant located within Rancho Cucamonga and RP-1 located within City of Ontario, neither of which are at capacity. The project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. No impacts are anticipated. P180 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 31 Less Than Signillcant Lass Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Petanuallr Significant with Mitipauon Tnan Sipnificam No Impact Incorporatetl Impepl Impact c) All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of Grading Permits. The impact is not considered significant. d) The project is served by the Cucamonga Valley Water District water system. There is currently a sutficient water supply available to the City of Rancho Cucamonga to serve this project. No impacts are anticipated. e) The proposed project is served by the Cucamonga Valley Water District sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant located within Rancho Cucamonga and RP-1 located within City of Ontario, neither of which are at capacity. No impacts are anticipated. Solid waste disposal will be provided by the current City contracted hauler who disposes the refuse at a permitted landfill with sufficient capacity to handle the City's solid waste disposal needs. g) This project complies with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations regarding solid waste. The City of Rancho Cucamonga continues to implement waste reduction procedures consistent with AB 939. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the () (/) () ( ) quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually () () (/) ( ) limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects that will () () (/) ( ) cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Comments: a) The site is not located in an area of sensitive biological resources as identified on the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Exhibit IV-3. Based on specific biological reports no endangered or rare species were found on the site. Although the site is undeveloped and primarily consists of non-native grassland, there is a small portion that contains disturbed RAFSS and riversidian habitat that will be unavoidably impacted as a result of the San Bernardino County Flood Control District's implementation of the San Sevaine Creek P181 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2o06-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 32 Less Tien Signilicanl Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant wun Mitigation rnan Significant Np Impact Incpfnprzietl Impact Impact Water Project. When completed the San Sevaine Creek Water Project will permanently alter the flow of floodwaters into the present East Etiwanda Creek and cut off/isolate the existing RAFSS habitat on the site from its natural and necessary water source. As a result, the on site RAFSS will not be suitable for long term sustainability of associated plant and wildlife communities. Since City staff was not able to document whether the subject RAFSS was accounted for and mitigated with San Sevaine Water Project the applicant will be required to ascertain and comply with California Department of Fish and Game requirements for mitigation. b) If the proposed project were approved, then the applicant would be required to develop the site in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. The 2001 General Plan was adopted along with the certification of a Program FEIR, Findings of Fact, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant adverse environmental effects of build-out in the City and Sphere-of-Influence. The City made findings that adoption of the General Plan would result in significant adverse effects to aggregate resources, prime farmland, air quality, the acoustical environment, library services, and aesthetics and visual resources. Mitigation measures were adopted for each of these resources; however, they would not reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels. As such, the City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations balancing the benefits of development under the General Plan Update against the significant unavoidable adverse impacts (CEQA Guidelines Section 15092 and 15096(h)). These benefits include less overall traffic volumes by developing mixed-use projects that will be pedestrian friendly and conservation of valuable natural open space. With these findings and the Statement of Overriding Considerations, no further discussion or evaluatiori of cumulative impacts is required. c) Development of the site will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The Initial Study identifies construction-related emissions of criteria pollutants as having a potentially significant impact; proposed mitigation measures would further reduce emission levels. Additionally, impacts resulting from air quality would be short-term and would cease once construction activities were completed. The Initial Study identified potentially significant impacts associated with the exposure of people to increased noise levels: Mitigation measures contained in this Initial Study will ensure impacts are at less-than-significant levels. EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Department offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (T) General Plan FEIR (SCH#2000061027, Certified October 17, 2001) P182 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 33 Lass Then Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Pptantially Significant with Mitigation Than Significant No Imnecl Inco oretetl Im an Impact APPLICANT CERTIFICATION I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and thh~rtrlns:ation measures. Further, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to a ro sed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point whele clearly n9 ~ignifi ni~nvironme I effects would occur. Applicant's Date: Print Name and Title: P183 City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Project File No.: Development Review DRC2006-00540 and Housing Incentive Agreement DRC2007-00119 This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) has been prepared for use in implementing the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration fortheabove-listed project. This program has been prepared in compliance with State law to ensure that adopted mitigation measures are implemented (Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code). Program Components -This MMP contains the following elements: 1. Conditions of approval that act as impact mitigation measures are recorded with the action and the procedure necessary to ensure compliance. The mitigation measure conditions of approval are contained in the adopted Resolution of Approval for the project. . 2. A procedure of compliance and verification has been outlined for each action necessary. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will betaken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. 3. The MMP has been designed to provide focused, yet flexible guidelines. As monitoring progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon recommendations by those responsible for the program. Program Management -The MMP will be in-place through all phases of the project. The project planner, assigned by the Planning Director, shall coordinate enforcement of the MMP. The project planner oversees the MMP and reviews the Reporting Forms to ensure they are filled out correctly and proper action is taken on each mitigation. Each City department shall ensure compliance of the conditions (mitigation) that relate to that department. Procedures -The following steps will be followed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga 1. A fee covering all costs and expenses, including any consultants' fees, incurred by the City in performing monitoring or reporting programs shall be charged to the applicant. 2. A MMP Reporting Form will be prepared for each potentially significant impact and its corresponding mitigation measure identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist, attached hereto. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. All monitoring and reporting documentation will be kept in the project file with the department having the original authority for processing the project. Reports will be available from the City upon request at the following address: City of Rancho Cucamonga -Lead Agency (Planning Department) 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 P184 Mitigation Monitoring Program DRC2006-00540 and DRC2007-00119 Page 2 3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staff's is needed, as determined by the project planner or responsible City department, to monitor specific mitigation activities and provide appropriate written approvals to the project planner. 4. The project planner or responsible City department will approve, by signature and date, the completion of each action item that was identified on the MMP Reporting Form. After each measure is verified for compliance, no further action is required for the specific phase of development. 5. All MMP Reporting Forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off as completed by the project planner or responsible City department at the bottom of the MMP Reporting Form. 6. Unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation measures. The project planner is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions. An MMP Reporting Form will be completed by the project planner or responsible City department and a copy provided to the appropriate design, construction, or operational personnel. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to stop the work of construction contractors if compliance with any aspects of the MMP is not occurring after written notification has been issued. The project planner or responsible City department also has the authority to hold certificates of occupancies if compliance with a mitigation measure attached hereto is not occurring. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to hold issuance of a business license until all mitigation measures are implemented. 8. Any conditions (mitigation) that require monitoring after project completion shall be the responsibility of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department. The Department shall require the applicant to post any necessary funds (or other forms of guarantee) with the City. These .funds shall be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measure for the required period of time. In those instances requiring long-term project monitoring, the applicant shall provide the City with a plan for monitoring the mitigation activities at the project site and reporting the monitoring results to the City. Said plan shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. The monitoring reporting plan shall conform to the City's MMP and shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to the issuance of building permits. MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III) Project File No.: DRC2006-00540 and DRC2007-00119 Applicant: SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Initial Study Prepared by: MICHAEL DIAZ, SENIOR PLANNER Date: JULY 25. 2007 .. - .. -. •. - .. ' ~ ' . ' tl - .N,.A,.a~., +.I,a„1va +G.r , 9C -3P.~: - ex ~asseu .~ ~.. All construction equipment shall be maintained in good PD C Review of plans A/C 2/4 operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. Contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers'specifications. Mainlenancerecords shall be available at the construction site for City verification. Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the PD/BO C Review of plans C 2 developer shall submit Construction Plans to the City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low-emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or chat their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conlorm to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning staff. All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed PD C Review of plans A/C Z/4 performance siandards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high-volume, low-pressure spray. All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards BO B Review of plans A/C 2 noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: 1 of 11 1 m cn -. - - .: Reestablish ground cover on the construction site BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 through seeding and watering. Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads. BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 areas to erosion over extended periods of time. Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. Dispose of surplus excavated material in BO C Review of plans A 4 accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. Sweep streets according to a schedule established BO C During A 4 by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public construction thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon time of year of construction. Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., BO C During A 4 wind speeds.exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with construction SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a.minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils BO C During A 4 haul trucks or cover payloads using carps or other Construction suitable means. The site shall be treated with water or other BO C During A 4 soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and construction Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily to reduce Particulate Matter (PM,v) emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. Chemical soil stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and BO C During A 4 RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,o emissions. The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean BO C Review of plans A/C 4 allernativefuet-powered equipment where feasible. 2 of 11 0, rn ., - - .. The construction contractor shall ensure that BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 construction-grading plans include a statement thatwork crews will shut off equipment when not in use. All industrial and commercial facilities shall post signs BO C Review of plans A 4 requiring that trucks shall not be Jett idling for prolonged periods (i.e., in excess of 10 minutes). All industrial and commercial facilities shall designate PD C Review of plans A/C 2/3 preferential parking for vanpools. All industrial and commercial site tenants with 50 or PD C Review of plans D 2/3 more employees shall be required to post both bus and Melrolink schedules in conspicuous areas. All industrial and commercial site tenants with 50 or PD C Review of plans D Z3 more employees shall be required to configure their operating schedules around the Melrolink schedule to the extent reasonably feasible. All residential and commercial structures shall be BO C/D Review of plans C 2/4 required to incorporate high efficiency/low polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. All residential and commercial structures shall be BO C/D Review of plans C 2/4 required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. rar '^~',,$$a .,-k=.~tt~~c ~~ z; ~t31~i1$ IG~I~OUfC~~r~vi'~~'rs ~ x. - - n sue _ -es~ ;=mar s m - "= =~~~. S, Prior to the removal of any Riversidean Alluvial Fan PD 8 Review of plans B 2 Sage Scrub (RAFSS) habitat from the site, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) including approved mitigation for the removal the extant RAFSS habitat from the site. Prior to the removal of any Riversidean Alluvial Fan pD B Review of plans B 2 Sage Scrub (RAFSS) habitat from the site, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of California Department of Fish and Garne (CDFG) including approved mitigation for the removal the extant RAFSS habitat from the site. 3of11 v w V ... -. -. - .. Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits for PD B Review of plans B 2 the project, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board, for the removal and/or alteration of on site riparian habitat within thejurisdiction of the abovementioned resource agency. Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits for PD B Review of plans B 2 the project, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), for the removal and/or alteration of on site wetland waters. Prior to the removal of any on site heritage trees as pD B Review of plans C 2 define by the Rancho Cucamonga Tree Preservation Ordinance, the applicant shall apply for and comply with the provisions of said Ordinance including approval of a Tree Removal Permit. Prior to any on-site grading/construction activity or the PD 8 Review of plans D 2 removal of trees for which a Tree Removal Permit has been issued, the applicant shall perform a pre- construction tree/nest survey to determine whether active bird nests are present. Study shall be performed no more than 30-days prior to construction activity and be made available to the Planning Director for City verification. Prior to any on-site grading/construction activity on-site PD B Review of plans D 2 grading/construction, the applicant shall perform a pre-construction nest survey to determine whether active Burrowing Owl nests are present. Study shall be performed no more than 30-days prior to construction activity and be made available to the Planning Director for City verification. 4 of 11 1 -. .. ~~tllillral F,idsi311Ydes~'S~;ntl~'tEC~bs', ~i '.:zs~'":~ `_%:-r....a5,.t.+f ^.o ~ 2~ ~.2Sx ~3:~:.~LQ 4+.1"a- S ~ ~~~ ~'! `~- ~ +t.+'3o-r ~.~°/~'~M' #~` /_4'~: ~-s~wyi-iqn~ ~~i~~~~.3'~~ ~~. ~ _w.eaG.o -ry~.+~a. ~~..:~' fr~L Y. ,r. h y }y'~,-q,~~a~'~-~'. .4'flil4i$" S!d `~~ Prior to issuance of grading permit, the developer shall , retain a qualified archeologist to prepare an archeological resources assessment. If any prehistoric , archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. W ith the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will: Enact interim measures to protect undesignated PD/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. • Consider establishing provisions to require PD/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. • Pursue educating the public about the area's PD/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 archaeological heritage. Propose mitigation measures and recommend PD/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 conditions of approval to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, following appropriate CEQA guidelines. Prepare a technical resources management report, PD C Review of report A/D 3/4 documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report, with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. 5of11 ~ cn - - - -. .: Prior to issuance of grading permit, the developer shall PD B Review of report '4/D 4 retain a qualified paleontologist archeologist to prepare paleontological resources assessment. If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: Assiyn a paleontological monitor, trained and PD B Review of report A/D 4 equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities. Should fossils be found within an area being cleared BO B/C Review of report A/D 4 or graded, divert earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. It construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for PD D Review of report D 3 documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). Submit summary report to Cily of Rancho PD D Review of report D 3 Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy to the report to San Bernardino County ' Museum. ~F-Qb~~ g~atad9otlsri "~., ,~*n :.^me, aa.W~lY.nss~~a"es~.'f~.~~,o.~.>a.,~.', - ,N ~' ~.~ ~f~' ~ ~ '~R `,a~* §k' 9 ~r-. 'D 6 of 11 ~ 0 ~ ~ .. - .. .. . . ~. .. The site shall be treated with water or other BO C During A 4 soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAOMD and construction RWOCB) daily to reduce PM,oemissions, in accordance with SCAOMD Rule 403 or re-planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a BO C During A 4 schedule established by the City to reduce PM,o construction emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon time of year of construction. Grading operations shall be suspended when wind BO C During A 4 speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM,o emissions construction from the site during such episodes. Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and BO C During A 4 RWOCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction construction . areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,o emissions. t_1=1~drol~~}f`ahi3~ate~=QUalif~`~- ~~F }, ~..~~ -~ka~~.,..a~-, ~~~5:'2'- ~-~ _~ -~ _ ,'F t..~ ~ ._.. «~~--mss ~~ ~' .z; ~ :r ~i.. x ~ Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 shall submit to Building Official for approval, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SW PPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. v 7of11 f -. .. An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on- site and off-site erosion from the lime ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading: This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in Southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or oft-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. During construction, temporary berms such as BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. During construction, to remove pollutants, street BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. Insert other specific BMPs from WQMP CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared by Dan Guerra 8 Associates (April 12, 2006) to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 8of11 ~ N .. ~ - - ~. - . - .. Landscaping plans shall include provisions for BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions fora ' minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 submit to the City Engineer for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WOMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP shall identifythe structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, applicant BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit trom the Slate Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction P rmit. e ~ y '~ "G 1 ry "~k~ ~W _ ~5~"^ 'v"~~, ?.. i~` (f~f01§~ p~~ e rn7y ' z ~~" _ ~' ~ t ~ ~~ ~ ~~r G n-v.-~i ~ ~ ~~ ~ •aC~d -~ 'tea ~~ ~~.L•cw.e ~ ~~ ~ r§ ~ f ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ?;ytt'~(~j~ s~'~. a"'P{ ~ ~'~~f"~n:' 1 . .. . "3 J.Sa Y.H~YT YLL.uuea~ww..~ wa 3 ~. " ,~ L _ C ~ ° Suer I " . ~ : xf~ e `, tS. T eG,. Ldw"X.# 9 of 11 ~ w .. Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall PD/BO B/ Review of plans C Z3 submit to the Planning Director and Building Official for review and approval, building plans that demonstrate compliance with the noise attenuation recommendations of the acoustical engineer as contained in the Acoustical Analysis prepared by Gordon Bricken & Associates (September 2006), and on file with the Planning Department. Construction or grading shall not take place between the BO C During A 4 hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, construction including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the BO C During A 4 standards specified in Development Code Section construction 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early PD C During A A as possible in the first phase. construction 10 of 11 ~ .. Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the PO/BO C During A 4/7 hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, construction including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips (counting both to and from the construction site), then the developer shall prepare a noise mitigation plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. Key to Checklist Abbreviations ~r rv~ at ~ ~ sin t ~~ ,~~ ~es~or~sil~le~l~~f~..~~~"~" ~ " CDD -Community Development Director or designee .~~~ t n ~ ~Ye ~ ~II~oI` irt~d' ~~ ~ :~ A -With Each New Development €w ~,~ ° ~n ~I~~td.~~~``~~'aif~ 1~3c~t~ A - On-site Inspection ~ ~a~~li$'~, ' < '`'.~ '~' °- ~~ ~~P ~..2~ 1--Withhold Recordation of Final Map PD -Planning Director or designee B -Prior To Construction B -Other Agency Permit /Approval 2 -Withhold Grading or Building Permit CE -City Engineer or designee C -Throughout Construction C -Plan Check 3 -Withhold Certificate of Occupancy BO -Building Official or designee D - On Completion D -Separate Submittal (Reports/Studies/ Plans) 4 -Stop Work Order PO -Police Captain or desiynee E -Operating ~ 5 -Retain Deposit or Bonds FC -Fire Chief or designee 6 -Revoke CUP 7 -Citation i:\planning\rinal\cega\m mchklst-rev12-4-06f final. doc 11 of 11 ~ P196 _ City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Negafive Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Acf Section 21091 and 21092 of fhe Public Resources Code. Project File No.: DESIGN REVIEW DRC2006-00540 AND DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT (ALSO REFERRED TO HOUSING INCENTIVE AGREEMENT) DRC2007-00119 - PITASSI ARCHITECTS Public Review Period Closes: July 25, 2007 Project Name: Project Applicant: Nacho Gracia, Executive Director Northtown Housing Development Corp. 8599 Haven Avenue, Suite 205 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Project Location (also see attached map): Located in the Medium Residential District (14-24 units per acre) 13233 Foothill Boulevard, in the area between the Etiwanda San Sevaine Flood Control Channel on the east, and the Southern California Edison Transmission Corridor on the west. - APN: 0229-041-10. Project Description: A request to develop 225 workforce apartment units on 12.87 acres of land and a review of a proposed Density Bonus Agreement (also referred to as Housing Incentive Agreement) to implement Development Review DRC2006-00540 allowing a density bonus and modifying specific development standards for the construction of 225 workforce apartment units on vacant property. FINDING This is to advise that the City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment and is proposing this Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the following finding: The Initial Study indicates that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. If adopted, the Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. The factual and analytical basis for this finding is included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department at 10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 477-2847. NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration during the review period. Julv 25 2007 Date of Determination Clfy o/ Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division (909)477-2750 ENIFIRONMENTAL P197 INFORMATION FORM (Part I -Initial Stud/) (Please type or prinf clearly using ink. Use the tab key fo move from one line to the next lin^r.l . rte. The purpose of this form is to inform the City of the basic components of the=proposed project so that the City may review the project pursuantto City Policies, Ordinances, and Guidelines; the Califorriia Environmental Quality Act; and the City's Rules "and Procedures to Implement CEQA. It is important that the information requested in this application be provided in full. Upon review of the completed Initial Study Part I and the development application, additional information such:as, butnot limited to, traffic, noise, biological, drainage,and ,., ...: . unless Ithe dent Pied sy ec al stud a free por~ ct app'lcation will riofbe deemed complete p. p are submitted for review and accepted as complete and adequate. ;The project application wilLnot be scheduled for Committees' review unless, all required reports are subrnitted and deemed complete. for staff to prepare the Initial Study Part'll as required by CEQA. In.addition to..the filing fee, the applicant will be regPonsibae to pay or reimburse the'City, .its .agents, .officers, and/or consultants for-all costs :for the ;preparation, review,.analysis, .recommendations, .mitigations, etc., of any special studies or reports:.' INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED. Please note that i(is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the application is complete at the time of submittal; City staff wil/ not be available to perform work required to provide missing information. Application Number for the project to which this form pertains: ~`~ C Z.(O La ' (7D S~-t C7 0_+.~ n~zna-1 - ob ~ ~ ~i . Project Title: San Sevaine Villas Name&Addressofprojecfowner(s): Northtown Housing Development Corporation - 8599 Haven Avenue, Suite 205 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Name 8 Address of developer or project sponsor.' Northtown Housing Development Corporation 8599 Haven Avenue, Suite 205 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 y Partl.docPage 1 of 10 ~ Rev. 3/17/04 xN,~~rs rr ContacfPersonBAddress: Nacho Gracia, Executive Director Northtown Housing Development Corporation, 8599 Haven Ave., N205 P198 `Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Name & Address o/person preparing this form (if different from above): Curtis Dahle, AIA Pitassi Architects, Inc., 8439 White Oak Avenue, #105, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Telephone Number: (909) 960-1361 Information indicated by an asterisk () is not required ofnon-construction CUP's unless otherwise requested by staff '1) Provide a full scale (8-1/2 x 71) copy of the USGS Quadrant Sheet(s) which includes the project site, and indicate the site boundaries. 2) Provide a set of color photographs that show representative views into the site from the north, south, east, and west; views into and from the site from the primary access points that serve the site; and representative views of significant features from the site. Include a map showing location of each photograph. 3) Project Location (describe): Vacant parcel on south side Of Foothill Blvd. @ East Avenue; bordered on west by SCE transmission lines/R.O.W.; bordered on east by San Sevaine Channel (S.B. County Flood Control); vacant property to the south. 4) ~ Assessor's Parcel Numbers (attach additional sheet if necessary): 0229-041-10 "5) Gross Site Area(acJsq.ff.): 14.2 acres/618,552 s.f. '6) Net Site Area (total site size minus area of public streets & proposed dedications): 12.887 acres/561,363 s.f. 7) Describe any proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect the project site (attach additional sheet if necessary): None. I:IPIANNINGIFINALIFORM5I000NTER1lnifial Study Part1_docPage 2 of 10 Rev. 3117/04 8J Include a description of all permits which will be necessary from the City of Rancho~Cucamonga and other governmental P ~ 99 agencies in order to fully implement the project: A Section 404 Permit from the Army Corp of Engineers;. a 1602 Permit from the CDFG; a WDR from the RWQCB; Development Review approval; an Encroachment Permit to widen Foothill Blvd.; Grading Permit; and Building Permit. 9J Describe the physical setting of the site as it exists before the project including information on topography, soil stability, . plants and animals, mature trees, trails and roads, drainage courses, and scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on site (including age and condition) and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of significant features described. In addition, cite all sources ofinformation (i.e., geological and/orhydro/ogic studies, biotic and archeological surveys, traf(c studies): See attached, >OJ Describe the known cultural and/or historical aspects of the site. Cite all sources ofinformation (books, published reports and oral history): No known historical or cultural significance is associated with this site. Source: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, dated 10/3/05 by RGS Engineering Geology. I:\P LANNINGIFINAL\FORMSICOUNTcR\Initial Study Partl.docPage 3 0( 10 Rev. 3/'17/04 P200 11) Describe any noise sources and their levels that now affect the site (aircraft, roadway noise, etc.) and how they will affect proposed uses: Foothill Blvd. is a major divided highway and generates traffic noise. There are no other known scources of noise affecting the Proiect site 12) Describe the proposed project in detail. This should provide an adequate description of the site in terms of ultimate use that will result from the proposed project. Indicate if there are proposed phases for development, the extent of development to occur with each phase, and the anticipated completion of each increment. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary: See attached. 13) Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical, w scenic aspects. Indicate the type of fond use (residentia/, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.) and scale of development (height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.): The property north of the site (across Foothill Blvd.) is a vacant grove of Elacalyptus trees. To the east is the San Sevaine Channel and single family houses/ mobile homes in the City of Fontana. To the south is an open lot vacant And to the west is the open space of the SCE corridor, with single family 14) Will the proposed project change the pattern, scale, or character of the surrounding general area of the project? It will provide medium-density housing in an area with single-family and multi-family neighborhoods, but buffered fromthem by the open space corridor and flood control channel. I:\PLANNING\FINAL\FORMS\COUNTER\Initial SWdy Partl.docPage 4 of 10 ~ Rev. 3117/04 r-. 15) Indicate the type of short-term and long-term noise to be generated, including source and amount. How wilt these noise P2O1 levels affect adjacent properties and on-site uses? What methods of soundproofing are proposed? Short term moderate levels of noise will be generated from grading and construction activities. Hours of construction will be limited to that allowed by City Ordinance. No long term noise generating uses aze anticipated or proposed. `16) Indicate proposed removals and/or replacements of mature or scenic trees: proposed removal of existing Willow and Eucalyptus trees (no scenic or heritage value). No other trees present. Project wil include complete landscaping throughout site, with new canopy and accent trees provided as required by City Ordinance. 17) Indicate any bodies of water (including domestic water supplies) into which the site drains: The site currently drains into the East Etiwanda Creek bed, haaever, with re-grading and completion of City Master Planned Storm Drain at Foothill Blvd. and County Flood Control facilities, the Project site will drain into new San sevaine Flood Control Channel. 18) Indicate expected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification, please contact the Cucamonga Valley Water District at 987-2591. a. Residential (gal/day) 57,600 gal/day Peak use. (gal/Day) 115, 200 gal/day b. Commercial/Ind. (gal/day/ac) Peak use (gal/min/acJ 19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. ~ ^ Septic Tank ~ Sewer. If septic tanks are proposed, attach percolation tests. !f discharge to a sanitary sewage system is proposed indicate expected daily sewage generation: (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification, please contactthe Cucamonga Valley Water District at 987-2591. a. Residential (gal/day) 42,750 gal/day b. Commercial/Industrial (gal/day/ac) RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS: 20) Number of residentia/units: 225 Detached (indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size: Attached (indicate whether units are rental or for sale units): Lower and moderate income rental units. I:\PLANNINGIFINALIFORMSICOUNTER1lnitial Study Partl.docPage 5 of 1D ~ Rev. 3117/04 P202 21) Anticipated range of sale prices and/or rents: Sale Price(s) $ fo $ Rent (per month) $ 335.00 to g 1 , 281 .00 22) Specify number of bedrooms by unit type: Manager's Apt . - 2 Bedroom Unit type 1 - 1 Bedroom Unit type 6 - 3 Bedroom Unit type 2 - 1 Bedroom Unit type 7 - 3 Bedroom Unit type 3 - 2 Bedroom Unit type 8 - 3 Bedroom Unit type 4 - 2 Bedroom Unit type 9 - 3 Bedroom Unit type 5 - 2 Bedroom Unit type 10 - 3 Bedroom 23) Indicate anticipated household srze by unit type: Unit types 1 & 2 2 persons Unit type 3r.4 & 5 4 persons (maximum) Unit type 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10: 5 perons (maximum) 24) Indicate the expected number of school children who will be residing within the project: Contact the appropriate School Districts as shown in Attachment 8.• a. Elementary: 2 9 • 1 4 b. Junior High: 1 1 • 81 c. Senior High 19.13 COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL. AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS 25) Describe type of use(s) and major function(s) of commercial, industrial or institutional uses: 26) Total floor area ofcommercial, industrial, or instifutional uses by type: 27) Indicate hours of operation: 28) Numbero(employees: Total: Maximum Shiff: Time of Maximum Shift: I:\PLANNING\FINALIFORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Partl.docPage 6 of 10 Rev. 3/'17/04 ,_. 29) Provide breakdown ofanticipated job classifications, including wage and salary ranges, as well as an indication ofthe rateP203 hire for each classification (attach additional sheet if necessary): 30) Estimation of the number of workers to be hired that currently reside in the City.' '31) For commercial and industrial uses only, indicate the source, type, and amount of eir pollution emissions. (Data should be verified through the Soufh Coast Air Quality Management District, at (818) 572-6283): ALL PROJECTS 32J Have the water, sewer, fire, and flood control agencies serving the project been contacted to determine their ability to provide adequate service to the proposed project? If so, please indicate their response. Yes. Adequate services can be provided to this proiect (Flood control requires completion of scheduled City Storm D ain ar,~ County Flood Control facilities.) 33) In the known history of this property, has there been any use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials? Examples of hazardous and/ortoxic materials include, but are not limited to PCB's; radioactive substances; pesticides and herbicides; fuels, oils, solvents, and otherflammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any ofthe above. Please list the materials and describe their use, storage, and/or discharge on the property, as well as the dates of use, it known. No known history of use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic material on subject prooerty Source: Phase I Envornomental Assessment, dated 10/R/n5 hlr nFr Consultants. I:WLANNING\FINALV=ORMS\000NTER\Initial Study Partl.docPage 7 of 10 Rev. 3117/04 P204 34) loll the proposed project invdlve the temporary orlong-terrn use, storage, ordischarge ofhazardous and/ortoxic materials, including but not limited to those examples listed above? /f yes, provide an inventory of all such materials to be used and proposed method of disposal. The location of such uses, along with the storage and shipment areas, shall be shown and labeled on the application plans. No. 1 hereby certify~that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for adequate evaluation of this project to the best of my abifity, that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct tot he best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Date: June 20, 2006 Title: Project Architect I:IPLANNING\FINAL\FORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Partl.docPage 8 of 10 Rev. 3/17/04 ATTACHMENT "A" CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ESTIMATED WATER USE AND SEWER FLOWS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT (Data Provided by Cucamonga Valley Water District February 2003) Water Usage Single-Family Multi-Family Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Office Professional Institutional/Government Industrial Park Large General Industrial Heavy Industrial (distribution) Sewer Flows Single-Family Multi-Family General Commercial Office .Professional Industrial Park Large General Industrial Heavy Industrial (distribution) 705 gallons per EDU per day 256 gallons per EDU per day 1000 gal/day/unit (tenant) 4082 gal/day/unit (tenant) 973 gal/day/unit (tenant) 6412 gal/day/unit (tenant) 1750 gal/day/unit (tenant) 2020 gallday/unit (tenant) 1863 gallday/unit (tenant) 270 gallons per EDU per day 190 gallons per EDU per day 1900 gal/day/acre 1900 gallday/acre Institutional/Govemment 3000 gallday/acre 2020 gal/day/acre 1863 gal/day/acre Source: Cucamonga Valley Wafer District Engineering & Water Resources Departments, Urban Water Management Plan 2000 P205 I:IPLANNINGIFINAL\FORMSICOUNTER\Initial Study Partt.docPage 9 of 10 Rev. 3!17/04 P206 ATTACHMENT B Contact the school district for your area for amount and payment of school fees: Elementary School Districts Alta Loma 9350 Base Line Road, Suite F Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909)987-0766 Central 10601 Church Street, Suite 112 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909)989-8541 Cucamonga 8776 Archibald Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909)987-8942 Etiwanda 6061 East Avenue P.O. Box 248 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 (909)899-2451 High School Chaffey High School 211 West 5th Street Ontario, CA 91762 (909)988-8511 I:IP LANNINGIFINAL\FORMS\COUNT=R\Initial Sludy Partl.docPage 10 of 10 Rev.3I17fD4 P207 BACKGROUND Project Files: City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540 - PITASSI ARCHITECTS FOR THE NORTHTOWN HOUSING AUTHORITY CORPORATION - A request to develop 225 workforce apartment units on 12.87 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 units per acre) located at 13233 Foothill Boulevard, west of the Etiwanda San Sevaine Flood Control Channel, and east of the Southern California Edison Transmission Line Corridor - APN: 0229.041-10. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT DRC2007-00119 - PITASSI ARCHITECTS -Review of proposed Density Bonus Agreement (also referred to as Housing Incentive Agreement) to implement Development Review DRC2006-00540 allowing a density bonus and modifying specific development standards for the construction of 225 workforce apartment units on vacant property in Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located at 13233 Foothill Boulevard, west of the Etiwanda San Sevaine Flood Control Channel, and east of the Southern California Edison Transmission Line Corridor - APN: 0229-041-10. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. 2. Description of Project: Northtown Housing Development Corporation is proposing to develop 225 workforce apartment units on an undeveloped 12.87 acre site located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard near the City's eastern border with the City of Fontana/Unincorporated San Bernardino County. More specifically, the property is situated between the existing Etiwanda San Sevaine Flood Control Channel on the east and the Southern California Edison Corridor on the west. Vehicular access to the project will be provided via two driveways on Foothill Boulevard; left-hand turns in and out of the driveways will not be allowed. The westernmost driveway will allow right-out only for residents leaving the site and right in/right out for emergency vehicles only. The project will be known as San Sevaine Villas. Buildings will include a mix of two and three-story structures arranged across the site. Apartment mix will include one bedroom (20 units), two bedroom (136 units), and three bedroom (68 units) ranging in size from 708 to 1,287 square feet, respectively. A two-story community building is proposed which includes .approximately 6,679 square feet on the ground floor and a 2-bedroom Manager's unit (1,792 square feet) on the second floor. The community building and pool will be located near the main entrance. Required parking for the project is 430 spaces. A total of 469 unattached parking spaces will be provided, including 225 covered carport spaces at a rate of one covered space per unit, 188 uncovered spaces, and 56 visitor spaces. The uncovered spaces and visitor spaces will be unassigned largely concentrated along the south and west boundaries of the site. The site has twd existing major drainage features, the most prominent of which is the East Etiwanda Creek course that receives seasonal runoff. The site will require major grading including the filling in of the East Etiwanda Creek drainage course. The project cannot begin until the San Bernardino County Flood Control District completes its San Sevaine Creek Water Project which is designed to divert upstream (north of Foothill Boulevard) waters to the San Sevaine Creek Channel located on the east boundary of the subject site. P208 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 2 Affordable Housing Incentive Agreement (hereafter the Agreement) Under State law, cities are required to provide development incentives for the development of affordable housing units within its jurisdiction. In November 2005, the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted a Density Bonus Ordinance (codified as Section 17.40 of the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code) to conform to State law. The City's Density Bonus Ordinance allows applicants to request extra density and/or relaxed development standards in exchange for the creation of affordable units. The applicant has submitted an application (DRC2007-000119 Density Bonus Agreement) requesting a 25 percent density increase amounting to 45 more units than would be normally allowed in the Medium Residential District (8-14 units per acre). The proposed density for the project will be 17.4 units per acre, and in exchange the applicant has agreed to set aside 55 units for lower income households and 109 units for Very Low Income households for a term of 30 years. In addition, the applicant is requesting to modify certain building to building, and building to property line setback distances as identified in the Agreement. The proposed agreement will be considered by the City Council, and if approved the project will be able to proceed as proposed. If the Council does not approve the agreement, the project will have to be revised or abandoned. 3. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Nacho Gracia, Executive Director Northtown Housing Development Corporation 8599 Haven Avenue, Suite 205 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 4. General Plan Designatiori: Medium Residential (8-14 Units per Acre) 5. Zoning: Medium (M) Residential (8-14 Units per acre) 6. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting (Briefly describe the project's surroundings): North - Undeveloped commercial properties and the Southern California Edison (SCE) utility corridor. South - Undeveloped residentially zoned land in the Etiwanda Specific Plan. East - San Sevaine Flood Control Channel and single family residential uses in the City of Fontana/Uniricorporated San Bernardino County across Ilex Avenue. West - SCE Transmission Lines and an existing single family residential tract further west. The project site consists of a large open undeveloped area between a concrete lined drainage channel on the east and the high voltage transmission line corridor owned by Southern California Edison. Currently, the site has gradual slope to the southwest and is marked by the unlined streambed of the East Etiwanda Creek that generally transverses the property from northeast to southwest. The East Etiwanda Creek is fed by seasonal water flows from the north via culverts below Foothill Boulevard at the northeast corner of the site, and from a storm drain outlet and man made earthen V-ditch located at the northwest corner of the site. Small scale shrubs and grasses are present across the site with some trees, mostly Eucalyptus, near. the center of the site. The site is completely fenced, although some portions are down or have been removed. Dumping (mostly broken concrete, asphalt, trash) along the frontage of the site along Foothill Boulevard was observed. P2O9 Initial Study for DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 8. Contact Person and Phone Number: Michael Diaz, Senior Planner (909) 477-2750 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 3 Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) • California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency GLOSSARY -The following abbreviations are used in this report: CVW D -Cucamonga Valley Water District EIR -Environmental Impact Report FEIR -Final Environmental Impact Report NPDES -National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NOx -Nitrogen Oxides ROG -Reactive Organic Gases PM~o -Fine Particulate Matter RWOCB -Regional Water Quality Control Board SCAQMD -South Coast Air Quality Management District SW PPP -Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan URBEMIS7G -Urban Emissions Model 7G P21O Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 4 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than-Significant-Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. (/) Aesthetics (/) Biological Resources ()Hazards & Waste Materials ()Mineral Resources (/) Public Services ()Utilities & Service Systems ()Agricultural Resources (/) Cultural Resources (/) Hydrology & Water Quality (/) Noise ()Recreation (/) Mandatory Findings of (/) Air Quality (/) Geology & Soils ()Land Use & Planning (/) Population & Housing (/) Transportation/Traffic DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: (/) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by, or agreed to, tithe prgject prq nen . A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. Prepared By: Reviewed By: Date: ~~' Z`r' ~~ Date: ~y(2S(~- P211 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC20o6-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 4 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than-Significant-Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. (/) Aesthetics ()Agricultural Resources (/) Air Quality (/) Biological Resources (/) Cultural Resources (/) Geology & Soils ()Hazards & Waste Materials (/) Hydrology & Water Quality ()Land Use & Planning () ineral Resources (/) Noise (±~opulation & Housing (~ublic Services ()~lecreation (.~'ransportation/Traffic ()Utilities & Service Systems ( Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: (/) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by, or agreea~to, b~he project pro~n~A~11TIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. Prepared By: Reviewed By: Date: ~ 0. 23.4 ~- Date: ~~ a~-b~ P212 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119- SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 5 Less Than Signilicanl Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: sgnirlioelm Ma ganen sig I cool Ne Im ect Incorpo2teE Imcact Imoact EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. AESTHETICS. Would fhe project: a) Have a substantial affect a scenic vista? () () () (/) b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but () () () (/) not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or () () () (/) quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, () () (/) ( ) which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Comments: a) There are no significant vistas within or adjacent to the project site. The site is not within a view corridor according to General Plan Exhibit III-t 5. b) The project site contains no scenic resources and no historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway. There are no State Scenic Highways within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. c) The project site consists of a large open undeveloped area between a concrete lined drainage channel on the east and the high voltage transmission line corridor owned by Southern California Edison. Currently, the site has the unlined streambed of the East Etiwanda Creek. Small scale shrubs and non-native grasses exist across the site with some trees, mostly Eucalyptus, present near the center of the site. The site is completely fenced, some dumped debris (mostly broken concrete, asphalt, trash) have been observed along the frontage of the site along Foothill Boulevard. When completed, the development of the site will result in an attractive apartment complex that will improve the current visual quality of the area consistent with the quality of new projects under construction in the nearby area. Design review is required prior to final approval. The City standards require the developer to underground the existing and new utility lines and facilities to minimize unsightly appearance of overhead utility lines and utility enclosures in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution No. 87-96, unless exempted by said Resolution. d) The project will increase the number of streetlights and general illumination fixtures in the immediate vicinity and site as typically required for safety and security purposes. The design and placement of light fixtures will be shown on Site Plans which require review for consistency with City standards that requires shielding, diffusing, or indirect lighting to avoid glare. Lighting will be selected and located to confine the area of illumination to within the project site. The impact is not considered significant. P213 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 6 Less Than Sipnificent less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Fp.en+ianv Signilicant wim Mdipaoion Than Sipnilicam No Impact Incotpo2ted Impact Impel 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or () () () (/) Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a () () () (/) Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, () () () (/) which, because of their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? Comments: a) The site is not designated as Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. There are approximately 1,300 acres of Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance within the City of Rancho Cucamonga, of which about one-third is either developed or committed to development according to General Plan Table IV-2. The major concentrations of designated farmlands are located in the southern and eastern portions of our City that is characterized by existing and planned development. Further, two-thirds of the designated farmlands parcels are small, ranging from 3 acres to 30 acres, and their economic viability is doubtful; therefore, they are not intended to be retained as farmland in the General Plan Land Use Plan. The General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) identified the conversion of farmlands to urban uses as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. b) There is no agriculturally zoned land within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. There are no Williamson Act contracts within the City. c) The site is located at the edge of the City and is surrounded generally by residential development and a major east-west rail line. The nearest agricultural use is approximately 1.1 miles to the northwest of the project site at the Fillipi Winery. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 3. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the () () () (/) applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute () (/) () ( ) substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? P214 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC20o6-00540 AND DRC20o7-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 7 Less Tttan Significam Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Pprentiaoy Significant wan Mitigation Than Significant No Impep Incomomtetl Impam Impact c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of () () (/) ( ) any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant () (/) () ( ) concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial () () () (/) number of people? Comments: a) As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.6), continued development will contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and State standards. The General Plari FEIR identified the citywide increase in emissions as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. After the initial study was initially circulated, the City received (via fax and letter) a comment letter from the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) indicating that the City's General Plan analysis of air quality impacts was out-of-date and that the analysis should be based on their latest air quality impact model (URBEMIS 2007 version 9.2, released in June 2007). In response, the applicant commissioned LSA Associates, Inc., to prepare a new Air Quality Analysis report for the project using the SCAQMD's latest testing methodology. The report was completed in September 2007 and concluded that long-term operational emissions associated with the project, from both mobile and stationary sources both on-site and off-site, would not exceed any criteria pollutant emission thresholds established by the SCAQMD. In addition, these long term emissions would not exceed any of the District's localized significance thresholds. As such, the new air quality analysis confirms the finding that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. b) During the construction phases of development, on-site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, construction worker vehicles, and energy use will generate emissions. In addition, fugitive dust would also be generated during grading and construction activities. While most of the dust would settle on or near the project site, smaller particles would remain in the atmosphere, increasing particle levels within the surrounding area. Construction is an on-going industry in the Rancho Cucamonga area. Construction workers and equipment work and operate at one development site until their tasks are complete. They then transfer to a different site where the process begins again. Therefore, the emissions associated with construction activities are not new to the Rancho Cucamonga area and would not violate an air quality standard or worsen the existing air quality in the region. The Air Quality Analysis for the project (prepared by LSA Associates, Inc. September 2007) also found that short-term construction emissions associated with the proposed project would not exceed any criteria pollutant emissions thresholds or the District's localized significance thresholds. Nevertheless, fugitive dust and equipment emissions are required to be assessed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) on aproject-specific basis. The LSA Air Quality Analysis recommended inclusion of mitigation measures that were similar to those originally proposed by the City, but which have been revised below to be consistent with the Air P215 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 8 Less Than Signiflcant Less Issues and Su ortinn Information Sources: PP tl °ptE"uauY Significant w"" Mitigation Than Significant No Impact pCplpplatEtl Impact mpdM Quality Analysis. Therefore, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels: 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. 2) Prior to the issuance of any Grading Permits, the developer shall submit construction plans to City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low-emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. The contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Duality Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning Staff. 3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high volume, low-pressure spray, or by using precoated/natural-colored building materials, water-based or low volatile organic compound (VDC) coating, and coating transfer or spray equipment with high transfer efficiency. 4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 5) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • Water active sites at least twice daily (locations where grading is to occur will be thoroughly watered prior to earthmoving). • Revegetate disturbed areas as quickly as possible. • Pave construction access roads at least 100 feet onto the site from the main road. • Pave, water, or chemically stabilize all on-site roads as soon as feasible. • Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads on to paved roads, or wash trucks and any equipment leaving the site. • Reduce traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to 15 mph or less. • Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, or maintain at least two feet of freeboard (vertical space between the top of the load and top of the trailer) in accordance with the requirements of the California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 23114. • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. P216 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 9 Less Than SigniLCant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: I=ptenrally Significant wpm Mhipation Than Sipnillcant No Irn act Incprporatatl Inwac[ Impact • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. • Sweep all streets once per day if visible soil materials are carried to adjacent streets (recommended water sweepers using reclaimed water). • Suspend excavation and grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. • Minimize at all times the area disturbed by clearing, grading, earthmoving, or excavation operations. 6) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWOCB]) daily to reduce PM,p emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 7) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWOCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,p emissions. 8) The construction contractor shall select the construction equipment used on site based on low-emission factors and high energy efficiency. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans include a statement that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specification. 9) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel- powered equipment in lieu of gasoline-or-diesel-powered engines where feasible. 10) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-Grading Plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. During smog season (May through October), the overall length of the construction period will be extended, thereby decreasing the size of the area prepared each day, to minimize vehicles and equipment operating at the same time. 1t) The construction contractor shall time the construction activities so as to not interfere with peak-hour traffic and minimize obstruction of through lanes adjacent to the site; if necessary, a flag person shall be retained to maintain safety adjacent to existing roadways. 12) The construction contractor shall support and encourage ridesharing and transit incentives for the construction crew. After implementation of the preceding mitigation measures, short-term construction air quality emissions would remain significant as noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.6). Based upon on the Urban Emissions Model (URBEMIS7G) model estimates in Table 5.6-4 of the General Plan FEIR, Nitrogen Oxides (Nox), Reactive Organic Gases (ROG), and Fine Particulate Matter (PM,o) would exceed SCAQMD thresholds for significance; therefore, would all be cumulatively significant if they cannot P217 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 10 Less Than Significant Less 'Issues and Supporting Information Sources: ame"°ally Signifinent wit" Mitigation Tnan Significant No Im act Incpmore~etl Impad Impact be mitigated on a project basis to a level less-than-significant. The General Plan FEIR identified the citywide increase in emissions as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. In the long-term, development consistent with the General Plan would result in significant operational vehicle emissions based upon on the URBEMIS7G model estimates in Table 5.6-4 of the General Plan FEIR; therefore, would all be cumulatively significant if they cannot be mitigated on a project basis to a level less-than-significant. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 13) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 14) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. After implementation of the preceding mitigation measures, the General Plan FEIR identified the citywide increase in operational emissions as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. c) As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.6) continued development would contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and State standards. The General Plan FEIR identified the citywide increase in emissions as a significant and adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The project proposed is consistent with the General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. d) Sensitive receptors are defined as populations that are more susceptible to the effects of pollution than the population at large. The SCAOMD identifies the following as sensitive receptors: long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, retirement homes, residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers, and athletic facilities. According to the SCAOMD, projects have the potential to create significant impacts if they are located within 1/4 mile of sensitive receptors and would emit toxic air contaminants identified in SCAOMD Rule 1401. The project site is approximately 300-feet from residences to the east and west and approximately 1/2 mile south of the nearly completed Perdew Elementary School on Miller Avenue, a sensitive receptor. Potential impacts to air quality are consistent with the Public Health and Safety Super-Element within the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. During construction, there is the possibility of fugitive dust to be generated from grading the site. The mitigation measures listed under b) above will reduce impact to less-than-significant levels. e) Typically, the uses proposed do not create objectionable odors. No adverse impacts are anticipated. P218 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 11 Less Than Signilicam Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Pptanliaoy SiBnilicant wan Mitipatipn Tnan Sipnificenl No mpOCI OCO 0~81etl Im atl Impact 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or () (/) () ( ) through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat () (/) () ( ) or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial .adverse effect on federally () (/) () ( ) protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native () () () (/) resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances () (/) () ( ) protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat () () () (/) Conservation Plan, Natural Community conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? Comments: a) The project site is undeveloped but has been disturbed by previous grading, dumping, and other man-made activities over the years. A Biology Resources Report (LSA Associates, Oct. 2005) was prepared for the project to determine the potential existence of sensitive plant and animal species on the subject site. The report identified the site as a composition of primarily non-native grassland with a small area of disturbed Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS) on the east side of the East Etiwanda Creek bed, and small portion of riparian vegetation. RAFSS is considered a sensitive natural community by State and Federal resource agencies and private conservation organizations. However, the RAFSS habitat on the site is an isolated fragment of the original streambed and is soon to fully be cut-off from its water source as a result of the San Bernardino County Flood Control District's San Sevaine Creek Water Project. When completed the San Sevaine Water Project will permanently divert the waters of both the San Sevaine and East Etiwanda Creeks off-site and into a concrete lined flood control channel (the channel already exists adjacent to the east side of the site). P219 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 12 Less Than Sipnilicant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Pere^tiany Significant wun Mitigation man Significant No mean nCOfpWalEtl Ifnpad IR'pad As a result, the on site RAFSS will not be suitable for long term sustainability of associated plant and wildlife communities. Since City staff was not able to document whether the subject RAFSS was accounted for and mitigated with San Sevaine Water Project the applicant will be required to ascertain and comply with California Department of Fish and Game requirements for mitigation. The following mitigation measure is proposed to offset the loss RAFSS habitat for this project: 1) Prior to the removal of any Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS) habitat from the site, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) including approved mitigation for the removal the extant RAFSS habitat from the site. Eight federally/State listed plant and animal species were also identified as potentially present on the project site.' Seven of the listed species tivere considered to the absent from the site based on a lack of suitable habitat, or the project site is outside the known range of the species. The plant and animal species considered to have a low potential for occurrence on the site included the federally/state endangered Slender-horned Spine Flower (Dodecahema leptoceras), and the federally. endangered Merriam's (or San Bernardino) Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys merriami parvus), and the State sensitive species Western Burrowing Owl (Athena cunicularia hypugaea). These specific species were the subject of separate focused reports (by LSA Associates 2006 and 2007), all of which concluded that the subject species were not encountered on the site. Thus, based on the Biology Resources Report and separate species focus studies, no adverse impacts to federally/State listed plant and animal species are expected. Although no Burrowing Owls were found on the site, a preconstruction Burrowing Owl survey will be required prior to ground disturbance to confirm that no owls are present on the site before ground work begins. The following mitigation measure is required: 2) Prior to any on-site grading/construction activity on-site grading/construction, the applicant shall pertorm ogre-construction nest survey to determine whether active Burrowing Owl nests are present. The study shall be pertormed no more than 30-days prior to construction activity and be made available to the Planning Director for City verification. b) The site has two major drainage features, the most prominent of which is the East Etiwanda Creek streambed that receives seasonal runoff and enters the site from the northeast. The other drainage feature is a storm drain inlet entering the site from the northwest which connects to the creek via aman-made earthen V-ditch. A Delineation of Jurisdictional Waters Report prepared for the project (LSA Associates June 19, 2007), identified approximately 0.51 acre of streambed and riparian vegetation impacts within the jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and approximately 0.2 acre of ephemeral and wetland waters of the U.S. within the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). As mentioned above, the San Sevaine Creek Water Project (when completed in the near future) will permanently alter these drainage patterns and adversely affect the sustainability of the associated habitat on the site. Moreover, development of the site with housing will not occur until after the San Sevaine Creek Water Project is completed. The applicant will be required to obtain a final determination on the status of the creek and riparian habitat on the site from both the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), and comply with the requirements of these resource agencies. The following mitigation measure is proposed: P220 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 13 Less Than Sipnilicant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: Pptanuany wan Than pp g Sipnilicam Mitigation Signiticam No Impact Incpmoretetl Impact Impact 3) Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits for the project, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and Regional Water Quality Control Board, for the removal and/or alteration of on site riparian habitat within the jurisdiction of the abovementioned resource agency. c) LSA Associates, Inc. conducted a wetlands jurisdictional waters delineation study on the site on June 19, 2007. Using U.S. Army Corps of Engineers methodology, a total of 0.20 acre of the site was deemed to be the jurisdictional waters of the United States. A portion of this total, 0.16-acre, meets the standards to qualify as a jurisdictional wetland under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The remaining 0.04-acre was found to be non-wetland waters of the U.S. Final determination of jurisdiction is subject to verification by the Army Corps of Engineers. The following mitigation measure is proposed: 4) Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits for the project, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), for the removal and/or alteration of on site wetland waters. d) The majority of the surrounding area has been or is in the process of being developed with both commercial, residential, and public works projects, thereby presenting a disruption to intact wildlife corridors that may have existed previously. More importantly the project site lies in an area where habitat has been fragmented by developments, and as such the Biology Report prepared for the site finds that the site does not serve as a regional wildlife corridor. No adverse impacts are anticipated for this issue. e) At the center of the site are stands (not a windrow) of Eucalyptus trees that will be removed to accommodate the project. These trees appear to have naturalized on the site at the side of the creek bed. The size and height of the trees qualifies them as heritage trees per city ordinance, and to remove them will require a Tree Removal Permit. Moreover, these trees could be suitable nesting trees for raptors, foraging, and or other nesting birds. At the time the Biology Report was prepared no nests were observed during field surveys. Prior to the actual removal of the subject trees a nest search will be required to removal to avoid harm to protected birds which may be actively nesting at the time of construction activity. If nests are found in the trees, then the impact will be deemed significant. Under the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) Code, active bird nests cannot be disturbed. If nests with eggs and/or young are found, an avoidance buffer of 250-500 feet can be required by the CDFG until nesting is completed. The following mitigation measures are proposed to offset the potentially significant impact: 5) Prior to the removal of any on-site heritage trees as define by the Rancho Cucamonga Tree Preservation Ordinance, the applicant shall apply for and comply with the provisions of said Ordinance including approval of a Tree Removal Permit. 6) Prior to any on-site grading/construction activity or the removal of trees for which a Tree Removal Permit has been issued, the applicant shall perform a pre-construction tree/nest survey to determine whether active bird nests are present. The study shall be performed no more than 30-days prior to construction activity and be made available to the Planning Director for City verification. P221 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 14 Less Tnan Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Fotenually Significant wnn Mitigauon rnan Sipnilicant No Impact Incomoratetl Itnpecl Impact f) The project site is not located within a conservation area as designated by the General Plan, Open Space and Conservation Plan, Exhibit IV-4. Therefore, there will be conflict with an established habitat conservation plan. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the () () () (/) significance of a historical resource as defined in. § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the () (/) () ( ) significance of an archeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological () (/) () ( ) resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred () () () (/) outside of formal cemeteries? Comments: a) The project site has not been identified as a "Historic Resource" per the standards of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 2.24 (Historic Preservatiorf). There will be no impact. b) There are no known archaeological sites or resources recorded on the project site; however, the Ranrho Cucamonga area is known to have been inhabited by Native Americans according to the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.11). Construction activity, particularly grading, soil excavation and compaction, could adversely affect or eliminate existing and potential archaeological resources. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 1) Prior to issuance of grading permit, the developer shall retain a qualified archeologist to prepare an archeological resource assessment. If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will: • Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. • Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. • Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of the area. • Propose mitigation measures and recommend conditions of approval to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, following appropriate CEQA guidelines. P222 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 15 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g P°tantiauy Significant wah Mi~ipation T"°" Significant No Impact Incorpora:etl Ingett Im°att Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. c) The General Plan FEIR (Section 5.11) indicates that the Rancho Cucamonga area is on an alluvial fan. According to the San Bernardino County database, no paleontological sites or resources have been recorded within the City of Rancho Cucamonga or the sphere-of-influence, including the project site; however, the area has a high sensitivity rating for paleontological resources. The older alluvium, which would have been deposited during the wetter climate that prevailed 10,000-100,000 years ago during the Late Pleistocene epoch of the Quaternary period, when the last "Ice Age" and the appearance of modern man occurred, may contain significant vertebrate fossils. The project site is underlain by Quaternary alluvium 'per General Plan Exhibit V-2; therefore, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 2) Prior to issuance of Grading Permit, the developer shall retain a qualified paleontologist archeologist to prepare a paleontological resource assessment. If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, tc take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: • Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full- time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities. • Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. • Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). • Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum. d) The proposed project is in an area that has already been disturbed by development. The project site has already been disrupted by construction on a portion of the site, surrounding developments, and probable annual disking for weed abatement. No known religious or sacred sites exist within the project area. No evidence is in place to suggest the project site has been used for human burials. The California Health and Safety Code (Section 7050.5) states that if human remains are discovered on-site, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. As adherence to State P223 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 16 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Pp.an,ianv $igni(ican+ wan Mitigation Tnan $ignilicant Np Impact Incorporatetl Impact Impact regulations is required for all development, no mitigation is required in the unlikely event human remains are discovered on-site. No adverse impacts are anticipated. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project. a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as () () () (/) delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? () () () (/) iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including () () () (/) liquefaction? iv) Landslides? () () () (/) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? () (/) () ( ) c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, O O O (/) or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table () () () (/) 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use () () () (/) of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Comments: a) No known faults pass through the site and it is not in an Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is it in the Rancho Cucamonga City Special Study Zone along the Red Hill Fault, according to the General Plan Exhibit V-1, and Section 5.1 of the General Plan FEIR. The subject site is approximately 3 miles to southeast of the Red Hill Fault, and 5 miles south of the Cucamonga Fault Zone. These faults are both capable of producing M,„ 6.0-7.0 earthquakes. The San Jacinto Fault, capable of producing up to M„, 7.5 earthquakes, is approximately 11 miles northeasterly of the site and the San Andreas Fault, capable of up to Mw 8.2 earthquakes, is approximately 16 miles northeasterly of the site. Each of these faults can produce strong ground shaking. Adhering to the Uniform Building Code will ensure that geologic impacts are less-than-significant. b) The proposed project will require the excavation, stockpiling, and/or movement of on-site soils. The Rancho Cucamonga area is subject to strong Santa Ana wind conditions during September to April, which generates blowing sand and dust, and creates erosion problems. Construction activities may temporarily exacerbate the impacts of windblown P224 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC20o6-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 17 Less Tnan Sipnificam Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Pplantianr Significant wan Mitipauon Tnan Sipnilicant No Impact Incomoratatl Impact Impact sand, resulting in temporary problems of dust control; however, development of this project under the General Plan would help to reduce windblown sand impacts in the area as pavement, roads, buildings, and landscaping are established. Theretore, the following fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels: 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RW~CB) daily to reduce PM~p emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or replanted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PM~g emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM~p emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWOCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM~p emissions. c) The General Plan FEIR (Section 5.1) indicates that subsidence is generally associated with large decreases or withdrawals of water from the aquifer. The project will not directly withdraw water from the existing aquifer. The site is not within a geotechnical hazardous area or other unstable geologic unit or soil type according to General Plan FEIR Figure 5.1-2. Soil types on-site consist of Tujunga-Soboba association (TvC and SoC) according to General Plan FEIR Exhibit 5.1-3. No adverse impacts are anticipated. d) The majority of Rancho Cucamonga, including the project site, is located on alluvial soil deposits. These types of soils are not considered to be expansive. Soil types on-site consist of Tujunga-Soboba association (TvC and SoC) according to General Plan Exhibit V-3 and General Plan FEIR Exhibit 5.1-3. These soils are typically considered rapidly permeable with slaw to very slow runoff and slight erosion hazard. No adverse impacts are anticipated. e) The project will connect to, and be served by, the existing local sewer system for wastewater disposal. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal is proposed. 7. HAZARDS AND WASTE MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the O O O (/) environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the () () () (/) environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or () () () (/) acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 1/4 mile of an existing or proposed school? P225 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 18 Less Than Signilicarn Less Issues and Su ortinn Information Sources: PP 9 Paenuanv Sigcificam With Mhipation Than Significant No Impart Inca oratetl Impact Impact d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of () () () (/) hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, O O O (/) where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, () () () (/) would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an () () () (/) adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of () () () (/) loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Comments: a) The proposed apartment project will not involve the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. The City participates in a countywide interagency coalition that is considered a full service Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive that any other in the state. The City is in the process of developing an Emergency Operations Plan to meet State and Federal requirements. The City has approved a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan which has received State and Federal approvals. Compliance with Federal, State, and local regulations concerning the storage and handling of hazardous materials and/or waste will reduce the ,potential for significant impacts to a level less-than-siynificant. No adverse impacts are expected. b) The proposed project does not include the use of hazardous materials or volatile fuels. The City participates in a countywide interagency coalition that is considered a full service Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive than any other in the state. The City is in the process of developing an Emergency Operations Plan to meet State and Federal requirements. The City has approved a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan which has received State and Federal approvals. Compliance with Federal, State, and local regulations concerning the storage and handling of hazardous materials or volatile fuels will reduce the potential for significant impacts to a level less-than-significant. No adverse impacts are anticipated. c) Perdew Elementary School is located approximately 1/2 mile north of the project site on Miller Avenue just east of Etiwanda Avenue. The construction of residential units on the subject site will not create objectionable odors. No adverse impacts are anticipated. d) The proposed project is not listed as a hazardous waste or substance materials site. Recent site inspection did reveal the presence of discarded concrete and asphalt rubble. However, according to the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared for the project (AEI Consultants, 2005), the site has been undeveloped since at least 1938 and P226 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 19 Less Tnan Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP 9 Fpranranr Significant wan Mitigation man Significant No Impact Incomoretetl Impact Impett there is no evidence of any recognized environmental conditions (e.g., presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products posing to ground or groundwater contamination) on the site. As such, no impact is anticipated. ej The site is not located within an Airport Land Use Plan and is approximately 4.1 miles northeast of the Ontario International Airport and is not in the direct flight path of its runways. No impact is anticipated. The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2 1/2 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated. g) The City's Multi-Hazard Disaster Plan, which is updated every two years, includes policies and procedures to be administered by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District in the event of a disaster. Because the project includes at least two points of public street access and is required to comply with all applicable City codes, including local fire ordirfa~~~es, no adverse impacts are anticipated. h) Rancho Cucamonga faces the greatest ongoing threat from awind-driven fire in the Urban Wildland Interface area found in the northern part of the City according to the Fire District Strategic Plan 2000-2005; however, the proposed project site is not located within a high fire hazard area according to General Plan Exhibit V-7. 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER DUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge () (/) () ( ) requirements'? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere O O O (/) substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the () () () (/) site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a fnanner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the () () () (/) site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed () () () (/) the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? () (/) () ( ) P227 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2o06-00540 AND DRC2o07-00119 -SRN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 20 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Pp~enoanr Sipnilicant witn Mitigation man Slpnillcant No Impact Incorpomtetl Inmxd Impact g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as () () () (/) mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures () () () (/) that would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of () () () (/) loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? () () () (/) Comments: a) Water and sewer service is provided by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (OVWD). The project will be designed to connect to the existing water and sewer systems. The State of California is authorized to administer various aspects of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act. The General Construction Permit treats any construction activity over 1 acre as an industrial activity, requiring a permit under the State's General NPDES permit. The State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB) through the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Santa Ana Region, administers these permits. Construction activities covered under the State's General Construction permit include removal of vegetation, grading, excavating, or any other activity for new development or significant redevelopment. Prior to commencement of construction of a project, a discharger must submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to obtain coverage under the General Permit. The General permit requires all dischargers to comply with the following during construction activities, including site clearance and grading: Develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SW PPP) that would specify Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would prevent construction pollutants from contacting storm water and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off-site into receiving waters. Eliminate or reduce non-storm water discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters of the nation. Perform inspections of all BMPs. Waste discharges include discharges of storm water and construction project discharges. A construction project for new development or significant redevelopment requires a NPDES permit. Construction project proponents are required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SW PPP). To comply with the NPDES, the project construction contractor will be required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SW PPP) during construction activities, and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for post-construction operational management of storm water runoff. The applicant has submitted a WQMP, prepared by Dan Guerra & Associates (April 12, 2006) that identifies BMPs to minimize the amount of pollutants, such as eroded soils, entering the drainage system after construction. Runoff from driveways, roads and other impermeable surtaces must be controlled through an on-site drainage system. BMPs include both structural and non-structural control methods. Structural controls used to manage storm water pollutant levels include detention basins, oil/grit separators, and porous pavement. Non-structural P228 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC20o6-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 21 Lass Than Slgnificam Less Issues and Su ortm Information Sources: PP g I=ntan+any Significam With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incur oratetl Impact Impact controls focus on controlling pollutants at the source, generally through implementing erosion and sediment control plans and various Business Plans that must be developed by any businesses that store and use hazardous materials. Practices, such as periodic parking lot sweeping can substantially reduce the amount of pollutants entering the storm drain system. The following mitigation measures would be required to control additional storm water effluent: Construction Activities: 1) Prior to issuance of Grading Permits, the permit applicant shall submit to Building Official for approval, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. 3) During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. 4) During construction, to remove pollutants, street cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. Post- Construction Operational: 5) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan• (WOMP) prepared by Dan Guerra & Associates (April 12, 2006) to reduce pollutants after construction enteririg the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 6) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of Grading Permits. b) According to CVWD, 43 percent of the City's water is currently provided from the groundwater in the Cucamonga and Chino Basins. CVWD has adopted a master plan that estimates demand needs until the year 2030. The proposed project will not deplete groundwater supplies, nor will it interfere with recharge because it is not within an area P229 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 22 Less Than Sipnilicant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g amemianr Signilicent with Mitigation Tnao Sipnilicant No Impart Inwmoratetl Impact Irrpaci designated as a recharge basin or spreading ground according to General Plan Exhibit IV-2. The development of the site will require the grading of the site and excavation; but this activity is not expected to pose any issue with ground water supplies as groundwater in the area of the city is estimated to be about 400 feet below the ground surface. As noted in the General Plan PEIR (Section 5.9), continued development citywide will increase water needs and is a significant impact; however, CVWD has plans to meet this increased need through the construction of future water facilities. c) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new buildings and hardscape proposed on a site. Although the project will be built over the East Etiwanda Creek bed; it will occur only after the San Bernardino County Flood Control District's permanently redirects water flow to the existing San Sevaine drainage channel adjacent to the east side of the site, as part of the San Sevaine Creek Water Project. When the San Sevaine Creek Water ~ roject is completed in the nearfuture, all runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. The project design includes landscaping of all non-hardscape areas to prevent erosion. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of Grading Permits. Therefore, the project will not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. The impact is not considered significant. d) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on a site. All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. A Grading and Drainage plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of Grading Permits. Therefore, increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on- or off-site. No impacts are anticipated. e) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on a site; however, all runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. The project will not result in substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. A grading and drainage plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of Grading Permits. Therefore, increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on- or off-site. No impacts are anticipated. f) According to the Phase I Envirorimental Site Assessment prepared for the project (AEI Consultants, 2005), the site has been undeveloped since at least 1938 and there is no evidence of any recognized environmental conditions (e.g., presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products posing to ground or groundwater contamination) on the site. Moreover, the proposed apartment community will not utilize hazardous substances which can degrade ground water supplies. Grading activities associated with the construction period could result in a temporary increase in the amount of suspended solids in surface flows during a concurrent storm event, thus resulting in surface water quality impacts. The site is for new development and must comply with provisions of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to minimize water pollution. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented: P23O Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 23 Less Then significam Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Pplentially Significant wun Mitipatipn Than Sieniticant Np tmpact Inwmorafatl Impact Impact 7) Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WOMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WOMP shall identify the structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. 8) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. g) The project site is located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Exhibit V-5. See response below. h) The project site is located within a 100-year flood hazard area as identified by General Plan Exhibit V-5. However, the San Bernardino County Flood Control District is currently in the midst of implementing its San Sevaine Creek Water Project that is designed to control flood waters along the San Sevaine and Etiwanda Creeks. Flood waters from these two water sources will be redirected and controlled via a new concrete line channel (which already present on the site's east boundary) and a series of upstream levees and flood control basins. When the project is completed in or around 2009, the impact of flood waters on the portion of the East Etiwanda Creek on the site will be controlled and there will be no further potential adverse impacts to the proposed development housing units on the site. The Rancho Cucamonga area is flood protected by an extensive storm drain system designed to convey a 100-year storm event. The system is substantially improved and provides an integrated approach for regional and local drainage flows. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City, spreading grounds, concrete-lined channels, and underground storm drains as shown in General Plan Exhibit V-6. See section above for response. There are no oceans, lakes or reservoirs near the project site; therefore, impacts from seiche and tsunami are not anticipated. The Rancho Cucamonga area sits at the base of the steep eastern San Gabriel Mountains whose deep canyons were cut by mountain streams. Numerous man-made controls have been constructed to reduce the mudflow impacts to the level of non-significance within the City. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City and spreading grounds both within and north of the City. P231 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 24 Less Tnan Si9nilicant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Pplanuaur Sipnilicam wim Mitigation Tnan Sipnilicent NO Imoatt Incorporated Impact Impact 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? () () () (/) b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or () () () (/) regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan () () () (/) or natural community conservation plan? Comments: a) The project site is in an area of the City that is in transition from underutilized/vacant land to new commercial and multifamily uses. The new uses, including the proposed apartment community, are being developed consistent with the permitted uses of the present land use designations for the property. As such, the project is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code. No adverse impacts to surrounding uses are expected. b) The land use designation for the site is Medium (M) Density and appropriate for the proposed development of multi-family (apartments). The proposed project is also consistent with the General Plan and does not interfere with any policies for environmental protection. As such, no impacts are anticipated. c) The project site is not located within any habitat conservation or natural community plan area as identified in the General Plan, pursuant to General Plan Exhibit IV-3. Moreover, the site is not identified as an area of sensitive biological resources per Section 5.3 of the General Plan FEIR. 10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral () () () (/) resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important () () () (/) mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Comments: a) The site is not designated as a State Aggregate Resources Area according to the City General Plan, Figure IV-1 and Table IV-1; therefore, there is no impact. b) The site is not designated by the General Plan, Figure IV-1 and Table IV-1, as a valuable mineral resource recovery site; therefore, there is no impact. P232 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 25 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g `Dtenuaily $ignilicant ww Mitigation Than Significant No TDdq IOLONO~d~etl mBaLi IfnOatt 11. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in () (/) () ( ) excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive () () (/) ( ) ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise () () () (/) levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in () (/) () ( ) ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, () () () (/) where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, () () () (/) would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Comments: a) The project site is not within an area of noise levels exceeding City standards as indicated by General Plan Exhibit V-13 at build-out. The main roadway affecting the site is Foothill Boulevard. Interstate 15 is approximately 3/< -miles to the west and too far away to pose any noise impact on the project. According to the Noise Study (Gordon Bricken & Associates, September 25, 2006) prepared for the project, identifies the four buildings (No.'s 1, 10, 11, 12) which are closest to Foothill Boulevard as being subject to slightly higher noise levels than allowed by the Development Code without mitigation. In order to meet the City noise standards and reduce exterior and interior noise levels to less-than-significant levels, the Noise Study makes recommendations for mitigating roadway noise impacts, which are referenced in the mitigation measure below: 1) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the Planning Director and Building Official for review and approval, building plans that demonstrate compliance with the noise attenuation recommendations of the acoustical engineer as contained in the Acoustical Analysis prepared by Gordon Bricken & Associates (September 2006), and on file with the Planning Department. b) The uses associated with this type of project do not induce ground borne vibrations. As such, no significant impacts are anticipated. c) The primary source of ambient noise levels in Rancho Cucamonga is traffic. The proposed apartment community use and will not significantly increase traffic noise on Foothill Boulevard; beyond the anticipated ambient noise levels within the vicinity of the project. P233 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 26 Lass Than Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Fp~anraov significant with Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incomoratetl Impact Impact d) The General Plan FEIR (Section 5.7) indicates that during a construction phase, on-site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, and construction equipment, will generate noise exceeding City standards. The following measures are provided to mitigate the short-term noise impacts: 2) Construction or grading shall not take place between the hours of B:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. 3) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. 4) Any perimeter walls proposed with the project shall be constructed as early as possible in first phase. The preceding mitigation measures will reduce the disturbance created by on-site construction equipment; however, do not address the potential impacts because of the transport of construction materials and debris. The following mitigation measure shall then be required: 5) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p-m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips (counting both to and from the construction site), then the developer shall prepare a noise mitigation plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. e) The site is not located within an airport land use Plan and is approximately 4.1 miles northwest of the Ontario International Airport, and offset north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated. The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2 1/2 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated. P234 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 27 Lass Then Slpnilicam Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Finanraoy Sipniticant With Mitipalion Than Sipnilicam No ' ImpdCl IOCOI omletl Impact Impact 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either () () (/) ( ) directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads. or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, () () () (/) necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating () () () (/) the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: a) The project will result in the development of 225 affordable housing units on the subject site and a moderate increase in the local resident population overall from current levels. The project also provides the community with much needed affordable housing units for families. Moreover, the new units will be constructed where housing units have been anticipated by the General Plan, and in an area that is characterized by a mix of single-family, multi-family, and commercial uses. No significant impacts are anticipated. b) The project will not result in the displacement of substantial numbers of existing housing units. The project site is vacant and contains no existing housing units on the site. With the development of new apartments on the site, there will be no adverse impact to housing within the City. c) The site is undeveloped. No significant population impacts are anticipated. 13. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? () () (/) ( ) b) Police protection? () () () (/) c) Schools? () () () (/) d) Parks? O O O (/) e) Other public facilities? () () () (/) Comments: a) The site is located adjacent to and has direct access from Foothill Boulevard, a major east west corridor through the City. Fire Station 173 will provide service to the site and is located approximately 13/a miles to the northwest near the intersection of Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard. Fire Station 174 is located at Milliken Avenue and Jersey Boulevard, approximately 2.5 miles to the southwest, and will provide back up service to the site. Finally, all new units will have fire sprinklers and, be constructed in P235 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 28 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Su ortm Information Sources: PP g Pp;6mially Sipnllicam WiID Maipa;ion Than Slpni4cam Np Irt'pap Incpmpld;etl Impart Impact accordance with Standard conditions of approval from the Uniform Building and Fire Codes. b) -Police protection is provided by the Rancho Cucamonga Police substation of the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department. The department conducts routine patrols of the area in which the site is located and will continue to do so after the new units are constructed. When the new apartment community is completed it will be gated and be secured by means of walls and combination fence walls along its boundaries. In addition, the applicanUdeveloper intends to participate in the Police Department's Crime Free Multi-Housing Program, a crime prevention partnership program between the Police and apartment complexes to created safer communities. Currently, the program has been established in 44 apartment communities in the City and has reported good success in reducing vandalism, burglaries, and in eviction of problem residents participating in criminal activities. No significant impacts are anticipated. c) The Etiwanda School District and the Chaffey Joint Union High School District serve the area in which the project is located. A standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay the School Impact Fees. With this standard mitigation, impacts to the School Districts are not considered significant. d) The area east of the I-15 freeway near the subject site does not currently have a public park. However, the City is planning to construct a new public neighborhood park (presently unnamed) approximately a Y<-mile north of the subject site on Garcia Drive (north of Foothill Boulevard and east of Etiwanda Avenue). The future park will add 5 acres to the City's inventory of parkland and will include an unlighted ball field, full basketball court, picnic tables/BBO's, tot playgrounds, open play areas, and a restroom building. Construction of the new park is scheduled to begin in late 2007. The anticipated park along with the on-site recreational amenities of the apartment community will provide open space and recreational opportunities for the new residents of the apartments. As a standard condition of approval, the developer will also be required to pay Park Development Fees to help develop new park facilities within the City. Thus, no significant impacts are anticipated. e) The proposed project will tie into existing public facilities. The site is adjacent to Foothill Boulevard and will be required complete roadway improvements (e.g., roadway paving, public sidewalk, street lights, etc.). Moreover, the project will not require the construction of any new public facilities or result in the alteration of any existing facilities so as to cause a decline in the levels of service. Cumulative development within Rancho Cucamonga will increase demand for library services. At the time the General Plan FEIR was adopted, it identified the cumulative impact on library services as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. Since the adoption of the General Plan, the City has opened a new library (2006) within the Victoria Gardens regional shopping center thereby adding approximately 23,000 square feet of library space in the community which also exceeds the projected need of 15,500 square feet at City build-out. No adverse impacts are expected for this issue area. P236 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 29 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Potemiany 59nillcant wpm Mitigation Than Signilicent No Irman Inromprated Impen Impact 14. RECREATION. Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and () () () (/) regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or () () () (/) require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Comments: a) The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest park to the site will be the forthcoming park on Garcia. Avenrle approximately 1/2 mile to the north of the site, across Foothill Boulevard. Although, the development of 225 additional living units to the area, the result in a modest increased potential for use of public parks or other recreational facilities within the City, this project will not adversely impact parks or recreational facilities. In addition, the project will provide on-site recreational amenities that will directly benefit the residents of the new apartments. As indicated above, a standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay Park Development Fees for the new units and help off-set the costs of on-going park improvements in the City. No impacts are anticipated. b) See a) response above. 15. TRANSPORTATIONlTRAFFIC. Would the projectr a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in () () () (/) relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of () () (/) ( ) service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including O O O (/) either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards because of a design () () () (/) feature (e.g.,sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? () () () (/) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? () () () (/) P237 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 30 Less Than ' Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Fptantiany Slgnillcant wah Mitigation Than Significant No Imnan Incprpprafetl Impact Irtpect g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs () () () (/) supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Comments: a) As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.5), continued development will contribute to the traffic load in the Rancho Cucamonga area. As a standard requirement of the project, the developer of the apartments will also be required to dedicate property to widen the roadway fronting the development and install all necessary street improvements (e.g., curb, gutter, and sidewalk) adjacent to the project that will improve roadway conditions. Currently, traffic signals are installed at the intersections of Etiwanda Avenue/Foothill Boulevard and there is a newly installed signal at Cornwall Avenue/Foothill Boulevard. Based on the Rancho Cucamonga Traffic Model, the estimated traffic generation rate expected from the proposed apartment project was calculated at 1,372 Average Daily Trips (ADT). According to the Traffic Engineering Department, Foothill Boulevard is a major divided arterial and the traffic generated by the 225 units will not exceed its capacity. Level of Service (LOS) at the nearby intersections (Etiwanda Avenue and Foothill Boulevard) will be improved as development occurs in the area additional right of way will be obtained for new roadway improvements (e.g., lanes and signals) that will improve traffic flow and level of service at intersections. After the initial study was initially circulated, the applicant commissioned LSA Associates, Inc., to prepare a focused Traffic Study (September 2007) to assess the potential circulation impacts associated with the proposed development of the San Sevaine Villas project. The Traffic Study examined traffic operations in the vicinity of project and analyzed impacts at opening year with and without project conditions. The Traffic Study found that under the existing conditions, the intersection of East Avenue/Foothill Boulevard operates at an unsatisfactory LOS (Level of Service) during a.m. and p.m. peak hours. After accounting for annual growth, the Traffic Study concluded that a new traffic signal at East Avenue/Foothill Boulevard was necessary for studied intersections to operate at satisfactory levels of service. The following mitigation measure is proposed to address the need for a traffic signal at East Avenue and Foothill Boulevard: 1) Prior to occupancy of any residential units in the proposed development, the developer shall install a traffic signal and minimal necessary street improvements related to the traffic signal at the intersection of East Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. Rancho Cucamonga has listed this intersection as a transportation City benefit and therefore, installation of permanent improvements are eligible for transportation fee crediUreimbursement from the City's transportation backbone account. Submittal of a request for reimbursement shall be made within 6 months of public improvement acceptance by the City Council or rights to reimbursement shall be waived. With this traffic signal and right-of-way improvements, the proposed project will be consistent with the General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared. Impacts evaluated will not create a substantial increase in the number of vehicle trips, traffic volume, or congestion at nearby intersections. Finally, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has adopted the San Bernardino County Measure I, which requires all development projects to pay a fee (Transportation Development Fee) based on land P238 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 31 Less Than Significant Lass Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Potennanr Significant wuh Mitigation Than signillcant No Ingact Incorooretetl Inroad Impact use and number of units. The Transportation Development Fee that must be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of Building Permits. Fees are used to fund roadway improvements necessary to support adequate traffic circulation. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. b) The Rancho Cucamonga Traffic Model estimates that each apartment unit will generate an average of .67 two-way peak hour trips daily. As such, the total trips generated for all 225 apartment units will be approximately 151 two-way peak hour trips, which are less than 250 two-way peak hour trips for non-retail uses; therefore, is below the threshold of the San Bernardino Congestion Management Plan (CMP) criteria for requiring a traffic impact analysis. The project site is adjacent to Foothill Boulevard which is largely improved and will be enhanced with the proposed project. According the Traffic Engineering Department, the project will contribute to making improvements to traffic flow and LOS on adjacent streets. As such, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated with this project. c) Located approximately 4.1 miles northeast of the Ontario International Airport, the site is offset from the flight path and will not change air traffic patterns. No impacts are anticipated. d) The project is in an area that is steadily being developed. As a part of the project, new street improvements (e.g., roadway, curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along Foothill Boulevard will be installed. The project design does not include any sharp curves, dangerous intersections, or farming uses that would present a conflict or hazard with the proposed development of the site as proposed. The project will not create a substantial increase in hazards because of a design feature. No impacts are anticipated. e) The project is designed to provide access for all emergency vehicles and will, therefore, not create an inadequate emergency access issues. More specifically, primary emergency access to the new apartment community will be from Foothill Boulevard via the main entry. If needed, a second gated access point for "emergency fire access only" is. provided on the west side of the site. Both entry points will have direct street access to Foothill Boulevard. No impacts are anticipated. f) The project will have adequate on-site parking in compliance with standards of the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code for multi-housing units and will, therefore, not create an inadequate parking capacity. No impacts are anticipated. g) The project design includes, or the project will be conditioned to provide, features supporting transportation and vehicle trip reduction (e.g., bus bays, bicycle racks, carpool parking, etc.). Bus service is provided by Omnitrans and Foothill Boulevard is designated by the General ' Plan as Existing Fixed Route Transit Service Corridor, which interconnects with other fixed routes to provide access to major activity centers in the community including major shopping centers (e.g., Victoria Gardens, Terra Vista), major government offices (City Hall and San Bernardino Courthouse), and colleges (i.e., Chaffey College), etc. The site is within close proximity to existing and/or future bus stops at the nearby intersection at Etiwanda Avenue and Foothill Boulevard, approximately 1/4 -mile to the west of the site. No impacts anticipated. P239 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 32 Less Than Signilicant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g `ote"zany Significant wnn Mitigation Tnaa Signilicant No Impact Incprpomtetl Imoatl Imoact 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the () () () (/) applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or () () () (/) wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm O O O (/) water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the () () () (/) project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment () (j () (/) provider, which serves or may serve the project, that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted O t) O (/) capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? 9) Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and O O O (/~ regulations related to solid waste? Comments: a) The proposed project is served by the Cucamonga Valley Water District sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant located within Rancho Cucamonga. The project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. No impacts are anticipated. b) The proposed project is served by the Cucamonga Valley Water District sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant located within Rancho Cucamonga and RP-1 located within City of Ontario, neither of which are at capacity. The project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. No impacts are anticipated. c) All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of Grading Permits. The impact is not considered significant. d) The project is served by the Cucamonga Valley Water District water system. There is currently a sufficient water supply available to the City of Rancho Cucamonga to serve this project. No impacts are anticipated. e) The proposed project is served by the Cucamonga Valley Water District sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant P240 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 33 Less Tnan Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Pdpnuauy Significant wnn Mitigation Tnan Significarn No Impact Inrorporatetl broad Impact located within Rancho Cucamonga and RP-1 located within City of Ontario, neither of which are at capacity. No impacts are anticipated. f) Solid waste disposal will be provided by the current City contracted hauler who disposes the refuse at a permitted landfill with sufficient capacity to handle the City's solid waste disposal needs. g) This project complies with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations regarding solid waste. The City of Rancho Cucamonga continues to implement waste reduction procedures consistent with AB 939. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the () () (/) ( ) quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually () () (/) ( ) limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects that will () () (/) ( ) cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Comments: a) The site is not located in an area of sensitive biological resources as identified on the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Exhibit IV-3. Based on specific biological reports no endangered or rare species were found on the site. Although the site is undeveloped and primarily consists of non-native grassland, there is a small portion that contains disturbed RAFSS and riversidian habitat that will be unavoidably impacted as a result of the San Bernardino County Flood Control District's implementation of the San Sevaine Creek Water Project. When completed the San Sevaine Creek Water Project will permanently alter the flow of floodwaters into the present East Etiwanda Creek and cut off/isolate the existing RAFSS habitat on the site from its natural and necessary water source. As a result, the on site RAFSS will not be suitable for long term sustainability of associated plant and wildlife communities. Since City staff was not able to document whether the subject RAFSS was accounted for and mitigated with San Sevaine Water Project the applicant will be required to ascertain and comply with California Department of Fish and Game requirements for mitigation. b) If the proposed project were approved, then the applicant would be required to develop the site in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. The 2001 General Plan was adopted along with the certification of a Program FEIR, Findings of P241 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-001 t9 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 34 Less TM1en significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Fplentiany signilicant wim Mi:iga:ion Than significam rvo Impart Incorporates Irtoad Impact Fact, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant adverse environmental effects of build-out in the City and Sphere-of-Influence. The City made findings that adoption of the General Plan would result in significant adverse effects to aggregate resources, prime farmland, air quality, the acoustical environment, library services, and aesthetics and visual resources. Mitigation measures were adopted for each of these resources; however, they would not reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels. As such, the City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations balancing the benefits of development under the General Plan Update against the significant unavoidable adverse impacts (CEQA Guidelines Section 15092 and 15096(h)). These benefits include less overall traffic volumes by developing mixed-use projects that will be pedestrian friendly and conservation of valuable natural open space. With these findings and the Statement of Overriding Considerations, no further discussion or evaluation of cumulative impacts is required. c) Development of the site will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The Initial Study identifies construction-related emissions of criteria pollutants as having a potentially significant impact; proposed mitigation measures would further reduce emission levels. Additionally, impacts resulting from air quality would be short-term and would cease once construction activities were completed. The Initial Study identified potentially significant impacts associated with the exposure of people to increased noise levels. Mitigation measures contained in this Initial Study will ensure impacts are at less-than-significant levels. EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Department offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (T) General Plan FEIR (SCH#2000061027, Certified October 17, 2001) (T) Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH #88020115, Certified January 4, 1989) (T) WQMP, Dan Guerra & Associates (April 12, 2006) (T) Delineation of Jurisdictional Waters, LSA Associates, Inc. (June 19, 2007) (T) Traffic Study, LSA Associates, Inc., (September 28, 2007) (T) Air Quality Analysis, LSA Associates, Inc., (September 2007) (T) Biological Resources Report, LSA Associates, Inc., (October 28, 2005) (T) Focused Slender-Horned Spineflower Survey, LSA Associates (May 15, 2007) (T) San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat Trapping Study, LSA Associates (October 6, 2007) (U) Focused Western Burrowing Owl Survey, LSA Associates, Inc., (September 20, 2006) (T) Acoustical Analysis, Gordon Bricken & Associates (September 25, 2006) (T) Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, RGS Engineering Geology (October 6, 2005) P242 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DRC2006-00540 AND DRC2007-00119 -SAN SEVAINE VILLAS Page 35 Less Than Signilicant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: pp g Fp~antially Significant wnn Mitigation Than Signilicant No Impact Incpmoratetl Impact Impart APPLICANT CERTIFICATION I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly n ~ ' ificant e vironmental effects would occur. A,~ Applicant's Signature: Date: ~~ (~f Print Name and Title: P243 City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Project File No.: Development Review DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00119 This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) has been prepared for use in implementing the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration fortheabove-listed project. This program has been prepared in compliance with State law to ensure that adopted mitigation measures are implemented (Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code). Program Components -This MMP contains the following elements: 1. Conditions of approval that act as impact mitigation measures are recorded with the action and the procedure necessary to ensure compliance. The mitigation measure conditions of approval are contained in the adopted Resolution of Approval for the project. 2. A procedure of compliance and verification has been outlined for each action necessary. This .procedure designates who will take action, what action will betaken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. 3. The MMP has been designed to provide focused, yet flexible guidelines. As monitoring progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon recommendations by those responsible for the program. Program Management -The MMP will be in-place through all phases of the project. The project planner, assigned by the Planning Director, shall coordinate enforcement of the MMP. The project planner oversees the MMP and reviews the Reporting Forms to ensure they are filled out correctly and proper action is taken on each mitigation. Each City department shall ensure compliance of the conditions (mitigation) that relate to that department. Procedures -The following steps will be followed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 1. A fee covering all costs and expenses, including any consultants' fees, incurred by the City in performing monitoring or reporting programs shall be charged to the applicant. A MMP Reporting Form will be prepared for each potentially significant impact and its corresponding mitigation measure identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist, attached hereto. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. All monitoring and reporting documentation will be kept in the project file with the department having the original authority for processing the project. Reports will be available from the City upon request at the following address: City of Rancho Cucamonga -Lead Agency , (Planning Department) 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 P244 Mitigation Monitoring Program DRC2006-00540 and DRC2007-00119 Page 2 3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staff's is needed, as determined by the project planner or responsible City department, to monitor specific mitigation activities and provide appropriate written approvals to the project planner. 4. The project planner or responsible City department will approve, by signature and date, the completion of each action item that was identified on the MMP Reporting Form. After each measure is verified for compliance; no further action is required for the specific phase of development. 5. All MMP Reporting Forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off as completed by the project planner or responsible City department at the bottom of the MMP Reporting Form. 6. Unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation measures. The project planner is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions. An MMP Reporting Form will be completed bythe project planneror responsible Citydepartment and a copy provided to the appropriate design, construction, or operational personnel. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to stop the work of construction contractors if compliance with any aspects of the MMP is not occurring after written notification has been issued. The project planneror responsible City department also has the authority to hold certificates of occupancies if compliance with a mitigation measure attached hereto is not occurring. The project planneror responsible City department has the authorityto hold issuance of a business license until all mitigation measures are implemented. 8. Any conditions (mitigation) that require monitoring after project completion shall be the responsibility of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department. The Department shall require the applicant to post any necessary funds (or other forms of guarantee) with the City. These funds shall be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measure for the required period of time. 9. In those instances requiring long-term project monitoring, the applicant shall provide the City with a plan for monitoring the mitigation activities at the project site and reporting the monitoring results to the City. Said plan shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. The monitoring/reporting plan shall conform to the City's MMP and shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to the issuance of building permits. MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III) Project File No.: DRC2006-00540 and DRC2007-00119 Applicant: San Sevaine Villas Initial Study Prepared by: Michael Diaz, Senior Planner Date: October 15. 2007 (Revised) . . . .. ... . . -. - .. =Air Qualify ' ~ ~ rt^ r , .~,,:~~ ~'"~`,~~~ ~Pr ~~ ~_~, ~~,? ~q~ ',~"~.y ~ ~ ~ ti' ,~ ~ ~~ ~.~ e ~ , ~, , ,i ,~ ~. t,~w All construction equipment shall be maintained in good PD C Review of plans A/C 2/4 operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and ' maintained as per manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the PD/BO C Review of plans C 2 developer shall submit construction plans to the City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low-emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was . investigated and found to be infeasible for the, project. The contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning staff. All paints and coatings shall meet or, exceed PD C Review of plans A/C 2/4 performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or ,high volume, low-pressure spray, or by using precoated/natural-colored building materials, water-based or low volatile organic compound (VOC) coating, and coating transfer or spray equipment with high transfer efficiency. All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards BO B Review of plans A/C 2 noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 1of11 n~i A C71 - - - - .. - AIl construction equipment shall comply with SCAOMD BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: Water active sites at least twice daily (locations BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 where grading is to occur will be thoroughly watered prior to earthmoving. Re-vegetate disturbed areas as quickly as possible. BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 Pave construction access roads at least 100 feet BO C Review of plans A/C Z4 onto the site from the main road. • Pave, water, or chemically stabilize all on-site roads BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 as soon as feasible. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 unpaved roads on to the paved roads, or wash trucks and any equipment leaving the site. Reduce traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 15 mph or less. • Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 loose materials, or maintain at least two feet of freeboard (vertical space between the top of the load and top of the trailer) in accordance with the requirements of the California Vehicle code (CVC) Section 23114. Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. Dispose of surplus excavated material in BO C Review of plans A 4 accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. 2of11 N a rn . - - .. Sweep all streets once per day if visible soil BO C During A 4 materials are carried to adjacent streets construction (recommend water sweepers using reclaimed water). Suspend excavation and grading operations during BO C During A 4 high winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in construction accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils BO C During A 4 haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other Construction suitable means. Minimize at all times the area disturbed by clearing, grading, earthmoving, or excavation operations. The site shall be treated with water or other BO C During A 4 soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and construction Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily to reduce Particulate Matter (PM,o) emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. Chemical soil stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and BO C During A 4 RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,o emissions. The construction contractor shall select the construction BO C Review of plans A/C 4 equipment used on-site based on low-emission factors and high-energy efficiency. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans include a statement that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specification. The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 alternative fuel-powered equipment in lieu of gasoline- or diesel-powered engines where Teasible. 3 of 11 N .A V -. .: The construction contractor shall ensure that BO C Review of plans A 4 construction grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. During smog season (May through October), the overall length of construction period will be extended, thereby decreasing the size of the area prepared each day, to minimize vehicles and equipment operating at the same time. The construction contractor shall time the construction PD C Review of plans A/C 2/3 activities so as to not interfere with peak-hour traffic and minimize obstruction of through lanes adjacent to the site; if necessary, a flag person shall be retained to maintain safety adjacent to existing roadways. The construction contractor shall support and encourage PD C Review of plans D Z3 ridesharing and transit incentives for the construction crew. All residential and commercial structures shall be BO C/D Review of plans C 2/4 required to incorporate high efficiency/low polluting , heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. All residential and commercial structures shall be BO C/D Review of plans C 2/4 required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. "BiologicalResources: ', "`~~ ~ '_' , , ;y,~, a"~ '`~ i~' ` ~''' ~,'r"~',: Prior to the removal of any Riversidean Alluvial Fan PD B Review of plans B 2 Sage Scrub (RAFSS) habitat from the site, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) including approved mitigation for the removal the extant RAFSS habitat from the site. 4 of 11 N - . - ... -. . - -. .. Prior to any on-site grading/construction activity on-site pp g Review of plans B 2 grading/construction, the applicant shall perform a pre-construction nest survey to determine whether active Burrowing Owl nests are present. The study shall be performed no more than 30-days prior to construction activity and be made available to the Planning Director for City verification. Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits for pD B Review of plans B 2 the project, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board, for the removal and/or alteration of on site riparian habitat within the jurisdiction of the abovementioned resource agency. Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits for PD B Review of plans B 2 the project, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), for the removal and/or alteration of on site wetland waters. Prior to the removal of any on-site heritage trees as pD B Review of plans C 2 define by the Rancho Cucamonga Tree Preservation Ordinance, the applicant shall apply for and comply with the provisions of said Ordinance including approval of a Tree Removal Permit. Prior to any on-site grading/construction activity or the pD B Review of plans D 2 removal of trees for which a Tree Removal Permit has been issued, the applicant shall perform a pre-construction tree/nest survey to determine whether active bird nests are present. The study shall be performed no more than 30-days prior to construction activity and be made available to the Planning Director for City verification. 5of11 ~ N A .. .. -. .. . . ~', "i`§i yMi"~ f`Y~y "*4 y~ q fG~t ~ Cultural Resources .- _ y:- yy~y ~kj 4t" • ~`e :1 . . ~ ' ~p ~ qy~~ -" ~ Y ~Li~~ ~. ^~ '~~'~~)~ @ ~ F ~~ R~4"^~'~ A 7 y- ~a , „ , ! l ,, ~3` r ' ` ,., Prior to issuance of grading permit, the developer shall retain a qualified archeologist to prepare an archeological resource assessment. If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will: • Enact interim measures to protect undesignated PD/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. Consider establishing provisions to require PD/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. Pursue educating the public about the area's PD/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 archaeological heritage. • Propose mitigation measures and recommend PD/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 conditions of approval to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, following appropriate CEQA guidelines. Prepare a technical resources management report, PD C Review of report A/D 3/4 documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report, with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. 6 of 11 N cn 0 .. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the developer shall PD B Review of report A/D 4 retain a qualified paleontologist archeologist to prepare paleontological resource assessment. If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and PD B Review of report P/D 4 equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities. Should fossils be found within an area being cleared BC B/C Review of report A/D 4 or graded, divert earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for PD D Review of report D 3 documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). Submit summary report to City of Rancho PD D Review of report D 3 Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy to the report to San Bernardino County Museum. 7 of 11 N .~. , ..- o;., ~ .. Nay 4 , Geologyahtl.Soils & ~ .,, vQ ..- -. ! ' {~ ix; ,;,~ - ,. 9 ` i ,, , . ' x) 1 ~.. . :;~ r _ ~ _. The site shall be treated with water or other BO C During A 4 soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAOMD and construction RW OCB) daily to reduce PM,o emissions, in accordance with SCAOMD Rule 403 or re-planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a BO C During A 4 schedule established by the City to reduce PM,o construction emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. Grading operations shall be suspended when wind BO C During A 4 speeds exceed 25 mph tc minimize PM,o emissions construction from the site during such episodes. Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCP;OMD and BO C During A 4 RWOCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,a emissions. Hydrology and Water Quality ' ~` ~ -~ ~ •, `' Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 shall submit to Building Official for approval, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SW PPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 8 of 11 N N An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and otf-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specifyihe timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in Southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program' within a specified time frame. During construction, temporary berms such as BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. During construction, to remove pollutants, street BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 the W ater Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared by Dan Guerra & Associates (April 12, 2006) to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. Landscaping plans shall include provisions for BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. 9of11 n~i w Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 submit to the City Engineer for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WOMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The W OMP shall identify the structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, applicant BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. Noise. . , _. _ _ -. __, E U _-_ Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall PD/BO B/ Review of plans C 2/3 submit to the Planning Director and Building Official for review and approval, building plans that demonstrate compliance with the noise attenuation recommendations of the acoustical engineer as contained in the Acoustical Analysis prepared by Gordon Bricken & Associates (September 2006), and on file with the Planning Department. Construction or grading shall not take place between the BO C During A 4 hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, construction including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. 10 of 11 N A Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the BO C During A 4 standards specified in Development Code Section construction 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. Any perimeter walls proposed with the project shall be PD G During A A constructed as early as possible in the first phase. construction Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the PO/BO C During A 4!7 hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, construction including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips (counting both to and from the construction site), then the developer shall prepare a noise mitigation plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. Key to Checklist Abbreviations Responsible"Person .- . ' '- _~ .- MohitoFing Frequency' ' '~; ~;Methoti of Venficatioii :"` Sanctioris' .. ._. CDD -Community Development Director or designee A -With Each New Development A - On-site Inspection 1 -Withhold Recordation of Final Map PD -Planning Director or designee B -Prior To Construction B -Other Agency Permit /Approval 2 -Withhold Grading or Building Permit CE -City Engineer or designee C -Throughout Construction C -Plan Check 3 -Withhold Certificate of Occupancy BO -Building Official or designee D - On Completion D -Separate Submittal (Reports/Studies/ Plans) 4 -Stop Work Order PO -Police Captain or designee E -Operating ~ 5 -Retain Deposit or Bonds FC -Fire Chief or designee 6 -Revoke CUP 7 -Citation is\planning\final\cega\m mch klst-rev12-4-06f inal.doc 11 of 11 ~ N C77 rr a 4 ~~ ~~~~d ~~ LL X~ ~~ ~~ ~fi ~_ W z ~d g ~~ V ~~ ~_ ~8 w z H'~l~f W ~~ 0 .~ 0 *« . .~- ~ y ;~,~. ~. ._ ~~ ~ k _ .... ~ - +~... ~,w S ~; ~ ~ ~II ~~ ~~. Z1 j ~ A j. a3 ~ ~'~ ~.~ ~. a ~ i' ~ c rs ~. -'~ y'b s . .,- 1t ~ ,A ~~_ VI ."r`, ~~ !.. ~~ ,* C a ~~~.. s.~~.- ~~~ !!- y e e LL 8e e :~ m'o i ~' ~''. ~~• •. ~. ~~ P. , ~ ~~ $ a~ ~ '~ ~ € LL CIS Y ~' J a 8 '~ < ~ a y~ ~ ~~..~. ~ .. ~ ~o~inerrowaavM r ~ ~ .. ~ E 2 Q N ~ _ J U~~ d' 2 _O UuLLu~~'~ ~aU O~O F- ~ V J ~ ~ ~,~ I _ EAST ~ ~______~~_~__~ 3 ~ i~ I ETIWANDA ' ~ VONtlM113 tlONVMIIR3- ~ ' - -~ 1 Z ~ 1 a~~< ~ I L__~_____r H332lDAYO `..~, I V11NV d1NV~ I ~~ .1 I a31s3H~oa_ sll l 1 ~-I ~ - ~ 1 1 1 - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I HERMOS/ I 1 I 1 I AMI 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1--- 1_ , _ ---~--- ,,~ ~~~~ ~~ 1 w ~~ ~u I 2 ~ SPRV ~-~ ~ ~ I 1 3 ~ I HAVEN _ I N3AYH ~ ~ 1 HERMOSA ~ ~~ I ARCHIBALD V Q I `~` ARCHIBALd TRYST HEWNAN HELLMAN ~ ~I ..BERYL ~ ~ ~ J J ~ OLNA3NU1 1 CARNEWW I 1 _~ n ~ ~ 1 v I Z SAPPHIRE • " ~ f ~ _ >:13H`d6 I 1 ~ _ _ ~ - ,-- _ e - ~~~ao . , a o California Constitution Article 34 The next /First subject I would like to discuss this evening is in regards to Article 34 of the State Constitution. I would like to show that this project absolutely needs voter approval as required by Article 34 of the State Constitution, and can not proceed until such approval by the voters of this city. Background: Article 34 Section 1 states: "No low rent housing project shall hereafter be developed, constructed, or acquired in any manner by any state public body until, a majority of the qualified electors of the city, town or county, as the case may be, in which it is proposed to develop, construct or acquire the same, voting upon such issue, approve such project by voting in favor thereof at an election to be held for that purpose, or at any general or special election." There are three definitions that are at the heart of this argument and verify the validity of an Article 34 Election, the first is "state public body", the second is "low-rent housing project", and the third is "persons of low income". The first definition of a "state public body" is expressed in Article 34 Section 1, paragraph 4. "For purposes of this article the term "state public body" shall mean this state, or any city, city and county, county, district, authority, agency, or any other subdivision or public body of this state." The Redevelopment Agency is a "state public body". The second definition that is of concern is :`low rent housing project". Article 34 Sectionl paragraph 2 states: "For purposes of this Article the term "low rent housing projecP' shall mean any development composed of urban or rural dwellings, apartments or other living accommodations for persons of low income, financed in whole or in part by the Federal Government or a state public body... " This is a development, of apartments, financed in part by a "state public body", (the Redevelopment Agency) the only thing left to deteRnine is if it is for "persons of low income". When this argument was posed to Jan Reynolds of the Redevelopment Agency on 11-29-07 she basically confirmed that the reason this project would not be subject to an Article 34 election was because the project only had 49% "persons of low income" and would not therefore be considered a "low rent housing project" She also referenced California Health and Safety Code 37001(a)(1): "not more than 49 percent ojthe dwellings, apartments or other living accommodations of the development may be occupied by persons of low income." Now, and here is the key, look at the very next section 37001.3 it states: "The maximum income of "persons of low income," as determined by the state public body, developing, constructing or acquiring the property, for purposes of Section, l of Article 7~C1 V of the State Constitution, shall not exceed the maximum income of lower income households, as defined in Section 50079. S." Section 50079.5 states halfway through the paragraph' "...the department shall, by regulation, establish income limits for lower income households for all geographic areas of the state at 80 percent of area median income.." This is key. As you will see by looking at the specific criteria for this project (Items 7-10) it is not less than 49% persons of low income, it is 75% "persons of low income"...This project must have an Article 34 election for approval or reduce the percentage of "persons of low income" in this project to 49% or less. Thank you Joseph Sibree Health and Safety Code 33413 The next /first subject I would like to discuss tonight is in regards to the California Health and Safety Code Section 33413 in relationship to this project. I will briefly show you direct evidence that expresses a misinterpretation of the law that when properly interpreted allows that this project has no right to redevelopment funds if built at this site. First off, in the Loan Agreement between Northtown Corp. and the Redevelopment Agency dated Sept, 1st 2005 paragraph D it states..."In order to carry out the Redevelopment Plan, Agency intends to utilize the rental housing development on the property to increase the supply of affordable housing production credits pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 33413(b)(2)(A)ii as new housing units available for not less than ninety-nine (99) years at affordable housing costs to low and moderate income households." Additionally, in the Redevelopment Agencies annual Report for 2005/2006 on page 24, last pazagraph we'll find, "Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33413(2)ii provides that under certain conditions, a Redevelopment Agency may adopt a Resolution to determine that units produced outside of the Project Area with Agency assistance may be applied to the Project Area production requirement on a 2-for-1 basis." "Under Certain conditions" Now lets take a look at California Health and Safety Code 33413 First Off and Most importantly this entire section of Code refers to those "certain conditions" previously mentioned, as you can see in the first paragraph "Whenever dwelling units housing persons and families of low or moderate income are destroyed or removed from the low and moderate income housing market as part of a redevelopment project...the agency shall, within four yeazs of the destruction or removal, rehabilitate, develop....an equal number of replacement dwelling units...as those destroyed or removed units at affordable housing costs within the territorial jurisdiction of the agency. " Now looking at the specific paragraph referred to by redevelopment 33413(2)(ii) "To satisfy this paragraph, in whole or in part, the agency may cause, by regulation or agreement, to be available, at affordable housing costs, to, and occupied by, persons and families of low or moderate income or to very low income households, as applicable, two units outside a project area jor each unit that otherwise would have been required to be available inside a project area." once again "ta satisfy this paragraph". In other words when and only when dwelling units have been destroyed or removed from the low and moderate income housing market, inside the redevelopment project azea and they aze being replaced, then and only then should a redevelopment agency be allowed to develop units outside the project area. Therefore, since this is not the case, and this project does not meet those "certain conditions," This project should NOT be allowed to be built at this site which is outside of the "Redevelopment Project Area" or at least has NO RIGHT to utilization of redevelopment funds. Thank you. Joseph Sibree The next subject I would like to discuss this evening is in regards to the fact that this project needs a full Environmental Impact Report (EIIt) and NOT just a Mitigated Negative Declazation as has been proposed so far. There are many reasons why a full EIR is necessary for this project, I will briefly state a few of the most relevant. The first and maybe most important reason is that 1 strongly believe, this Neg. Dec. is inaccurate, unreliable and has been deliberately altered to cover up and change the facts to the benefit of the developer. This accusation may seem strong to you but the facts are facts and I have brought with me tonight copies of these changes that I am discussing and would like to present to you how they were altered without justification. Looking at page 12 paragraph 2b of the Neg. Dec. Dated Oct. 25~' 2007and again on page 13 paragraph 3c you will find a discussion of the `jurisdictional waters of the U.S.' and of `jurisdictional wetlands'. In both these paragraphs reference is made only to a report by LSA Associates dated June 19'", 2007 and the findings of that report. There is no mention ojtheir first report of Oct 2005 and tke findings of that report. When I had enquired at the planning desk in a conversation with Mike Diaz if LSA had gone out and done another study in June 2007 for this revised report he stated that they did not and had only made some revisions to their first report. Please take a look at the attached documentation that I found in the file at the planning desk. First you'll see that LSA's original report Oct. 2005 states in both the Executive Summary and the Conclusions that "LSA has concluded that within the study area, 1.09 acres is jurisdictional waters of the U S. of which .81 acres meet the Corps. Definition ofnon-wetland waters and .28 acres meets all three parameters required to qualify as a jurisdictional wetland.. "additionally it states, "Potential CDFG jurisdiction encompasses 3.75 acres, of which 3.47 acres are streambed and bank and .28 acre is riparian habitat." If you will now take a look at the documentation dated 6/26/2007 (pg.2 of 3) in which you can see all of the revisions to the report. I have been through the file at the city probably 8 times, I have not been able to find any reasons stating why these revisions were made. Look at paragraph 2 c), I just love how 1.09 acres ofjurisdictional waters ojthe U.S. which is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers just magically changed to .2 acres over five times as small This is very important as well as you will shortly see that this therefore reduces the developers mitigation cost of $163,500.00 to $30,000.00 (my estimates)... and this is just for this one criteria. They were obviously made by Maria Lum at LSA on 6/23/2007 as she signed off on them herself, but why? Mike Diaz told me that there were no additional studies done, how then did ALL the fact in regard to this particulaz topic suddenly change, and in favor of the developer? Please take a look at the final copy of documentation I have with me Wow will you look at that. Seems that all of the changes to LSA's Tindings, that Maria Lum revised on 06/23/07 were already documented and forwarded to Mike Diaz from Paul Kielhold of Pitassi Architects on, get this... 06/14/07 nine full days prior to LSA revising the report. How, exactly, did Pitassi architects know of these changes nine full days prior to LSA revising this report and making these changes? This should be enough in itseljto at this point throw out the entire Neg. Dec. And once again require a full EIR I also want you to pay particular attention to their concern in this correspondence to the Mitigation costs in relation to the jurisdictional waters, and of Pete's concern that the city receive this. How much money will be saved by the developer because of these changes? Notice in paragraph 4 how only .2 Acres would require mitigation. Also notice in Paragraph 1 how for every 1 acre of impacted, that 3 acres of mitigated area would have to be purchased, at $50,000.00 per acre. That is how important these changes are. 3 to I ratio at $50,000.00 per acre. There are many other reasons why this project should require a full EIR, just to name a few...This project is being built on an ancient streambed, there is at least .28 acres of wetlands, there is at least 3.47 acres of streambed and banks, there aze at least three animal species of concern that aze either sensitive or threatened, there are several plant life species of concern, it is a paleo sensitive area, it is an area of very poor air quality where after years of pollution from industry and diesels both the air and soil are contaminated with at least lead and radium. I'm sure that there are many other reasons why this project should require a full EIIt, I have seen other cities such as Claremont require a full EIR for projects as small as 2.60 Acres, this project is almost 13 Acres in size and does have many Environmental, not to mention potential Cultural and Historical concerns. To be quite frank, from my experience with this city it has come to be my impression along with most every other person that I've spoken with, that this city is so pro development that it looks the other way when it comes to the health and welfare of the residents that are already here as long as the developer stays within design criteria for the city and meets all of it's legal obligations and mitigations. In speaking with regional and state agencies throughout this process that overlook and regulate the environmental concerns of development, I have heard time and time again that an Negative Declaration is basically a tool that cities use to get around doing a full EIR especially on projects that the city really wants to see go through. Let me finish by saying this. Most all cities want local control. Most of these agencies that we the people think are there to protect us from environmental abuses by corporations and developers really are limited in their powers and in many cases can only recommend and suggest to the cities what steps they take to protect the health and safety of it's citizen's. It is up to the cities therefore and their agencies, such as planning, to make absolute certainty that NO DEVELOPMENT is allowed unless al/ of the health, safety and environmental issues are absolutely dealt with. If there is even a chance that there may be issues that require further research and review than a full EIR needs to be done. This is the case here. A full EIR must be required if this project is to proceed. Thank you Joseph Sibree L!A A!¢OOIATEl, INO. ~ OCLINBATION OFjOI1BD[OTIONAL BAT818 OOTO¢8¢1006 ~ NOITHTOtlN HOVlINO DEYELOPYENT 00¢PO¢ATION OtTY OF IANCHO CV CAYONOA The soils within the potential wetlands of Drainage B were fine textured. Soil color ranged. from yellow to ~. - gleyed (Mtmsellcolor 2.SY/1 and Gley 1 2.5/I~. Based on the above evaluation, it is concluded that soils over the potential we- It and portions of the study area meei the NTCH cnteria for hydn~c soils - Hydrology. The annual growing season in this part of San Bemazdino County is estimated at 230 to 290 days (Soil Conservation Service, 1980). Assuming an average growing season of 260 days, soils would need to be saturated to the surface for a minimjun of five percent of the growing season, or about 13 consecutive. days, in order to satisfy the wetland hydrology criteria. A defutitive detemtination would require saturation for 12.5 percent of the growing season, or about 32 consecutive days. Wetland hydrology appears to be present within Drainage B and within a small azea at the northeast comer of East Etiwanda Creek in the study area, but not within any other portions of East Etiwanda Creek or Drainage B-1 (see Figure 2, Jurisdictional Delineation Map). Nuisance runoff associated with nearby urban development appear to account for the increased flows within Drainage B and the northeast comer of East Eflwanda Creek, which were inundated at the time of observation in late September 2005: Additional evidence of wetland hydrology associated with the drainages includes flowing water, well defined banks, scouring, and debris deposits. California Department of Fish and Game Both Drainage A and Drainage B satisfy the definition of a streambed by displaying a channel bed and banks. A small area of riparian vegetation dominated by Goodding's black willow is located in East Etiwanda Creek (Drainage A) the northeast comer of the study area. Herbaceous riparian vegetation consisting of yellow umbrella sedge, willow weed, Mexican sprangletop mule fat, white water-cress, arroyo willow, and Goodding's black willow was present throughout the length of Drainage B, but not within any portion of Drainage B-I Total potential CDFG jurisdiction within the study area is 3.75 acres. Of that total, 3.47- acres are streambed and bank and 0.28-acre is riparian habitat. L CONCLUSIONS '~~ Based on the data collected and analyzed, LSA has concluded that within the study area, 1.09 acres ism jurisdictional waters of the U:S, of which 0.81 acre meet the Corps definition ofnon-wetland waters of .the U._S., an 8-acre meets all three parameters require to qua r as a J`uris chonal wetlan under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Potentia DFG jurisdiction encompasses 3.75 acres, of which 3.47-acres are streambed and bank and 0.28-acre is riparian habitat. This jurisdictional detemunation is subject to verification by the Coi~js, RWQCB, and CDFG if Sec6oas 401, 404, and/or Section 1600 et seq. permits are,~requve_d_; RWHV530\Bio\WnterslDelincalionVurisdictional Delineation rytda(10/7/2005) - ~ ~ 13 Maria Lum From: Diaz, Michael Paul [Michael.Diaz~cityofrc.us] Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 2:39 PM / To: Maria Lum Subject: Draft answers to IS Biology Hi Maria: ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~`a~ Page 1 of 3 ,~ Would you please look aver my responses and provided comments and/or corrections as needed. 1 would really appreciate it if you would make sure the facts on land sizes of any potential and/or significant size of habitats..,.) am getting sort of contused. Thanks for your help. Michael S.g,.~1~N ~V~ 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: / a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or (/) (~1 O (/) through habitat modifications, on any species identified ~' as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in o ~' local r regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California De artment of Fi h d G Q ~ ~ ~ p s an ame or U.S. ~ ~ o Fish and Wildlife Service? pT r'.,~at~T b ~~< b) Have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat or (/) ( () (/) other sensitive natural community identified in local"or regipnal plans, policies, or regulations or by the ~ ~, li¢ J ~5 Califomia Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? ~ vJb willows rs r'x71- r1 ccn , c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected (/) ( () (/) wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water tn•llea Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, ,~~5 coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hyd~rological interru lion, or othermeans? ~rAtr g, dh~ch SF~f1t '«n d) Interfere substantially with the moveme of any native (), () (/) (/) resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or .migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting () (~' () (/) biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? '( "Ct26'E c~-E7it~ltanlC~, c q u,Pc,ta C~ - PJES'T U `j f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat () () () /) , Conservation Plan, Natural Community conservation ~.. ~ Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation Ian? rt..~,,..e.,,~. a) The project site is undeveloped but has been disturbed by previous grading, dumping, and other man-made activities over the years. A Biology Resources faeport (LSA Associates, Oct. 2005) was prepared for the project to determine the existence of potential occurrence of sensitive plant and animal species on the subject site. The report identified the site as a composition of primarily non-native grassland with elements of Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub (RAFSS) on the east side of the East Etiwanda Creek bed, and small portion of riparian vegetation. RAFSS is considered to be a sensitive natural community by State and Federal resource agencies and private conservation organizations. When implemented, the proposed project would 6/26/2007 -=~ ~ ~ Page 2 of 3 ~~ - ~ result in an incremental loss of approximately 2-acres of RAFSS. The loss of RAFSS habitat is considered significant and its loss at this location should be mitigated by contribution o ees to a habitat mitigation ank or a preservation of larger intact habitat at different location. The following mitigation measure is proposed to offset the loss RAFSS habitat for this project: 1. Prior to the removal of any Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS) habitat from the site, the applicant shall pay fees to a habitat mitigation bank or replace habitat at a one to one basis at another location. ba~~ Eight federally/State listed plant and animal species were also identified as poten Ily present on the project site. Seven of the listed species were considered to the absent from the site bas on a lack of suitable habitat, or the project site is outside the known range of the species. The plant and animal species considered to have a low potential for occurrence on the site included the Slender-homed Spine Flower {Dodecahema leploceras), and the Merriam's (or San Bernardino) Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys merriami parvus), and the Western Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia hypugaea). These specific specles were the subject of separate focused reports (by LSA Associates 2006 and 2007), all of which concluded that the subject spbcies were not encountered on the site. Thus, based on the Biology Resources Report and separate species focus studies, no adverse impacts to federally/State listed plant and animal specles are expected. b) The site has two major dralhage features, the most prominent of which is the East Etiwanda Creek channel that receives seasonal runoff. The other drainage feature is a storm drain outlet at the northwest corner of the site which connects to the creek bed via man-made earthen V-ditch. Riparian vegetation (e.g., Gooding's black willow and mule fat) is present within portions of th ctro~ite drainages. According to the LSA * Associates_Deline~n of Jurisdictional Waters Report October 20051,.tmpacts to California Department of - " Fish and Game (CDFG) Jursdiction are 0.51 acre o stream e andriparian vegetation and impacts to Army ~rp1 Corps of Engineers (ACOE) jurisdiction are 0.2 acre of ephemeral and wetland waters of the U.S. However, N" when the San Bernardino County Flood Control District completes its San Sevaine Creek Water Project flood ~`~' control project for the eastern portion of the City water in the creek will be permanently diverted away from the ,Y site into the existing concrete channel located adjacent to the east side of the site. The result of the County's project will be to cut off water flows to and through the site and thereby affect the quality and sustainability of -the RAFSS and riparian habitaVconditions presently on the site. Moreover, development of the site with housing will not occur until after the San Sevaine Creek Water Project is completed and the creek is cut oft from water flows. Nevertheless, [he applicant wilt be required to obtain final determination on the status of the creek and riparian habitat on the site from the Califomia Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and Army Corps' of Engineers (ACOE). Possible mitigation may be payment of fees to the Santa Ana Water Authority in-lieu fee program; which allocates funds to local Resource Conservation Districts for use in riparian habitat enhancement and restoration projects in the region. The following mitigation measure is proposed: 2. Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits for the project, the applicant shall ascertain and comply with the requirements of California Department of Ffsh and Game (CDFG) and Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), for the removal and/or alteration of on site riparian and wetlands areas as determined by the abovementioned resource agencies. c) LSA Associates, Inc. conducted a wetlands jurisdictional waters delineati tudy on the site on September 23r290~ Using U.S. Army Corps of Engineers methodology, a total of 1..09 cres of the site was deemed a~1 'to be the jurisdictional waters of the United States. A portion of this tot - 8- re, meets the st rds to quality as a jurisdictional wetland under Section 404 of the Clean Wate ct. The remaining St- cre 'J~ was found to be non-wetland waters of the U.S. Final determination of ju sdiction is subject to anon by the Army Corps of Engineers. D ( ~ Q~ ~~ d) The majority of the surrounding area has been or is in the process of being developed with both commercial, residential, and public works projects, thereby presenting a disruption to intact wildlife corridors that may have existed previously. More importantly the project site lies in an area where habitat has been fragmented by developments, and as such the Biology Report prepared for the site finds that the site does not serve as a regional wildlife corridor. No adverse impacts are anticipated for this issue. e) At the center of the site are stands (not a windrow) of Eucalyptus trees that will be removed to accommodate the project. These trees appear to have naturalized on the site at the side of the creek . bed. The size and height of the trees qualifies them as heritage trees per city ordinance, and to remove them will require a Tree Removal Permit. Moreover, these trees could be suitable nesting trees for raptors, foraging, and or other nesting birds. At the time the Biology Report was prepared no nests were 6/26/2007 Page 1 of 2 Diaz, Michael Paul ~. From: Paul Kielhold [paul.kielhold@Isa-assoc.com] ,~ Sent: Thursday, June 14,-2007 3:37 PM ~ To: Diaz, Michael Paul Cc: Maria Lum Subject: Northtown Housing -Biological Resources Mitigation Measures Mike ~- S Pete Pitassi asked me to make sure you received this from LSA. You may have already received this information from Maria. Paul Kielhold 1. Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub habitat - if this habitat is found to be occupied by the San Bernazdino kangaroo rat (SBKR) then impacts to this plant community would be considered significant and would need to be mitigated. The trapping survey found SBKR not to be present. Mitigation is not required for RAFSS. [Mitigation would be accomplished by pwchasing credits, in the Cajon Creek Conservation Bank. In 2003 the cost per credit (I credit equals 1 acre) was $30,000. More recently we have heard the cost has risen to $45,000 to $50,000 per credit. This number does not come from the mitigation bank itself, but I have a call out to verify the current number. The mitigation ratio likely to be required by the regulatory agencies is 3:1 .~a (3 acres of mitigation for every 1 acre of impacts). With.approximately 22 ~ acres of this habitat type on-site this would be about 6 acres of mitigation.] 2. Burrowing owl - Low potential to be present. Pre-construction survey typically required prior to ground disturbance. A bwrowing owl pre-construction survey would also need to be done no more than 30 days prior to the initiation of ground distwbing activities. 3. Spineflower - No suitable habitat and no plants present. No mitigation required. 4. Jurisdictional waters -off site mitigation ratios typically start at 3:1. Cun•ently the cost of off-site mitigation credits is about $50,000 per acre through SAWA. CDFG jurisdictional azea totals 0.6 J acres and ACOE is 0.2 acre that would require mitigation. RAFSS is not ripazian vegetation per CDFG definition. -`` -~~~ 5. San Bernardino Kangazoo Rat. A focused survey was conducted on the project site. SBKR was found to be absent. No mitigation required. The surveys for the SBKR can be done anytime of the yeaz, although the agencies will consider the survey valid for only one yeaz. TABLE B: Potential Jurisdictional Areas (Acres) Revised /CDFG ACOE Drainage Linear Feet Stream bed Riparian Vegetation Wetland Non- wetland East Etiwanda Creek Channel 907 0.32 0 0 0.04 Foothill Boulevard Drainage Ditch 608 0.24 0.04 0.16 0 Total 1,51 0.60 acre 0.20 acre The next subject I wish to discuss this evening is in regards to redevelopment in relation to this project. Now I understand that you `the council' also sit on the board for the redevelopment agency and in actuality aze `the agency'. That as `the agency' you~have already approved of a $40.7Million dollar loan for this project, that happening over two years ago (Sept.1,2005). I also understand that $8.3 Million dollars has already been released to Northtown Housing Development Corp. To acquire the parcel of land as well as to reimburse Northtown for `pre development' expenses. Further it is my understanding that Northtown receives a "Developer Fee" of $2.5 Million dollars for doing this project, something that no private developer is entitled to from tax payer monies. Finally, and this is my favorite part, I understand that the total loan commitment of $40.7 Million dollars IS AT 1% SIMPLE INTEREST FOR 75 YEARS! First off, how can we, the people, truly expect any type of fair judgement in regards this hearing and the ultimate decision of you `the council', since you `the agency' has already approved of the initial funding for this project, which would seem to imply that you are strongly in favor of this project. It really seems quite ridiculous to me that after approving this project two years ago and releasing huge sums of monies so the developer could move forward, that naw, you would use a fair an unbiased judgement in the decision making process of this appeal. I would think it much more fair to have another governing body or outside agency to be making the decision on this hearing. Secondly, that's a lot of money, and I don't simply mean in terms of what you `the council' and you 'the agency' are used to throwing around, your budgets are huge. I simply mean in regards to this project and what your getting for the buck. Let's quickly compare. NHDC: San Servaine Villas $40.7 Million redevelopment dollars - 225 Units /Credit for 110 Units $370,000.00 per Unit LINC: Pepperwood Apts. $18.5 Million redevelopment dollars - 276 Units /Credit for 276 Units $67,029.00 per Unit SCHDC: Woodhaven Manor $9 Million redevelopment dollars - 117 Units /Credit for 58 $155,172.00 per Unit As you can see, the San Servaine Villas project is at least two times the cost eD i Unit for which the city will be receiving credit from the state. It is obviously just a waste of redevelopment funds. Thirdly, This project does not lie within the `Redevelopment Project Area.' As stated in your 2005 / 2006 Annual Report for the R.C. Redevelopment Agency (pg. 3), "Through the establishment of a Redevelopment Project Area, the Agency is able to use special legal and financial mechanisms to eliminate blight and improve the economic and physical conditions in designated areas of the cites"This is not in the `Project Area' and will not improve the economic and physical condition in the designated area of the city. Therefore, you have no right to use redevelopment monies for this project unless, perhaps, you move this project to within the `Redevelopment Project Area' of the city. The whole idea of Redevelopment is to `Redevelop an area that needs redevelopment, hence the `Redevelopment Project Area' which this project is not a part of . Finally, this project has no right to utilization of redevelopment funds, should by no means be approved by you `the council', and unless can be funded independently of the Redevelopment Agency should be abandoned immediately. As stated in the R.C. Redevelopment Agencies Annual Report 2005 / 2006 (pg. 3), "In 1981, the Rancho Cucamonga City Council established the Redevelopment Agency (Agency) in order to alleviate blight and development barriers in the City." Further in Section IV of that same report (pg. 28), in stating goals of the Agency, "...other projects will be considered as they relate to the overall goals set forth in the Redevelopment Plan, which include: Protect and promote the sound development and redevelopment of blight as defined in Section 33030 through 33032 of the California Health and Safety Code:" My friends, please read the code. This in all accounts fails to meet even one of the criteria set forth in the Health and Safety Code in it's description of blight. Let me highlight a few for you. Section 33030 (b) "A blighted area is one that contains both of the following: (1) "...an area in which the combination of conditions set forth in Section 33031 is so prevalent and so substantial that it causes a reduction of, or lack of, proper utilization of the area to such an extent that it constitutes a serious physical and economic burden on the community that can not reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private enterprise or governmental action, or both, without redevelopment." (2)"An area that is characterized by one or more conditions set forth in any paragraph of subdivision (a) of Section 33031 and one or more conditions set forth in any pazagraph of subdivision (b) of Section 33031." I have been through this code several times and I can not find even one condition that would justify this proposed project as qualifying as a blighted area which would require redevelopment which would require redevelopment funds. I challenge `the Agency' or `the Council' to show myself as well as the public, proof, beyond a questionable doubt, or for that matter, any proof, that this is a blighted area and that this blighted area constitutes a serious physical and economic burden on the community. In actually, this is not a redevelopment of a blighted area, this is... a Development of a Ten Thousand year old River Bed. Thank you Joseph Sibree c~~Y My name is Kenneth Van Horn, I live at 13050 Chestnut Ave , R.C. page 1 of 2 I am opposed to the San Sevaine Villas, ( show signed mitigation ) The Nothtown Housing Authority Corporation was aware as of July 16-2007 of the required environmental mitigation for the San Sevaine Villas project, yet they aloud the Foothill Boulevazd Storm Drain project to go forth as of Nov. 08 2007 with out the mandated mitigation required on the properly. (show daily inspection report ) ( show pit's) Per Paul from the Northtown Housing Authority Corporation, said they gave permission for construction equipment to be pazked on their property; this can't be accurate, what is being aloud is; storing of excavated soil, grading, they cut two pathways into the streambed, this to installed a 120 inch storm drain in Foothill Boulevard While the Storm drain Project was determined by the engineering staff to be categorically exempt per, article 19 section 15301(c) of the CEQA guidelines, that does not exempt the work or activities on there private property. Per the general provisions of the County of San Bernazdino Department of Public Works, (Show general provision info. ) I quote Item 15, This permit is only valid to the extent of the flood control district jurisdiction. Permits or other approvals required by other cognizant agencies or underlying fee owners of district easements land shall be the responsibility of the permittee. I quote item 25 also: Unless otherwise specified herein this permittee is subject to all prior permits, agreements, easement privileges or other rights, whether recorded or unrecorded, in the azea specified in this permit. Permittee shall make his own arrangements with holders of such prior rights. Here's a break down of some of San Sevaine Villas prior required mitigation measures: ( show mitigation monitoring program ) Air Quality, 14 mitigation measures such as; no work aloud if wind exceeds 25 mph (Show wind picture) Weather report states guests to 45 mph Biological, 7 mitigation measures for State and Federal listed plant and animal species Cultural resources 2 mitigation measures for azcheology and paleontology resources Geology, 4 mitigation measures Hydrology, 4 mitigation measures Post-construction operational 4 mitigation measures Noise 5 mitigation measures such as, construction and grading monitoring There are at least 5 state and county entities requiring submittals or requiring them to fallow there guidelines Show code section 65584(d)(2) Per California affordable housing code section 65584(d)(2) it says, the regional housing needs allocation plan shall be consistent with the protection of environmental and agricultural recourses. Page 2 of 2 Due to the mitigation measures that were not employed, many endangered state and federal species and their habitats were possibly destroyed. We can never know now, damage is already done, who can put a price on that. Our appeal stated many environmental issues and now the site has been permanently Damaged. Northtown housing gave the contractor permission to be on their property, they could have informed the contractor of the mitigation measures. They could have informed the city engineering department of the mitigation but did not. I have examined the storm drain job file with the assistant engineer, reviewed the plans and reviewed the contract documents. There are no mitigation measures to be found. In my opinion in light of these State, Federal and city violations the Northtown Housing Development Corporations "San Savaine Villas" project should not be approved. THESE ITEMS WERE IN THE APPEAL BUT NOT ADDRESS We asked: 1 Why hasn't Rancho Cucamonga kept up on affordable housing? The planning commission said they allotted land for this use years ago, they have know since the 80's they needed affordable housing. The mazket did not take caze of it self either as stated, you still had to go by the counties median income, that means you still needed affordable housing. 2. The air quality was addressed as far as this projects impacts; however that was not the focus off the issue. The focus is the air quality currently and most importantly the fact that there is lead and cadmium in the air, the amount is unknown but is know to be there. Affordable housing must meet health and safety requirements. Lead and cadmium also settle into the soil, this must be tested as well. 3. The Job site was called out as a Low Fire hazard zone, but this is a very high fire hazard zone per Oct 18, 2006 Rancho Cucamonga Fire District review comments, it is also in a high wind area, gusts up 60, 70, 80 mph 4. Decreased building separations and a high fire hazard increase risk The NFPA fire sprinkler systems were designed and test under normal conditions; therefore in our opinion sprinkler mitigation is not sufficient 5. We asked will the developer pay the mitigated School district fees and be community friendly, or the unmitigated fees that will not provide the necessary school facilities? 6. We asked why don't you plan smaller affordable apartment complexes on more plentiful smaller lots? 7. We asked, If the moderate rate units don't rent out, will they rent them to low income, if so what brackets? 8. The Edison power line corridor is a place that crime occurs in, how will you permanently secure it? 9. Fontana police will no longer respond to home alarm systems after this yeaz. How will you provide security for the surrounding neighborhoods? 10. Planning told us they have to use the density bonus, show us the law that says you have to use it. 11. Noise -This project will increase traffic by 1391-vehical trips a day, Our noise level is way above standard ah~eady. Mitigation was addressed for the project site but not our neighborhood. 12. Pedestrian access to the future Garcia Pazk not addressed. 13. Traffic studies aze still not complete. The city only checked afternoon peak traffic at foothill, Cornwall and chestnut, this showed 82 % of vehicles that came into our neighborhood were using it as a buy pass. They need to perform am peak traffic studies as well. 14. Traffic North on East Ave. near the freeway needs to be studied; this traffic is out of control. This project will add 1391 more vehicle trips, improvements to that area not to start till after 2010, that would be after these apartments are built. SPEECH CITY COUNCIL Betty Wanner (909) 899-8707 My name is Betty Wanner I live at 13022 Vine Street, Rancho Cucamonga I have lived in this neighborhood 25 years. I am opposed to the San Sevaine Villas -Affordable Apartments My backyard backs up to Foothill Boulevard. This is a constant source of traffic noise. Traffic accidents are more frequent now with all of our completed developments (Wal-Mart, the new renovation to the Catholic Church and the new development directly across the street- Amador Condos. At times I feel like a prisoner. I have been late for work or rescheduled an errand because of a traffic jam. When an accident occurs on Etiwanda our neighborhood becomes a drive thru to Foothill. So getting out of my cul-de- sac becomes a challenge. The same is true when an accident occurs on Foothill with one exception. When individuals try to beat the traffic and are unfamiliar with the area they think Vine St. goes straight through to Etiwanda. We had a near miss one year when a child was playing at the end of the cul-de-sac. We have no sidewalks. It should have been safe. A truck raced down the cul-de-sac thinking it went through to Etiwanda because of an accident tying up Foothill. If the child was not pulled away in time she would have been hurt. The driver also endangered himself and barely got the truck stopped before he would of hit the end of the curb. At the speed he was traveling it could have been another ambulance call. Signs cannot be seen and people are in a hurry. My husband has repeatedly had to yell at individuals to slow down in front of our house. The residential area I live in cannot accommodate the additional traffic. Even the bus drops off students at a location that is currently risky at best and could turn potentially dangerous with one unforeseen accident at Etiwanda and Foothill. Just the fact that the new project has all the openings facing Foothill will create frequent u turns. Definitely a potential for more accidents. Study the traffic flow and the number of U- turns on any Sunday where the Catholic Church patrons and the Wal-Mart patrons- all competing for space coming or going from their destination. It can be chaotic not to mention scary. I hope you take my fears into consideration. I feel the proposed apartment complex is too big. The foot and vehicle traffic will impact my little street as well as the rest of the neighborhood. Our little residential area did not foresee the need fora 40 miles hr. drive thru on Chestnut to Cornwall, the speed limit 25 miles an hour. The city apparently does not feel we need speed limit signs or stop signs. Please relocate, downsize or change the entries and exits for this project. Thank you for your time. To: Mayor, City Council Members, City Treasurer, City Clerk and Serener Planner. 12/05/07 From: Angie Avila The community along Etiwanda Avenue and Foothill Boulevard is one of Rancho Cucamonga's oldest communities. It is the eastem gateway to The City of Rancho Cucamonga. It was once known as Etiwanda. The homes were built in the 50's. Phase II was completed in the early 60's. Residents purchased their low priced homes the old fashion way through good credit and a down payment. For years, the homeownership of our neighborhood was up to 100%. Some community residents worked locely as did retired Sheriff George Martin. Others worked as nurses at Kaiser Hospital as did Mrs. Hope. Sharon Eisenman worked for Lucas Real Estate Company. Other residents commuted to Los Angeles County for work and entertainment The trade off was good as the community enjoyed an outstanding school system, the chaparral, horseback riding, vineyards and groves of orenge and Eucalyptus trees. Sheepherders grazed their flocks next to the groves of Eucalyptus trees. The warm Santa Ana winds qme around like clockwork each year. As they swayed in the wind, the eucalyptus trees perfumed the entire neighborhood. Gone are the vineyards and groves. In their place are jails, factories and noisy industrial traffic. The City of Rancho Cucamonga lists todays population at 147,000. In the 70's the population was approximately 5,000. What does remain within the neighborhood is its 50's infrastructure. The City of Rancho Cucamonga targeted Etiwanda and used some of its lands for large developments. These large developments have resulted in negative impact to our neighborhood. Along with this, the city failed to provide an adequate infrastructure. This resulted in loss of community identity. The lack of infrastructure opened the door for loss of homeownership, and it opened the door for rental properties within the community. The community embraces neighbors that rent, and wants them to have homeownership as well. The neighborhood also embraces its new Spanish-speaking population and their aging populations of long time residents. The community has a rich treasured heritage. Our neighborhood has some of Rancho Cucamonga's long time residents of 50, 40, 30, 20, and 10 years. Sharon Eisenman is an honored - 50-year resident. She raised the down payment for her home by working for Lucas Really. Her job was to mow the lawns and clean the interior of the tract's three model homes located on the corner of Cornwall Avenue. Prior to that, her mother purchased the first home within the trail. George Martin is a retired sheriff and adored thirty-year resident. The list of long time resident is extensive. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has taken advantage of the neighborhoods aging population, Spanish-speaking residents and its lower priced homeownership. It has systematicaly discriminated against the community by placing large negative impact developments and failing to provide the infrastructure for an aging and Spanish-speaking population that is not readily able to exercise their rights. I oppose the San Sevaine villas and bonus density agreement The development is too large. This Eastern Gateway community to the illy of Rancho Cucamonga does not have he infrastructure to support another high<lensity project. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has not been indusive of its eastern gateway residents. -------Blessed are the peacemakers Mt 5:9------ To: Mayor, City Council Members, City Treasurer, City Clerk and Senior ~uosio~ Planner TRANSLATION My name is Manuel Rodriguez. I reside at 13059 Vine Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga. My family and I have been homeowner's for 14 years at this residence. I oppose the San Sevaine Villas #DRC2006-00540 and Bonus Density #DRC2007-00199. The development is too large. First: Some of my Spanish-speaking neighbors did not know this three story apartment "low rent housing project" of 225 units was going to be built. The notices we received were written in English. If not for our bilingual neighbors, we would not know about the project. Our neighbors put out notices in English and Spanish, because they care about all residents within our community. I am a citizen of this city and yet unable to voice my opinion to the city planning or council. I feel my rights have been violated. My concerns are: Foothill traffic is already imposing on the safety of our neighborhood. I have 3 children ages 14, 12 and 7. Every morning I walk my children to the school bus stop. This is located on the corner of Vine Street and Cornwall Avenue. I have to protect them from cars racing through our neighborhood, as we do not have sidewalks. Drivers race through the neighborhood to avoid stopping at the Etiwanda Avenue traffic light. I understand this apartment complex will bring in an additional 1,372 vehicle trips into my neighborhood. We do not have speed limit and school bus stop signs or speed bumps. How long before a child is run over? I am also concerned about the pedestrian traffic that will come through our neighborhood as a result of this complex. I know this apartment complex would not allow loitering within its complex. I feel the San Sevaine Villa residents will loiter in my neighborhood. How will you guarahtee the security in my neighborhood from disruptive activities generated by San Sevaine Villas residents? I am concerned for the safety of my children. Another concern is the ever-rising noise levels. Foothill Boulevard is north of my street. Additional vehicular noise as well as pedestrian noise will impact us. These new residents will walk to the bus stop and stores near Etiwanda Avenue. We need block walls now as the noise level is too much already. Block walls are also needed to stop cars from crashing into my neighbor's yard as one did last month. Again, I oppose the San Sevaine Villas. The development is too large. The LORD bless you and keep you... Numbers 6:24 Para: Mayor, City Council Members, City Treasurer, City Clerk y Senior itiosio~ Planner Mi Hombre es Manuel Rodriguez. Vivo en la Avenida de 13059 Vine, Rancho Cucamonga. Por 14 anos, yo y mi familia somos Buenos de nuestro hogar. Opongo el desarollo San Sevaine Villas #DRC2006-00540 y el Bonus Density #DRC2007-00199. EI desarrollo es demasiado grande. Primero: Algunos de mis vecinos que hablan espar5ol no sabian que 225 apartamentos economicos del gobierno de tres pisos iban ser construidos. Los avisos que recibimos fueron escritos en ingles. Si no fuera por nuestros vecinos bilingiies nunca hubi~ramos sabido de este desarrollo. Nuestros vecinos dieron avisos en ingl~s y espa~iol porque ellos se preocupan por todos los residentes de nuestra comunidad. Soy ciudadano de esta ciudad y aun incapaz de expresar mi opini6n al departamento de urbanismo o a ustedes las 5 personsas electadas pare el consejo de la ciudad. Siento que mis derechos han sido violado. Mis preocupaciones son: EI tri3fico de Foothill Boulevard ya es peligroso para la seguridad de nuestra comunidad. Tengo tres hijos de anos 14, 12 y 7. Cada dia en Camino a mis hijos al autobus escolar que esta localizado en la esquina de las Calles de Vine y Cornwall. Tengo que protegerlos de coches que corren por nuestra comunidad. No tenemos ningunas aceras. Los coches corren por nuestra comunidad para evitar de pararse de la luz en la Avenida Etiwanda. Entiendo que este edificio de apartamentos hard entrar unos 1,372 viajes de vehiculo adicionales en nuestra comunidad. No tenemos ningunos signos de limite de velocidad, ningunos signos de parada de autobus escolares o ningunas tope de frenado. ~Cu~nto antes de que un niRo sea atropellado? Tambien estoy preocupada del trafico de pie que vendra a consecuencia de estos apartamentos. S~ que este ed~cio de apartamentos no permitiria vagar dentro de su complejo y siento que ellos van a vagar en mi vecindad. LComo garantizar~ usted la seguridad en mi vecindad de actividades perjudiciales generadas por residentes de San Sevaine Villas? Estoy preocupada por la seguridad de mis Winos. Otra preocupacibn es el crecimiento de ruido de trafico. Foothill Blvd esta al norte de mi hogar en la Avenida Vine. Somos afectados por el crecimiento de ruido de pie y ruido de coches. Con los apartamento del govierno, mas personas van a caminar a la pa~ada de autobus y tiendas cercas de la Avenida Etiwanda. EI ruido de trafico ya es demasiado. Tenemos que liloquear Paredes ahora para el ruido y nuestra seguridad.Tenemos que parar autos de chocar contra yardas de nuestors vecinos Como el auto que choco el mes pazado. Opongo a los apartamentos San Sevaine Villas. EI desarrollo es demasiado grande. The LORD bless you and keep you... Numbers 6:24 cirr cl~tIF41~ci~c ~;~cQ~~1r~~r~N. November 6, 2007 '',~~P 13 4 ~- '' ~L~~ 6~ Rancho Cucamonga Cih~ Hall t~ ~n E r-, ,_ ,q.,_.. !~~`to L.~,IL I? i~f_ni~,t~l ~~,~. Attention: Mayor: Dr. Donald.J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem: Diane Williams City Council Members: Res Gutierrez, L. Dennis Michael, Sam Spagnolo City Clerk: Debra Adams City Treasurer: James Frost Senior Planner: Michael Diaz 10500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 (909) 477-2750 Re; Szn Ser•.~sine Villas Beve!opmcat DRC2006-00540 and ^uensiiy Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199 Dear Mayor, City Council Members; City Planners, and Clerk: My name is Michael Brown. My wife. Jennifer, and my two young daughters live at 12996 Chestnut Ave. in Rancho Cucamonga. I have lived in this area for two years and I oppose the San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007- 00199. When my wife and I seazched for a place to live near my job in Upland, CA I focused on Rancho Cucamonga due to the many positive things I have heard about it. Rancho Cucamonga had the appearance of a family based, up and growing city; however 1 have seen a different side of the city since I moved here in October 2005. 1 wished 1 had known more information about the city I was purchasing in because it did not match the image portrayed to me by others. Each day I watch numerous cars use my street as a bypass to escape traffic at Etiwanda and Foothill Blvd. Many of these cars travel at speeds well above the speed limit. This is permitted through the lack of stop signs, speed bumps, and police patrolling on this route. My children have to play in the back yard because of the lack of sidewalks and the hazards this street poses. I have had a man arrested for beating up his girlfriend on my front ]awn. removed graffiti off my brick walls, and watch many families travel with young children in the streets because there is no other way to travel on foot down the avenue in a safe manner. My occupation allows me the freedom to choose my area of residence, however I would have reconsidered Rancho Cucamonga had I known the placement of the jail and how you release prisoners on foot from this nearby location as well as the low air quality as a result of the poor standards local factories are held to. Afrer reviewing the current city council's track record it is apparent to me that this is a council that likes to espand the city and build, however in the enact words of one of the top ranking city officials of Rancho Cucamonga, "Rancho Cucamonga has forgotten about this portion of the city. " 1 am not a person desiring to live in an "exelusive~' area. ]n fact, this is why 1 moved from my former area of residence to Rancho Cucamonga so that my children could grow up in a culture more symbolic of the cultural diversiq~ this state is made up of. Therefore, [challenge you not to stop expansion and grov`rth of the city, but to develop the city in a fair and logical mamter that will be of benefit to all of its residents. Prove to me that you have not forgotten about this portion of the city by improving this area in the same proportions that you are improving the rest of this city. Every city has its areas of concern; however it appears to me that you are making up for lost time and therefore making rash decisions at the expense of the residents of this area. We have a great amount of negative impact that is a6~eady affecting this area, and I question why you have not spread the negative impact out across the city so that it has minimal impact on the majority of its residents. As recent national surveys demonstrated, Kancho Cucamonga is lower on the safe-living scale than neighboring cities (Chino Hills, for example). This demonstrates that this needs to be an area of focus for Rancho Cucamonga. Please take a look at the impact you have already placed upon this area, and distribute the burden. Prom records on file at City Hall, it appears that you have several low income housing units, but the percentages are not consistent from one housing complex to another. In summary, I ask for the following for the residents of our area: 1. Improve safety for our children and those who live here. Give them a safe place to play, walk, and [ravel to school without the constant threat of speeding cars, speeding traffic, questionab]e visitors, and loud noises. 2. Expand the affordab]e housing project in a fair and reasonable manner throughout the city. It is very obvious which areas of the city are given preferential treatment and what builders you hold to higher standards and those in which you look the other way towards. 3. When building the affordable housing please take the current residents into consideration. Like many things in city life this is a revenue related project and it is a portion of our tax _ money that contributes to these projects. We elected many of you into office to support our community not work against us: Respectfully, ,; _ \ ~ i%'',~ i ~' ~~~ ~ichael Brotvn 12996 Chestnut Ave. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 909-899- ] 461 i SAN SEVAINE VILLAS DRC2006-00540 • DRC2007-00119 APPEAL PUBLIC COMMENTS LETTERS • OPPOSED TO PROJECT petition to block the proposed development of a 225 apt. Facility at 13233 Foothill Blvd. Rancho Cucamonga fhe undersigned persons below indicate their opposition to the _= Northtown Housing Development Proposed at 13233 Foothill Blvd. 1 Name~Please Print) Address Phone# Signature ~ IV®V 27 2007 RECEIVED - pl_Ahlruif,~c This is a petition to block the proposed developmerit of a 225 apt. Facility at 13233 Foothill Blvd. Rancho Cucamonga The undersigned persons below indicate their opposition to the Northtown Housing Development Proposed at 13233 Foothill Blvd. Name(Please Prir;t> Address Phone# Signature _. ,-.~.. - ~ ; ~ '"- RECEIVED - rd-Hrv,vuwu This is a petition to blockthe proposed development of a 225 apt. Facility at 13233 Foothill Blvd. Rancho Cucamonga The undersigned persons below indicate their opposition to the Northtown Housing Development Proposed at 1'3233 Foothill Blvd. Name~Please Print) Address Phone# Signature ~ ~~- A Gov 2 ~ zooa Indicate an individual willing to volunteer some time with~eGa~V~er c~~~l~~beside his or her name 11-14-07 No On "San Sevaine Villas" oxc zoor~oosao RECE9VED To: Mayor Don Kurth,City Council, Head planner Mike Diaz and City ClerkOV 1 `' ~~ City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91729 ~ '~C2~-. I am a disabled homeowner living in the Foothill / Etiwanda homes. This housing development was built in 1956; at that time there was no commerce to access and no traffic. Now that I am confined to a wheel chair I am unable to leave my home safely. There are no sidewalks along Etiwanda blvd. and Foothill blvd. There is no way for a citizen in a wheel chair to cross Etiwanda Ave with out going in the street. There is no way to go down Foothill blvd. without taking your life in your hands Because this is slow-income complex many people will not have transportation and will walk. The proposed disabled citizens of this apartment complex will have to pass by our neighborhood also. I don't think some will make it, I feaz they will be run over. Caz drivers don't pay any attenfion a~ more, they veer off the road while talking on cell - phones and with no curbs, we will get hit. I cannot believe this city council is considering building yet another apartment' complex. I always thought of Rancho Cucamonga as a suburb, now it is looking like an over developed big city. The vineyazds are all but gone, if you try had you might find a patch; they would be located behind the "notice of filing" signs. With all the unwanted commercial developments and a prison down the street, this city has imported crime and transients atl around our neighborhood. My home was invaded not so long ago and still no protection. I understand some of these buildings will _ be three story, you would not like someone coming and building that in you back yazd. My neighbors were here first; you have no right taking away our privacy and safety. This city needs to keep its last remaining open spaces, some memory of the way things were, like our neighborhood! Respectfully, CITY OF RAfVCHO CUCAAC~IONGA CITY CLERK 0.v ~ ~k ~ ~ ~~~~~ Cam. ~'' (I3`~ • • ... • C (_. 1 arK1,3rn ~~I{a-Yima~l H~ati•,AI~!-~ ~~T~ • Date 11-13-2007 To: Rancho Cucamonga Mayor, City Council, Mike Diaz and City ClerkR'ECEIVED City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive NOV 14 2001 Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91729 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ClIY CLERK My oposiHon to the San Sevaine Villas DRC 2006-00540 I am wondering what groups like "The Americans with Disabilities Act" or "The Disability Rights Legal Center" would say about the Accessible Public Rights-of-Way for the San Sevaine Villas? Just try and get to a public bus stop along Fcothill Boulevard in a wheel chair let alone a store west of Etiwanda Blvd. Dirt and gravel streets, no sidewalks or curbs for protection. I see senior citizens trying to negotiate there way around Foothill and Etiwanda "Disgraceful"! If you happen to make it to the bus stop on Foothill Boulevazd with out getting run over by a caz or truck you're lucky. You sit out there vulnerable in the dust and dirt, no shelter from the weather, no bench for people to sit on. All the graffiti does not make one feel anymore secure either. Would you tell me how a disabled high school student will make his/her way to school from this complex? Let me, you have to cross East Street at least three times due to lack of sidewalks, and when there is no sidewalk you must go in the street. You ever try' and be seen by a car on the road in a wheel chair? Did I mention no crosswalks? It seems to me that this proposed San Sevaine Villas affordable apartment complex would have a huge number oflow-income tenants, most disable people I know would fit in that category. This proposed Apartment complex would put to much stress our community. We are overburdened as it is and need capitol improvements now. I have never seen any residential neighborhood survive after slow-income apartmentcomplex is built in its path. Plan on budgeting a lot more money into the counties sheriff patrols because there will be a lot more service calls out here. I have attached a photo of the so-called Accessible Public Rights-of Way. Treat my neighborhood with respect, Foothill/Etiwanda Resident ~.~~~~ ~~ ~~~ r- • `J • (,. ~~~ -~ /j. ,; „~ Rancho Cucamonga City Hall. >' Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, ' Clerk and Senior Planner ;~`• P.O. Box 807 ' Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Cleric and Senior Planner. . My name is live at ~ y311 a ~j~,lD~c-Q ~ ~dY)fQnp-~ Number Street cny I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies for City Comcil Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex Gutiertez Council Member L Dennis Michael Counal Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk lames Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magn'lttfde. . San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This targe,project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons 1 oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10 Crime Devaluation of Surrounding Properties Overcrowded Schools Traffic_ Air Pollution Extinction of Wildlife .Noise Pollution C1i~ OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P. ~ ! _ ~> 2007 - . Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Densit}i Bonus Agreement DRC200 -00199. Signa re ~~aola'7 Date • You are the Itght of the world A city that on a hell cannot be hidden Mt s:ta i ~ ~ r-'~., {{ _ 1 _ f~ '~ Rancho Cucamonga City Hall %' Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner f, ~ P.O. Box 807 . Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. . My name is n 1C,G`lw I live at `~\\'\ S-c\~4~~ Number . .. Street ~=t'~ 1 U City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. • The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevairie Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area: -Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties ' 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution C! r Y Gr= i~AVCHO CUCAMONGA Attentim: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Seaior Flamer: Rex Gutiettez _ Council Member L Dennis Michael ' Counril Metrtber Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debts Adams city clerk James Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner ~iQ~, ~~ ZOQ7 A sin, I oppose San ev ine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus A eme DRC2007 9. \SignatU e ~?~~01 _ Date .. • ,. You are the Itght of the world. A city that on a htll cannot be hidden Mt s:ta ' ' ~; ,-- ~~ r~ ii: %.'~ Rancho Cucamonga City Hall ' ~;f Attention: Mayor, City Council Members,. ,• Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. . My name is I live at Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2008-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. . Attention: Please make copies for Cily Council Members, Clerlt and Senior Plam~er: - Rex Gutierrez Council Member L Drams Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debts Adams city clerk James Frost ' City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Plaaaer The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fk into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story • dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure _ 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties "`~ `'~'~ hA~d°''~~ CE;CAMONGA 6. Overcrowded.Schools 7. Traffic r~.; ~',l ~ ;~ %Gt1l' 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife Is;-~ i;~;-~ - rL~Uril~~ 10. Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine"Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus A reement DRC2007-00199. Sig-n~tu e~ Dat ~ • You are the light of the world. A city that on a htll cannot be hidden. Mrs:ta ... "/f ~ I~ ;~' .Rancho Cucamonga City Hall ' L' Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, ;~ Clerk and Senior Planner ~' P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. My name is I. live at ~ a ~ ~ ~l ~ Number Stree City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and. Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Pleau make copies for City Comd Members, Clerk and Senior Flamer; Rez Gutiersez Council Member !.. Deanis MicharJ Council Member Sam Spagnolo Counril Member Debra Adams city Clerk James Frost City Treasurer Mike Diai Senior Planner U The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. _ ---. . San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unft rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area.. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the communiiy that consists of single and two-story dwellings: • Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties CITY 0~ RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic Pd 0'd 2 3 200 .. 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife ~: f,'l;~r~ - P!.rh~INIPIG 10. Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DR~C2~007-00199. '/ rSignat re ~l;~lv~ Date - ~ •._ You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta ~.. .. . (J,/J j /f/: J. 7 ,.•'• r- u r^ Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 ~' Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Cleric and Senior Planner. My name is I live at I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 aril Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. . Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex Gutiertez Coundl Member L Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams city Clerk James Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication.of Community.identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure • 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA _ _... N 0'1 ? =~ 2007 RFC~i~iFO _ PLAP,NING Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agre~rle~lt DRC2007-00199? e Signature ~~ n ~ _ D Date i ~(/ You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden Mt s:ia . .. ti r ,~ i~'~ Rancho Cucamonga City Hall '~ Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner j' P.O. Box 807 ' Rancho Cucamonga, CA 97729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. . My name is e.. live at Z~~ . ~~ti, ~~ e,~,.~ Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: please make copies ror (Sty Comcil Members, Clerk and Senior Planner; Ilea Gutierrez .. Couneil Member L Denis Michael Counril Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams city clerk James Frost City Treasurer MHte Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10. Noise Pollution CITY OF RANCHU Ct1CAMt1NG H il'J ? ~ ~ ?007 r~~~1'!iJ - F~ pNN{Nu Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agr a ent DRC2007-00199. Si nat a/i psi ~ ~ Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta ~' u • Y~ ~ ~ ~~ i ~'' I~~ j~ Rancho Cucamonga City Hall ji' Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner ~'• P.O. Box 807 ' Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 • Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council M ~ tiers: Cleric and Senior Planner. . My name is I live at Number I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7.. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution ~J CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fk into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies for City Coundl Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rea Gutierrez Countil Member L Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City clerk J Frost Treasurer Mike Diaz SeviorPlanner N 0'J 1 ~= 2007 R.r,.1'/=U -PLANNING Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agr ment DRC200 -00199. ure _ Date ' You are the light of the world. A city that on a hell cannot be hidden. Mt s:la _: :: . 1 ' / /' ~' ~.~ ,i ,j Rancho Cucamonga City Hall !>' Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, <` Clerk and Senior Planner r° P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tern Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk any{ Senior Planner: . My name is I live at Number Street I oppose the.San Sevaine.Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. . CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of unRs up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this'three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. - ' Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1.. The development is too large: 225 2. Eradication of Community identity 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime units on a small area Three story building 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution • Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex Gutienez Council Member L Demus Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk James Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner N O ~~ ? ~I 2007 Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus •._ You are the Ilght of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta :: ~f ,: ~~! t/ i) !; J.`• • i I l Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 ~_.. Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council M"e~mbers, Clerk and Senior Planner. . My name is if(Ja/11 S z ~~~If-.it P,t'-5 r live at ~t~1 ~~1,•~ ~ • ~ ~.~ ~ ~ • /~~ ~"L~iWt~ Number Street Cgy I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies for City Comcil Members, Clerlt and Senior Flamer: Rez Gutierrez ~ . . Council Member L Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member ~>a Adams City Clerk lames Frost City Treasurer M~lte Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime CI7Y OF RANCNQ CUCAM~NGA 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic N p ~j t ;i 200? 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife R~;~PIcD - PLANNING 10. Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Date ' ' • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hell cannot be hidden. Mt s:ia di ,, ;l Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner ~' P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. . My name is I live at ~1'Y'3 J Number City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. . Attention: Please make copies for City Comd Members, Clerk and Senior Flamer: Rex Gutierrez Council Member L Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City clerk James Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic td 0 V 7 ca ?007 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife R~~.1'!.D -.PLANNING 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. ~__ _ .!l1 _ ,f tom,/--'~/-z -~C Signatufe' 9-:?oz~7 Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden Mt 5:14 .;,,. • • • i-• i . ( 1 !,1 .; ;' i Rancho Cucamonga City Hall _ i;' Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner j P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Cleric and Senior Planner. . My name is I live at ~•. Number .Street • City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. AttenBon: Please make copies for Cary Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner; Rex Gudemz Cowcil Member L Dennis Michael Counril Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams city cleric James Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz., ,. . Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fR into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. - Following are some of the reasons I oppose the-San Sevaine Villas developmen_ t DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10. Noise Pollution • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • NOV 1 ~ 2007 R=C.1'/cD -PLANNING Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreeme t DRC2007-00199. Signatur i~ ~~~ ~~ Date `~ _ .. You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden not s:ia t / %/ is Rancho Cucamonga City Hall , ' Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, ~-~ Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 - Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. . My name is _~ live at ~ ~ _._._ Number City " I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies for City Comcil Members, Clerk end Senior Planner: Rex Gudertez Council Member L Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk James Fros[ City Treasurer Mike Diaz senior planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density-Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic NO'1 1_ ~ Z0~7 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife R~ ;'r!'J-O - P! ANNlNG 10.Noise Pollution ` Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Date y, You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden Mf s:ta .. I~ • L~~ ~i .--5 ,,~ L' ~~ ' f% ~• ~ Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, .• Clerk and Senior Planner r P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. My name is ~~-~t I~~~ Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk end Senior Planner: Rex Gutierrez Council Member L Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk James Frost - City Treasurer Mike Diaz SeniorPlamtcr . live at 3300 !) IQv lllrr~tt-i ba(~ 11'/s.,~„(n ,e~ d~,..~W~~a Number Street Cgy I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude.. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height oh a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identRy of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are. some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime. 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9: Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution • NOl! 1 v 2007 RG ~=1'/=0.-PLANNING Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. "" Signature 9- o-o ~ Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden Mt s:ta ':. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA To: Mayor Donald J. Kurth 11/08/07 • Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams Council Members: Sam Spagnola cc: City Clerk L. Dennis Mchael Rex Gutierrez ~~~~~~~~ My name is Joseph Sibree, I live at 5765 Cornwall Ave. R. Cuc., Ca. 91739. NOY ~ g ~ I strongly Oppose the San Servaine Villas Development DRC 2006-0050 and the Density Bonus Agreement DRC 2007-00119. C(TY ~ RAPdCHO CUCAM®NGA CITY CLERIC This is my eighth letter to you and will be by far the shortest. 1 just wanted to send you a copy of the California Constitution Article 1 Declazation of Rights Section 1, instruct you formally that if you allow this project to go forward as proposed you will be violating n:y inalienable rights, In particular my right to protect my property and in this case protecting the value of my property, as this project will have an negative impact on my property value no matter what you say. Secondly, and even more importantly, this development will violate my rights of obtaining safety, happiness and privacy. You are considering approving of a three story apartment building that will be completely adjacent to my home. -This will be a complete invasion of privacy as 1 live in a single story home . with a standard six foot wall in my backyard. I will now have complete strangers able to look into my backyard and livingroom and bedrooms. I was here first. When I bought this home there were no three story apartments next to me to invade my privacy, I would not have bought this home if there were: YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO INVADE MY PRIVACY. We all have rights as individuals. Rights that are stronger than any city code. I don't caze if you Gave built other structures throughout the city of all heights and designs. They did not infringe on my rights as put forth in the Constitution. This development does. I must insist that you must have the developmental standards altered for this project so as not to invade my privacy. Sincerely, ~ Joseph 4sibrde • \J ALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGIiTS SECTION ]. ATl people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable ri ts. Among these are enlOVing ~ and def~n¢irig life and lib,~ty, a uirin possessing, and protectine property, and pursui ~-~ ~ obtaTinine safety, haDDin~etC and np •vacy. CALIEORIVIA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 1 - DECLARATION OF RIGH'T'S SEC. 2. (a) Every person may freely speak, write and publi s or her sentiments.nn all subjects, being responsble for the abuse of this right. A 1 y not restrain or abridge liberty of speech or press. (b) A publishe _ , er, or other~erson conne _. aper, magazine, or other periodical publications or by a press association or wire service, or any person who has been so connected or employed, shall not be adjudged in contempt by a judicial, legislative, or administrative body, or any other body having the power to issue subpoenas, for refusing to disclose the source of any information procured while so connected or employed for publication in a newspaper, magazine or other periodical publication, or for refusing to disclose any unpublished information obtained or _ - _.. prepared in gathering, receivi~ or processing of information for com~u~i anon to the, public. . Nor shall a radio or television ne5vs reporter or other person connected with or employed by a radio or television station, or any person who has been so connected or emp~ed, be so adjudged in contempt for iefusing to disclose the source of any_infonnation procured while so connected or employed for news or news commentary_purposes on radio or televisionLOr for refusing to disclose any unpublished information ob~ned or prepazed in gathering, receiving or processing of information for communication to the public. As used in this subdivision,^'unpublished information" includes information not disseminated to the~ublic by the~erson from whom disclosure is so~ht, whether or not related information has been disseminated and includes, but is • not limited to, all notes, outtakes, photographs, tapes or other dataofwhatever sort not itself ' disseminated to the public through a medium of communication, whether or not published information based upon or related to such material has been disseminated. CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE T DECLARATION OF RIGIITS SEC. 3. (a) The people have the right to instruct their representatives, petition ovenmrent for redress of grievances, and assemble freely to consult for the common good. (b) (1) The people have the ri t o access to information concerning the conduct of the people's business an , t erefore, the meetings of public bodies and the writings of blic cials and agencies shall be o en to ublic scrutiny. (2) A statute, court le or other authority, including those in_ effe_ on __ e e er+ve date o this subdivision, shall be broom construed i£it furthers eople s~n~aht o~_cess and narrowly construed if it limits the right of access: A statute,. court rule, or other..authority ad~ted after the effective date of this subdivision that limits the ri t o~access s be adopted with findings_demonstrat~•nQ the interest protec„Ted by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. (3) Nothing in this subdivision supersedes or modifies the right of privacy guazanteed~ Section 1 or affects the construction of any statute, court rule, or other authority to the extent that it protects that right to privacy, including any statutes-~rocedu_ r~overning disco_er,~or disclosur~f information concerning the official performance or professional qualifications of a peace pflicer. (4) Nothing in this subdivision supersedes or modifies any_provision of this Constitution, including the antees _ that a person m~ not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due~rocess of law, or . denie~equal protection of the laws, as provided in Section 7. (5) This subdivision does_rtot repeal or nulli , expressl~or by implication, andconstitutional or statuto~ exception to the right of access to pubticYegords or meetin s of public bodies that is in effect on the effective date of this subdivision, including, but not limited to~any statute protecting the confidentiality of law • ~-_ r. To: Mayor Donald J. Kurth 11/08/07 • Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams Council Members: Sam Spagnola cc: City Clerk ~~~~~~~~ L. Dennis Michael Rex Gutierrez ~Q~ o My name is Joseph Sibree, I live at 8165 Cornwall Ave. R Cuc., Ca~3~F RA~C~ CUCA~ONGA I strongly Oppose the San Servaine Villas Development DRC 2006-0050 Cf1~Y CLERK and the Density Bonus Agreement DRC 2007-00119. This is my seventh letter to the council in objection to this project. Because of the lack of time I will very quickly state my concerns in regazds to the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the lack of a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that myself along with many of my neighbors feel is absolutely necessary for this development. There are many reasons why a full EIR is necessary for this project, I will briefly state a few of the most relevant. The fast and maybe most important is that this Neg. Dec. is inaccurate, unreliable and I believe has been deliberately altered to cover up and change the facts to the benefit of the developer. This accusation may seem strong.to you but the facts are facts and I have enclosed copies of the changes that I am discussing and how they were altered without justification. Looking at page 12 paragraph 2b of the Neg. Dec. Dated Oct. 25`" 2007and again on page 13 paragraph 3c you will find a discussion of the `jurisdictional waters of the U. S.' and of • `jurisdictional wetlands'. In both these paragraphs reference is made only to a report by LSA Associates dated June 19"', 2007 and the findings of that report. There is no mention of their first report of Oct. 2005 and the findings of that report..When I had enquired at the planning desk in a conversation with ll~ike Diaz if LSA had gone out and done another study in June 2007 for this revised report he stated that they drd not and had only made some revisions to their first report. Please take a look at the attached documentation that I found in the file at the planning desk. First you'll see that LSA's original report Oct. 2005 states in both the Executive Summary and the Conclusions that "LSA has concluded that within the study area, 1.09 acres is jurisdictional waters of the U. S. of which .81 acres meet the Corps. Definition ofnon-wetland waters and .28 acres meets all three parameters required to qualify as ajurisdictional wetland...." additionally it states, "Potential CDFG jurisdiction encompasses 3.75 acres, of which 3'.47 acres are streambed and bank and .28 acre is riparian habitat." If you will now. take a look at the documentation dated 6/26/2007 (pg.2 of 3) in which you can see all of the revisions to the report..I have been through the file at the city probably 8 times (check record), I have not been able to find any reasons stating why these revisions were made. They were obviously made by Maria Lum at LSA on 6/23/2007 as she signed off on them herself, but why? Mike Diaz told me that there were no additional studies done, how then did ALL the fact in regazd to this particular topic suddenly change, and in favor of the developer? Please take a look at the final copy of documentation I have enclosed. Wow will you look at that. Seems that all of the changes to LSA's findings, that Maria Lum revised on 06/23/07 were already documented and forwarded to Mike Diaz from Paul Kielhold of Pitassi Architects on, get this... 06/14/07 nine full days prior to LSA revising the report. Wow! Pitassi architects really are good, so good seems they can foresee the future.. • This should be enough in itself to at this point throw out the entire Nei Dec. And once again require a full EIR i r' jrf I I~ ,l~ ~ `/ `~ pLLINAATIOtl O! A//OOIATA/. IXO. NOATHTOX'N tlOV/IXO DL9 OLLA t010 _ OITT The soils within the potential wetlands of Drainage B were fine textured. Soi] color ranged from yellow to gleyed (Mansell color 2.SY/I and Gley 1 2.5/I~. Based on the above evaluation, it is concluded that soils _ - overthe potential wetland pomons of the stuffy azea mee[ the NTCH cntena for hyarrc so ~- Hydrology. The annual growing season in this part of San Bernardino County is estimated at 230 to 290 days (Soil Conservation Service, 1980). Assuming an average growing season of 260 days, soils would need to be saturated to the surface for a minimum of five percent of the growing season, or about 13 consecutive days, in order to satisfy the wetland hydrology criteria. A defuvtive determination would require saturation for 12.5 percent of the growing season, or about 32 consecutive days. Wetland hydrology appears to be present within Drainage B and within a small area at the northeast comer of East Etiwanda Creek in the study area, but not within any other portions of Eeat Etiwanda Creek of DrainageB-i (see Figure 2, Jurisdictional Delineation Map).'Nuisance runoff associated with nearby urban development appear to account for the increased flows within Drainage B and the northeast comer of East Etiwanda Creek, which were inundated at the time of observation in late September 2005. Additional evidence of wetland hydrology associated with the drainages includes flowing water, well defined banks, scouring, and debris deposits. Caiifornia Department of Fish and Game . • Both Drainage A and Drainage B satisfy the definition of a streambed by displaying a channel bed and ba~cs. A small area of riparian vegetation dominated by Goodding's black willow is located in East Etiwanda Creek (Drainage A) the northeast comer of the study area, Herbaceous riparian vegetation consisting of yellow umbrella sedge, willow weed, Mexican sprangletop mule fat, white water-crass, arroyo willow, and Goodding's black willow was present throughout the length of Drainage B, but not within any portion of Drainage B-I Total potential CDFG jurisdiction within the study area is 3.75 acres. Of that total, 3.47- acres are streambed and bank and 0.28,acre is riparian habitat. CONCLUSIONS Based on the data collected and analyzed, LSA has concluded that within the study area, 1.09 acres is jurisdictional waters of the U.S., of which 0.81 acre meet the Corps definition ofnon-wetland waters of .the U. ,, an . 8-`acre meets all three parameters requu~,to_,q___ , ~az a juris chonal wetlan under JeCrlOn vtrt ~+ we ~.wpa, .....~, .,.... Potenh~GDC ~ jurisdiction encompasses 3.75 acres, of which 3.47-acres are streambed and bank and 0.28-acre is riparian habitat. This j urisdictional deternination is subject to verification by the Corps, RWQCB, and CDFG if Sections 401, 404, and/or Section 1600 et seq. permitsa• • $WHV530laio\WLIers\DelipeetionUulisdictionel Delineation lp0.doc QO/M00~ ~~' ~, r- ~~" _ -~ ti Pagf 1 of 3 ~ Maria Lum j, From: Diaz, Mighael Paul [MichaeLDiaz~cityofrc.us] Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 2:39 PM To: Marla Lum /'/ Sub]ect: Draft answers to IS Biology questions' Hi Mada: ~~ ~~1 ~~ ~ ~ `~~ Would you please look over my responses and provided comments anrUor corrections as needed. I would really appreciate R 'rf you would make sure-the facts on land sizes of any potential and/or significant size of habitats...:) am gefting sort of confused. Thanks for your help. Michael Sg,~l N (~~ BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: / a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or (/ } (/j () (/) through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in ~~ loge) or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by Q~ ~ the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. w~~ ,~e b)' Have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat or (/) other senstive natural community identified in local'or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the ~ ~~ I i2J Califomia Department of Fish and Game or US Fish -~5 and Wildlife Service? ~ wo wl{{cwS ~S nol- n cc,n c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected (/) - wetlands as defined by Sectioh 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limiteii to, marsh, vernal pool, t ttl~IlEa CGS coas al, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hyydrological _- Interruption. or other means? `.nYYliv~nne ?hL~., y, c: r, r.: ,__ _i ~t mcenere substantially with the moveme}t1 of any native O ' O (/ j resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or wRh established native resident or migratory wildlrfe corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sftes? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting O ( ) _ bldlogical resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? ? T126"E ~t.I~hIC~ ~ enP~tr~ ~ ' NQ-[ f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat O j) O. Cpnservation Plan, Natural Community conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat COnservatinn nlan9 a) The project site is undeveloped but has been disturbed by previous grading, dumping, and other man-made activities over the.-years. A Biology Resources Report (LSA Associates, Oct. 2005) was prepared for the project to determine the existence of potential occurrence of sensitive plant and animal species on the subject site. The report identified the "site as a composition of primarily non-native grassland with elements of Riversidean~~alluvial fan sage scrub (RAFSS) on' the east side of the East Efrwanda Creek bed, and small portion,of riparian vegetation. RAFSS is considered to be a sensitive natural community by State and Federal resource agencies and private conservation organizations. When implemented, the proposed project would • • • 6/26/2007 (': l- 7~ • r„ f ..~ i Page 2 of 3 result in an incremental loss of approximately 2-acres of RAFSS.. The loss of RAFSS habitat is considered ~y significant and its loss at this location should be mitigated by contribution o ees o a hobs at mi igatton ank of r"'"'t tl-e-pbreservation of larger intact habitat at different location. The following mitigation measure is proposed to offset the loss RAFSS habitat for this project: t. Prior to the removal of any Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS) habitat from the site, the applicant shall pay fees to a habitat mlLtgatlon bank or replace habitat at a one to one basis at another location. ~~ ~--- Eight federally/State listed plans and animal species were also identified as potent' Ily present on the project site. Seven of the listed species were considered to the absent from the site bas on a lack of suitable habitat, or the project site is outside the known range of the species. The plant and animal species considered to have a low potential for occunence on the site Included the Slender-homed Spine Flower (Dodecahema leptoceras), and the Merriam's (or. San Bernardino) Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys merdami parvus), and the Western Burrowing Owl (Athena cunlcularia hypugaea). These spec'rfic species were the subject of separate focused reports (by LSA Associates 2006 and 2007), all of which concluded that the subject species were not encountered on the site. Thus, based on the Biology Resources Report and separate species focus studies, no adverse impacts to federally/State listed plant and animal species are expected. b) The sfte has two major drainage features, the most prominent of which is the East Etiwanda Creek channel that receives seasonal runoff. The other drainage feature is a storm drain outlet at the northwest corner of the site which connects to the creek bed via man-made earthen V-ditch. Riparian vegetation (e.g., Gooding's black willow and mute fat) is present within portions of th bjeet-o~~ite drainages. According to the LSA Assgciates-DeJint:;£tion of Jurisdictional Waters Report ober 2005.)~.knpacts to California Department of - Fish and Game (CDFG) junsdict~on are 0.5 acre o stream a an npanan vegetation and impacts to Army r/~ ~ Corps of Engineers (ACOE) jurisdiction are 02 acre of ephemeral and wetland waters of the U.S. However, when the San Bernardino County Flootl Control District completes its San Sevaine Creek Water-Projectflood ~.t9' 'control project for the eastern portion of the City, water in the creek will be permanently diverted away from the site Into the existing concrete channel located adjacent to the east side of the site: The result of the County's project will be to cuF off water flows to and through the site and thereby affect the quality and suatainab(Ifty of the RAFSS and riparian habitaVconditlons presently on the site. Moreover, development of the site with housing will not occur until after the San Sevaine Creek Water Project is completed and the creek is cut oft • from water flows. Nevertheless, the applicant will be required to obtain final determination on the status of the creek and riparian habitat on the site tram the- California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). Possible mttigatlon may be payment of fees to the Santa Ana Water Authority In-lieu fee program; which allocates funds to local Resource Conservation Districts for use in riparian habRat enhancement and restoration projects in the region. The following mitigation measure is proposed:. 2. Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits for the project, the, appficant shall ascertain end comply with the requirements of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), for the removal and/or alteration of on site riparian and wetlands areas as determined by the abovementioned resource agencies. c) LSA Associates, Inc. conducted a wetlands jurisdictional waters delineati tudy on the site on September ~3r2005' Using U.S. Army Corps oT Engineers methodology, a total of .09 res of the site was deemed a.po7 to be the jurisdictional waters of the United States. A portion of this tot - 8- re, meets the st rds to qualify as a jurisdictional wetland under Section 404 of the Clean Wate ct. The remaining .81- cre ~,r was found to be-non-wetland waters of the U.S. Final determination of ju sdictfon is subjectto lion by the Army Corps of Engineers. O ( ~ 0, Df-{ d) The majority of the surrounding area has been or is In the process ofi being developed with both commercial, residential, and public works projects, thereby presenting, a disruption to' intact wildlife cgrridors that may have existed previously. More importantly the project site lies In an area wherehabitat has been fragmented by developments, and as such the Biology Report prepared for the site finds that the site does not serve as a regional wildlife corridor. No adverse impacts are anticipated for this issue. e) At the center of the site are stands (not a windrow) of Eucalyptus trees that will be removed to . accommodate the prdject. These trees appear to have naturalized on the site at the side of the creek • bed. The size and height of the trees qual'rfies them as heritage trees per city ordinance, and to remove them will require a Tree Removab Permit. Moreover, these trees could be suitable nesting trees for raptors, foraging, and or other nesting birds. Ai tfie time the Biology Report was prepared no nests were 6/26/2007 ~~ ~f° Diaz, Michael Paul Fro Paul Kielhold [paul. Page 1 of 2 ... Sent: ' Thursday, June 14, 2007.3:37 PM To: Diaz, Michael Paul J~~ Subject: Northtown Housing -Biological Resources Mitigation Measures Mike, Pete Pitassi asked me to make sure you received this from LSA. You may have already received this information from Maria..,. Paul Kielhold - 1.- Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub habitat - if this habitat is found to be occupied by the San Bernardino kangaroo rat (SBKR)'then impacts to this plant community would be considered significant and would need to be mitigated. The trapping survey found SBKR not to be present. Mitigation is not required for RAFSS. [Mitigation would be accomplished by purchasing credits in the Cajon Creek Conservation Bank. In 2003 the cost per credit (I credit equals 1 acre) was $30,000. More recently we have heard. the cost has risen to $45,000 to $50,000 per credit. This number does not come from the mitigation bank itself, but I have a call out to verify the current number, The mitigation ratio likely to be required by the regulatory agencies is 3:1 (3 acres of mitigation for every 1 acre of impacts). With approximately 2 acres of this habitat type on-site this would be about 6 acres of mitigation.) 2. Burrowing owl - Low potential to be present. Pre-construction survey typically required-prior to ground disturbance, A burrowing owl pre-construction survey would also need to be done no more than 30 days prior to the initiation of ground disturbing activities. 3. Spineflower - No suitable habitat and no plants present. No mitigation required, 4. jurisdictional waters -off-site mitigation ratios typically start at 3:1. Currently the cost of off-site mitigation credils is about $S0, 000 per acre through SHWA. CDFG jurisdictional area totals 0.6 acres and ACOE is 0.2 acre that would require mitigation. RAFSS is not riparian vegetation per CDFG definition. 5. San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat. A focused survey was conducted on the project site. SBKR was found to be absent. No mitigation required. The surveys for the SBKR can be done anytime of the year, although the agencies will consider the survey valid for only one year. TABLE B: Potential Jurisdictional Areas (Acres) Revi CDFG ACOE - Drainage Linear Feet St~eambed Riparian Vegetation Wetland Non- wetland East Etiwanda Creek Channel 907 0.32 0 0 0.04 Foothill Boulevard Drainage Dit 608 0.24 0.04 0.16 0 Total ],SIS 0.60 acre 0.20 acre i~ .r • • • u • To: Mayor Donald J. K\'-' Mayor Pro Tem Diac~e Williams Council Members: Sam Spagnola L. Dennis Michael Rex Gutierrez ~ _. cc: City Clerk My name is Joseph Sibree, l live at 8165 Cornwall Ave. R. Cuc., Ca. 91739. I strongly Oppose the San Servaine Villas Development DRC 2006-0050 11/07/07 ~~C~~~~~ NOV p ~ 2 and the Density Bonus Agreement DRC 2007-00119. CITY 0~ RANCHO CUCAi~QNQA This is my fourth letter in opposition to this development and I would have w~nttCenEmo e if not for the absence of time and the absence of response in regards to my previous letters. I still have not heard back in regards to any of my previous letters or to any of the questions I, and many of my neighbors, have raised at the neighborhood meetings and the Planning Commission meeting. Questions that were raised back in March of this year, still, there are no answers. To be quite honest this whole process stinks! We now have a date for our heazing, Dec. 5'", 2007 and have not had any answers to questions already raised. Even if we did get answers at this point it will basically be too little too late as it allows myself and others whom have written no time to digest, interpret and react to your answers before the hearing. If this is a democratic process then I guess I do not understand democracy. In light of this, it seems only right that the hearing be postponed until after we get some answers and have time_to review.your responses. Speaking of the hearing, this is another fallacy of the democratic process. First off there is no profowl. If there is it seems that it is a tightly kept secrete that the city does not want the public to know about. It seems that we should have some rights since not only are we citizens of the United States but we are also tax payers that pay-your salaries so you can represent US not just developers but US the people of your community, yet we are treated like the enemy. How are we to represent ourselves and our concerns properly if we do not even know of the process that is to be expected for this hearing. There aze no forms, no summary no outline nothing at all to explain to the residents what to expect and fiurther what our rights are in regards to this hearing and the appeal. We spent nearly twenty one hundred dollars to file this appeal and we can not even get a one page summary of our rights, responsibilities and protocol of the hearing: It is already an uphill battle for us as we all know that this City Council is pro development and pro affordable housing. It is also an uphill battle, as the format of the Planning Commission meetings as well as the City Council meetings aze very much biased toward the developers. No actual questions and answers of the public, in fact when asked directly for answers during the public comment phase, the Commission and the Council both have their default response, "this is not the time for us to answer your questions, it is the time for public comments". Yes, public comments but without any response. Then, after the floor is closed to.public comments, then and only then, the Council responds, and gives the public NO chance to rebut. 1n fact if we try to speak up at that point you will have us REMOVED BY FORCE. Very democratic. You need not take any of this personal as I'm sure that you did not develop and install this. process, and just like many of us are only mindless cogs in the bureaucratic machinery that feverishly grinds on to slowly yet steadily disenfranchise us all of our individual rights as it expands and strengthens the rights of Governments and Corporations. One day, some day in the distant or possibly not to distant future, each and everyone of you will no longer hold you position of power. You may at that time find that your rights have been diluted to the point of mere illusion. I can only hope at that time, that you find yourselves in a position similar to the one that I currently find myself. I can only hope that at that time you see things through the eyes of an individual once again. Sincerely, ~oseph Sibree~~; ~~_., /'° To: Mayor Donald 7. Kurth Mayor Pro Tem LTiane Williams Council Members: Sam Spagnola cc: City Clerk L. Dennis Michael Rex Gutierrez My name is Joseph Sibree, I live at 8165 Cornwall Ave. R. Cuc., Ca. 91739. I strongly Oppose the San Servaine Villas Development DRC 2006-0050 and the Density Bonus Agreement DRC 2007-00119. 11/08/07 ~~~~~~~~ NOV p g ~ • CffY OF RAfVCHC CUCAINCINGA CITY CLERK .This letter is in regazds to the density bonus agreement, the density of the proposed project, and the densities of low income residents inside the project compared to all other affordable housing projects within the'city. As first stated in the appeal, this project is too big. It is too big in regards to the size of the project as it does not conform to zoning densities and it is too big in regazds to the percentage of low income residents that potentially will be living there. First off, this project lies in an area zoned for 8-14 units per acre and it borders a SFR zoning of 2-5 units per acre. Considering this, if you look to the south of our immediate neighborhood you will find the Victoria Woods Apartments. Now the city took into consideration. when approving that project the impact on our neighborhood and reduced the zoning density for the immediately adjacent, potion of that project to low density (5-8 units per acre). The other half of that project has a zoning of 8-14 units per acre, that part is buffered from our neighborhood however with the lower density zoning, . (Mike Diaz can verify this). The proposed San Servaine Villas will be directly adjacent to our neighborhood with TOO HIGH A DENSITY. This is not even taking into consideration the Density Bonus Agreement that you are considering for approval.. There is no justification for allowing the Density Bonus Agreement as it will have a very direct, negative impact on our immediate neighborhood and will allow instead over 17 units per acre directly adjacent to SFR Further I propose that as with Victoria Woods, this Qroject have it's zoninf; densities reduced on the half of the project that borders our neighborhood to 5-B units per acre. There is another issue here that is of gave concern to me and I strongly feel it needs addressing by the Council. Take a look at ALL the other Affordable Housing Projects in the city. There are thirteen other developments throughout the city that are restricted to some or all ofthe units available for affordable housing. There is only one however that is compazable in sine and allows for 100% of residents to be low income, that is the Pepperwood Apartments. There is a difference however in relationship between that project and the one being proposed here. That development is surrounded with other apartment complexes and Commercial establishments, we aze surrounded with single family residents, to the North, East and West it is All SFR. Let me summarize all of the other Affordable Housing developments in the city so you can get a better understanding of the paint that I am trying to make. 1. Evergreen Apartments: 2. Monterey Village Apts. 3. Pepperwood Apts.: 4. Sycamore Terrace: S. Villa del Norte Apts.: 6. Woodhaven Manor: 7. La Casitas: Affordable 20% . Affordable 49% Affordable 100% Affordable 32% Affordable 100% (88 Units-much smaller, easier to manage crime, etc.) Affordable 100% (117 Units-much smaller) Affordable 100% (14 Units-much smaller) • •.. ~- • 8. Mountainside Apts.: Affordable 49% 9. Mt. View Apts.: Affordable 20% 10. Parkview Place Apts.: Affordable 20% 1l. Rancho Verde Village: Affordable 24% 12. Sycamore Springs: Affordable 37% 13. Waterbrook Apts.: Affordable 11% _ As you can plainly see, in general most of the Affordable Housing in the city allows a portion of the development to restrict to low income. The Apartments that are at 100% Affordable are generally much smaller in size than the proposed San Servaine Villas (225 Units - 100% Affordable). This is extremely unfair to the residents of these existing neighborhoods as there is no way of foretelling of the long term - affects of a project of this-size-and-scopethat is designed to allowfor-100%Affordable housing.-- - - In conclusion, let me make my point by simply reminding you of city policy when redevelopment first came about. Prior to the Judgement of the Superior Court of the State of California in Pedro Carrillo, Frank Chaffino vs. City of Rancho Cucamonga, City Council and Redevelopment Agency (July 27, 1989), as par[ of the housing goals for the city, "2.Over concentration of very low and low income household units in any single project shall be avoided. For this policy, the number of very low and low income subsidized housing units shall not exceed 25 percent in any one project." . It took a lawsuit for the city to start allowing a higher percentage of low income residents into a particulaz project, why? Maybe it was for the same reason that we don't want 100% affordable for this project. Maybe because "Over concentration of very low and low income households..." is not good for the city and not good for the residents that live immediately adjacent to the project. I hope that the • council can see the reality of what impact this project will have on the city in the long ivn. Reduce the percentage of affordable units in this project, make it more comparable with other projects throughout the city. Even a fifty percent ratio would be much more acceptable to residents that have established themselves and their families here. Sincere] , ~~~;-~ Joseph Slbree • i' ~~ j The. Clty s ,1 prroride opportunities taeantfres for the provision of a misty ar Aosesing types tpr alt atonosic segeents • Wishing to reside 1a tht Coasattntty regardless of raa, rlllptan, sa or encore ~rrvup• to addition to the obfectires and action progress, the C1ty Ms Identified policy trtas - rhtch tontrlbute to the pursuit of Llte housing goat. These poltclts sre as tolloMS: 1. The City shall Ost development agreements as_ a procedure rith profects providing - ..,~ ~"~ the Citr. 2. Ores concentration Of eery lom and low incoa+e Aousehotd units 1n any single project shall be avoided. For this -• - policy, the ronber pf very tow and low income subsl4tzed housing units shall not exceed 25 percent to any one protect. F'~CTriE .1: Peograe l.l: 5. Provide i~ut; such as eost/benetft -alanee, and recaomendattons to the Ca11lornia Energy Couratssion in its preparation and updating of energy effitient residential guidelines. The rwatnder of this Housing Element is broken • down into seven obfectives which Then cartbined rith the stated pOlicles are intended to meet 'the housing gaal• of the tity of Rancho Cucaronga. PI^orDte and encourage Anusinngg opportunities so that it is desirable for ]0 percent of ~ ectsd e~ercial and irdustrtal tagloyed ids 1a tAe City to lire and cork in the ctty. Oetarrine rice iacore levels of future Ces®eref+l and industrial aeployed households iw Order to identify the affordable housing ranges in "ail incoar groups of the expected new Households. Ys~e~t ~ 70 percent Of al i air ta7P loyee dsous-t~+old for•ations gasponslblt enc ~ City of Rancho tucmonga none n Bneral Fund, C12y Budget e u e: 1985 .77_ • • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: City Council, M>7ce Diaz and City Clerk 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, Ca, 91729 Research for the San Sevaine REV~BYGD Datell-08-2007 Page 1 of 5 NOV p~ ~ After spending days looking at each affordable apartment complex, the surrounding neighborhoods and/or commerce, then calling each for further infotrnation, these are the findings: The affordable aparment complexes that aze in mid and upper end neighborhoods contain a low percentage of affordable units, the majority of units aze mazket rate. These apartments only take the Bond program. The bond program caters to a higher income level of tenant as this type of program only takes a few hundred off the rent. These apartments aze located north of Foothill Boulevazd. There are two exceptions and one is "Sycamore Springs" they will look at section 8 voucher and take it if it pays enough. This apartment complex is still iow percentage affordable units and is not located in an azea that will affect existing single-family homes. The other is Woodhaven Manor, now known as "Sunset Heights" this apartment complex is all affordable. It has access to an existing residential neighborhood. It has had long standing public safety issues • The affordable aparnnents on or South of Foothill Boulevazd are mostly 100 percent affordable units. The neighborhoods that have tenant access and are run down. Some are located next to other apartments or commercial developments so there is no impat:t They use the tax credit program; these cater to lower income tenants. Conclusion: The proposed San Sevaive Villas will over time cause our neighborhood to decline. The reseazch has shown when tenants of 100 percent affordable housing have direct access into existing neighborhoods; graffiti and crime will spill into our neighborhood As homeowners get frustrated with apartment tenants making life unenjoyable, they will move or rent their houses. The real state comps I have seen show a clear drop in home values. Example, neaz Rancho Verde Village a nice looking home 1900 squaze feet was listed for 369,000 homes in my neighborhood are selling for 350,000 but they aze only 1052 square feet. Graffiti and the evidence of past graffiti are all azound the apartment community. With statements like this from documented city sources: "I can not guarantee crime would not occur but it would be minimized". "They are putting see through fencing around the complex so they can not do f;raffiti and so police can see in." " I'm not going to tell you that people who reside in this work-force apartrnents won't commit some crime, they are. But.the end result is no slats to say its true" . \J Date 11-08-2007 Page 2 Of 5 The proof is heaz, the design of this complex is unacceptable to impose our existing .. . neighborhood. Build 100 percent affordable complexes where they won't intrude on existing homeowners. V/e have enough trouble keeping the transients and prison release out of our neighborhood, not to mention the existing apartment on our south property line. In closing, nobody would accept a project like this in their neighborhood knowing the truth. I find my neighborhood has been prejudiced against because we were left out here to fend for ourselves. The city has not taken care of the infrastructure around our neighborhood, yet keeps building all around us. The city won't even come out here and' spend time to see our neighborhood is a nice place. I can't see how the city can mitigate away these facts. Included fmd 3 pages of research I oppose San Sevaine Villas Respectfully, Kenneth Van Horu, '~%~/~ 13050 Chestnut Ave. R.Cnz w91vv 739 "." u ~J • Page 3 of 5 EXISTING AFFORDABLE APARTMEMT COMMUNITY IMPACTS -RANCHO CUCAMONGA 1. Ever egr en Apartments - 79 of 393 units -- 20% low-income -Sara 791ow and moderate, no very low - 2-story buildings, Bond only no other subsidizing aloud. Surrounded by commercial south, school north, apartments east and single-family 2-story homes west. Theses homes are protected by block walls and are located across Terra Vista Parkway with median divider. surrounding area appears clean no graffiti. 2. Monterey Village Anartments - 112 of 224 units -- 37%low-income 56 very low, 28 low and 26 moderate income, section 8 available -Debra Voucher ok - 2-story buildings surrounded by other apartments, no single family homes, no pedestrian impacts to the community -residents can only access arrow route, surrounding azea appears clean no graffiti 3. Mountain Side Apartments - 192 of 384 units -- 37% low-income . • 96 very low, 48 low and 44 moderate, Bond program -- Kathy 2-story buildings -- surrounded by commercial on the north, east and west and single-family 2-story homes on the south separated by pazking lot and a 8-foot block wall. Access to commerce via foothill blvd. Tenants cannot access existing single family homes at south: No pedestrian impacts. Surrounding area is clean, no graffiti. 3. Pepperwood Apartments - 276 of 276 units -- 100% All low income will except section 8 voucher -also tax credit program -- "lupe" 2-story buildings -- surrounded by other apartments on the south, east and west property lines and commercial north across foothill blvd. - No pedestrian impacts to the community -access to commerce via Foothill blvd. no other access points. Surrounding area is clean, no graffiti 5. Sycamore Terrace - 48 of 152 units -- 30% low income -Bond only 30 very low, 15 low and 3 moderate -Jeremy said mod income only? 2-story buildings -located on the southwest corner Spruce & Terra Vista. School at south and west property lines. Apartments on east side across Spruce st. and Single-family homes north across Tema Vista Parkway with • page 4 of 5 Community impacts continued Rancho Cucamonga block walls. No direct pedestrian impacts into the existing neighborhoods, no direct access to commerce. No graffiti area looks clean: Outside rdv. Zn. 6. Villa Del Norte Aaartments - 88 of 88 units -- 100% low income 47 very low and 41 low income, no moderate income, Maria, tax credit only 2- story buildings -- surrounded by a school on the north, railroad tracks on the south, community center on the east, Single family neighborhood appears in poor condition on the west, tenants have direct pedestrian and vehicle access. 7. Woodhaven Manor (Sunset heights) 117 of 117 units -100% low income 30 very low and 281ow -outside redevelopment area -section 8 voucher no bond--long standing problems with public safety--2- story buildings Surrounded by commercial on the south (Banyan street), field on the north, Chaffey Collage across Haven Ave. "east" and single family homes on the west .Commerce is accessible from Haven and from Amber street. Tenants can access the existing single-family residential neighborhood by foot or vehicle via Amber st. or Banyan Street. Residences complain of late night • loitering, possible drug usage and thefts. Area in fair condition This project must take place in a high maintenance police program. 8. La casitas - 14 of 14 units --- 100% very low income -- 2 -story Surrounded by Commercial on the west, Train tracks south, single family homes north and east on Main street. Commerce accessible from Main street to Archibald ave. Neighborhood is in poor overall condition with pedestrian and vehicle impacts. "Marian" -Tax credit only 9. Mt. View Apartments - 54 of 270 units - 20% low income, 54 units low income, no very low or moderate income, Bond only Jeremy said Moderate income only? Participates in a crime free program. Located at south7east corner spruce and Terra Vista Parkway. There is a park at the east side, apartments north across terra vista., apartments west across spruce st. 2- story single family homes south across mountain view street protected by block walls, no pedestrian, vehicle access. No commerce to access by foot. 10. Parkview Place Apartments - 30 of 152 units --- 20% low income, NO very low or moderate income, 2-story buildings, Bond per Jeremy moderate Page 5 of 5 Community impacu continued Rancho Cucamonga . Income only? Apartments and a pazk south across terra.vista, apartments west, 2-story Single family homes at north and east sides separated by a tall block wall. No pedestrian access into existing single-family homes, no commerce to access by foot, No graffiti, place looks c]ean. 11. Rancho Verde Villa>;e - 126 of 300 units -- 24% low income 26 very low, 10 low and 16 moderate income --outside redevelopment area. Expansion of 19 knits done`?'1 3-story buildings Train tracks south, field and two single-family homes east ,apartments west and commercial and single family homes north. Surrounding neighborhood is in poor condition and graffiti. Pedestrian access to commerce via Grove ave. Note private gate chained open so anyone can come and go. 12. Sycamore Springs - 96 of 240 units -- 37% low income • 30 very low, 15 low and 3 moderate -outside redevelopment area Section 8 available --- 2-story buildings Surrounded by commercial north and south and across street west. mobil home park "east" at rear separated by a block wall and apartment gazages. This apartment complex looks to be deteriorating. There are no direct pedestrian impacts to the community. No access to mobil homes at rear. No Single-family homes to impact, access to commerce via Archibald Ave. Area in fair condition. Said they would look at section 8 voucher but they don't nonnally take it because it does not pay up to market rate. But they help you do the subsidized paper work there to get what's needed. "Michelle" Would not .. say what program they use. 13. Waterbrook Apartments - 70 of 624 units -- 11% low income 79 low income, no very low,. no moderate income -- 2-story buildings Surrounded by other apartments, no pedestrian impacts to the community Access to commerce via Arrow Route, no other access points. Surrounding area appears clean no graffiti. They take Bond only, no section 8. Alfreado said bond helps reduce rates. Like single bed apartment would normally be 1175 would be reduced to 947. • _, ... . i v, , To: Mayor Donald J. Kurth 11!08/07 Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams Council Members: Sam Spagnola cc: City Clerk - L. Dennis Michael R~CE'V~~ Rex Gutierrez a~ ~OV Q 8 (~ My name is Joseph Sibree; I live at 8165 Cornwall Ave. R. Cuc., Ca. 91739. CITY OF RANCHO Cd1CAfiflONGA I strongly Oppose the San Servaine Villas Development DRC 2006- 050 C(N CLERK and the Density Bonus Agreement DRC 2007-00119. There aze numerous reasons why this project as proposed and funded is not a good project for this neighborhood or this city and must not be approved by you the council. This is now my fifth letter in opposition to this project, all letters discussing different issues. There are a few other letters I hope to write as well time permitting as there aze many flaws with this project, however since I have not had any response to any of my letters thus, I am hesitant to waste anymore of my time writing as it seems that they aze all falling on deaf eazs. Nevertheless, even if just-for the satisfaction of knowing that I have done everything in my power, I will proceed. This letter is in regards to redevelopment in relation to this project. Now I understand that you `the council' also sit on the board for the redevelopment agency and in actuality aze `the agency'. That as `the agency' you have already approved of a $40.7 Million dollar ($40,700,000.00) loan for this project, with the $3.7 Miton dollaz ($3,700,000.00) contingency, that happening over two years ago (Sept.1,2005). I also understand that $8.3 Million dollars ($8,300,000.00) has already been released to Northtown Housing Development Corp. To acquire the pazcel of land as well as to reimburse Northtown for `pre development' expenses. Further it is my understanding that Northtown receives a "Developer Fee" of $2.5 Million dollars ($2,500,000.00) for doing this project, something that no private developer is entitled to from tax payers monies. Finally, and this is my favorite part, I understand that the total loan commitment of $40.7 Million dollazs ($40,700,000.00) with the $3.7 Million dollaz ($3,700,000.00) contingency (potentially $44.4 Million dollars $4,440,000.00) get this, IS AT 1% SIMPLE INTEREST FOR 75 YEARS! WHAT??? First off, how can we, the people, truly expect any type of fair judgement in regards this up coming hearing and the ultimate decision of `the council', since you `the agency' has already approved of the initial funding for this project which would seem to imply that you are strongly in favor of this project. It really seems quite ridiculous to me that after approving this project two years ago and releasing huge sums of monies so the developer could move forwazd, that now, you would use a fair an unbiased judgement in the decision making process of this appeal. I would think it much more fair to have another governing body or outside agency to be making the decision on this hearing, but we all know that will never happen. Secondly, that's a lot of money, and 1 don't simply mean in terms of what you `the council' and you 'the agency' are used to throwing around, your budgets are huge. I simply mean in regards to this project and what your getting for the buck. Let's quickly compare. NHDC: San Servaine Villas $40.7 Million redevelopment dollazs - 225 Units /Credit for 110 Units $370,000.00 per Unit LINC: Pepperwood Apts. $18.5 Million redevelopment dollazs - 276 Units /Credit for 276 Units $67,029.00 per Unit SCHDC: Woodhaven Manor $9 Million redevelopment dollars - 117 Units /Credit for 58 $155,172.00 per Unit - As you can see, the San Servaine Villas project is at least two times the cost per unit for which the city will be receiving credit from the state. It is obviously just a waste ojredwelopment funds. • • • (- !"~`, • • Thirdly; This project does not lie within the `Redevelopment Project Area.' As stated in your 2005'/ 2006 Annual Report for the R.C. Redevelopment Agency (pg. 3), "Through the establishment of a Redevelopment Project Area (please see map on page 4), the Agency is able to use special legal and financial mechanisms to eliminate blight to improve the economic and physical conditions in designated areas of the citv." This is not in the `Project Area' and will not improve the economic and physical condition in designated area of the city. Therefore, you have no right to use . redevelopment monies for this project unless, perhaps, you move this project to within the `Redevelopment Project Area' of the city, (see map}. Additionally, according to a memorandum from the Housing Subcommittee Members, Gutierrez and Michael, dated July 6'", 2006 in regazds to Inclusionary Zoning Workshop, Program 3: RDA Assisted Multi-Family Project Development (pg. X -15), "The RDA shall work with property owners, financial institutions, public agencies, non-profit housing development corporations, and for profit corporations to construct new restricted, affordable rental units within the redevelopment area." Once again, the whole idea of Redevelopment is to `Redevelop an azea that needs redevelopment, hence the `Redevelopment Project Area' which this project is not a part of . Finally, and I have been saving the best for last, this project has no right to utilization of redevelopment funds, should by no means be approved by you `the council', and unless can be funded independently of the Redevelopment Agency should be abandoned immediately. As stated in the R.C. Redevelopment Agencies Annual Report 2005 / 2006 (pg. 3) Introduction, "In 1981, the Rancho Cucamonga City Council established the Redevelopment Agency (Agency) in order to alleviate blight and development barriers in.the City." Further in Section IV of that same report (pg. 28), in stating goals of the Agency, "...other projects will be considered as they relate to the overall goals set forth in the Redevelopment Plan, which include: Protect and promote the sound development and redevelopment of blight as defined in Section 33030 through 33032 of the California Health and Safety Code;" My friends, read the code: This in all accounts fails to meet even one of the criteria set forth in the Health and Safety Code in it's description. of blight. Let me highlight a few for you: Section 33030 (b) "A blighted area is one that contains both of the following: (1) "...an area in which the combination of conditions set forth in Section 33031 is so prevalent and so suhstantial that it causes a reduction of, or lack of, proper utilization of the area to such an extent that it constitutes a serious physical and economic burden on the community that can not reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private enterprise or governmental action, or both, without redevelopment." (2)"An area that is characterized by one or more conditions set forth in any paragraph of subdivision (a) of Section 3303 ] and one or more conditions set forth in any paragraph of subdivision (b; of Section 33031." I have attached a copy of the Health and Safety Code Sections 33030-33039, I have been through it several times and I can not find eren one condition that would justify this proposed project ns qunlifyii:g as a blighted area which would require redevelopment which would require redevelopment funds. I challenge `the Agency' or `the Council' to show myself as well as the public, proof, beyond a questionable doubt, or for that matter, any proof, that this is a blighted area and that this blighted area constitutes a serious physical and economic burden on the community. In actually, this is not a redevelopment ofa blighted area, this is... a Development of a Ten Thousand year old River Bed. I truly hope that the Council look seriously at this issue, as to some, if this project proceeds as is, may seem an abuse of Agency powers and an abuse of Redevelopment Monies. Sincerely Joseph S~ren~e~' "v'"" CA Codes (hsc:33030-33039) ~~ ~~ HEALTH AND-SAFETY CODE SECTION 33030-33039 ~~. 33030. (a) It is found and declared that there exist in many communities blighted areas that constitute physical and economic liabilities, requiring redevelopment in the interest of the health, safety, and general welfare of the people of these communities and of the state. - (=b~:~.b~rli~lted::.arP~-. is.. one.. that,.contains-~.:hoih_..of. the.. follnwing.- (1) An area that is predominantly urbanized, as that term is defined in Section 33320.1, an~ d i an area in which the combination __ - ____-~i i„ ocu ~t Vil asu31 15 50 prevalent and SO substantial that it causes a reduction of, or lack of, proper utilization of the area to such an extent that it constitutes a serious physical and economic burden on the community that cannot reasonab y be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private .i4 enterprise or governmental action, or both, without redevelopment. (2) An area that is characterized by o_ne_`or more conditions set forth•in any paragraph of subdivision (a) of Section 33031 an one or more con~m di,tions set forth in any paragraph of subdivision (b) of ~~ sectio^ n 33031, (c) A blighted area that contains the conditions described in subdivision (bj may~also be.characterized by the existence of inadequate-public improvements or inadequate water or sewer utilities. Page 1 of 4 ~v 33031. ~ This subdivision describes physical conditions that cause blight: .. - (1)BUildings in which it is unsafe .or unhealthy for persons to live or work. These conditions may be caused by serious building code ~\}~ violations, serious dilapidation and deterioration caused by --- long-term neglect, construction that is vulnerable to serious damage from seismic or geologic hazards, and faulty or inadequate water or . sewer utilities. ... {2) Conditions that prevent or substantially l,inder~~the viable.use ~ ox capacity of buildincjs or lots.-These conditions may be caused by ~,~~ buildings of sub standard defective, or obsolete design or --^ construction given the present general plan, zoning, or other development standards. (3) Adjacent or nearby incompatible land uses that prevent the development of those parcels or other portions of the project area. ~~,`` ..t~~ (4)The existence of subdivided lots that are in multiple '"'-' ownership and whose physical development has been impaired by their irregular shapes and inadequate sizes, given present general plan and ~(J zonin standards and present market conditions. ~----~ (b This subdivision describes economic conditions-that cause blig t: (1) Depreciated or stagnant property values. ~d (2) Impaired property values, due in significant part, to ~ U hazardous wastes on~property where the agency may be eligible to use its authority as specified in-Article 12.5 (commencing with Section '~v 33459). ~ - (3} Abnormally high business vacancies, abnormally low lease rates, or an abnormally high number of abandoned buildings. i'~~ • http://www. t eginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/di splaycode7section=hsc&group=33001-34000&file=3 ... 10/27/2007 Codes (hsc:33030-33039) ~ .~ i r (4} A serious lack of necessary commercial facilities that are • normally found in neighborhoods, including grocery stores, drug stores, and banks and other lending institutions. (5} Serious residential overcrowding that has resulted in significant public health or safety problems. As used in this paragraph, "overcrowding"'means exceeding the standard referenced in Article 5 (commencing with Section 32) of criapter 1 of Title 25 of the California Code of Regulations. (6) An excess of bars, liquor stores, or adult-oriented businesses that has resulted in significant in public health, safety,~or welfare problems. (7) A'high crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to the public safety and welfare. 33035. It is further found and declared that: (a) The existence o£ blighted areas characterized by any or all of such conditions constitutes a serio~ and rowinq_menace which is condemned as injurious and inimical to the public health, s---a~ety,.~nd welfare of the people of the communities in which they exist and of ' the people ofthe State. ~--~~ . (b) Such blighted areas present difficulties and handicaps which are beyond remedy and control solely by regulatory processes in the exercise of police power. (c) They contribute substantially and increasingly to the problems of, and necessitate excessive and disproportionate expenditures fox, crime prevention, correction, prosecution, and punishmen±, the treatment of juvenile delinquency, the preservation of the public • health and safety, and the maintaining of adequate police, fire, and accident protection and other public services and facilities. (d) This menace is becoming increasingly direct and substantial in its significance and effect. (e) The benefits which will result from the remedying of such conditions and the redevelopment~of blighted areas will accrue to all the inhabitants and property owners of the communities in which they exist. 33036. It is further found and declared that: (a) Such conditions of blight tend to further obsolescence, deterioration, and disuse because of the lack of incentive to the individual landowner and his inability to improve, modernize, or rehabilitate his property while the condition of the neighboring ' properties remains unchanged. (b) As a consequence the process of deterioration of a blighted~~~ area frequently cannot be halted or corrected except by redeveloping the entire area, or substantial portions of it. ~~-- (c). Such conditions of blight are chiefly found in areas , subdivided into small parcels, held in divided and widely scattered ownerships, frequently under defective titles, and in many such instances the private assembly of the land in blighted areas for redevelopment is so difficult and costly that it is uneconomic and as a practical matter impossible for owners to undertake because of lack of the legal power and excessive costs. (d) The remedying of such conditions may require the public • acquisition at fair prices of adequate areas, the clearance of the areas through demolition of existing obsolete,' inadequate, unsafe, and insanitary buildings, and the redevelopment of the areas Page 2 of 4 tai o ~~ N4 i'+~ http:/hvww.l eginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=hsc&group=33001-34000&file=3... 10/27/2007 ~I~~~UU~ -U~~`fU ~s a petition to block the propose ~velopment of a 225 apt. Facility at 132~~ bothill Blvd. Rancho Cucamonga The undersigned persons below indicate their opposition to the IVorthtown Housing Development Proposed at 13233 Foothill Blvd. Name(Please Print) Address Phone# Si n ture ~~~~~ .._... Indicate an individual willing to volunteer some time with an astrik or chec`k'mQar~k~~~~~i'Y1~f~1~A Rancho Cucamonga C,., Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner - . • P:O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 • Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: , . My name is ~L ,! I IIVe at - Mc and Mrs. Pedro A Yanez '! 1299 Chcshnd Are ... Clty .. Rancho Cucamonga. CA 91739-)G03 j _ I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-0054 Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex Gutierrez Council Member ,/ L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk James Fros[ 0 and City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and-two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons l oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication~of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime ' 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife. 10.Noise Pollution • The foundation for theprotection of our neighborhoo implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, std .tG ts, speed bum~pJs, police patrol, etc... !'-~ / ` Signature ir~~ d 7 DatT . d requires immediate crosswalks, stop lights, CITY OFRANCHO CUCAIv10NGA Gov o ~ 2ooa RECEIVED -PLANNING You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. ntt e:ta ' ~ ~' ", REC~11/ED NOY 0 r 1W1 CRY OF RANCE{a CUCAMONGA CRY CLERK To: City Council, Head Planner Mike Diaz, James Troyer and City Clerk City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91729 Pubtic Comments on the Mitieated Negative Declaration San Sevaine Villas DRC2006-00540 and DRC2007-00119. Date I1-07-2007 Page I of 7 You should notify all citizens that public comments for the "Mitigated Negative Declaration" is from November 5, 2007 through December 5, 2007. As you know this project has been appealed, I'm sure many people would like to comment if they only ..knew. The existing zoning for this proposed apartment complex is "Medium Residential District", 8 - 14 units per acre. NOT 14-24 units per acre as show on the "Notice of Intent to Adopt Negative Declaration" and also on the "Mitigated Negative Declaration". The coverage per acre is proposed at 17.4 units, this makes it ahigh-density project in a very low density neighborhood.. - The fallowine comments are regarding the Environmental Information Form Part 1: Page two item 3, no mention of our single family homes west of the site or the single- . family homes to the east. Our homes are sandwiched between the proposed apartment complex and existing commerce. We will have an overbearing influx of pedestrians and additional vehicular traffic into our neighborhood. - .. Page four item 13, it states to the south is an open lot vacant field: This is not true as this field is used to store six foot and larger diameter stomt drain pipes. This is where transients, prison releases from the jail down the street and homeless live (in the pipes). With the minimal 6-foot rod iron fencing around this proposed apartment complex it will invite criminal activities in our backyards. Page four item 14, it asks will the proposed project change the pattern scale or character of the surrounding general area? It says it will provide medium density housing in an area with single-family homes and multi-family neighborhoods. THIS IS NOT medium density, it is high density three story buildings next to single-family homes. Also it states we will be BUFFERED by the open space comdor and flood control channel. The SCE . corridor is not secure first off and it provides cover for illegal activifies. This corridor backs up to our homes, we need an 8-foot block wall along our property line for protection. • • • • Page 2 of 7 Page five item 15, short term and long term noise. As this complex will be surrounded by open style fencing there will be no noise protection to our neighborhood. Also hours of construction are proposed from 6:30 am to 8:00 pm Monday to Saturday. These hours are consistent with commercial type developments. This is a residential project next to existing residential neighborhoods. The hours of construction should not start any earlier that 8:00 am as people will be sleeping. Page five item 17, drainage of the site. While the site it self will drain into the cities storm drain system, there is an underling water probkem in front of the site on East Street. Water is always seeping out onto East Street from underground. This water ends up in front of the proposed site. It is a concern that there could be sink holes developing. Page six item 24, expected number of school children residing in this project. As reported 29.14 elementary, 11.81 junior high and 19.13 high school. The school districts report states the schools are above capacity now. If the developer only pays the unmitigated fees they will be farther above capacity. However in the developer pays The mitigated fees the over crowding will not increase. I think the difference between the unmitigated fees and the mitigated fees is around 400,000.00 (four hundred thousand). I have two Sons who attend the high school and can attest to the over crowding. • At lunchtime by the time they wait in line to get there ranch the bell rings to go to class (no time to eat). My younger son has second lunch; he gave up on getting food at school and started making his own lunch. This project is bringing 19 more students into this school, which means 19 more students go without lunch. Page seven item 32, fire agency service. This project is in a high fire hazard area per the fire department report; yet the building separations have been greatly decrease to allow more density. The fire department is also out side the 4-minute response time. Fire sprinklers aze proposed in these buildings but the type of system is very minimal. Because of the high fire hazard area and decreased building separations, these buildings should have a commercial type fire sprinkler system. This would insure complete coverage in all azeas within the buildings including attics. ' The fallowing_comments are regazding the Environmental Checklist form Initial Study Dart 2 Page 1 description of project. No mention of our existing single-family residences west of project or the single family homes east of the project. Page 2 surrounding land uses and settings, again no mention of the single-family residences surrounding this proposed apartment complex. Page 5 item "I C', degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its SURROiJNDINGS. Currently the residents in my neighborhood enjoy a view of the Page 3 of 7 • sunrise over a mountaintop beyond. With proposed three story buildings our view and our privacy is lost. Page 5 item `1D", new source of substanfial light or glare. The report states lighting will be confined to the project. How can the lighting be confined when the project is surrounded by open style fencing? ' Page 6 item " 3B", Air Quality. With the steel plants near by it is known that they release lead and cadmium into the air. These cancer causing substances settle in the soil, there for a soil test must be done and removal of any toxic soil. Dust control is critical as our homes are 220 feet away. Air quality tests reflecting lead and cadmium must be performed as well. _. . Page 7 item" 3D", Sensitive receptors, residences within a 1/4 mile of construction. Our homes are 220 feet away, as mentioned there are no block walls on this site and our neighborhood will be greatly affected. Page 11 item "4A", First of all this site maintains its natural composition, the dumping referred to is very very minimal and could be taken away easily. The creek bed maintains its natural flow and usability. Although. the Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub is very minimal along the creek bed that is because we have had little rain this year. When we do get rain - it blooms back all along the creek. Second the state sensitive "Western Burrowing Owl" has suitable nests along the creek bed. The facts are when the focus survey was done it was not done during the peek nesting period. Apre-construcfion nest survey no more than 30 days prior to grading means nothing unless it is.done during the peek nesting period. __ _ Page 11 item "4B & C", The LSA Delineation of Jurisdictional Waters Report of June 19, 2007 shows much less environmental impact that the report of September 23, 2005. The property has not changed; down gmding these figures would save the developer money but hurt the environment. Page 14 item "SB & C" Archaeological site and resources. Rancho Cucamonga has been inhabited by Native Americans, on site archaeological recourses are very likely. It is recommended that some reseaich be preformed at the `Sacred Heart Catholic Church" down the street from this site. They have been known to keep rewrds of this area dating far back. Also a qualified azchaeologist'should be on site at all times to retrieve any resources. This wait and see as proposed in the mitigations is not expectable as construction crews aze not archeologists. Because this site is on a creek bed it is even - more likely you will fmd archeologist recourses. Page 16 item "6B", Loss of topsoil. This project location gets strong Santa Ana winds, this yeaz they were in the 60 - 80 mile per hour zone. These Last from September to April and can occur at any time during the day. Again with no block walls around this project our homes will be inundated with dirt, sand and any other substances in the soil. No grading should be aloud if there is any wind at all. - -- • Page 4 of 7 Page 18 item "7H", Expose people to significant risk of injury or death involving wind- driven fire. (SEE comments on page 2 of 7 for EIIt page seven, item 32) Mitigation measures are not adequate. Page 19 item "8C" substantially alter the existing drainage patterns of the site. This proposed project wll permanently remove a natural streambed. How will the property behind it drain with the new flood control channel? Arrow Route will be washed out when we have strong rainstorms. . Page 20 item "8G, H & I", 100-yeaz flood control channel. The property line neaz as I can tell "on the east side of the site" is the flood control channel. The open style fencing proposed at this site is only six foot high. All it takes is two chairs; one on each side and you can get over. I know this to be true as we currently have apartments behind us and that's what goes on. I bring this up because kids like to explore. During a storm you .-. might find some kids washed away or dead. Eight-foot walls would give much more safety. - - Page 24 item "9A" Physically divide a establish community. There are single-family homes to the east of this site and single-family homes to the west of this site. Most all of _ these homes aze single story. Putting a three story apartment complex between us will • look out of place, be overbearing and will divide our neighborhoods. Page 24 item "9B", The land use designation for the site is Medium (M) 8 - 14 units per acre. This project proposes 17.4 units per acre. That makes it high density with in.a single-family neighborhood. What kind of permit is issued fora "Density Bonus". How can they say it does not interfere with any policies, it is violating them. Page 25 'item "11 A & C" exposure of persons to excess noise levels. This project as - proposed has open style fencing. This project is located on Foothill Blvd. Rancho Cucamongas main corridor. The new condos across the boulevard required a 14-foot sound wall due to the traffic noise. It is one thing to try and mitigate away the interior - noise levels but how about the exterior? This project will be adding an additional 1372 vehicle trips a day. Our neighborhood is already above noise level standazds. Any additional noise level increase is unacceptable unless you provide our existing neighborhood with sound walls. Page 25 item "11D" Substantial Temporary Noise Level. As this complex will be surrounded by open style fencing there will be no noise protection to our neighborhood. Also hours of construction are proposed from 6:30 am to 8:00 pm Monday to Saturday. These hours aze consistent with commercial type developments. This is a residential project next to existing residential neighborhoods. The hours of construction must not start any eazlier that 8:00 am, as people will be sleeping. • Page 5 of 7 • Page 27 item "] ZA", Induce Substantial Population Growth. This apartment complex is 225 units and wiU introduce approximately 1,000 people into the neighborhood. Ow existing single-family neighborhood is 116 homes. This apartment complex as designed will inundate ow neighbor hood with pedestrian traffic. The current infrastructwe azound this proposed complex needs updating first (Block Walls, Sidewalks, Cwbs, Gutters, Widen streets, Schools, Traffic lights, Turning lanes, Bus stop, Parks, Secure the Edison Corridor permanently, Secure the field behind Permanently ECT). Page 27 item "13A" fire agency service. This project is in a high fire hazard area per the fire department report; yet the building separations have been greatly decrease to allow , more density. The fire department is also out side the 4-minute response time: Fire , ~~ - sprinklers are proposed in these buildings although the type of system is very minunal. Because of the high fire hazard area and decreased building sepataations, these buildings should have a commercial type fire sprinkler system. This would insure complete - coverage in all areas within the buildings including attics. _ _ . r_ _ .. . Page 27 item "13B" Police Protection: This proposed apartrnent complex is 100 percent affordable units. 36 units to extremely low-income, 74 writs to very low-income, 59 units to low-income and 56 units to moderate income NO market rate units. The city says you can't tell makket late units from affordable but there is a difference. The apartment complexes that have a low percentage oflow-income units and the remaining are market • rate aze in nice neighborhoods. The affordable apartments that aze ] 00 percent are in run down neighborhoods or are located next to commercial developments and do not effect residences. Ow neighborhood is unique as we have a prison down the street that release inmates, recycling centers that bring in the transients, an existing apartment complex on ow south property line and a open field that stores large six foot in diameter pipes where the transients and prison releases live. This project will hale to take place in The Police Departments Crime Free Multi-housing Program" They say it has helped reduce crime "Not eliminate it". We have been given ow share and then some of Rancho Cucamonga's unwanted projects. If this get built as proposed the police will be very busy and our neighborhood will suffer all the more. Page 27 item `13C" Schools: I have two Sons who attend the high school and can attest to the over crowding. You walk shoulder to shoulder down the comdors. At lunchtime by the time they wait in line to get there lunch the bell rings to go to class. My younger son has second lunch; he gave up on getting food at school and started making his own lunch. This project is bringing 19 more students into this school, which means 19 more students go without lunch. More high schools and middle schools need to be built before any more residential construction. Page 27 item "13D" and Page 29 item "14A", Parks: First of all the future pazk to be located on Garcia Drive will have no pedestrian access for these proposed new residences. There will be no sidewalks for residences to access it; additionally it is not a '/< mile away unless you truss pass through private property. It is'/, of a mile away and • • Page 6 of ' you would have to walk on unprotected streets part of the way. The city cannot consider the park as part of the proposed apartments open spaces unless direct pedestrian access is provided. In talking to the existing residences to the north of this new pazk location they said, this pazk has been promised to them for a few years. They feel with this proposed apartment complex and the soon to be occupied lions condos on Foothill blvd. this pazk will have significant pedestrian impacts day and night. Page 29 item "15A & B", Traffic on-East Street: This proposed apartment complex will only exit east on Foothill Blvd. due to a new median on foothill. The traffic will use East Street to go to the I S fwy. East Street already is very congested due to the, high school just ._ . north of the I S fwy.. All high school kids in Fieldstone, Pacific Efiwanda and Etiwanda/foothill must walk to school (no bus service). There is no sidewalk just north of this site. Many parents drive their kids to school. With the increase in traffic this is a bad azea where someone will get hit by a car. My neighborhood is located between this proposed site and Etiwanda Blvd. There are no sidewalks or curbs on Foothill Blvd. at that location. What planning has said is they will not include our sectioh of Foothill Blvd. in the Route 66 visual improvement plan till after the corner lot is improved and after the proposed site is improved. The residence of whatever residential wmmunity gets built there will walk to Food 41ess and other commerce at the south west corner. Pm sure you realize that someone will get run over or • killed if this proposed site is built before Foothill Blvd. is improved. The other problem is Cornwall st. and Chestnut ave have no sidewalks, this is the short cut from Foothill Blvd to the bus stop and other commerce like Food 4 less, then they would jaywalk across Etiwanda. If this proposed apartment complex goes in, again how long till someone gets run over or killed. The LSA traffic report does not reflect any of this and is useless to our real world living conditions.. Page 29 item "15D" This projects 1372 vehicle trips will only be able to exit east on Foohill due to a new median in the road. If they want to head west on Foothill they must make a u-turn at East Street. Foothill Boulevard is Rancho Cucamonga's most congested street. This intersection is the site of many crashes a yeaz. Even with the new traffic light going in you can bet people will try to beat the light; when that happens there will be death. The speed limit at that section of Foothill boulevad is 45 mph, that is a,figment of someone imagination as the cars do at least 60 mph. Page 29 item "1 SG" bus stop access will not have safe access. As mentioned previously the only way to access the bus stop is walking unprotected along Foothill Boulevard. There are no curbs or sidewalks along Foothill Boulevazd, a very congested major highway. _ Page 7 of 7 • The fallowine comments are on the "Mitigation Monitoring Program" Cover sheet page two item 6, "Unanticipated circumstances may arise". Due to the fact that this project has been appealed more mitigation may be required. I don't see how this Mitigated Negative Declaration can be submitted to the County of the Boazd of Supervisors, before hand. Cover sheet page two item 9, Long term mitigation. This project will require full time mobil security within and around the existing neighborhoods and vacant fields. Video monitoring and proper lighting that will not blind existing residences. The "Notice of Intent to Adopt Negative Declaration" does not reflect actual real life conditions. This proposed apartment complex will impact our neighborhoods and the proposed residences. Therefore a full environmental report needs to be preformed. Thank you, //// Kenneth Van Hom, ~'"' v ~~~~ 13050 Chestnut Ave. R.C. 91739 • • TO: Milce Diaz Senior Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91729 FROM: Joseph Sibree 8165 Cornwall Ave. Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91739 11/01/07 u 2 L 71-~e~ -CZ~.f40" . . ORC 'ZCId-7-~oil`1 Mike, As per our conversation at the planning desk last week on 10/25/07. I had brought to your attention at that time the fact that the first two pages of the revised `NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT NEGATIVE DECLARATION' dated October 25", 2007 had two typos that misrepresented the project zoning in regazds to the densities. The notice.states that the proposed project is located in the Medium Residential District (14-24 dwelling units per acre) when in actuality the project only allows (8-14 dwellirigs per unit) without the density bonus. I had informed you that this typo was both on the cover page and on the first page of the Mitigated Negative Declazation and had asked you if you would make sure that this is corrected and then redistributed to all the agencies that were to receive this report. You had said that you would take care of this. • This letter is to verify that you did follow through with my request and to confirm that ALL agencies that were to receive this report were notified of the mistake and were given the correct information. I would appreciate a response to this letter as soon as possible. Sincen(rely, Joseph Sibree CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIv10NGA . NOV 05 2007 RECEIVED -PLANNING • ~.,,~, ~, UR - y 63 - ~~~- ~ 8 Z ~4-$ -I6 Z¢ ~~ ~- ~q~ ~ U~0`6 t, RECEPVEf~ r~ov p 1200 C!T!' OF RAEdChdO CUCAt~ONGA C~iY CLERK To: City Council, Head Planner Mike Diaz, James Troyer and City Clerk City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91729 Regarding: San Sevaine Villas DRC2006-00540 and DRC2007-00119 x~. ~_ a~~~~l Date 11-01-2007 ~'~~`~ Page 1 of 1 ` After reading the "Notice of Intent to Adopt Negative Declaration" dated 10-ZS-2007 A glaring mistake has been found. It states the project location is in a medium density district (14-24 dwelling units per acre). This is not accurate as it is in a medium density district (5-14 dwelling units per acre). This is also stated incorrectly on the Mitigated Negative Declaration. It is important that these mistakes gets corrected and redistributed to all the "Mailing List" included in the negative declaration. This is ahigh-density project that will greatly impact my neighborhood, public streets public safety, public schools and more. The, current density is 17.4 units per acre as proposed, that is far above current caning. My comments on the full environmetttal study part 1 and 2 and also the mitigation • ^:onitoring=Yros ~.-will-be-cemiagshortl;'- _ _-- I am opposed to the building of this project Thank you, ~ l~~ Kenneth Van Horn, 13050 Chestnut Ave, R.C. 91739 • ~--. (- r R~VG,f V ~iJ October 24 , 2007 Rancho Cucamonga Q~T 2 5 2UU7 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 9] 730 CITY OF RRi~lCNO CUCAMONGA CITY CLERi< To: Mayor, City Council Members and City Clerk Regarding: San Sevaine Villas DRC2006-00540 & All Affordable Housing Please add this item on your next agenda and inform the public at your next council meeting. Regarding affordable housing apartment tenants: Is it the requirement of affordable housing developers or the city: 1. To make sure all vehicles owned by tenants are registered. 2. To make sure the vehicles are registered in their name. 3.'To require the tenants to provide proof of car insurance 4. To make sure the tenants address matches.the registration and insurance • of the car. 5. Tow and impound cars unregistered parked in affordable housing parking State law requires all drivers to be insured. State law forbids unregistered cars from being parked in public view or on public property. There is no reason why this cannot be enforced if not already. My friend told me recently, one of his friends was at a stoplight and there was one car ahead of him. He looked in his rear view mirror and saw another car approaching him. This car did not stop and ran into him at full speed. This caused the friends car to ram into the car ahead. The car that did not stop had no insurance or registration. The car the friend got pushed into sued the friend's car and won hundreds of thousands of dollars. What my friend's friend got out of it was a broken back and tripled car insurance rates. I would like some assurance the people that live and drive near me have car insurance. Thank you, Kenneth Van Horn ~~~.- • 13050 Chestnut Avenue, R.C. ~ ~ ~ .P t ~~ - S c'~. ~J J e.<"~ Cx \ N ~e„"~ 2e~,o ~ < z~~l~~ `r Rancho Cucamonga „ity Hall ~~w' ~~`• `~ ~Y' ~ ?, ~ % Attention: Mayor, City Council Mem rs, ~ ~ ~~~ Clerk and Senior Planner ~~-~u,z, Ci . ' P.O. Box 807 CITY OF RANCii0 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Y i /~ ~AI~A r~ ~C I 1 V 2~0~ Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth Q~}~Y ro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk aFftl'~~io~~~ My name is ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ I live at ~ ~ozl ~w~ Sa Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex Gutierrez Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk James Frost City Treasurer MiAe Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height oh a small.and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. - --~- Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10. Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights, sp ed bumps, police patrol, etc... (~,~ i Sign~'tur `J ~-~6 _~~ Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:ta • • ~y . ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ N e, tom- , Rancho Cucamonga ity Hall ~ ~ '~~'4 Attention: Mayor, City Council M~~@4sRANCHO UC I N~'A ~ ~"' -~.o._ . u • • Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 OCT 0 9 2007 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 !~ECFIVE~ - P~~N~~~nr--. Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Mynameis ~1~~.tn;.kejlGnlDAI~cQ I live at N Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies Cor City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex Gutierrez Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member -E9ebra Adams City Clerk James Frost City Treasurer Mi{:e Dizz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this, magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199.- 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights,- streetlights, speed bumps, police patrol, etc... T Signature ~~~~ ~~.~ Date - You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, ~~~~p~~~ Clerk and Senior Planner • P.O. Box 807 ~~'~ 4? i G1J;` Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 ~~ ~~ ~ ~1~, t~l,~~ C~~ Attenfion: Please make 't _ '! copies for City Council ~,~ `~( ~II-~~l{ Members, Clerk and • - Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane, llliams, Senior Planner: City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex carierrez (\~~ A \ 1 Council Member My name IS `, )~1~1 ~ ~,~ \~~, L. Dennis Michael i Council Member T' ~, ` , Sam Spagnol0 I live at ~~-~~ t:.~~~'LT I~1~, ~ ~.C~~~~{~~,j~Council Member Debra Adams Number Street City City Clerk James Frost I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Ciiy Treaaarer Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and . densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. • 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4..Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7: Traffic 8. Air Pollution _ 9. Extinctian of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implem ntation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlis, speed tfpmps, police patrol, etc... Date' You are the light of the world A city that on a hell cannot be hidden. Mt s.ta • " .: .. .'. ,~. ,~ Rancho Cucamonga ,;ity Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner • P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: My name is I live at j3t:21 ~l Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Dehsity Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex Gutierrez , Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk lames Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude: San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. - Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development • DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area._ .., 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure -_ 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic ' 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights, speed bumps, police patrol, etc... ;~Y.:-- ~~ Signature ~ ~ Date • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:ta ' ~ Rancho Cucamong( amity Hall '~ Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 • Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, Senior Planner: City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. aeX Gutierrez " - ~ Council Member 'pJ~ I L. Dennis Michael My name is /4+ro'~ l l a('t i NP ~- Council Member I~ (~~ II Sam Spagnolo Iliveat ~`I~ Y~h0?tt~Y ~di~ V1t'cif`t7 Council Member Number Street Cit Debra Adams - y City Clerk lames Frost I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and City Treasurer Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Make Diaz " Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. ... ---,,_:.- , San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories.in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Borius Agreement DRC2007-00199. • " - 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementatio loc walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights;,s ~d by~mps, police patrol, etc... Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta • Rancho Cucamonga amity Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner • P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 - Attention: Please make copies for City Council Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, - Members; Clerk and senior Planner: City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: ~ Rex Gutierrez - Council Member c~,~\ ~ 5Cl (l~u name is 1 I ~1 J/ M L. Dennis Michael ' y Council Member ~ ., ~ I live at (~ ~ ~~ ' ~~ i j IOILi r 1 ~ tnl (/i:l,l 'Y/~ C-~ `~ '~ () Sam Spagnolo Council Member Number Street City Debra Adams City Clerk James Frost I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and City Treasurer Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Mike Diaz SeniorPlanner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. • Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10. Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights, speed br\Jmps, police patrol, etc... -~ `fIL%/oT Date 1-~ . • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ia _, ~--~ Rancho Cucamonga amity Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: My name is ~'~ IG~ ~C7 ~~I'l~C+~(~- i live at Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies for Cily Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex Gutierrez Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk lames Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height oh a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10. Noise Pollution The foundation for the.protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights, speed bumps, police patrol, etc... C~: ~~~ (;iO~~ ,~, h . Signature lj _ ~ J_ ~ .~ Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:la • u Rancho Cucamong. .;ity Hall `~ Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner • P.O. Box 807 R h C CA anc o ucamonga, 91729 Attention: Please make copies for City Council Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex cn[ierrez ~ ~ Council Member M ~ ~ l ~ I ~ My name is ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ G Y ` ` L. Dennis Michael _ Council Member I live at I S ~ LI ~ Z ~ v ~. i1 `'Y~ C <^~ n C ~ ~ ` ~~ t-f I~ Sam Spagnolo Council Member Number ~ Street City Debra Adams City Clerk ' oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and . lames Frost city Treasurer Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199 Mike Diaz . Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development • DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225~units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure _ 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implemeritation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights, speed bumps, police patrol, etc... ~~W c~~% Signature <~~,,~ Date • You are the light of the world: A city that on a hill cannot be hidderi. not 5:ta ~~ - So, ~1 ~~ L'i' J c. ~ 1.1 L, ~ancho Cucamonga C'"~Hall Attention: Mayor, City c,~uncil M Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ embers,~~ u"~ /,~ `2 ~ l ,, ~~~~ ~~ Attention: Please make • copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Plainer: Rex Gutierrez Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, Council Member City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: t.. Dennis M;cbzel Council Member IL1 I!~il-~ ~ L ~-- ~ ~ Q j ~ L. ~S Sam Spagnolo My name IS Council Member ^ ' _ "~ Debra Adams live at % 7 S s ~j f"jC~ i 1, ~/ Cti ~ t'Zi ti ~~ City Clerk James Frost C Number Street City y3 City Treasurer Mike Diaz'" ' Senior Planner I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development • DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime Ci7Y OF RANCHO CUCANiONGA 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic SEP 2 4 2007 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife RECEIVED - PLANfJING 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2 07-00199. II , L--~~ Signa ur i, ~-%~ 0 0 7 Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta • Rancho Cucamonga C'Ity Hall - Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, • Clerk and Senior Planner ~ Box 807 P O - . . Rancho Cucamon a CA 91729 9 ~ Attention: Please make copies rnr city cunncil Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, Rex Gutiemz couoN Member City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. - L oeanis Mirharl Council Member n ~ My name is ~-= c~ r r ~ ~ ~ ~f t~ ~~ .1 r ~ n C co ~1 Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adana _ live at ~ k~i 7 /-i LC ,'~; ~fi . d~~~/~ . ~ sic rr ~,.,,,~,ct ~ city Clerk Number Stre City r lames Frosc City Treasurer MrYe Diaz Senioi Planner I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Dens'lty Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartrnent building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of. single and two-story dwellings. • Following are some of the reasons 1 oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. . -,. ~~:. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Ag ment~C2897 9. ~`\ Signature r~yl~a-lo~~ Date • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta i ~ l /' R h C C' Hall ~~~ --- "~) ~~'~ anc o ucamonga Ity Attention: Mayor, City Council Memb , Clerk and Senior Planner ~ P.o. Box so7 ~- y ~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 r - ~~ Attention: Please make • copies for City Council ~ Members, Clerk and Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: My name is i/~`IZic~ t~r~?"C vii I live at ~ • ~ ~~ ~ f i" t^'" `i'~ Number city I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Senior Plainer: Rex Gutierrez Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk James Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. - •t ~ - - This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development • DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1~ -The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10. Noise Pollution Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus re e m ent`D R C2 Q 07-OCl 199. Signature ~ ''t ~-7i Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be.hidden. Mt 5:ta • Rancho Cucamonga. City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, • .Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: My name is i) C r ,-~ ~`t r, 1: I live at -7 ~ y ~. ~,~L L "~- Number StrAet City I oppose the Sari Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex Gutierrez Council Member L. Dcnnis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo . Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk alames Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated.area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. .._ . • Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools _ 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, 1 oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. .P t-G~-~ cF-e-tif~h,~,, Signature l/ ,-~ ~r~a 3~ o T Date • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ia Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: My name is ~~ ~ ~~ live at ~ ~ 7~f ~ i'~{'62 //i~Gl`~ti Number Stfeet City I oppose the Sail Sevaine Villas development DRC2i)06-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement URC2007-00199: The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure _ .. 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agr~ meat DRC2007-00199. Signature lr-al'0~ Date u • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mc s:ta • Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. Rez Gutierrez Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo - Counci] Member `/~ ~ ~ .Debra Adams ,/ ~~ City Clerk _ James Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner S.~ IZ C 7_C~~ 6-d~ S`l0 act ~~ c_ "L~~ -~ Cl.q Thisis a petition to blockthe proposed development of a 225 apt. Facility at 13733 Foothill Blvd. Rancho Cucamonga i~~CY~~dersigned persons below indicate their opposition to the ~C~Io,rxM~~vn Housing Development Proposed at 13233 Foothill Btvd. - ,~ a Address Phone# Signature r t~`it 1' ~ X324 '~' ~il~ ~. a^ G3_ _~ ~ R C~- 2 7 . F,' ~ v~ ~o -c~ ~ ~~ j c19~ re l< < RC ~ ~ Fi1 ~)v~3-u~~ ~ ~/ 4 -( r~ ~(; S 7861 I, ~-/~ /~ C. ~Z~S S~ l 371 rte, ~ I~~.. ~7z: '~~ G7' ~- c (~'°~)•R~~~3 ' ~ b 8 ..- C o 3 ~ ~ . Iv1 ~ I i'Z ~ ~ ~ -gby -- ~l~n4l, ~ 13flf ~~ ~I,a 1,6 ~ , ~1~`"~ ' lc' 2t i5 , ~. 7~. - ,( an~~%4 !3'~by ~l~ a~ I ~~ ivy ~-~-,5~ - ,G ~ ~ ~'~ 1 ~~i 1 ~ -'-163-~`l Cuero ~ ~~', / (8d Ca ~ ~F. 4~4-Y637~db C'~-P.;~. ~,~Qac- ~., e ~ ; T ``- ~l ~(,C~ ci n-s- ; ~ nr I ~ , - - fl1b ~. ~-~c; 3U 1 ~t~,C c5~ (eN;ti~Z`l~ oai3 N" `a~Gy ` i v~ q51-U6~~~63 2. /~U~ c f',~SS fir/ ~~i ~= 5a s .~ / 6 r ~. _, J ~- phis is a petition to block the proposed development of a 225 apt.Facil"ttY at 13233 Foothill Blvd.~ancho Cucamonga ~~~iersigned persons below indicate their opposition to the nl„rrh-r..,~,n Nei icing bevelooment Proposed at 13233 Foothill Blvd. p Address Phone# ignature • 7S~ C! k~ ss c r L n ~3 c ~3 ~ wS 7 SS C [ASS ~ 1. ~ ~ -~ j - 15 Si DR- Q~s - ,Ji ~. cti~~ r Mots'. ~k C c.FJ ~`l r/a 7~ I ~ Esc C~ `jo9 - ~f G3' ~ ~ 4 S"/ J $~~ ~~i ~• a/iebfu~ a~.~ ~ ; ati. ~ o - -9 i- • I /nom _ l~u.d 7~'(vz /~/G!-~,~7 C/ `loci "`F~P3-9o ~-r9~ - ~~~ ~~ ~x-n, 7elp Z ~/ora/ji L1 ~lo~j, ' ~~ 3 ~ ~ ~ 7~/PL 1~/~c>,~'i ~ U~r - y~39s ' f~f1.e~J-acs 7~~L ~ru'P,` ~ , Qe`~' ~~~ ya ~` ~ ,~ 7~~ Z ~TGyi~7 e% ~ ~3 ~ ~. ~ `~G3~1 gv4-~/ , yj ~ n ~~3 eih Ix~-~~~52~ a,A tE ~(-c'~KrNn~ % ~"" ~,~ kG., 4e~r-y63-3~7~ texa~~` /~ LISca y'~LoK~ }a~ll~/ G~~57NuT gRq-Zs,~'~ ~' ,c,e~ ~ ~.~.1 f~~~-ri Indicate an individual willing to volunteer some time with an astrik or checkmark beside hls or her name • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: My name is f('~nl ~ f~ '7t>~A-I' live at i 3 i!, ~ R~'(s i.I N ~ '1e! v~;. RUi. ~,~r ~t-r-1:: +ti G~/a- Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. AttenBon: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex Gutiertez Council Member. L. Dennis Michae] . Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams Ciry Clerk James Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two,-story dwellings. • Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution - Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. ~~~---- Signature ~~~° ~ Date • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta _, r\ I Rancho Cucamonga .;ity Hall - Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: My name is ~lhc, ~ A~r~c--iv r I live at ~~'GZ~ ~~t~t~! > ~ 1~c nnC V-w h~C~ih•.cn Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. • Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex Gutierrez Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk lames Frost City Treasurer Mike.Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project.- This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and - densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. • 1. The development is too"large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community. identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic _ 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10:Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights, speed bumps, police patrol, etc... ~--~ .... Signature ~il2olc~y Date - You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. MI s:ta • Rancho Cucamong 'ity Hall ( - Attention: Mayor, City Council Members,. Clerk and Senior Planner • P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Mynameis ~%SCC:v" I!~r,,,g c;~-acs - live at l3o"L1 ~~~ C S~ (Zc„~~1-.o C~:~c,~~a.~ Number Street City • I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies.for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex Gutierrez Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk lames Frost City Treasurer. Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure ., _ ._ - 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10. Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementati n= ck walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights~s bumps, police patrol, etc... ~~~ ~~ ~; ~~1~_l,Ii;~ • Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner , P.O. Box 807 ~~C+~i F f~~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor P e~ „illri~ ~~~ City Council Members, Clerk and Senior PlanQ`•';;~'~~'`~,~' lJi i 1 .. ....,n N~ My name is ~ra•SF~F/ ,~[ LtJr I live at Z51g3 GK}SSrc't] +~L hC Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Atteatloa: Please make espies for City Counol Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex Gutierrez Council Member 1.. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk James Frost City Treasurer Mike Dial Senior Planner -- The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8.. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreem~enj~t DR\C20~07-00199., ~S ~COti~- Sig~re `~ Date • • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta • ,` Rancho Cucamonga City Hall • Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner _ ~ P.O. Box 807 s~~~~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 'r~ '`~~ r "r`rl` j % Ja ~" ` Attention: Please make ~ ; ~ a~ ~ copies for City Council Members Clerk and Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro rri~3i2t~t{Jia , Senior Planner: City Council Members Clerk and Senior Planner 1T'! ' `rtY( Rez Gutierrez Council Member J, ti Gurney My name 15 12gL 4 Chestnut Ave L. Dennis Michael Council Member Edwmda G 91739 602 Sam Spagnoln , 9 I IIVe at - Council Member . Number Street City Debra Adams City Clerk - James Frost I oppose the San Sevairte Villas development DRC2006-00540 and City Treasurer Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00 i 99. Mike Dial Senior Planner. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. • Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10. Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights, speed bumps, police patrol;'etc:.. ,.. ,. Signatur Date • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta ..' Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, • Clerk and Senior Planner ~~~~~~~~ P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 ~~r-t~, ~, ~. ~j:rt-; LJ+-i a..:~ . S'3 i Attention: Please make - copies fur City Council y y fJ ~ f't~',l~<{_;i-~i~~~~~ "~ Members, Clerk and Dear Ma or Donald J. Kurth, Ma or Pro Tem ~larte, Senior Planner: City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner`:'" ' °` ~ •° t'' aeX cueerrez Council Member .- p L. Dennis Michael My name is I ti zc R~ i-~l Flt YLf-"6 ~f i Council Member Sam Spagnolo Iliveat ~'SO'y~/ Tyy AV. fCA~c~~.10 Cl~raxOaSG.A (*.Li, Council Member Number ' Street Cit Debra Adams Y or1'i-39 CityCterk lames Frost I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and City Treasumr Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support aproject-of this, magnitude. San Sevaihe Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. :;v ~ This large project consists of units up to three stories in height oh a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development • DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10. Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights, speed bumps, police patrol, etc... ~~ ttAtE~ _ - Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:ta • r~ .. Rancho Cucamonga City HaH • Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, ~~~~~~~~ Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. BOX 807 ~'~ F `~' Attention: please make ~ '~ ~ ~~~~ ~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 '` ` copies for City Council r~~ OF RR,i ~rN~i ct~cAMOr~~~n;tm: p ~'e~R and y y' .• - ~'~' i"~~ Rex Gutierrez Ma or Pro Tem Diane tlV'tll~attis; Co Dear Ma or Donald J. Kurth ncil Member , u City Council Members; Clerk and Senior Planner. r~ Dennis M;onael I n ~ Council Member (. ~ ~ (~ ~ry„r~ Sam Spagnolo "'~~ " My name is irv //~~ V~ Coancil Member I Debm Adams live at 132~i~{ ~avn~r~.su, taw ~• C • ~~'~ ci`l'~"~ Number Street City Jatnes Erost City Treasurer Mike Diaz SeniorPlamer I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. • Following are some of the reasons 1 oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Signatur a ~~~ n~ Dat~~~T' . ..._ • You are the fight of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5a4 ~°' Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 ~ECEji1~CJ r, , r:,///~~~~`tld` 4.. :i °1W~i~i Attemion: Please make ~t'rY C}F ~~r~ckr cucar~oNC~e1~~, ~,~ enari, G+T~f ~;:..rC~~It Senior Planner: R G ' l J Dear Ma or Donald J Kurth Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams ex unerrez . , y , Council Member City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. ~ L Dennis Michael 1 Council Member My name is Gto' (~2 Y1 ~- ~ ~ ~ S~`1 Sam Spagnolo Council Member /' - ~ ~ ? Debra Adams ` live at j~~~ Q?6~.~ICVS(o ~ ~,t ( 4 ~~J aJ citycie<k Number Street CRy lames Frost . . City Treasurer Mike Diaz Savior Planner I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The local. infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-OOi99. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic , 8. Air Pollution "' 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10. Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Ag ~ment DRC,~007-001 9. /, Ignature ~, Date • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden, Mt 5:14 • ' -' Rancho Cucamonga City Hall • Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, -Clerk and Senior Planner ~~~~~~~~ P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 ~-, , -);,,~>~ x~~'i' . , .1 ,,;,dr.' ; Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Dlan~e~~f{ hi .`f, ~'~~~~~ aA City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: ' i j"'"''1` My name is ~~~ l~ ~s4 I live at P3aY~ l~,g(i.US'W ~7 ~-~~ P.U.Cdw.thGrt,Ok Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies for City Counal Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. Rex Gutiertez Council Member L Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk James Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. - • Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-OD199. ~• I Signature - Date ~~ • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ia Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner ~~'~~j+~~~ P.O. BOX 807 Attention: Please Drake Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 P~ rl , , ~, ~;n;;i°! copes rur city council ~LLI r., ;l ?,+:~iJ Members, Clerk and ' yq~^p~rgp r pad Senior Planner: ~~ i r 6i7" S?f'il''i~tyyUt~ry~yt~~ Rex Gufietrez P Di W lli T :'~ ro em an l a, , Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor 1 ~`j' { Council Member " ..>r. r City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. L. Dennis Michael Council Member -~- My name iS ~e-l1~CL 10Y~rE.C samspagnolo Council Member Debra Adams live at ~U~ Fi~,~ipi C~c. \2CUnclnU C;u~O~rnC~noJ ity clerk Frost Number treet City a City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is a high-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development • DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic S. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, 1 oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Signat e . ~ j `-~ n~ Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:1a • .. '. '. . Rancho Cucamonga City Hall • Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 ~~~ra~`,j~~~ Rancho Cucamon a, CA 91729 g AttenOOa: Please make copies for City Council ~'~~ ''~ ~• ')`i' -' Membe Clerk and Senior Planner: n ~ ~ Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Til~ial~;@iJt~64~/1C~fUC Rex Gutiertez ~ cnnncil Member City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. ti±"' r-;_r~; i~ Dom,;: M;ebael + /I,,~~~ Y~ ~~fvl-- ~ ~~' Council Member sum spagnnln 1~1 My name is / Counci] Member r ((~~ ~~ ~.,( C ~ ~ ~ Debra Adams City Clerk rK~ ;/b I live at 7k72- i Number Street City lames Frost Ci[y Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. ' 'The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Viilas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height. on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. - - - Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure ` 4. Crime 5: Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Agreement DRC2007-00199. ,~~ Sign e ~~~~ Date Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus You are the light of the world. A city that on a hell cannot be hidden Mt 5:14 Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, • Clerk and Senior Planner ~~6 a~E~~~ . P.O. Box 807 Attention: %eaae make Rancho Cucamonga CA 91729 ,~~~ ~ + nr,~r w ~ ~ copies Cor City Counul ..: ~,i ~iJ : ~ Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Mayor P{~ 1~rari~jlV~tlli~~n~~A Kurth Dear Mayor Donald J co ~uMe be< , . ~~-f'1"i>? City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planne°r"'~ L Dennis Michael Council Member My name is r, -~ s~+^ n ~ Sam Spagnolo Council Member - / ~ Debra Adams _ ~+~a R ~~ live at 13 /~ `C ~., City Clerk Number _ Street City lames Frost City Treasurer ~~ Mike Diaz " Senior %anner I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. - - San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. ""This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development • - DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution - 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. a Signatu ~` _~ -- Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. mtt 5:ta • ;. ...: • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner pp.. ~p g~ P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 u ~:y ,, „r _ _. _ ~:~ ~ F....~ Ji~% Dear Mayor Donald.J. Kurth, Mayor Pr~rti'~~n'et+NilliaiJ~, City Council McAAmbDDers, Clerk anTd Sen-ior~Planne~ll'l i;i.~}~~' My name is /~~Lb~ 1- '~~`~-c~~t~t~-~/- Iliveat 1~0a3 rvy Jtl/e ~">l~va~c U~9 Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaihe Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, L9erk end Senior Planner: Rex Gutiertez Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member bra Adams ty Clerk James Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height oh a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not ,, ...fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I.oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too larger: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, Date streetli hts, speed bumps, police patrol, etc - T ~...~ Signature f 4 SD • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. nm s is ~' Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, • Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 ~~~~Q~~~~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 ~~ ~., ..~. r,„,_: Attention: Please make ~~r,~ r..',J ii,':i! copies for City Council Dear Ma or Donald J. Kurth Ma or Prt~:p'j~;gJ~~,~l~« Members, Cleck and y , y ` I t Illl Senior Planner: City Council Members Clerk and Senior Planners,... ~ ~~'~~~9~-'~ Rez Gutierrez ,G °" I ,~ ~'~ ~,t~yi~ .... Council Member O L. Dennis Michael My name is ~Q-t-'L ~ _~~]ZA Q. Council Memfxr [~J~ , Sam Spagnolo I live at ~3~~3 ~V u/ (~iiD ~i~('(~,~~~QQ Council Member Debra Adams _ Number S eet City Ciry Cterk James Fros[ -I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and City Treasurer Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-0.Ot99. M'ke D'az > Senior Plamrer The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story - dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development • DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetli eed bumps, police-patrol, etc... _ ~ ~J Signature. _l~ ^ ~, Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta • • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner (~C~t~-`.~~a9~~~ P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 +^F r;a ; , r~ '1j,';•l-~~ ... .. ._ ~.- ~tl fr7 ~~~,Cf;S~i ~"~~.~},~i,.,rt°iAN4471V4ar't Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro' a lagg,lN,~ ~ , City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner " ' "'" My name is ~.~-; I IC~E+""~ ~-~t-vl ~ live at `~ ti~(~ ~ C~ 1'2j :`~ ~ I N.f7 ~ ~ • ~ ~ C Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attentloo: Please make copies Cor City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. Rex Gutierrez Council Member L Dennis Michael Council Member sam spa~,nln Council Member Debm Adams City Clerk - ~- lames Fmst City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small. and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. • Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution - - 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199 ..~ <_~• Sign ture ~~ °-g~=~i :a ~, c~-7 Date .~..._ .. • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:ta 1."Scati1. c~t~Ja ~tJC, `/. Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Anayol•, City Council Members, Clerk and :senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA-91729 4~C%-G<-c c- ~ s~ Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: My name is I live at Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make • copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. Rex Gutierrez _ _ _ Council Member L Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk lames Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior P)anner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development • DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus- Agreement DRC2007-00199. Signat re C~/ j~ /' Date // / You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta • ,Rancho Cucamonga r'~ r Hall ~ Attention: Mayor, City council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner - P.ID. BOX 807 • Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and " Senior Plawer: Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams Rex Gutierrez , City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Council Member iw Dennis Micnael j ~ Council Member My name is ~ L, ~'~_ Sam Spagnolo Council Member // , live at ~~~(/J" "/71r~7~f iU~:~ ~~. /Lr/~l. Debra Adams City Clerk Number Street City James Frost City Treasurer Mi&e Diaz •" I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Senior Planner Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. • Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime ' 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreemenf DF(f/2007-00199. Date • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:ta Rancho Cucamonga i~ ~ Hall ~~ Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, _ City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: My name is ~~~ cara ~ ~c-• I live at ~~ ~-~~ ~ rmrh, G~~cK~ ,_ Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex Gutierrez Council Member ~L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk lames Frosl City Treasurer Mike Diaz ~- SeniorPlanner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists. of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas-development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10. Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Sigriature °~h~l~ Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt a:ta • • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, • Clerk and Senior Planner P.O: Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 • Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, Citv Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Mynameis JA2R,4G Ml~7.25i~, live at 78~a- l=,~ II ~~, . c~ 2aNr.~ t-„c~m~-~ Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. Rex Gutierrez Council Member L. Dennis Michael ~~ Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk James Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that,consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4." Crime _ 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution _ 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution • Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. ~~ ~ Signature y/,7~o7 Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:ta Daze 09-16-2007 • To: City of Rancho Cucamonga ~ of ~-- 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 ~~~~~~~ Att: City Council, Mike Diaz, James troyer and City Clerk ~~ i :: `u~-f San Sevaine Villas DRC2006-00540 and DRC2007-00119` ~ ~{ ~,([h~ ,r~ rU ~~~ Ju fl.)f ~~ r 'J C, First off I am opposed to this project as it is way to lazge for our nei~libdrhb6d~'to handle. We already have a lazge apartment complex on our south property line; we have enough :.problems with thoughts residence getting into our neighborhood already. We also have a prison down the street and the released prisoners come through our neighborhood as well. The reason for this letter is to make known the dangerous air quality in this area. This proposed apartment complex is exposed to high levels of Lead and Cadmium. The developed and any future residents nced to know they are exposed to above standard levels of cancer causing substances. See page 2 of 2 provided. This notice appears in our newspaper every few months or so. Also [ am awaze the city has not done any on site air quality testing. This site not only is exposed to Tamco's pollution but we are surrounded by recycling centers, a dump, other • steel plants and more big businesses, on site air testing needs to be preformed. l don't feel this are is safe to build more residential complexes. The neighborhood I live in has been here since the mid fifties. The city has chosen to allow negative impact developments to be built around us. It is time to treat us with some respect With Victoria Gardens up the street this neighborhood has become a desired place to live. Again I oppose this project, Respectfully Submitt\ed~by: • • Michael In accordance with the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Proposition 65), TAMCO hereby provides notice that its steel mill located a[ 12459 Arrow Highway in Rancho Cucamonga, California emits lead and cadmium into the ambient air. Persons within the approximate lightly shaded area shown below are exposed to lead, and persons within the darker shaded area are exposed to both lead and cadmium, through ambient air at levels determined by the State of Califomia to require a Proposition 6S warning. Lead is a chemical known to the State of California. to cause cancer and to cause birth defects or other reproductive harm. Cadmium is a chemical known to the State of California to cause cancer. Please address any questions concerning this warning to: Community Information Line " TAMCO P.O. BOX 325 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 (909) 899-0660, ext. 5297 www.tamcosteel.com Angeles National Poresf Snn Bernmdno National frorest , Rioltu Muni[ipol '~ Airport Junrpa-Mountaim c poi .}- Corona Muni[ipal~ Airport i.` is is i, ~;,., I. ~ ., I,,,' i';:' i. .. ~ . I i ( . ~~-, (~' 1 Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: My name is !~'1 /I/f (; A r'~t-i P ~Tfl ~ ~~C1~1'L~ly~ I live at Number Sireet C~-S I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Plawer: Rex Gutiertez - Counci] Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagtolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk lames Frost Cily Treasurer Mike Dia Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development greement DRC2007-00199/,. /~ SI tUre ~ ~a~~ r6~.~~,::~ Date DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus • • • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta Rancho Cucamonga City Hall 1 Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, • Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Myname.is UiRA~ ~o~i~4iRA~ I live at X21$ . [-tgs'~1C~T. nVC LI I~A'V~~ elk Number Street City Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Attention: !'lease make copies for Citp Council Members, Clerk and .Senior Planner: Rex Gutierrez Council Member .,~ ,..L. Dennis Michael _ Council Member Sam Spagnolo C%~~ Council Member I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. llcbra Adams Cif}' Clerk James Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine.Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. • Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution • The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights, speed bumps, police patrol, etc... Signature ~~ ~ ` ~, -7 Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council_Members, Clerk and Senior Planner ~~G~E~~ P.O. Box 807 ~ j „ , , rl,, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 v~. :. :;..,. CITY Cgc F64i°;E;P'.'J CJCA~iON~A Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Dl~'iie V1lii~aiils, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. . My name is i ~C/~'~' %'' ~ et ~ ~-t. I live at Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Viflas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make rnpies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rez U~ttierrez Council Member L Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagrolo Council Member Debra Adams - - - City Clerk lames Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic S. Air Pollution - - 9. Extinction of Wildlife t0.Noise Pollution Again, 1 oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. _......; ~i~-- Signatu ~~/ ~ (,~ ~ Date ~ • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:ta _ • ;~ • \J --. Rancho Cucamonga (,..y Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 ,._. Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: i ,n . My name is I live at ;~p~~~ 1~I1C'j/1 U Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies (or Ciry Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. Rex Gutiertez Council Member L Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk James Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units. up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DFiC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4.•._Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic " 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution evelopment DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus • varc You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta (~ ` (~ Rancho Cucamonga• ~~ty Hall - Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. - - My name is I live at Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC200?-00199. • Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex Gutierzez Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams Ciq• Clerk James Frost Cily Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this, magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not tit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building _ 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, str~eletlights, speed bumps, police patrol, etc... ature Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta .. ..... `7~P • • u Rancho Cucamonga~ty Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 (_ Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: oU,r N,~n,e N=~ Nor ~- ~, -. VA r~tit,-:~ 5~~: '1~~ t~ ~_. ~ live. rit _ ~-~~C~ En~n~~~ ~~z ~,-~ t ~~:~.t~c~ ~I1~1~~ Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies ror Ci[y Council il9embers, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex Gutierrez Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk James Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large:'225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime (c a w~~~ ~ IR ~y 1` ~~ c.~c-~ P~Kt-Y-~`~ 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution • The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights, speed bumps, poli patrol, etc... ignature ` I` Date I ~-._. ~~~''C1. ~~C..l_Ltrf~ You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. MI s:ta Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.~. BOX 807 ~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Attention: Please make espies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams ' Rex Gutierrez , Council Member City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: ~. Dennis M;cnael ' I !-~ My name is ~ ~ G~ ~\~ ~" ~~ ~ { ~ ~ a~ S Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member \ ~ I live at 7~~(' I ItI\t'1 i\ ~~ _ ~ , l (~~`C~1\\V~\~i'i' Debra Adams City Clerk Number Street Cit lames Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Senior Planner Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Derisity Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Li~The development is too large: 225 units on a small area ~2.='Eradication of Community identity: Three story building L3.= Inadequate Infrastructure ~.~ Crime ~~ Devaluation of Surrounding Properties ~% Overcrowded Schools Q'~ Traffic ~: Air Pollution Extinction of Wildlife ~O:Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Signatu e ` ~~(o-~ Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:t4 • t~~ • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, • Clerk.and Senior Planner ,' P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 " ~ Attention: Please make ~" ~ copies for City Council Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex cntierrez Council Member My name IS ~,_r.~G, r~~;" ~/,-'; .f ~„- L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo r~ ~; , ~ - _ , , IIIVeat Si ~r h~;;~li:I;/% ..,.~~ r'-~r,; ('.~:.nn:,~cr.~ !r/ '''//i'=1 Council Member Number Street 'City Debra Adams Ciryclerk James Frost I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and City Treasurer Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this, magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings.. • Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools " 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the proti=ction,of,our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights, speed bumps, police patrol, etc... ,• - Signature n. :; , • Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 • Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Allenlion: Please make copies fbr City Council Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, Memhers, Clerk and sensor rlanner: City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: aea c»eeReZ ~t ~ Council Member I My name is ~~~cS ~ ~ C/ `c_ I_. Dennis Michael _ _ Council Memhcr ~, e Sam Spagnoln I live at ~.2~'O C ~ council Me»,ber ~I!/'.7F~~/~~i_ ~~/ E ~c ~C'~(// ~ Number Street City ~cnra Adams ~Cily Clerk - lames Fros,~ I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and City Treasurer Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199 n-rke Diaz . Senior Planner The local infrastructure'is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development • DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools _ 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights, speed bumps,,police patrol, etc... Signa~r~ / 7 /S' z> Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:1a • • Rancho Cucamonga Ciry Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members; Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 (~ Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Mynameis ~~~~~1~~ T{}~~~}~l.',7(,DL~N I live at l3 t ~Z ~-a ln,~-~~3c::~ C-1 : ~~~.G~.:, ~~«tv,,..~tt-.r,, r.. t; Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density.Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Plamer:- Rex Gutierrez Council Member L Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams ~t. City Clerk James Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10: Noise Pollution • Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC-270-07-00199. u.~- 1 GvxJ~---- Signature o9-is-o7 Date You are the light.of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta 1~ Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 .Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, - City Council Members, Clerk and Senlior Planner: My name is '=II/t~ ~(ii2Jc ~ ~~~fr ~; Lei 'r~~- ~= ~ li ,. n live at ~ ;~~ ~. i~i,(~f lil.i~%~~- ~l,~f /;%/GC1~~(//)/% Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-60540 and Density bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. • Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: - _.. - }2ex Gutierrez Council Member L. Dennis Michael ~ -~~ ~ ~~ ~-.:.. _,.~,. Council Member Sam Spa@nolo .Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk James Frost City Treasurer MiAc Diaz ~ - Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights, speed bumps, police patrol, etc... / ` ,t,, I ~ ~- ;` ; - ~i Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, , - Clerk and Senior Planner ~~~~j~~~ • _ P.O. Box 807 ~ , `., ; :~,: Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 ~~ ' %.ui~.' ~t !~6nf1p~~f, Attention: Rlease make. CITY fJc Fi>q)'<frFi~ ~iV(rfYfY1V1YW1 copies [ot City Council A".f"'~~ r-~+,r-~; ~( Members, Clerk and Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem D~ar(a Wtt{ia~rts, Sensor manner: City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex cnt;eaex _ Council Member n A ~ L ~ ~ L. Dennis Michael My name is ~y ~ ~~ / '~ 4 Council Member Sam Spagnolo I live at ~ "~ ~ ~~ !'~FG'ST[aT 5t r'T~io/,et1 )~7a-- Council Member Debra Adams Number Street City City Clerk Lames Frost. I oppose the San Sevaine Vilias development DRC2006-00540 and City Treasurer Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Mike Diaz senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Vilias is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. _~....-..._..- - ..-. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00133. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity:. Three story building 3. inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools ._ 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights, speed bumps, police patrol, etc... ~~ Signature ,6 O~ l/ ~~ Dat~' ` • You are the Tight of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden M[ s to .. .. Rancho Cucamonga City Hall ~~~~~,~~~ Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner ~' 9 ~; , :~ ; ~ ' • P.O. Box 807 w• ` ` ~'~' Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Ciro` ®c Rpt'~ia~ ~~i~G.~~fa~~A ' i k on: Please ma e A[ten[ (;; i ; ! ..~:F511 espies for City Council Dear Mayor Donald J.-Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, Memtiers, Clerk and Senior Ptaitner: City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rez cntierrez Council Member i ru~'{ ' name is ~~ ~ , -~ y~ M L. Dennis Michael Council Member ,d .. L ~ . y { ,f~s1 / t} (J ~~ ~~-L~ ~~ u: @ e . GT Q% I live at ~~`r0~ ty~rL~JIJ Sam Spagnolo er ' - , - - ~,a~ t Debra Adams Number Street City city clerk lames Frost I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and City Treasurer Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Sen ior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. _ . Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development • DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks,.crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights; speed bumps, police patrol, etc... Sig atri us'e` Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:t4 • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, ~~~t;:~°jt~.~,} • Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. BOX 807 ~c~"YA ! ,4 ~;;~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 t~r - Cil ~ r QC R~bl`s~i1'"ri vl.~fr/~~Of~r7~-. f;, ~ ~~~ '~'.',':,-s} Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, Attention: Please make copies for Ci[y Counril Members, Clerk end Senlnr Flanner: City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: l/I ~J~ j ~ My name is !~ l'Ii( Gam-- Rex cutserrez Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member (`/~ ~ /~ "y~~ Iliveat d t-.3~ j~~16r~1'~ 1~.LS./~C(~~ ~~cC~6K~W..C Number Streef pgy.. __, ~ t Sam Spagnolo Council Member CabraC edk ms Y lamzs Frost I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and City l'reasurer Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. s'~ o°r anner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does riot fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single. and two-story dwellings. • Followirig are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our rieigliborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetli hts,~s~pyee~d bum-p}s-, police patrol, etc... Signature 9 -x-o7 Date • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:ta Rancho Cucamonga City Hall ~~~~~~~ Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner ~ ~. ,,,,,. P.O. Box 807 µ~" ' `' -:1:1/ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 CITY G~ RNi't°t?t} E;~C~tNfONGA Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: My name is ~VAn ~rrrpnlD Cnz ~ ~ r I live at ~20e. P4orawl ~o,- l:unrno CvCnMOn~~a Number Sireet City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attendoo: Please make copiesaor City Council Memtiets, Clerk aad Senior Planner: Rex Gutierrez Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams Ciry Clerk lames Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planaer The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unft rehtal assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agnnreement DRC2007-001/99. `` V/w~s.. ~arvt a ~ C J r l .... gnature °~ l t3l a~ Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden Mt 5:14 • • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, ~~~~ jt~r~, ~ w • Clerk and Senior Planner . P.O. Box B07 w~e~e: - - Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 `~`' ~~-+-v ~~ ~,~~,y~,~,i~} ,~~~~~~t~~~~~ A[fxntion: Please make _ rnpies for City Council y ~ ',~ Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diarie Williams, Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: City Council Members Clerk and Senior Planner: aex Ga[icRez , Council Member ~-/ My name is ~l~ .~ L. Dennis Michael Council Member - ~([~fJ L Sam Spagnolo ~Membcr I live at ~ j ' Number Street City ebra Adams Ci[y Clerk Janus Frost oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and ci[y Treasarer Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. MiJ:e Dial ,. Senior Planner The local ihfrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community.that consists of single and two-story dwellings. • Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic B. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10. Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights, speed bumps; police patrol, etc... ~~~ ~ , Signature Date • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden Mt s:ia Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members and Clerk~pnl~ P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 n t,~z Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members and Clerk: Rex Gutien•ez Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk James Frost City Treasurer Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, •City Council Membners and Clerk: /, My name is Y~! 1 ~[~V, t ~n ~"C~ ~' (A trU//~~~ Iliveat ~~ ~~ m~~~T1n t-tt\Q, I oppose the government housing project known as San Servaine Villas development DRC2D06-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007- 00199. My concerns are not limited to the follov~ing. 1. Massive Government Housing Project 2. Crime 3. Devaluation of Properties 4. Overcrowded Schools 5. Traffic 6. Air Pollution 7. Extinction of Wildlife ~~~~~~~~ n~. • ~rrv ~~ ~a~dc~o cueAn~arrc~A ~,i~i`( `~~~PiK The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a government housing project of this magnitude: three stories, 225 units, and a small piece of land that is densely populated. Such an environment is breeding ground for gangs, drugs and alcohol, vandalism and graffdi, burglaries and thefts, violence, etc:..thafwill overflow into other neighborhoods. The development is too large. Again, my response to yet another large project in my community is, "NO!" I oppose San Servaine Villas development D C2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. t t n ~ Q~~ `~ J Signature „~-V~..Q n d ):,S ~ - Date C1<-~ ~ ~U Y IJC.C.~ ~ G V N You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be~hiydd~en. nnr5aa b •e `~ ~o 4 ~ 2GQr~S ~ 1L .PCB 5 Rancho Cucamonga City Hali Attention: Mayor, City Cduncil Members and ClerktMllCE Dip'Z- P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members and Clerk: My name is ~~~~~t;~n I live at ~Z~`b ~~~~o~-{~~ '~.C. Attention: Please make copies for City Couucil Members and Clerk: Rex Gutierrez Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk James Frost City Treasurer I oppose the government housing project known as San Servaine Vllas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007- 00199. My concerns are not limited to the following. • 1. Massive Government Housing Project 2. Crime 3. Devaluation of Properties 4. Overcrowded Schools 5. Traffic 6. Air Pollution 7.• Extinction of Wildlife ~~~~~~~~ r, :,,•-;~~5~ CITY ®~ ~iRFIC~C ~JCAMbt~GA The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a govemment housing project ' ` of this magnitude: three stories, 225 units, and a small piece of land that is densely populated. Such an environment is breeding ground for gangs, drugs and alcohol, vandalism and grafAti, burglaries and thefts, violence; etc...that will overFlow into other neighborhoods. The development is too large. Again, my response to yet another large project in my community is, "NO!" I oppose San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. ,~~ ~~~ ~I~~K~.~I ~~ sr~~~~~~5 `ro ~E~ T~r/ ~.ia4S~ a~~ T~S~~~Ts A~ x,3.01 T~~ T~~ ts~- Date • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:ta Attention: Please Rancho Cucamonga City Hall make copies for City Attention: Mayor, City Council Members and Clerk,Mj-CE, pl~-L Council Members and P.O. Box 807 Clerk: Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Rex Gutierrez Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, Council Member City Council Members and Clerk: Debra Adams City Clerk My name is tC~(, VtGfiiil James Frost li t ~` ~ ~ ~- ~ ~ ' " ~~ City Treasurer ve a i~ ~ c7v~ I N .Gt.~ ,t,o- ( L r ar.yr.fnzJa,- > . _ ~`~- `ji73°~ I oppose the govemment housing project known as San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007- 00199. My concerns are not limited to the following. t. Massive Government Housing Project 2. Crime 3. Devaluation of Properties 4. Overcrowded Schools 5. Traffic 6. Air Pollution 7. Extinction of Wildlife `--~ ~.i 1~~~ ~i~1 ~ ~~ 9~ C~ERK AMONGA • The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a govemment housing project of this magnitude: three stories, 225 units, and a small piece of land that is densely populated. Such an environment is breeding ground for gangs, drugs and alcohol, vandalism and graffiti, burglaries and-thefts, violence, etc...that will overFlow into , other neighbofioods. The development is too large. Again,. my response to yet another large project in my community is, "NOI" I oppose San Servaine Villas development DRG2006-00540 and. -.,. _... __ ...._. Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. ~. Sign ture 5~ ~-- 3 Date You are the lighto.,f.~yth~e world. A city that o~An a hill cannot be~~yhi7pd~d~_en. not s:1a • b fl®9i Y~ *- ~. 16ER~ ~ ~R6~ • Attention: Please Rancho Cucamonga City Hall make copies for City Attention: Mayor, City Council Members and ClerkfMlKE OIR't Council Members and P.O. Box 807 Clerk: Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Rex Gutierrez Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, Council Member City Council Members and Clerk: Debra Adams 7 L City Clerk My name is ~~~~~ (/~, Ti James Frost City Treasurer ~~tt~~ I live at~~-~~-tom.- /~r(~E ~ C I oppose the government housing project known as San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and"Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007- 00199. My concerns are not limited to the following. 1. Massive Government Housing Project ~~6~~~ 2. Crime 3. Devaluation of Properties • ~ ; j 4. Overcrowded Schools CITY ~~ ~ ~ • ' S. Traffic /Sf';41.1 CUCAfl~OfVCaR 6. Air Pollution U1.1',./ "' ~fy~ 7. F~ctinction of Wildlife The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a govemment housing project -of this magnitude: three stories, 225 units, and a small piece of land that is densely populated. Such an environment is breeding ground for gangs, drugs and alcohol, . vandalism and graffiti, burglaries and thefts, violence, etc...that will overFlow into other neighborhoods. The development is too large. Again, my response to yet another large project in my community is; "NOI" I oppose San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. p %~ ~-~ ~~ao~. /' ~ c•- iq tom, `',a ¢~.~~~~~ -~ ; Si ature Cf-3-(J~ Date • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:1a ~ ~ ;~. ~ ~ Attention: Please Rancho Cucamonga City Hall make copies for City Attention: Mayor, City Council Members and Clerk pllKE p(AZ Council Members ana ~ P.O. Box 807 Clerk: Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Rex Gutierrez . Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem.Diane Williams, Sam Spagnolo Council Member City Council Members and Clerk: Debra Adams My name is r~1GjJZ>rl~ C~cc ~ c.. q iZ City Clerk Lames Frost City Treasurer I live at ~~o / ftifc,t?'TOr,~ .¢ric ~',4A/Gr~o Cuensafcv6~4 I oppose the government housing project known as San Servaine ~Ilas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007- 00199. My concerns are not limited to the following. 1. Massive Government Housing Project 2. Crime 3. Devaluation of Properties- 4. Overcrowded Schools 5. Traf£c 6...Air Pollution 7. F~ctinction of Wildlife ~{~~~' ~~ 5. '. r. w.~ 9/ i:) PtBJ1.1 cirr ~~ ~~r(c~ir ci~c~MOna~t C~=Rr ^I.~~r< The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a government housing project of this magnitude: three stories, 225 units, and a small piece of land that is densely populated. Such an environment is breeding ground for gangs, drugs and alcohol, vandalism and graffiti, burglaries and thefts, violence, etc...that will overflow into other neighborhoods. The development is too large. Again, my response to yet another large project in my community is, "NO!" I oppose San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. ~~~ . Signature. 3-~On 7 Date • .. . You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. tit 5:ta • *a ~. ,. *., ~,. ~.y~ • • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members and ClerktMIKEDIN2 P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members and C~le.~rk: My name is ~/~i~.~6~~~-~ ~iv ~. Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members and Clerk: Rex Gutiersez Council Member L. Dennis Michae] Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk James Frost City Treasurer live at ~;!~D r-~~~~, .; ~`P ~r:~>~ ~~ ,: ~r~..~c,Frro~~ . ~ ,~% s I oppose the govemment housing project known as San Servaine Villas development ORC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007- 00199. My concerns are not limited to the following. 1. Massive Government Housing Project 2. Crime 3. Devaluation of Properties 4. Overcrowded Schools 5. Traffic 6. Air Pollution - 7. Extinction of Wildlife ~~~~~~~ „~, ~I~Y C3~ RAY~CI~(7 CUGAM~f1GA js ~~ co• The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a govemment housing project of this magnitude: three stories, 225 units, and a small piece of land that is densely populated. Such an environment is breeding ground for gangs, drugs and alcohol, vandalism and graffiti, burglaries and thefts, violence, etc...that will overFlow into other rieighborhoods. " " The development is too large. Again, my response to yet another large project in my community is, "NO!" I oppose San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. ~ss-~- -~''~ nature Dates You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. not 5:ta Rancho Cucamonga City Half - Attention:. Mayor, City Council Members, ~~~~(~E Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box' 807 ~ ~ = ~ Lu~~' • Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 pp~t,,.^~ ~'t~{ ~^~~~~ Attention: Please make ' ~`~ ~~ jl ' ' ,~ ! ii ii „ -,; .^~ _ ~r~ ~: L~^ I ~ ' ~~ copies far City Council . -. ~ Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Ciry Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: RerGutierrez ---'' Council Member ~pyp~ [, ~ ~ L. Dennis Michael My name is l ~.f~~ tA.b Pf yUf ~.IXF< Council Member Sam Spa~tolo ) ) live at ~ ~ ~ j7 CJL~Sf NU ,t /~ CK 1~4N Gtt0 CAmd"+~t ~} ~' FF-~-LP Council Member . Number Street Cily u Debra Adams City Clerk James Frost •- -- oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and City'rreasurer Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. • 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights,~speed bumps, police patrol, etc... ~~~-(1% Sig ature ~~~ Date You are.the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:1a ~~~~~ ~ /^., l l ~... / Rancho Cucamonga l,..y Hall i~' ft .~ ~ ~ , ~ . ~ ;~ ~~~ ~"~~~ t~ ,t ~~..,~, _, Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, ~~ , . Yi,~ r. , ~~~ e /~,~.«., Clerk and Senior Planner :.% ~~ ~''-"' P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamdnga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: My name is I live at Number - Street City I oppose the San Sevaine.Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex Gutierrez Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member ~y Dcbra Adams / Ci;}' Clerk lames Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Manner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and derisely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. • 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3..Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The fouridation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights, speed bumps, police patrol, etc... Signature ~- i3- o~ Date • Following are some of the. reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:ta Rancho Cucamonga City Hall August 30, 2007 Attention: Mayor, City Council Members and Clerk P.O. Box 807 - Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Kurth and Mayor Pro Tem Williams: My name is Arturo Lopez. I am a homeowner. I live at 8156 Cornwall Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga. . I oppose the San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus. Agreement DRC2007-00199 for many reasons including the following. DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY VALUES: Like most people, I work hard to live the American dream: The backbreaking long hours at work are worth it. My family has a home that we own. However, imagine the feeling when someone steals a piece of that security. Our property will .not appreciate at the same rate as other similar properties because of the development: Would you let someone slip their hand into your bank account and take $20,000? That is the start of what is being done to the security of my family. CRIME: Ten years ago, I moved our family to Rancho Cucamonga fleeing an area that had • unbearable crime as a result of housing similar to San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. I completely oppose the San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. _.. Cl! Y 0~ i?Ai~Ci10 CUCAl1~ONGA Mr. Arturo Lopez • The LORD blesses his people with peace. Psalm 29:11 Rancho Cucamonga City hu~~ Septei „per 04, 2007 Attention: Mayor, City Council Members and Clerk ' P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 •. Dear Mayorponald J. Kurth and Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams: My name is Estela Mercado. I reside at 13005 Chestnut Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga. I am a homeowner. This has been my residence for 29 years. ` I oppose the housing project San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Our neighborhood was established in the 1950's. The city has a pattern of using tax dollars to force negative impact developments on our neighborhood. The San Servaine Villas development is another example of this. 1 request that the security of my neighborhood be restored. Please build block walls at Etiwanda Avenue, .Foothill Boulevard and east of Corhwall Avenue. Block walls-may deter crime, and the negative impact generated tiyihe West Valley Detention Center inmate eleases. There have been home invasions in our . neighborhood frbm said releases. Additionally, our children should not have td be exposed to drug and alcohol addicted transients walking through and around our homes. --Neither should the adult homeowners. .The construction of block walls will help reduce noise levels that are generated into our neighborhood by heavy traffic from Etiwanda Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. Our properties are not appreciating at the same level as other similar properties. This year, the West Valley - Detention Center celebrated its 15-year anniversary. Ih the interim, the number of renters has increased throughout the neighborhood. In comparison, fifteen years prior, the neighborhood consisted of Nearly 100 • - .percent owrier residents. The neighborhood needs a crosswalk and stoplight at Etiwanda and Chestnut Avenues. It is common for speeders,to'try ahd beat the light at Etiwanda Avenue and Foothill Boulevard by driving through our neighborhood streets. Motorists speed to and from work alongside pedestrian traffic. Children who walk to and •• from the school bus are in danger. All pedestrian traffic is vulnerable. Construction of speed bumps will slow down motorists. This may also reduce the wait time it takes to back out from my driveway --up to 10 minutes. Additional streetlights are also needed to illuminate the neighborhood. - -The surrouhding chaparral, eucalyptus trees and virieyards have been replaced by developments that have had-- . a-Negative impact on our homes. We request landscaping around our neighborhood to compensate for what has - been lost. ' • - The following are some of the reasons I oppose San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199: Massive Housing Project, Crime, Devaluation of Properties, ` Overcrowded Schools, Traffic, Air Pollution, Extinction of Wildlife and Inadequate Infrastructure: ' Damage has already been done to our neighborhood. Please, proceed to experiment with the massive San Servaine Villas develbpmerit on another neighborhood for a change. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGR ~~ SEp 1 ~ 200 Estela Mercado • ~ - r Cf'1cD - PLAPJNING e Y Y w i ~ ~r 1,~+, M ~ W I µ EJ I ~ ir„ e ~ i.~ i.~ ~,. i ~ i ~ e.; i~ i,, ~.~ ~ ~ ~,! ~ r ~ i ~ i ~~e~ ~~ ;~~ ~~ +m::;Eo~ Sic ;~~.;~m~ .b;; ~, ;~~ ~~ ,~''o~ ;;~~ ;Sep Sep .b~ ;fm;, ;?®~ smt ,`~, ;~a, yb..:;b' ;`m~ ;~. ?o. Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens... Daniel 12:3 Rancho Cucamonga City Mall Attention Mayor, City Council Members and Clerk P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth and Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams: My name is Edith Johnson. I am a homeowner. I have resided at 13021 Chestnut Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga since 1967 --a total of 40 years. I oppose the San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. ' The project is too big. This low income assistance apartment project consisting of 225 units with three story structures will further encircle our neighborhood with more residual crime. Enough is enough! Our neighborhood has already been impacted in a negative way by the inmate releases from West Valley Detention Center. Drug and alcohol addicted transients walking through our neighborhood are common. West Valley Detention Center celebrated its 15-year anniversary this year. It is one of the largest county jails in the state of California. Prior to the inception of the jail, home ownership was 100 percent for residents. Our neighborhood is now dotted with renters. • Speeders are the norm as they cut through our neighborhood from Etiwanda Avenue to Foothill Boulevard and vise versa. There is no regard for pedestrian traffic, especially for children as they walk to the school bus. Residents driving the speed limit are harassed, tailgated and impatiently • passed. It has taken up to 10 minutes for me to get out of my driveway due to the heavy traffic in our neighborhood. There are many matters that concern me regarding the San Servaine Villas development Density Bonus Agreement including the following: crime, devaluation of properties and traffic. The city has already loaded other massive developments on our neighborhood. They are developments no one else would have near their neighborhood. As it is, we have more than one jail down the street. It's time for the city to step up and protect our neighborhood residents and homes. Start using our hard earned tax payer dollars to implement the protection: block walls, street lights, crosswalks, speed bumps, landscaping, etc.... Enough is enough! We are homeowners trying to make the best of an already bad situation. Again, I oppose the San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. CITY OF RNPdCHO CUC11~~lONG~: Edith Johnson ro~~ This is the day the Lord has made, I will rejoice and be September Ot, 2007 :;~.' __ :, 2001 in it. Psalm 118:24 • 6r+ ` ~ • Rancho Cucamonga Cny Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members and Clerk P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 September 01, 2007 Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth and Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams: My name is Maximiano Mercado. My family and I have resided at 13005 Chestnut Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga for 29 years. We are homeowners. Our family opposes the housing project San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Such a large housing project will erode at my family's security. The city has already forced other large developments around our neighborhood. The result has been crime and traffic. Our neighborhood properties have not appreciated at the same level as other similar properties. The West Valley Detention Center inmate releases have had an extremely negative impact on our neighborhood. The San Servaine Villas will do the same. • The city planners and representatives have neglected our neighborhood year after year. They think of our neighborhood when they are deciding where to place an unwanted project. Please use our tax dollars to secure our neighborhood with street lights, cross- walks, speed bumps, landscaping and block walls around the entire neighborhood. Immediate action is required as this will help to decrease crime and reduce noise levels. My wife provides more detail in her letter. Again, I oppose the San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The project is too big! ® CITY Or RANCHO CUCAMONGA Maximiano Mercado v-~ ~ ~ zoor 'i-~cl!/~D - PLANp11NG Date _... • -- Y Y I 1 1 iY Yr I~ i/, IY Yu YY YY I.a YY, IM IY irk lar 1Y /, fY W : IY IM -;t?c-'!?f $~ °o"-','~~-?'Q~ ;'ac 'm' jb. ;a--",}q: °oc :'~"''a ;~- 'o~ ;'gz'QC ?'?; :a rbe -~, qc'~,'~~: 'o' ;'~: -`„fit; ;'n= Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens... Daniel 12:3 L- S a ~.; Ste. r J cti ~ ti ~,. Rancho Cucamonga City F;, Attention: P.O. Box 807 - _ - Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Mayor, City Council Membe^Clerk and Senior Planner September 10, 2007 Dear Senior Planner Mike Diaz: My name is Rosinda Diaz. I live at 12978 Chestnut Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga. I am a homeowner. I oppo• the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The infrastructure cannot support this large three-story rental assistance apartment project consisting of 225- units. The project is designed for a dense population on a small area. Such conditions are not fair to the surrounding community or the project's potential residents. The surrounding community is made up of one and two story dwellings. The San Sevaine Villas is a three-story structure. It does not comply with the basic goal of the planning commission for "protection of community identity". The Etiwanda/Foothill homes were built in the 50's. It was a quiet neighborhood surrounded by the chaparral, vineyards and trees. However, the West Valley Detention Center rapidly changed the pattern, scale and character of the neighborhood. The San Sevaine Villas will do the same. This year, the West Valley Detention Center celebrated its 15-year anniversary. Recently, I caught a release from the West Valley Detention Center looking around my car. This was an unsettling experience. Other neighbors have had break-ins. Loitering is constant. This is no way to live. The San Sevine project will only compound the problems with its toot and motor traffic. The West Valley Detention Center had 67,554 releases in 2006. It is one of the largest jails in the state of California. Some of the releases from the West Valley Detention Center walk up Etiwanda Avenue and through our neighborhood. Others loiter around Wall-Mart and Food 4 less. The presence'of the facility has created a situation wherein a percentage the drug. and alcohol addicted releases "stick aFdund". I have grandchildren who were almost run over by a speeding car. It is common for non-residents to speed through our neighborhood from Foothill Boulevard to Etiwanda Avenue. I called law enforcement to file a police report and for resolution of this ongoing traffic problem. The response was that they are short staffed and • cannot patrol the area on a regular basis. The city collects enormous taxes/revenues from the negative impact developments that have been placed around our neighborhood. However, the city has not placed the appropriate infrastructure to protect our families from the resulting crime and traffic. City representatives betray residents as it forces another negative impact development: The San Sevaine Villas. The Etiwanda/Foothill neighborhood infrastructure needs block walls and landscaping to prevent crime and loitering from the round the clock releases of the West Valley Detention Center. Block walls are also needed for noise control and fo protect residents from the heavy traffic. It is a matter of time before an unfortunate accident occurs involving a truck or vehicle thaTlboses control into a home. The open space corridor and flood control channel will not buffer our neighborhood from the resulting crime and traffic the San Sevaine Villas will generate. It will only'add to it. The open space corridor and flood control channels are used by West Valley Detention Center releases. Residents are not prepared for what has been done to our neighborhood by the West Valley Detention Center releases. The negative impact is substantial. The San Sevaine Villas will do the same. The infrastructure cannot support the San Sevaine Villas. Our neighborhood infrastructure needs block walls, landscaping, a stoplight and crosswalk on Etiwanda and Chestnut Avenues, sidewalks, speed bump, additional street lights, regular police patrol... I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The infrastructure cannot support another large negative impact development. Have you considered the impact it would have around your neighborhood? For starters, your home would depreciate. CITY OF RANCHO CUCA~ONGA~--~~,~ A`n G /~ ~osinda Diaz ~`~~• ~ ~~ SEP i ;~ 2007 ~ ~~ The Lord is the strength of my life... Psalm 27:1 RECEIVED - PLAN[~!NG ~` ~fTY Q~ RAP~CH~. CU AMQ~IC~t Ci=,~~:, ,_t~~ounci , ead Planner Mike Diaz, James Troyer and_City Clerk City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91729 Regarding: San Sevaine Villas DRC2006-00540 and DRC2007-00 1 1 9 I am opposed to building this project The initial study signed and dated 07-16-07 by Peter J, Pitassi is incorrect. u Date 09-08-2007 Page I of 1 The initial study states on item 13 (d) on page 26 that no impact on pazks would occir;;Firt of all the future pazk to be located on Garcia Drive will have no pedestrian access for these proposed new residences. There will be no sidewalks for residences to access it; additionally it is not a''/o mile away unless you truss pass through private property. It is'/. of a mile away and you would have to walk on unprotected streets part of the way. The city cannot consider the pazk as part of the proposed apartments open spaces as stated unless direct pedestrian access is provided.. This proposed apartment complex is ahigh-density project and there are no lazge open spaces for children to play. The new pazk is not accessible to children unless they aze driven to it. Where will the children play when pazents are at work or they have no transportation? Item 14 (a) on page 28 states no impacted on existing parks also. Tn talking to the existing residences to the north of this new park location they said, this park has been promised to them for a few yeazs. They feel with this proposed apartment complex and the soon to be occupied lions condos on Foothill blvd. this pazk will have significant pedestrian impacts day and night. The initial study report needs to reflect actual conditions this proposed apartment complex will impact on our neighborhoods and the proposed residences. Thank you, Kenneth Van Horn ~~ Rancho Cucamonga City h~,~ Attention: Mayor, City Council Members and Clerk P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 September 04, 2007 • Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams: My name is Terry Estrella. My residence is 13021 Chestnut Avenue, Ranchc Cucamonga. This has been my residence since 1969. I oppose the prbject San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The project is too big! The security of our neighborhood has already been compromised by other large developments placed around our neighborhood. The problems created by existing large developments need to be addressed first and immediately --especially crime and traffic. The releases from the jails down the street have had a "negative impact" on our community. Also, there are problems from the heavy motorist traffic that flows directly through our neighborhood streets from Etiwanda Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. Our neighborhood needs block walls, street lights, crosswalks, stoplights, speed bumpers and landscaping to restore some of our security. The following are some of the reasons I oppose San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. _.._. 1. Too Big: • These are assistance low-income apartments consisting of 225 units up to three stories on a small piece of land. --Creating a "Sardine Can" environment for its potential residents is not fair to them or the surrounding communities. The infrastructure is not equipped to handle another large "negative impact" development. This will result in additional: A. Crime B. Traffic C. Noise Pollution D. Devaluation of Properties E. Overcrowded schools F. Air Pollution G. Extinction of Wildlife H. Poor Infrastructure CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMCNGA Sw? '~ ~ ZOIJ°1 The straw that broke the camel's back: The San Servaine Villas development and Density Bonus. ~ COPY Terry Estrella • This is the day the Lord has made, t will rejoice and be glad in it. Psalm 118:24 ~t~CElVED Date 09-06-2007 't 1 ;j d~~D _ - Page l ofl ~l~Y b~ RAF,~,CH~Q.CU AMQ~VC~1 ~_ ~: ~ounct , ead Planner Mike Diaz, James Troyer and City Clerk z v:_ City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91729 Regarding: San Sevaine V illas DRC2006-00540 and DRC2007-001 ] 9 I am opposed to building this project The initial study signed and dated 07-16-07 by Peter J, Pitassi is incorrect. • The initial study states on item 13 (d) on page 26 that no impact on parks would occftt;>Firt of all the future pazk to be located on Garcia Drive will have no pedestrian access for these proposed new residences. There will be no sidewalks for residences to access it; additionally it is not a '/. mile away unless you truss pass through private property. It is'/. of a mile away and you would have to walk on unprotected streets part of the way. The city cannot consider the park as part of the proposed apartments open spaces as stated unless direct pedestrian access is provided.. This proposed apartment complex is ahigh-density project and there are no large open spaces for children to play. The new pazk is not accessible to children unless they aze driven to it. Where will the children play when parents are at work or they have no transportation? Item 14 (a) on page 28 states no impacted on existing parks also. In talking to the existing residences to the north of this new park location they said, this pazk has been promised to them for a few years. They feel with this proposed apartment complex and the soon to be occupied lions condos on Foothill blvd. this park will have significant pedestrian impacts day and night. The initial study report needs to reflect actual conditions this proposed apartment complex will impact on our neighborhoods and the proposed residences. Thank you, . Kenneth Van Hom ~~~ ! 3 0 ~, a C l-f~ ST~~r ~vl~ ~ J2_v G ,. , Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members and Clerk ~r_,- , ., P.O. Box 807 ~~ ~- Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 /i~-,~S~et~r~bterj,~2,~2tp~~~NGA ..~tY' Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth and Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams: My name is George Martin. I am a homeowner. I live at 12985 Chestnut Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga. This has been my home for 30 years. I am a retired law enforcement officer. I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement u DRC2007-00199. This development is too large. The infrastructure is not adequate to support it. Permanent officers cover the richer areas. Officers also need to permanently cover our community. Our neighborhood has been placed in harms way with the releases from the West Valley Detention Center. The San Sevaine Villas will also place our neighborhood in harms way Crime and traffic generated by the San Sevaine Villas will overpower our immediate community. Our neighborhood consists of approximately 120 single-family dwellings. The San Sevaine Villas is a rental assistance apartment project consisting of 225 units with up to three-story structures. The type of structures and number of units The San Sevaine Villas project has will destroy the identity, pattern, scale and character of our homes. Traffic problems currently face our neighborhood. Speeders, traffic congestion and noise - pollution are a constant. The San Sevaine Villas will only add to these traffic problems. The foundation of our neighborhood needs regular patrols, a neighborhood watch program, block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, speed bumps, street lights and stops lights. The current infrastructure cannot support the San Seville Villas. r' .~e"t'~~ ~7~~"~ Mr'.-'George Martin My help comes from the Lord, Who made heaven and earth. Psalm 121:2 Tr, '\ ' Rancho Cucamonga City f, ~ Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner ` P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 • September 12, 2007 Dear Senior Planner Mike Diaz: My name is Yolanda Hernandez. I am a homeowner. I live at 13013 Chestnut Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga. This has been our family home for 22 years. I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The infrastructure is not equipped to support this large development. It's only a matter of time before the city of Rancho Cucamonga makes national news because of a crime committed against our neighborhood by a West Valley Detention Center release. Last year, the West Valley Detention Center had 67,554 releases. The West Valley Detention Center celebrated its 15-year anniversary this year. Throughout this time period, the inmate releases have had a negative impact on our homeownership. There is an increase in crime and loitering. Our properties do note appreciate like other similar properties. Our quality of life has been reduced. The San Sevaine Villas will do the same. - The city enjoys the monetary benefits from one of California's largest jails. However, the city has not protected our neighborhood with the adequate infrastructure: block walls, landscaping, adequate streetlights, speed bumps and regular police patrols... Instead, the city has left our neighborhood vulnerable to crime and traffic. There is a repeat plan for our neighborhood with the oversized San Sevaine Villas: Force the large development on existing homeowners and collect the revenues. --Never mind that the infrastructure is not adequate to support the current community. --Never mind that the large project will generate crime and traffic. --Never mind that the "pattern, scale and character" of our neighborhood will deteriorate. --Never mind about the destructidn of "community identity". --Never mind about the existing homeowners. • The message we are receiving is that homeowner's like the Etiwanda/Foothill residents do not matter. The city continues to bombard our neighborhood with large negative impact developments. After all, other neighborhoods are too good for that. The city does not respect our homeownership. It does not matter to the city that the Etiwanda/Foothill homes and its residents were here first. The homes were first established in the 1950's. It's a crime for the West Valley Detention Center releases to violate our homes. The city has found politics and the legal system to do the same. This is what takes place when greed and lazy planning become the norm. I am here to remind the city that this is not okay. Families in our neighborhood have worked hard for homeownership. Traffic is another problem for residents. The variables are present for a large truck to veer into a home white a family sleeps or children play. The homes alongside Etiwanda and Foothill Boulevard have been left exposed _ _ __ _to_such a peril. Residents also live with the inconvenience of not being able to exit or enter our homes due to traffic congestion. The noise pollution generated by the Etiwanda Avenue and Foothill Boulevard traffic needs to be curtailed. Block walls are a necessity for the safety of residents. The San Sevaine Villas is an enormous rental assistance apartment project. Il has 225 units on a small area. It has up to three=story structures. Our community's infrastructure is not equipped to handle more crime and traffic that will be generated from this large development. Instead, the infrastructure of our neighborhood needs to be constructed now: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, speed bumps, traffic lights, crosswalks, regular police patrols, more street lights, a neighborhood watch, etc... I//V(~/(N //v L/~/./ olanda Hernandez • You are a chosen generation... called out of darkness into His marvelous Tight. 1 Pt 2:9 ~~ (_ Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor; City Council Members, CIerK and Senior Planner P.O: Box 807' ~~~[~~~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Att ti Pt k en on: ease ma e I ~ '""°' espies for City Cuuncil DearlMa or Donald J. Kurth, Ma or Pro Tem ~~yy~~ ~~y~rlrt}}~~~,,~~.~~sc 6' }M,3ebmbers, Clerk end p~Planner: y y ~iY~F tYSG' P~±' ~r'~`~'f .+'iJ~ st73t~i(H41Y City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: , , ,. ~;j >-~ ~fi . Rex Gutierrez - Council Member /f''' II M name is ~t~ ~~~^~~ ~y ~/'~ ~ ^ ~ ~I IJ~ l~ 1 l~ f~ I ~ C L. Denrds Michael y - - . Council Member ~~jj~~~~~~yy,, ( ((~~ _ yy ~j~~ I live at ~~~J~~.l C.Y~~~~1~~ ~~ ~iVYY _ _ y~t ~ -~~ ~~r 1;/ ~ Sam Spagnolo t~~~ouncil Member Number Street City ebra Adams City Clerk .lames Frost I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and ciry Treasarer Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. - ~ . Make Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic $. Air Poilutian ' 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the. protection of our neighborhoo implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, etlights speed bu p police patrol, etc... 9 atur l2~ Date d requires immediate crosswalks, stop lights, • You are the Tight of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. not a;ta • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall ~~~~'~ i=` ~•i- Attention: Mayor City Council Members, -' Atteminn: Pieasemake , „ .; Clerk and Senior Planner copies rnr ciry canned - • P.O. BOX f307 Members, Clerk and Sentor Planner: Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 ~1s~°y r;r ,; ~,, ; 1 ~. ,p; :; +: it ;. Ir (if' Rex Gutiertez .,_i , ; Council Member L. Dennis Michazl Council Member Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, Sam Spagnolo City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: coancil Member Debra Adams r //~~ 1 My name is C' ~~~~ C <- U.-t" +-~I r}~ "~`'" L City Clerk lames Frost {~~, 1 ( 1 `t I 0 ~} rL (4 ~ C ~ ~ ~Q ~ ~ ~ ~~ l S t~C Cily Treasurer Mike Dial ~ . 1 I live at V .\ 1 - ~ Senior Planner Number Street CRy I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The focal infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. -. ..... Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development • DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Fontana residents are good neighbors. The citizens residing along your east border have invested in life giving communities that enhance your city. I am disappointed in the decision by the city of Rancho Cucamonga to build a massive rental assistance apartment project near our homes and businesses /~ ~ O ~ ~ . Signature '~r~~'~~7 . Date ~aeyG~'~~ ,,~'s .` ~/4j1+p Blessed are the peacemakers Mt 5:9 Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, ~~~~i~~ Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 ~ ~ ~~:-~° Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 °' ' ~'•~ tic F~,~ f ,~.uF,.• ,,., „~ ' "I~id~~°~~l ~ `• ~ Attention: Please make A _ ' ` ~ "~ ~ ` • ' copies for City Council ~ ? ~ '? ^ p Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Clerk and Senior Planner: City Council Members Rez Gutierrez , ~ gi Y ~ ~ Council Member L. Dennis Michael / 1` )/~'1'/t-~m+~' 1h ,`~0.1A, My name is ~, Council Member ~ (~ ~ _ ~, ~ ~, :} (,~. j~ ~i ~,ry~,i,L"~ `4f~/ .-~-Y- ~ ~' ' Sam Spagnolo Council Member - live at C ~1~(..E.i%tl-G ~ D b d ms Cm, Number Street ` k C e Y James Frost I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and City Treasurer Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Mil:c Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights, speed bumps, police patrol, etc... Signature ,,_ . Date • f. J You are the light of the world A clty that on a hill cannot be hidden Mt 5:14 -~~ • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall r ~ ~, , Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, ~~"' ~ ~ ~~' • Clerk and Senior Planner ~„>,~, , P.o. Box ao7 ~~L ` Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 CCT1` ~c ~ rza:f~ ui ; r:J~.:AlWQNfaA ,...nt, Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members(~Clerk and( ~Seniogr Planner: My name is ~4't`1 C~orw l~-r'"zY rl^a.K--~~/}} /I live at ~Z3S ~b r-~ot~ ~-x I~av.cCu~'.~.~~~5 Number Street City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex Gutierrez Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adanu City Clerk lames Frost Ciry Treasurer - Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. ` Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development • DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4...Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block wall landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetli s e bum olice patrol, etc... Signature ,~ p- ~~ Date • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta ~ ~. Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Counbil Members, ?~~~:~`<f ~= Clerk and Senior Planner • P.O. Bax 807 ^~ ? ~" Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 ~~ rr'~t~ ~r ~~~ `~~.t~f}.:,.;F.~f;l~147~Ji~$~` ~,, ,Attention: Please make copies for City Council (,i,l...'.., ..''",i~ Meiubers, Clerk and Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, senior rianner:__. City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: aeX cmierrez Council Member i _ L. Dennis Michael _ My name is AY1QP~tPi:. MA(1C~ " l:-Yl~ z- Council Member ' Sam Spagnolo IIIVe at ._ 0~-0~ I~l Ulr~n {aV~ Y]Q yi!'~tm C:[~ejLyylr~Yt (\. Council Member Number Sheet Cit ~ Debra Adnms Y City Cletk lames Frost I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and city treasurer Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. • 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate _ _ implem, eritattpn: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks; stop lights, streef~igh(~~speed bumps, police patrol, etc... Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members and Clerkt(Ybtt~rL~IhZ P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 • Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members and Clerk: My name is ~inae~ics. ~vc~. ~,• (U Z I live at X208 dot kon RV nneyb @.~, cn~mon~ u +Lce . R (lap -96 tS I oppose the govemment housing project known as San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007- 00199._My concerns are not limited to the following. 1. Massive Government Housing Project 2. Crime 3. Devaluation of Properties -- ~ 4. Overcrowded Schools 5...•fraffic 6. Air Pollution 7. F~ttinction of Wildlife ~~~~~~~~ 1. ..1 '..5$~}'~~. CITY Q~ RF,Pyf~Pfi€~ :`,;~iCAMaN~!? The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a govemment housing project of this magnitude: three stories, 225 units, and a small piece of land that is densely populated. Such an environment is breeding ground for gangs, drugs and alcohol, vandalism and graffiti, burglaries and thefts, violence, etc...that will overFlow into other neighborhoods. The development is too large. Again, my response to yet another large project in rriy - - - community is, "NO!" I oppose San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bo s Agreement DRC2007-00199. Sign re SP.n~ 3 J Zoo 7 Date • You are_the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:14 Anenson: Please make copies for City Council Members and Clerk: Rex Gutierrez Council Member L. Dennis Michael Council Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk James Frost City Treasurer ,rte r'~ Randho Cucamonga City Hall r~ ~ Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, ~~'~~` ~ `~ ~j`"? Clerk and Senior Planner ~,i-.-.=. - P.O. Box 807 ` ' ' Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 ~~-~, r•,~ ~ El,,t ,,;-.. r:~f,Al'ti~~€~~ ' ''tl Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, City Council Members(~Clerk andf /Seniogr Planner: My name is ~41' l ~~Yw l~-~ ~Y t.i.a,.`. ,. r~/~ r live at ~Z-: ~ 1' I' lp ~~'tr t~ b~..>t ar.cCw ~ ~~e e>-~1.~5 Number Straet City I oppose the San Sevaine Villas developmeni DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: Please make copies fnr City Council Memhers, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex Gutierrez Council Member L..L>cnnis Michael Clmncil~Member Sam Spagnolo Council Member Dehra Adams City Clerk James Frost Ciry Treasurer Mike Diar Senior Planner . The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units uP to three stories in height do a small and densely. populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation; block wall landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlight , s e bum „police patrol, etc... Signature ,Y" p- ~~r~ Date O - • • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, tµ- 5 Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 ' ~~-~;, - .; Rancho Cucamdnga, CA 91729 cry a= ~t~;~~c~~ ci~~;aMOr~ca Attention: Please make ~oP;es,~p~ t,ty ~onnd] ,£_',' ':; ~F:' Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Dlaiie Wi(fiams, Meiritiers, Clerk and Senior Planner: . City Council Members Clerk and Senior Planner: ~ Rex cntierrez , Council Member --TT My name is tiJQ ~Y ~~gYCLV O L. Dennis Michae] Council Member ~ ~-/ ' , p I liveat ~(~ ~''1 ~~~~~1~~~ ~~I` ~'n~~(Ze (~m(~ Sam Spagnolo e Council Member .. Number Streei City 4 t Debra Adams Ciryclerk lames Frost I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and City Treasurer Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Mike D;az Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. • .Following are' some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building . 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10. Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights, p ed umps, police patrol, etc... ~ , Signature' q -g-o-7 Date ~ • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, ~~~~f~~ Clerk and Senior Planner r` r P.O. Box 807 ~ ~^F°~' ~ ^ - ° ~ °~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 .gu, `'"'' ~ i~~ ~P ~` ! i{'~ ~ U ~ ~ ~~, ~~~ r,~ ~`kj~ a>\G f Attention: Please make ' " v 'r t ~ - A ~~ cgpies for City Council • ~ ~!":' Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Wihia''ms, Members, Clei'k and Senior Planner: City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rex Gat;errez Council Member /n~ L. Dennis Miehacl My name is ~r~l~ l ~t )Yl2(l~,~Z Council MemFier Sam Spagnolo live at ~i' Z5y Mn~'~ov, Ave ~->,+nc~tc, l' uc~Yw~( Council Member ~ d ms ebr Number Street CRy J ce k ~ Y - James Fmsl I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and City Treasurer Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. --- - Mike. Diaz Senior Pfenncr The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10. Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls; landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, streetlights, speed bu~lice patrol, etc... Signature CI/- A n ~ Date • • You are the light of th"e world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta • Rancho Cucamong ty Hall ~~"'~~`'"° ~' ('`~~1 "~~?G ~ ~ ~7 ~~-c~->,~~C% Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, %-~-=-~1i '~ ~~ Clerk and Senior Planner ~~' ~ \~~"~"`"~ / ~~°-~ d- P.O. Box 807 ~~ ~~"`-~ ~`-,`-`<., i' Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 ~" Attention: Please make copies for City Council Members, Clerk and Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, Senior Planner: City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: Rea cnticrrez Council Member - L. Dennis Michael My name IS _ Council Member Mr. Pedro Yenes Sam Spagnolo 12995 Chestnut Ave Council Member live at _ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739-9603 Debra Adams h~~~~....~ _ City f';tyCt^rtc James Frost I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and City Treasurer Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Mike Diaz Senior Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistahce apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height nh a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity.of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development • DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution The foundation for the protection of our neighborhood requires immediate implementation: block walls, landscaping, sidewalks, crosswalks, stop lights, st~r, ~ghts, speed bumps, police patrol, etc... 1,/. ignature / ;~ Date • You are the lieht of the tverld..4 city :ha: on a hill cennoi be hidden. Mc saa Fi~C~~~/~[) C~ QC ~ar~cFia Ci1CA~i0NGA Date 09-04-2007 C3~ ~~ ~~~ To` Mayor Don Kurth, City Council, Mike Diaz, James Troyer and City Clerk City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91729 Petition To Block The Proposed San Sevaine Villas DRCZ006-00540 and DRC2007-00119 Please find attached pages 1 - 15 residences against the building of this proposed apartment complex, totaling 281 signatures Page 1 of I S 16 signatures Page 2 of 15 8 signatures Page 3 of I S 19 signatures Page 4 of 15 20 signatures Page 5 of I S 12 signatures Page 6 of 15 9 signatures Page 7 of 15 14 signatures Page 8 of I S 22 signatures Page 9 of 15 8 signatures - Page 10 of 15 11 signatures Page I1 of 15 21 signatures Page 12 of 15 18 signatures Page 13 of 15 51 signatures total (32 on the front 19 on the back of the sheet) Page 14 of 15 25 signatures Paae 15 of 15 27 _ signatures Total 281 this submittal Copy and distribute to all parties -isted above and include in job file Submitted by Kenneth Van Horn September 04 - 2007 ~~. • L J ~AG~ loFlS This is a petition to block the proposed developmertt of a 225 apt.Facility at 7 3233 Foothill Blvd. Rancho Cucamonga • The undersigned persons below indicate their opposition to the Northtown Housing Development Proposed at 13233 Foothill Blvd. •C • Name(PleasePrint) Address Phone# ignature ~-' ~~, ~Ea~~i~frD ~ r s/iTY ~" ~Ri~ 1 This is a petition to block the proposed development of a 22s apt. Facility at 13233 Foothill Blvd. Rancho~Cucamonga ~ The undersigned persons below indicate their oppositiori to the 2O~ ~-~ Northtown Housing Development Proposed at 13233 Foothill Blud. • Name(PleaseFrint) Address Phone# Signature , a d ~ ~A~oN'Get E`f"!G.' °~ • ,,is is a petition to blockthe proposed development of a 225 apt. Facility at 13233 Foothill Blvd. Ran ho Cucamonga 0. The undersigned persons below indicate their opposition to the 1 Northtown Housing Development F~roposed at 13233 Foothill Blvd. Ndme(Please Print) I Address ~ Phone# ~ . Signature ~ .-, ,. _ ~ 1. P,. ,.. ` Indicate an individual willing to volunteer some time wth an astrik or checkmark beside his or her name This is a petition to block the proposed development of a 225 apt. Facility at 13233 Foothill Blvd. Rancho Cucamonga The undersigned persons belovv indicate their opposition o t~e ~ f' ~~~ Northtowri Housing Development-Proposed at 13233 Foothill Blvd. Name(PieasePrmt) Address Phone# Signature ~ . a- ~l<E of RRPdC~fp CUCAiNC?f~G/~ • This is a petition to blockthe proposed development of a 225 apt. Facility at 13233 Foothill Blvd. Rancho Cucamonga The undersigned persons below indicate their opposition to the ~'~ ~ r~ i\Inrthtnwr, Hnusina Development Proposed at 13233 Foothill Blvd. ~~~'~ Name(Please?rint) Address Phone# Signature ~'~3^ C~ ~r ~ Vii, CITY 0~ RANCFfO CUCAi~i N p G?i'l C' ~R~. ~• Indicate an individual willirig to volunteer some time with an astrlk or checkmark beside his or her name •- •Th'l.'~s a petition to blockthe proposed development of a 225 apt. Facility at 73233 Foothill Blvd. Rancho Cucamonga The undersigned persons below indicate their oppositlonto the ~ I ~ ~ Northtown Housing Development Proposed at 13233 Foothill Blvd. Name(Ple se Frint) Address Phone# Si nature ~ •' 0 ~~ ` 0~ R~dC~l~ ~~CANAON~k `? C ; ~"_k Indicate an individual willing to volunteer some time with ari"astrik or checkmark beside his or her name •• T!iis is a petition to bbckthe proposed development of a 225 apt. Facility at 13233 Foothill Blvd. Ranch~CE camonga ~ The undersigned. persons below indicate their opposition to the ~ °~~5 Northtown Housing Development Proposed at 13233 Foothill Blvd. - Name Please Print) - Address Phone# 'nature ~ . . =.~ , ~~~~D ~~T ~n~Q=~~~, .~ .Indicate an individual willing to volunteer some timewith an astrik or checkmark beside his or her name .s is a petition to block the proposed development of a 225 apt. Facility at 73233 Foothill Blvd. Ran~h~o~C~uc~ onga N The undersigned persons below indicate their opposition to the °Fi'~ '~' ni„~*t,~~,~,r. Nn„cirtn nPVelooment Proposed at 13233 Foothill Btvd. Ndme~Please Print) ~ Address ~ Phone# Signatur - ~i=~~ .l 0~ l~:F..k ~6"l~ ~~ (I. ^x!17 ~~ ' .Y~" i F , ~ .-. Indicate an individual willing to volunte~'G.~'~'n~?t[with an astrik or checkmark beside his or her name • is a petition to block the proposed development of a 225 apt. Facility at 13233 Foothill Blvd. Rancho Cucamonga The undersigned persons below indicate their opposition to the P'~ ~8c~ ~ ~ Northtown Housing Development Proposed at 13233 Foothill Blvd. Mdme~Please Print) Address _ ~, / • Indicate an individual willing to volunteer some timewith an astrik or checkmark beside his or her name This is a petitaon to block the pro~sed d/eve~°pmen of a 2 S apt. Facility at 13233 Foothill Blvd. R~anc~ h~,o~Cucamonga ~` The undersignerd p~f~'Sns~ ow Indicate their opposition to the ~`~ d`-~~ Northtowr Housing Development Proposed at 13233 Foothill Blvd. Name(Please Print) Address - Phone# Si nature ~ ~ ^~~-, :T~;;;'. ~ .~ f f'v1l ?'? FR' . • r _ ~.. • Petition to Stop Development ~~~ ~-~ ac l~ ~~~~~~~~ of the San Sevaine Villas ~~':~' ~~ j= W~a' Northtown Housing Developers Carp. proposal of dTY 0~ AP.t1Cii[2 Ge1CAN64NGlt 225 Affordable Housing Apartments ~;~~ r!_~~;C (Located at S.Foothill & Etiwanda Creek) rL` ~c.ca ~. t'O! >: ,~. k~ ~ , -. ~... 4 l Awn W b... l~ Y 6..y~ - / //~/ Otr ~~ ~ .. \ ~ ~ ~~(iMl ~~ • ' 5 ' f y ' .. t ~`<~ n~j i ~+7'e4r1 T ~ id4/RM1fVI®NUp p ~ n M ; ; .: ~ 3 .:: .: ~~ . nv+ xY . ATTENTt`ON: ~, BotrAlezande>r IVlajor of Rancho Cucamonga - and the Rancho Cucamor`ga Cr€y Courrcri REGARDENG T~heAffordable Hous~rt'g P~o~ects Sponsored by Northtown~ ;`:. Hausing'D'eveloprr~ent Corporation " ~ ;; , , ;•. ; We the residents ~rs~the 650 foot radius, of the arJBOSed sight to build the affordable 'housing Are soarsrng;t~is petition to make.you avaare that we are against the location i , , k €orthehous~ng , ; i r . Name ~ ,' Sheet Address ` Si r f , ' • ' ~_~ 23 - ' 24. ':i, ' 25. i , , • ~,., ,F ' ~~~~~V~~ ATTENTIOiV: :,;, , ~ti;, c`c K ~ ~7P O ~,~ (.j • crt~ of ~o~•aC~?c ~~CT~-- G 3 o F I S REGARDING The Affordable Housing Projects Sponsored by Northtown Housing Development Corporation, :.. _... ,. - . We the residents, in the 660 foot radius of the proposed sight to build the affordable housing. Are signing this petition to make you aware that we are against the location . for the housing. '~~ • ~ l ~S ~~ ke ~ 3~ a ,~ r . ~~~~ P CITY aF RkhlGrU':~~JCIIfrJfC)B~CFI ~ ~ ~ ~ L ! ~~~ ATl"EN1'IOIV: ~ P~ l~r or ~~ Bob•Alexander Illlajor o~ Rancho Ca~camonga and the Rancho Cucar'r~onga City Coaancil '? RE~ARDIMG :The A''ffordable Housirig :Projects Sponsored by; Noithtown Housing Development Corporation We the residents, in the 660 foot radius of the proposed sight to build the affordable housing. Are signing this petition to make you aware that we are against the location' for the housing. ''•ti~ . ~~~~ ~P~' _ ~ J+I lsl I 1 6fi' S-ESQ.IJSdt"'.~} Q.etLCYS.!M~0.MIdQC~M i Name Street Address ISerl~ This is a petition to block the proposed development of a 225 apt. Facility at 13233 Foothill Blvd. Rancho Cucamonga ,~ The undersigned persons below indicate their opposition to the ti Northtown Housing Development Proposed at 13233 Foothill Blvd. Name(PleasePrint> Address Phone# Signature ~~ • :.%Su >/~ Qc R,Q.i.~i"'S4l'Z P?r If`.6d6P9HYPia ~'f~!`~ • ..ice:`" ;~ ~: ~~ Date 08-24-2007 (r}.~ U~ ~t~Ylr~'tC! ~~~~~~ Page 1 of 2 C"ii~`l ~„ ~FioC To:. City Council, Head Planner Mike Diaz, James.Troyer.and City Clerk City of Rancho Cucamonga • 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91729 Regarding: San Sevaine Villas DRC2006-00540 and DRC2007-00119 - After reading the South Coast Air Quality Management District Report dated July-25-2007 and talking to SCAQMD on 08-23-2007 these are a few of my comments Based on the SCAQMD staffs review of the proposed project, the analysis should be revised and the documents recirculated for public review for these reasons: 1. The test model that the city has been using UR73EM1S7G is a few years out of date The current model is URBEMIS2007 version 9.2, released in early lone of 2007. Available on on at http://www.urbemis.com. The option to this is to use the SCAQMD's CEQA Air quality handbook, as long as the most current emission factors are used. • 2. The lead agency has not quantified project-specific air quality imnacts from this proposed project. It has not demonstrated that the proposed project will not generate significant adverse construction or operational.air quality inpacts. - 3. Due to the existing single family homes to the west and single family homes and mobil homes to the east of the proposed project SCAQMD recommends evaluating localized air quality impacts. This is to insure that neazby residents are not adversely affected by the construction. 4. There is a new traffic light at Cornwall (west of the site) and a soon coming traffic light at East Street (east of the site). These were added due to the additonal traffic of the new town homes across the street and the future additional traffic of the proposed San Sevaine Villas. The lead agency has not disclosed potential traffic impacts for intersections affected by the proposed project. It has stated to SCAQMN that it will not create a substantial increase in the number of vehicle trips, traffic volume or congestion in neazby intersections, but has not provided a traffic study to back this up. The lead agency needs to fallow SCAQMD guidelines as shown in their report. Foothill traffic is already very heavy at this proposed project location. Traffic sits idling at the stop lights every morning and every afternoon next to this site. A CO hot spot analysis needs to be done. SCAQMD has outlined the minimum requirements in their report. u ~~~~~~. G{TY OE F~tPdC;HQ CJCA~[®Is1Cx41 Date 08-24-2007 Page 2 of 2 t.:;i-`~ f.".~5i~ The air quality in this section of the city is very bad. Within one mile of this site you have a solid waste disposal center, two recycling centers, Fontana steel., Maas-Hanson steel, Ameron, Etiwanda Generating Plant, Vista Meta Corp, and Advanced Enviromental. There are lazge "approximately" six feet in diameter rusty steel pipes stored in the field behind this proposed project. Every year the newspaper reports on how bad the air quality is around this site. We are always located in the most severe section due to the steel plants and alike aoound us. The lead agency has not preformed any on-site tests and appears to use old information from previous jobs around the city. The comments from SCAQMD on this job coincide with the comments from many other jobs in the city, actual site testing is not be preformed. This proposed site is located next to lazge business that put out emissions, therefore it is a must that on-site tests be preformed if you don't require it than you could be putting innocent people at risk. I am opposed to the building of this project Thank you, ~ , / ~~~NN ~~'~ V ~r/ ~P~ ~~~ 1 ~°~ia e~STrvv~' r~uE ~eCm Qf7~9 ~- Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention• • Attention: Mayor, City Council Members and Clerk Dr.:Donald J. Kurth P.O. Box 807 Mayor Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91729 Diane Williams Mayor Pro Tem - NOTE: Please make copies and distribute to City Council Members 'and Clerk Rex Gutierrez Council Member August 3 ] , 2007 L. Dennis Michael Council Member Dear Mayor, City Council Members, and Clerk: Sam Spagnolo My name is Judith Barak. Council Member I live at 8083 Jamestown Circle Fontana, CA. 92336 West Heritage. ] oppose the San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Debra Adams Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. City Clerk The development is too large. Our community cannot bear the James Frost additional burdens this large project will bring such as: crime, traffic City Treasurer conditions, air pollution, negative impact on schools, impact on usage of our new park, devaluation of properties, and quality of life. • We moved to this community because it is clean, peaceful, not overcrowded, there is no graffiti or gang activity noted, the schools are great, our park is safe (we are not intimidated by negative groups or inappropriate activity), i.e. we found a place to raise our children in a safe, positive environment, so they can succeed and live without fear of their surroundings. The-local irifrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. Again, my response to yet another large project in my community is, NO! The City has already placed enormous burdens on our neighborhood with thejail, dump, and realignment of the school district. Please help! 1 am sure you will have a solution for this situation. Thank you so much for your valuable time. Sincerely, yu~~ • Attention: Dr. Donald J. Kurth Mayor Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members and Clerk• . Diane wilGams P.O. BOx 807 Mayor Pro Tem Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729. Rex Gutierrez NOTE: Please make copies and distribute to City Council Members Council Member and clerk - L. Dennis Michael August 31, 2007 Council Member - ~~ ~ ~ Sam Spagnolo Council Member Dear Mayor, City Council Members and Clerk: My name is Dimas Barak Debra ndams 1 live at 8083 Jamestown Circle, Fontana CA 92336 Ciry Clerk I OPPOSE the San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. James Frost Ciry Treasurer The development is too large. Our community cannot bear the additional burdens this large project will • bring such as: crime, traffic conditions, air pollution, negative impact on schools, and devaluation of our properties and quality of life. We moved to the City of Fontana looking for a better future for our children, please help us. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this malmitude. Again, my response to yet another large project in my community is: NO!!! The city has already placed enormous burdens on our neighborhood with the jail, the dump and the realignment of the school district. We cannot afford one more Sincerely, ~ ~` ~ _. __ ---Dimas • ~~ ~~~ • The LORD make his face to shine upon you, and be gracious to you...Numbers 6:25 u u 'Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members and Clerk P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729- r -:~~. August 27, 2007 Dear Mayor Kurth and Mayor Pro Tem Williams: My name is Dolores Costa. I am a homeowner. I live at 8206 Cornwall Avenue, Randho Cucamonga. This has been my residence for 40 years. I am a citizen of the United States and registered voter. I oppose the San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The development is too large: Our neighborhood cannot bear additional burderis this Iai a rD Oiect will bring such as: crime, traffic conditions, air pollution, negative impact on schools, extinction of wildlife and devaluation of properties and quality of life. The W est Vallev Detention Center was built down the street 15 years ago. It is a "round the clock" operation. The facility has a capacity of 3,291. In 2006, the facility had 61,457 bookings and 67, 554 releases. , A percentage of the 67, 554 releases walk through our neighborhood. This has created an enormous negative impact on our neighborhood. It is not safe. It is especially not safe for our children. The San Servine Villas development will surely add to the crime that already exists from large projects such as the jails. Additionally, all inmates from the Glen Helen Rehabilitation Center are bused and released at the West Valley Detention Center parking lot. The Devore community complained of the negative impact the Glen Helen Rehabilitation Center releases had on their community. Therefore, our neighborhood bears their burden. Please note that the West Vallev Juvenile Detention Center is also located down the street. We know of the enormous revenues and benefits the jails bring to other parts of the city. However; the local infrastructure is not adequate to support yet another large project in our neighborhood. Please, let us breathe and deal with the everrising crime, traffic, overcrowded schools, disappearance of wildlife and devaluation of properties that have resulted from already existing large projects. The Etiwanda/Foothill homes were built in the 1950's. We were here first. We are home owners. However, our community bears the burden of every undesirable large oroiect. Because of this, the Etiwanda/Foothill homes are valued $20,000 to $30, 000 less than other similar properties. The San Servine Villas development will only add to the devaluation of our properties. My son is non-ambulatory and totally dependent on me. When walking to church on Sundays, I negotiate his wheelchair through dirt and gravel sidewalks; heavy traffic; and crime including transients begging for money. Due to my son's respiratory problems, I must shield his face from the excessive air pollution. Children in our neighborhood are not allowed to attend the schools up the street due to the realignment of the school district and overcrowding. The children are bused to other neighborhoods. Wildlife seeks refuge in our backyards as natural habitats disappear. Our yards host an abundance of new birds and gophers due to the disappearance of their homes. Again, my response to yet another large project in my neighborhood is: NOI The city has already placed enormous burdens on our neighborhood with the jails, realignment of the school district and dump -to name a few undesirable large oroieets. ~% iE~io-, n~ L Ct Dolores Costa CITY Of RANCHO CUCANiONGA AUG 3 0 2007 RECEIVED - PLANfJlNG ~ ~ ~1 c~ c, ~C \,0. rr~ 1~~1 a~~ V \ ~~ c~\~~e.S~ N ~e r' o. Rancho Cucamonga City Hall August 30, 2007 Attention: Mayor, City Council Members and Clerk P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Kurth and Mayor Pro Tem Williams: My name is Patricia Velasquez. I live at 8156 Cornwall Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga. The LORD blesses his people with peace. Psalm 29:11 I oppose the San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199 for many reasons. My concerns are not limited to the following. 1. The project is too big! --You have got to be kidding. This is a mammoth three story housing project of 225 units that sits on a small piece of land and will be densely populated. This is a recipe for crime that will overflow into my neighborhood. 2. Crime --We already have transients that are released from the jails walk through -our neighborhood. With the current situation, my child is not allowed to play outside. I have major.concerns about gangs and graffiti that will be generated by this massive housing project. • 3. Overcrowded schools -my child is on a waiting list for pre-school and kindergarten. 4. Traffic -We already have vehicles lining our neighborhood streets as they cut from Etiwanda Avenue to Foothill Boulevard. There are times when I am not able to enter or exit my home. 5. Air Pollution -I am concerned about the air quality for my family, especially for my child. There are factories discharging smoke into the air that we breathe. 6. Extinction of Wildlife --I am concerned about the lost habitat for the avian populations. We have seen an increase amount of birds around our home due to their lost habitat. Again, I oppose the San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. v ~~~ atricia Velasquez ,4'~e Q Q ,~.Q~ .Q Q :~...Q .~. QG Q@ .~-.QY ~' ~~ .'®'.@ .Q Q4t .~4.e ~.~. .Q ®'. ~~.~ ~'' Q' • `y As for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.'' Toshua 24:15 Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members and Clerk P.O. Box 807 Raricho Cucamonga, CA 91729 'August 30, 2007 Dear Mayor Kurth and Mayor Pro Tem Williams:- .. My name, is Bernardo :Duran. I am a homeowner. Llive at 8116 Corhwall.Avenue, . Rancho Cucamonga.,'. ~ . - -. I oppose the.San Servaine Villas developrtient DRC2006=00540 and `Density • Bonus Agreement DRC2007=00:199 The protect is 400 larger am a'realtor by.p~ofe'ssion: I know first hand that dejireciation of property values and crimes follow such projects. -The size and, scope of this enormous project of 225 units is a formula for a ghetto. A,ghetto'is an area,of a city,lived in 6y a minority group,~especially a run-down and densely populated area: _ Gangs; drugs, graffiti, home invasions, and overall destruction of surrounding properties are the norm.. As the cancer spreads,:many ' famllies:will be forced to move from our neighborhood. . It is unfortunate that. the city has systematically.chosen.fo'place burdensome projects around our neighborhood. Again, Loppose the San Servaine Villas development,DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall August 30, 2007 Attention: Mayor, City Council Members and Clerk P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mayor Kurth and Mayor Pro Tem Williams: My name is Olga Lopez. My husband, Arturo Lopez, moved our family 10 years ago to 8156 Cornwall Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga. We are homeowners. Our family moved because of a project similar to the San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The project generated unbearable crime. We have a family member who was murdered in his home. We know the experience of living next to a project. It is inevitable that crime from the San Servaine Villas development will overflow into our • neighborhood. Our schools are overcrowded and our road system is not able to support the heavy traffic. Yet, the city continues to deposit another negative impact on our neighborhood. Our family opposes the San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. ~~ - OI a L pez • The LORD blesses his people with peace. Psalm 29:11 (~-. ~~ To: Mayor Donald J. Kurth 08/30/07 Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams Council Members: Sam Spagnola cc: City Clerk • L. Dennis Michael (~~ Rex Gutierrez (~ v Gt-~1~ My name is Joseph Sibree, I live at 8165 Cornwall Ave. R. Cuc., Ca. 91739. (~T'Y ~ R~ EGA " I strongly Oppose the San Servaine Villas Development DRC 2006-0050 Cam' ~"~{( and the Density Bonus Agreement DRC 2007-00119. There are numerous reasons~why this is not an appropriate project for this neighborhood and will have a major negative impact on the residents that have been here for many yeazs. I will concern the City Council however with only those issues that I feel have the most impact and will ultimately lead to the determent of both this neighborhood as well as the city. The first, and potentially most important, issue that needs addressing and feel should not be allowed by the city council, is in regards to the size of the project. Previously, Northtowns largest development for an Affordable Housing Project has been Villa del Norte, located at 9997 Feron blvd. This project is only of Eighty Eight (88) units, approximately two and a half times smaller than the proposed project under consideration. Even with this smaller project, Northtown developers went through two previous management companies before getting the Jon Stewart Co. (Current management co.) because they were having many issues with crime and proper maintenance within the project. Additionally,-Northtown repeatedly refers to the idea that the crime within this development (Villa del Norte) is no worse than that in other neighborhoods. However, even by their own adnuttance, this project must take part in a High Management Program with the Police department in order to keep things under control. The fact that this project needs to be a part of this High Management Police Program shows for. itself that there is an increase in criminal activity that can only be negated by'additional police management and resources. Villa del Norte is only eighty eight units, it is quite obvious that the effects on the community of a project of this size and scope (proposed 225 Units) will not be of a beneficial nature, and will be a detriment as it puts addition strains on Management and Police resources just to maintain status quo. The size of this project also puts an additional burden on traffic, air quality and schools. In the file you will find a letter from the Etiwanda school District stating in black and white that the schools are akeady over capacity and will not be able to accommodate all of the students expected to be generated by this project. It also shows current enrollment in excess of 72,042 and the Districts current enrollment capacity at 11,080, there already over capacity. Additionally, the estimated student generation seems ridiculously low. This project will house over one thousand new residents and they estimate that there will be only 28 K-5 students and only 9 6-8 grade students, that seems absurd. What about high school students? The project is much too big. There is nothing wrong with Affordable Housing, in fact there is a need. The City Counsel I'm sure can agree that it would be much. more of a benefit for the city as well as for our neighborhood, that there he many more affordable Housing Projects, all with fewer units per project, spread throughout the city as the state requires. it is not fair to make our community and the residents here, some of which have been here for over forty yeazs, whom have paid their taxes, have had faith in this community and who have helped to build this community, the victims of this project that should not be built unless it be reduced in size quite substantially. Thank you for your time, Joseph Sibree. • • ~, , (~ ~ '. CITYOFRANCROCUCAMONGA . • August 29;2007 AUG.2 9 2007 .. . Emily Spinney 8198 Cornwall Ave. RECEIVED -PLANNING Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 RE: San Sevaine Villas Development DRC2006-00540 And Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199 Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attn: Dr. Donald J. Kurth - - -.. City Council Members And Clerk This Letter is in regazds to my opinion about the opposed development. Attached is the letter I typed in 2005 which I still stand by. But I have issues to add on this follow up letter and a few questions to bring to your attention. This project is just to big and to tall for the location and traffic control. (Seems like compound) Like the fact that my neighborhood has already been burdened with the Dump, Jail, and all the Industrial Businesses, which seem to operate 24 hours and is interrupting the quality of my sleep. • Stores W. Etiwanda and S. Foothill_all seem to be relocating neaz the Victoria Gazdens Mall. What is left is struggling or vacant Why do we have cops trained. for this type of development if low income properties aze not a threat to the community? Why is a daily head count necessary if so safe? Why is there no trust if no threat? Especially if cops/teachers aze qualified to live there because they aze low income according to Pam Stewart. What are the qualifications in order to be accepted as a resident there? What is the allowed time per unit to reside there? What kind of background checks aze they doing? Where do they live now to afford the cost of living? • And Seniors do not have enough vacancies in the Senior Homes aze they qualified to live there? :,, ~,.. ,. ' ~:~ '~. ,~;. ,: ;~., ~~ ~--. 1vly opinion is, is that I am concerned for my families well being. Low income is a big threat to 'any ones property value. It seems there is more problems associated with people that are struggling to make it in a low income situation. This is when they need assistance to get by. So there's more stress which relates to more problems. There's arguing then alcohol and drug,problems becorrie an escape route. The kids are neglected and seek gangs or violence to release their depression. I know this neighborhood has struggled in the past itself. And I know all the homeowners have been working hard to improve the over-all appearance of the.area, in which they have purchased a home to admire, enjoy; and change for the-best: Thisneighborhood has really been through a remarkable change and has become a well desired place to live. The surroundings of a house influence the property value. People that rent apartments would never buy near them. New buyers would never buy riear~'apar'tme~itis:' They would select`~a.h.eigliborhood that is not near apartments; because people desire the trust in-pride of ownership. People take better care of things'they own and try harder to keep there properties in good shape. Of course they are proud and look towards a better future for there selves and family. The larger the percentage of home ownership the . more economically stable the area is. Invasion of low income equals zero pride and zero respect. Lower income percentage prevails Neighborhood influence. Economic/Social Obsolescence is incurable. The causes are shabby rundown. The result; value will decrease. Regression Principles high proper settings for family and safety. The, schools and shopping areas seem safer. ' ~ I know this neighborhood would' like to continue conformity and see more similarity to keep the stability in our futures. We have all come very far to gain this. Please do not take it away from a lot of people who have really worlced.hard to make this a great neighborhood. It would ruin a lot of. ,great people and' destroy a -lot of hard work. Nobody deserves this kind of threat in their lives. ,~ "~. ' The area of land where the apartments are to be built is a 1.00 YEAR OLD FLOOD PLAIN ZONE. And natural habitat lives there. The project would be putting the low incoipe renfers''in a harmful situation. Also it will be creating a lot of UNSAFE AREAS FOR VIOLENCE TO OCCUR. Like between the retaining wall and power lines. Or the retaining wall and' `.' wash. Also, there is no safe area to walls to stores; buses, shopping centers, ~efc.'~No d'eal'crossng cones foi'~pedesfrans. So you see this is the wrong . choice for every ones circumstances. And it would be causing a lot of problems to a lot of good people. It will effect all of Rancho Cucamonga. It will not look good to take away from the people that have given so much ~~.~ already. Before involving us, consider your own backyard not ours. ~~'` Thank you for letting me be heard. ,.. l ~t - - ,. , ~: ,: Code Enforeement;and Coimmunity Attitudes about Neighborhood Deterioration: The 'Broken .Window Theory' Developing a sense of order w}uch .destroying property percerved,to 6e adventitious, not .the result 'of results from' effettive and nmely :, negletted`and abandoned Because inexorable social`-forces or;per§on- code enforcement can help to curb . rt was an-easy tazget, abandoned al failing. A rash of burglaries may, the physital' decerioration of our" property attracted criminal beliav occur;' because drug users`. have cities. ff we strive for au orderly , roq and the soaoeconomrc level of found ,a back alley or an":aban- urban envrroivnent through such ::+the nerg66orhood segmed to have doned building iir wlvch to-hang measures as tepatrmg dilapidated no appreciable rmpacY. out., Tn them=spare' nme; and in buildings, removing trash and i Describing the "theory in the order'to get money to buy drugs "::. , junk from vacant lots, and replac- ` Atlamic Monthly in'i 1982,• James thty steal from their neighbors. If ing broken .widows,, we might ;iQ Wilsoe and George L Kelling the.back alleys are deaned'dp and improve our_-oppormnipes as a -wrote that soaal psychologists the abandoned'butldiags, torn community io manage the more `and police officers tend to agree down; the drug users tvill go away.. complex social' and economic `ithat if a window in fa-building!is Theyinay'even'use fewerdrugs, problems of homelessness, ' because they wdl have drf(i crime, and poverty s '`*~:; ~~~```~~"-~~ ~ ~~ ~`~ ~,-~vs~~~ ~; --' ~ ~„s culty finding•convenient deal " ~ How individuals respond f , y„ iu ~ ers and soft burglary targets. ' to property maintenance has ~~~,~ri 1Js .6 n „ t^~K ~ ' This relationship between - bren cleverly demonstrated m w +r~ ~ Pt t'~ ~;'~~ mine and neighborhood dete- r ~ ~ ' an experiment by social sctrn :"" "' ' i _, "~..r,; y ~.'e. noranon rs one of. the leading • ' tilts to test the hypothesis of ~ ~ y , ~ irte.y a lustaficanons~for a comprehen- L 8 .~ - the `Broken: Window The ~`,, ~" ~ r~ ,,,,,,t .v„K.M~ 4t s live code eaforcement pro- ory'.• They left an inoperable t;,,~*t 3 ~~"'~.~ r e~~ a'.,~ r ~ t~ am, If -eft unabated aban- ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~f'~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~~ car arked on a ublic "a- " " "f~ ' ~ `r' t 0f" " P P Street ~ Boned buildings,<substandard in a high crime neighborhood m 'broken and rs left unrepaaed,Sall apartments, and`;even graffiti can New York Ciry. During; the next ~ the rest of. the windows will soon . rapidly develop. info .public nui- few hours they obsrned'a number `~ be broken. Neglected property aances threatening the public's of people varidalize'and steal parrs ' allowed'to remain in-such a'condt- health and safety: An' aggressive from the car; and within forty- 'uon rs a aignal,to the community code'`anforcement program can eight hours -the car was nothing `that no one cares- :: Wilson -and help to reduce the likelihood thac more than a'shell ;Kelhng go' on to suggest thavdis- propeiiies with minor violations "They repeated the expenmrnt m .order and crime are inextricably will contribute to a neighborhood a more affluent neighborhood in' ''-liriked with'rhe:physical environ- becoming worse. Code rnforce- Palo Alto, California, near Stanford !: meat at the community level:. As meni canalso help contain the pos- University. Although more nme `. they eicplarned m a`. more recent sibility that more dilapidated prop- elapsed, the social scienusts ob- : artrde m 1989=' ernes will .spread throughout a served the swine behavior. people ': "[A] lot of serious crime is neighborhood of community. ` "Broken Windows," byJames Q ;Wdson and George~L. Kelbng Atlantic Monthly, March 1982. "' "Making Nerghborlioods Safe, by~James Q Wilson Arid George L. Belling, Atlantic Monthly, February 1989. • }x :._. _ a'r ~~+eu:g~+ay~ront sensor ~tousuig rota juu vlot+~rt~go~~enunent,ho x a detetioratrorr of mynergHGorhoodr :, + ~ ~ t i i Lr M ~ ,~, r 1 p s ~.~: r t t A °, ., ~ 4 4 c t r~lfter choosnta to 6ui(dsemor citizen Housing eCsei+heie t(e crty~states theie'ts no'othei:j~(c+ce for ,~ : s z rnassive`goyennnent housp}g`knotvri as San,~-Servame hillas dei%eCopmenh .DRCzooG oosgo~" `} i , Density Bonus 7greeinent,DRCzoo7 ooigg .~, ,-. e,• :' ..., .. Creme andtraffic are already hard to manage nt,my neig(6orhood fey are a direct r esuft from other large scale developmentsYhat no Dire else wouldhave in tHerr 6dekyar d a r > "' I do no[ feeLsafe A7rdnsients,~ eCeasedfrom~aiCtvalk tHrouAH my neigHHorhood` The transrentspu up",residene¢ m the fieldlocaf¢~fdtrectlybeHindmy backyar'cL''Some?of the transients are attra'cte to-mypeach and apricot trees ~I,seerthe~`tops of t6i'eir Heads'ac tHey i~~alk,alotrgside my backyard fence :", s " P + - i. r, ;:~%. ~ l!ehicles,cuttntg frotrr;~'oothdQBoulerai•cfto Etn+arrda 7lvertiiie hne`[he tiro streets 7her-e are rimes, 5 "'° "' tvliett7 cannot Gack..riiy vehule,'onto CHe'street ,='~ r'•` :" *~ ~` 9Ny son ancf~hu fainrCy stayedi+%ith tree i+~(en He`was ti ansferredfrom-another state }{is girls ++ere not allot+}ed"outsrde due to cr mie an`dtraffic CHildretr aitd~Yeetts are `at a,~reater dsadi%antage,ifiXe toYHe existing cnme`Andtraffic , t ht thepast i5 years t!e quahtyof (fe fias Heen d dmat+caCly reduceditr my neighborhood Tlease , stop the additronaldeter+oratroir ofmy~neigfiborf'ood Agdiit do riot'6uildtlerSan Seri~Aute VrC(as; dei%elopmeiif D7tCzooG o053o diidDensity Boitus .~greemeitt DRCzoo7 ootgg`lefiuidmy'backydret 7fiepro~ect;is toq(opGrg ~• ~ ~ - Florence Sfredwick Rickard; ' The LO,Rl7 Gless you and keep yoii..'. Numbers G:zq" !~ J . ' / :. CITY 0~ RANCHO CUCA~iONGA San 5evaine villas AU6 2 9 2007 s~z7~zoo7 • RECEIVED - PLANPJING My name is Terri Ebell, i live at 8157 Cornwall Ave in the city of Rancho Cucamonga, I oppose the San Sevaine villas Development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00119: I am a home owner and have lived in my residence for 30 years," this is where my husband and 2 settled as a young newly married couple and it is where we chose to stay and raise our family, we are commited to keeping our neighborhood safe for ourselves and our neighbors. written below are reasons why z am opposed to the San 5evaine villas I live in a small, quiet rural area lust west of the proposed developement and my fear is the negative impact that such a large apartment commum ty will have in our area. My concerns are valid as I believe the crimes in our area will increase. Crimes such as vandalism, graffiti, theft and assault, these are crimes that I have not had to deal with in the 30 years that z have lived in this neighborhood. The proposed development is quite large and overwhelming for this area of our city, these three story apartment buildings are going to be surrounded on all sides by nothing more than small single family homes, where children walk to and from the school bus stop and play in their front yards. who is going to keep them safe from preditors that have an easy place to hide in such a large complex of apartments, this is real! i fear for the lose of what we now have and that is a small, safe,somewhat • quiet neighborhood, a neighborhood where i can take a walk in the evening if I chose to, a neighborhood that stil 1. sees people sitting in their front yards when the evenings are cool, a neighborhood where people still wave hello to one another as they drive past you. These are just a few of my concerns and fears-for my neighborhood, and the community that i call home. i thank you for taking the time to read this letter and ask that you keep my concerns in mind when decidingg on the San Sevaine villas DRCZ006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00119 which i oppose. Thank you ~'~ , ~ Terri 7. Ebell 8157 Cornwall Ave Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739-9605 Page 1 • / L,0" • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor: City Council Members and Clerk P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91729 August 28, 2007 Deaz Mayor, City Council Members and clerk: Our names are Anthony Milian and Regina Alvazez and we live at 13060 Chestnut Ave. and we oppose the San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC20.07-00199. The development is too large. Our community cannot beaz the addition burdens this lazae rp oiect will bring such as: crime, traffic conditions (which we already have), air pollution, negative impact on schools, extinction of wildlife and devaluation of properties and quality of life. • The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. Again my response to yet another lazge project in my community is NO! The city has already placed enormous burdens on our neighborhood with the jail, dump and realignment of the school district. THANK YOU ANTHONY MILIAN AND REGINA ALVAREZ /~j % , /./~` NOTE: please make copies of this letter and distribute to City Council Members and Clerk. Attention: Dr. Donald J. Kurth Diane Williams Rex Gutierrez L.Dennis Michael Sam Spagnolo Debra Adams James Foster (,.nY UI R4nvn.. -- ~ -- M~,~I~'Y'III'1IStt'~t~ Date 08-21-2007 To: Mayor Don Kurth, City Council and City Clerk • !'ArMC UUrr i !1f IiAF rlU llilD NCiC[7T/1DLl/111T A C I am opposed to the SAN SEVAINE VILLAS _ DRC2006-00540 and DRC2007-00119 Starting way back on April ]2-2005 at the first neighborhood meeting with North Town Housing development; there was a concern that graffiti would occur on the block walls surrounding the complex. The latest design of this complex has see through fencing so graffiti can not occur; buy that change alone they have shown graffiti will be a problem in our neighborhood. This information was taken from the minutes recorded by North Town Housing Development. Next back on March 15-2007 there was a city meeting with North Town and the city's representation. Linda Daniels with the Redevelopment Agency said and 1 quote: "I can not guarantee crime would not occur but it would be minimized". This was taken from the minutes of that meeting. Next "Mike Diaz" head planner for this project. He said at the July 25 - 2007 planning commission public hearing: and I quote, "They aze putting see through fencing azound the complex so they can not do graffiti and so police can see in." this was taken from the audio cd purchased of this hearing. • Next Planning Commission Chair "Stewart" on the sameJuly 25-2007 hearing said and I quote. " I'm not going to tell you that people who reside in this work-force apartments won't commit some crime, they aze. But the end result is no slats to say its true. So another words they know crime will occur but don't know how much because their have be no studies. Also she said the 220 foot edision power corridor is some protection. Next North town housing development only refers to crime within its developments and does not consider what goes on azound it's projects, like our neighborhoods. By there own admission they must take part in a high maintenance program with the police department. This is to try to keep things under control. Next on the city's Initial Study Document page 4 of ] 0, item ntunber 14 it asks. Will the proposed project change the pattern, scale or character of the surrounding general area of the property. The response was this: It will improve medium-density housing in an azea with single family and multi family neighborhoods, but BUFFERED from them (residences) by the open space corridor and flood control channel. This is not medium density it is HIGH DENSITY due to the proposed Density Bonus Agreement .The word BUFFERED means, something or someone that protects or shields from physical damage or financial blow. Yes that is an accurate statement of what will happen to our neighborhood if this.project is build. Here are six documented statements staying we will get crime. This is not acceptable! Is adding more cri a in your neighborhood acceptable to you. ~~~wi'1 i C~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~r n ~~~~ ~~. u Mrs. Sharon Eisenman • 13015 Vine Street Rancho Cucamonga, Calif. 91739 (909)899-8559 August 27, 2007 Rancho Cucamonga City Hall ATTN: Mayor, City Council Members and Clerk P.O. Box Sod Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 NOTE: Please make copies and distribute to City Council Members and Clerk. Dear Mayor, City Council Members and Clerk: My name is Mrs. Sharon Eisenman and I live at r3oi5 Vine Street, Rancho Cucamonga, • CA. 91739. I oppose the San Servaine Villas Development DRC2oo6-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2oo7-00199. The development is too large. Our community cannot bear the additional burdens this large project will bring such as: crime, traffic conditions, air pollution, negative impact on schools, extinction of wildlife and devaluation of properties and quality of life. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. Again, my response to yet another large project in my community is: NO! The city has already placed enormous burdens on our neighborhood with the jail, dump and realignment of the school district. _. _ Sincerely Mrs. Sharon Eisenman • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall • Attention: Mayor, City Council Members and Clerk P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91729 August 26, 2006 Dear Mayor, City Council. Members and Clerk My name is Ralph. Lee Sharp Jr. I live at 13051 Chestnut Ave, Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91739. I oppose the San Servaine V llas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199 The country as a whole is fighting urban blight. The city of Rancho Cucamonga is promoting urban blight by allowing this project to continue even in the planning stage. The infrastructure is not antiquate even now and will get much worse. The inhabitants of this project will have to go through our small community to get to the local. shopping center. There will be an increase in crime, traffic and pollution. Every morning and evening Cornwall and Chestnut streets are.inundated by traffic trying to avoid the • traffic light at Foothill and Etiwanda Avenues. It is bad enough that these vehicles come though our community but to them the 25 MPH speed limit is a figment of someone's imagination. The additional vehicles associated with this project will make it much worse. Someday soon, I fear, a child will be seriously injured or killed by a vehicle that doesn't even. belorig in this community. I watch cars and light trucks speed by every morning and every afternoon. Police patrols are almost non existent. If the police can't stop the traffic, how are they going to stop the break-ins and vandalism? I have lived here since 1973 and have seen the neighborhood suffer urban blight. The neighborhood is now being brought back to a nice comfortable place to live. This project will effect property values and plunge our little community back into urban blight. I like living in Rancho Cucamonga and would like to see the city go forward in its growth not backwards. Please copy this letter and distribute to the responsible individuals. ~~ • og- a~6-~7 ~' n ~_~ ~ v~~ J 5 /f~~~ LS ~1/L' Gr/V .~~Y ^7 ~~!z-F7c~~!'Et~L~ /~c'`E :C-~•z~ ~ ~~~u/ct_~v~ J'.~U-oJ:.~/1'V~J„tii !y"• ct~4~'7 G~/d~~i/ ~ CSCh~C~Jti'T ~~c•'zc-u_t.lJ ,,~y1.~-LeG~ c ~cc~~%is~2 Cc//_ c-cam / /~1,~ ~rL4 -L« L'L~-a-d.-~ //~'. G9Zc-r r'G ~i"Gl G=,yj<'< dz'6~~ CJOdJJ ~~ GZ ~ ~ C.z ~c~ rjv7~~ . L'~x~T Gt-~ ~;~/ vl.'~cNPI~ /~e~-t C'L~i(n/l.~.Q !/ J?~-~- l~,.oa_z ~Ce' --w ,~rurn-,-~ ~pR.vf~~~~c,vt+~ o LL:.I.~, CU--vv, o-c-~,~- ~i~iCC,cn~i-~- 7~ v~ ~;C-P~ . ~y-e ~ltrv ~ d~eaQ ~~ ~1;~-~ Coti~r i ~7-~P~ ~ ~v ~d '~ k~ p~r ~j r~~u! Cpl r?i~'I ~un~. ~ '~- ~ ~ _L~~y ~ ..,~GQ24~~-r a~/t-4-- CZ-ri~ ~/Gr,/~i-r~Ci ~- _ ... !~i cC-E ~ti~ cc,~~~~ ~i*-~ i C'7!l ~3'Lt~1 oU c~ ~-r' ~ YU.~ G1iv-e ~W/~ J~~iI~I~ J,c~2Ain~-i.r--C~,X 'J/n~' ~~' 'rJC, 1/~~J~AJ.,~~'I .'._ 1 Vyc.k= I~c~RRzS~ .~S O PPoS~ p io 7~Hc S ~~ ScRV~.L. NE ~lsLLAS DRc ~v0~ ~-OOS"yQ LT wfc-~. v~~R Caowq ~irc S'c:.NoOL$ H CG Rc.t?Y ~ ih pf}CJ~ oN. ,~.OGffL i R./-r~~~c. .Z'~ w~x~c -Z~_c RC eSc._ ~.P:uG__ RcTzv1-~'y . .C .. ., u arm /'~_nn ~r-~ n _ ~.. n. ;:c~;c~'vcu _:;, ~i Honcho Cucamonga ~~i ~ 2 3 2007 • :',: .. ... ~r~ .~~G'~__S' . ~ mss' ~ . f /~~. S~ n S ~ r V ~ t rv~ Chi /l~_ ~~~ l~~ ~~ ~~~s_ Cpl- / 7 ~ --~=C'-/~'f~d~S-- .~. - _._ rtoa,gwc~ a Rancho Cucamong0 _ • ~~~~~® Date 08-21-2007 To: City Of Rancho Cucamonga ~r ~ ~' a~~ 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91729 GI`I`'l ~c ~AI'1!'%N~ CU~AMONGH Attn: Planning Department, Mike Diaz, James Troyer, Lois Schrader, City Clerk Reg: DRC2006-00540 and DRC2007-00119 San Sevaine Villas [ am opposed to the building of this project. !n going through the public file for this project I noticed that no communication has been made to the "Chaffey High School District". It is important that contact be made as soon as possible, then payment of district fees can be made prior to a possible building permit. It is important to let the district know the actual square footage of this project so that the maximum fees can be paid. As you know the school districts are above capacity and payment of unmitigated fees will increase capacity; therefore payment of "mitigated" fees to the Etiwanda School District and the Chaffey High School District must be made. On page 26 of the "Initial Study" for this project signed by Peter J. Pitassi dated 07-16-07 He states: 'No Impact" on Schools as noted in section 13 subsection "C". This is not • accurate as noted by the Etiwanda School District Report that states: "Without full mitigation the district will not be able to fund the school facilities needed for this project" Denise at the Chaffey High Schoo] District has already "Mapped out this project area" and looks forwazd to your communication with her. Please copy this letter and forwazd to all parties and include in job file. You response is requested. Thank you, Kenneth Van Horn ~YW" L 909-463-6000 d-~~-a-~ ~e9u~«~ ~12CZ(~`Od5`-~c~ a~ ~~ 2~~-~}0l (9 lb - --- ~?lah __ _ _-- _ a~x=r dam- --f-h~~- _y~~~va~-i+-~ ~2u_~1 d --_- .-- ___ vJ~e., ---I~a~e.. ~ - Ue.d ~c~ -{-hay=---~o~,~~~_~ ~~- - ~ --- ors and _d~..r--~--c1~-~~e~ h,._ a~_ o~ ~__ -f-o -~'h-~~~Sc-hc~o ~~ ~ ~1~-~~_c.~c~~ _~a~d- Chi __... ~oo ~ ~s-4-r~-6_~~_~~ u~o~=~c.1--b~,-~ - --'-i .r_~e.~2 __L~ mor-~.~~-ru cwt ~~2.. e~, n~~'~ ~~''r~2a c-Y1 ~-~,~ __._ - I~v>2 ~or?.~Lo~~~ra_I~~~~ srn~l_~ ~1a5~_~__ ---- ---? ! e~lci-ens-haul. ~a ~u~~l-~~~u~~q h.~, ~~ ~~--~ h_a~~1~ Q{~_ f`h2, - _-G~6~1'-~__ ~at1~~a~y_~~;Ct_~C~s ~ h-ems __ ~ .: aid-. ~---n`~ --~-~~ _ c~~ u..~ ~ !~ -fl~.~'~~ __~~e,- m --_ o afar _- ~~-'~Y~.~-,. 6u we~~-- :,-moo ~J~u'~ _~ ~_:~~- ~oc~ - ,C p --- --- - _~ ~ _ _ 14~~ r~e~c~~t ~c -~_~~-~-~-o _v- harp --- ~ lie- -~=+=aw~-=o-{-~^e-~'---Ic~~.e~--ci~~~we.l V~er~- -~-~C-~- a~---- ~--- --- __ ~Uen,_ 1 cis ~1~~_c~~e~- g~~~~-=f-I~-d_- ___ ~ Irk-~-~ L-bececusQ ~~~ ~e,~ -~-ryr~__ -~_e~e~ d~¢-_ F-=~ --- ~.-ra~~ cam.-- ~ ~~5 ~ ~c~ c~g~n~_erro~~--~~r ~~ (a. o~ --- ---------___1~ecz5~/_tiS.~-- __ _ _._-- ----- _ -_.. -- -_- -- _ _c~~~s -~t~ -~--(~.- s-~r~-p-~S-~~~~e~-mac.-I-~---- doh t/i Q~~~,-e-e.l-~~ur' ~a-~_~ _~~2~0~~_ ion +-~, ~f-~~ a ~~_~~~ ~~-_ 2 ~b~=l- rte- ,._ _ _ - = -- -- ~ ~~Ul-~~-1~-~ ~ ~(_-~~ ~.~~ -~ Chi-L~i'QV- ~~-~ F~~C~CtFEC~ ~~ 20 ~3~ Date 08-16-2007 CITY OF RAPdCHO CiiCA(NONGA CITY ClERK To: City Counsel, Mike Diaz, James Troyer and City Clerk Regarding the appeal submitted on 08-06-2007 item DRC2006-00540 and Recommendation of DRC 2007-00119 "San Sevaine Villas apartments" I am adding on to appeal, item # 1 this needed information: Per Chapter 17.40.050 of the Affordable Housing IncentivesBonus Provisions Northtown Housing Development Corporation must comply with items: "G" The owner shall submit annually, and within thirty days of occupancy of a target unit, a certificate of compliance, which shall include the name, address, and income of each tenant occupying the target units. "H" The owner shall maintain and keep on file annual sworn and notarized income statements and current tax returns for all tenants occupying the tazget rental units. As we stated in our appeal we are concerned that Northtown has never built and managed such a lazge apartment complex. We need to see proof they are complying with these requirements with their existing affordable housing. If they aze not then they should not be aloud the Density Bonus per 17.40 - ~I`am-also adding on to the appeal item # 7 this needed information: As'we stated the schools-are severally overcrowded and what about the money the Developer will give to the school districts. We need to know will the developer give to the Etiwanda School District the mitigated amount of $6,704 per dwelling unit or will they give only the unmitigated amount that will create a significant shortfall in facilities construction funds to construct the school facilities needed due to this project? Why did Mike Diaz afthe planning commission hearing on 07-25-2007 tell the commission and residence that he received a letter from the district only requesting there money. He had this letter July 23, 2007 so he had to have know about this. Respectfully, f Kenneth Van Horn ~~(/J L~ Please call me and let a know s letter has been added on 909-463-6000 • u _.... ~_ • - Insufficient Notification DRC 2006-00540 ~ 08-13-08 To: Senior Planner Mike Diaz - • My name is Joseph Sibree, l live at 8165 Cornwall Ave. My home will be one of the closest homes to this project if the project is developed. It is my understanding that notice was sent out to residents within a 660 foot radius of the proposed project as required by city ordinance. It is also my understanding that every development has it's own unique and special circumstances as all projects aze unique in their development criteria. My concern that I strongly believe needs addressing is in the fact that this particular project, because of location and it's surrounding pazcels of vacant land does lack in sufficient notification to the public and it's residents that will be adversely affected from said development:- In particulaz, to the west, my neighborhood, there is an approximate 300 foot corridor of high power lines before you even reach the fist resident or home owner. When you do come to the homes you have only a small neighborhood of 115 homes. To the south of the project you have only vacant land. To the North you have vacant land and a project currently under construction which at this point has No home owners to object. The builder Lyons should have been notified ` and should be disclosing to all potential buyers this project but I could find no evidence in the file at city hall of such notification. To the east you have county property with very large lots and very few home owners, maybe a dozen or so. Finally, to the North and Northeast you have a very small section of the Heritage development and possibly Fieldstone that total have probably less • than 75 residents that notification was sent to. At this point I believe that approximately 180 or so residents were all that were notified for opposition or comment in regards to this project which by all standards I'm sure you would agree to be very lnsuiicient for a project that will have 225 Units itself There is also another major concern that both the city and the developer are trying to deceive the residences and the public by presenting the project in a "frame work" of words that would obviously result in the least amount of resistence from the public. Specifically while in internal memos the project is referred to as "affordable multi-family units" and in the meetings with the residences the terms "low income" and "very low income" were the accepted verbiage, because in reality that is exactly what it is. For some reason in the two notices sent out to the public, the first from North town developers and the second from the city itself, the project was described as first "a high quality apartment community" and secondly "a workforce apartments", whatever that is. These are the only notices sent out to the public to raise concern, not one of them mentions "affordahle"let alone "low income or very [ow income". Once again we are looking at insufficiat notification and in this case incorrect and deceptive notification. I therefore propose, that before any further Council meetings or any further progression of this project, that the public notification spear to be expanded to at least double the current radius and/or to include a minimum number of property owners. Us the concerned citizens have discuss this manner and feel that a minimum number of residents to be notified should be approximately 500. Given an average neighborhood and average densities throughout the city of Rancho 0 CUCAMONGA • Cucamonga this number is quite fair. We also feel that correct verbiage needs tom ~r~h~ notification process as not to play drnvn the impact of the development on it's neighbors. aus i s 200 Thank you for your time, Joseph Sibre~ 1~ RECEIVED - PLANWING r' ,~. i ~_, 1 .. ~ - - ®B ~, _ , fii,,,d~, i r I / ~I' i / i ~ ~- . IPA- il / I' ~3 ~~ ~ I + ~ III / • ~ !~ ' 1 i 1 ~® a ~ . 4. li - ~ ! ~ F I ~ f ~ 1 I : B= s a l i 1- ~ ~ ~ ~ ` ~ ICY ~ a I ~ - ~j 1 ~ 3 u ~/ , - - - - -1 _ "I - ~ i j p .a+B fA. ~ ~ 6 E 3 5 G 9 i ` p.~'g ~e B• . ~bc.. ~ ._ a.~ ~ µ L J: 1; ~ '- ~ +® _ ~ ~ A ~ a rr ' IS ^ AC ~ ~I !! ! - , ! ® Po~gi alc b =• ~, B i E ( y ' 9 i ~I[ i ~ I ~ 1 E rI A ~ .. I _~" hcxJ.A'_ y nl' t l '' . ~ i - _ - y i ; e - 'tom'... >~: f`-'~ / .Al ~'~. = . :it ~( ~`! f'. F~J ~/>"4'/~ _.. 'IF ~i i ~ 611 I ~+ ' f `m r.~ ~ r • ' 'It 1'~ISC' 1 ~ ?j _-. t ~ ~=? - a~.e -. .! _~ ! ~?'ii l i / > ~\ f '~F.~ ~ T ~ P CB ~ P1. F i {!9 ii S t ~~ 2471 yuSn.V , ~''-~1-"".L ~ ~ .~ P"A 4a. /3 P F .^±, p M'a tl /' ll d' .-~ ... __.~. ~ a '.... r .. y °' ~ ' " •-a ~'~ - -- ~ ° ""' t''i 4liJ5$ fltKf f-~~ d t~ -! e lur ~~~m .1~1<IFU ~.ti~aFFititi~a, ~aurorrna . . ~,ri,a,.~.,.~,~,.~ • `~ ~ ~i ~.~ ~ ~, ~~..x ~ z . moo, <U` oho`.-Trty .- K~.~ U.~ c,~, YZ.C. Viz. ~~r..iJ. /3939 10 S oo d~~ ~N ,~ ~lP~.~,~- ~. K.~, q~~39 Za-weP,e C~.co..,.,4,h ~..~ Ca 9i73.n,.. 9~9- G~6-9i6S (~..~ a. ~(.~:,, ..yy ~ Zoo(, -ooS ye ~ V "~ y '~I "/~toi--q, ~v fawn .S.Eu ~_• I~_- ,.~ J~~ ~ /r.~~~aa,.dd,, h ~ ~ Iad R'`"."~' 172C top YV-o'.`o~i !¢9J ,~~'•^°vcv~. '{~ .x/v.- ~~,~,~~ ~ ,~ ,.-"""`n.e -1.~..a,Y ...,~~ ~,a.~.lt ~J O-kni 61"'~'Oi-'-~h.~ ~ ~~ c,,.~ ~~~-~. kece~veo City of Rancho Cucamonga !_:._'~i ].4 2007 r"~ n!'e i s" - s C'Fri'+~' ~~~ ~pu ~ nL+lc:~. ~iaZ_._ Y1~, ~ yam,,, f~, CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIViONGAF,,Z_~ AU G 14 2004 I3 oa 4 C~~ ~,,,- RECEIVED -PLANNING 2. C. 9~ z 3 y 5o9-6~Fs-9i6a -Q.1M~ oW ~..~'~L.~ ~,.Q' "~. 'C ~.1.N S'Q-~Sb..V~µ..~, V•~,u.d, ~-~,.• D ~ 200 l-oos4o ~ ~`C"'''i.~.1 I J-OYL'.t~d ~`,M,[.Prv,.,,,~ . ~ ~ ~. Oo't - ao ~ ~ `! ,~' ~~q"u"`by~ ~ ~L.-W. ~,y,~G f . ~ . fy._ 6~t,CGv f o p o0 • t..0.. ~„~ _ -~.~'; , .~ ~ w :~ ~,~,~ • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall 10500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, Ca 91730 Aug, 13, 2007 • Donald J. Kurth, Mayor RE: San Servaine Villas 4 My name is Elizabeth. Wanner, I live at 13022 Vine St. I oppose the San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DR C 2007-00119. I went to the last Council Meeting just out of curiosity. What I saw was a dangerous situation with the traffic on Foothill Blvd. If you lived in this residential area you would of seen the same thing. Foothill Blvd. is by nature a busy street. Of course adding more apt. or homes adds to the congestion. But allowing all the exits and entries to the apartments only on Foothill Blvd will create more than just congestion. I have lived at this house for 25 years. When more people moved in as well as the new shopping center Etiwanda and Foothill took most of the traffic. It wasn't long before accidents Happen. Yes, accidents do happen and sometimes are unavoidable. But to save time cazs with individuals not .living in this residential area started cuffing through as a short cut. With one entry and two exits.only on Foothill. The apartment dwellers have not other option but to make u turns, hopefully obeying the flow of traffic and all laws. My guess is they too, will,need a shortcut. To get to the point, we have no sidewalks, our children and residents walk on the streets. We have had. many neaz misses where cazs driving too fast, unfamiliar with the area and trying to avoid a traffic jam have cut through and did not see the small child. I in fact, ran in front of a car to keep it from hitting one our children. School children walk to and from buses several times a day. One bus stop is just inside Cornwall, just off of Foothill. One caz trying to make a left turn into the residential area too fast could easily hit one of those children. Please, please re-evaluate this project. Address important needs like the traffic first. The fact. we have no sidewalks and the corner of Etiwanda and Foothill are extremely busy." The u-turns are potentially dangerous too. Could-the project be moved to another site? What about.two entries and exits on different streets. One serious car accident on Foothill Blvd that backs up traffic will also confine the dwellers to their site (unable to get out) Thank you for your time. Elizabeth Wanner • ~c'` ~~r _6.~~u,~rlaj ., Q' ~~'~•'CH~ CUCAMONGA Dai 08-oa- 007 Page 1 of 5 1ot:~5t~~ Plannine Commision Appeal ~i~.~~~5 . To: The City Of Rancho Cucamonga "City Counsel /Planning Director/ Commission" Regazding the Planning decisions of 07-25-2007. Items DRC 2007-00119 and DRC 2006-00540. Construction of 225 unit workforce apartments From: The Residents directly impacted and opposing the proposed San Sevaine Villas Development. - For these reasons we are appealing yow approval of this project: I. This apartment community is to large. We the citizens have not been satisfied that Northtown Housing development corp. will be able to control what will happens in ow neighborhoods with the overbearing influx of pedestrians and auto traffic. Northtowns current largest development for affordable housing is Villa del Norte, located at 9997 Feron blvd. This project is only 88 units. Approximatelytwo and half times smaller than this proposed project. Even with this smaller project they went through two different management companies before getting the John Stewart Co They were already having problems with crime and maintenance. As stated by Mike Diaz the head planner for this project at the 07-25-2007 public hearing for this project " we are putting see through fencing azound the complex so they can not do graffiti" and "we aze putting see through fencing so the police can see in" By --~ -thaistatement alone he admits there will be crime. Also the head chairwoman said before they voted that we would get crime and the power line easement was ow protection. Additionally Joshua Viso a County prosecutor said "More crime and hard core gangs". By Northtowns own admission this project must take part in High Management _ Program with the police department to keep things under control. Northtown only refers to crime within its developments. The crime will spill out into ow neighborhoods instead of inside the complex. How will you stop additional crime in ow neighborhoods from this development? Rancho Cucamonga has never built such a large workforce (low-income) apartment complex. They do not know what the future will bring with 225 units and over 1000 people. Why are you experimenting on our neighborhoods? What facts do you have that can back up the safety of ow neighborhood as there is nothing azound to compare to? 2. We the citizens need to know if Foothill Blvd. (south side from Cornwall st to Etiwanda blvd) will be improved before occupancy of this proposed project. For these reasons: A. There are no curbs, gutters or side walks for residences to walk on foothill blvd.. This is very unsafe as the residences would have to walk to the bus stop that's on Etiwanda or would need to walk to Food 4 less, Wal-Mart ect. It will be inevitable that someone gets run over or killed. • \J • • Date 08-04-2007 Page 2 of 5 planning commission appeal DRC2007-00119 and DRC2006-00540 B. There are no sidewalks on Comwall or Chestnut ave. This is the short cut to Food 4 less. Residences would have to walk in the street to get there and jaywalk across Etiwanda. This is unsafe and someone will get run over or killed also. C. Could the city be sued if someone gets hurt or killed because of this? It is public record now; we have let you know about this bad situation. _ I . There will be over a thousand people in this complex when occupied. Northtown Housing dev. corp. has provided the residences with a 6,000 sq. ft. clubhouse and a pool. There is no large grassy field for the kids to play soccer, football ect. There is no basketball court ect. Kids today don't need to sit in front of a computer they need exercise. They have designed it to big with buildings to close, not thinking about the kids. Where will the kids play out doors? Will the kids jaywalk across Foothill and use the private pazk in "Hertitage'"? These residences are paying high taxes for there own park. They moved in and paid 650k - 750k because they wanted a safe private park. How will you guazantee Heriitage residences that the apartment residences won't use their private pazk? 4. Traffic on East Street: This proposed apartment complex will only exit east on .._ _ __ • Foothill Blvd. due to a new median on foothill. The traffic will use East Street to go to the 15 fiery. East Street already is very congested due to the high school to the north. All high school kids in fieldstone must walk to school (no bus service). Many parents drive their kids to school. This is another bad azea where someone will get hit by a caz. How will you improve safety? 5. Will the comer at foothill and East Street be improved before occupancy of this proposed apartment complex? What improvements will be done on East Street before occupancy to improve safety? 6. Traffic on Foothill Blvd. between Etiwanda and East Street: Already traffic in the morning backs up from Etiwanda to Comwall. When this happens traffic diverts off foothill blvd, toms south on Comwall st., right on Chestnut and exits at Etiwanda Blvd. Our neighborhood already has a unsafe condition as they speed down our streets. How will things be any better when the apartment resident make a u-turn at foothill and East Street, adding more traffic and doing the same? What statistic do you have to show making a u-tom at foothill and East Street will be safe when foothill is already backed up? Why is all the traffic diverted towards Fontana? 7. Etiwanda Schools: Our children cun•ently go to Etiwanda schools and they aze severely overcrowded. It is so bad they must take two lunches because they can't serve them all in one. It is so crowded when you change periods you aze rubbing shoulder to shoulder with other students. This apartment complex will influx our schools with 600 or""- more new students. What proof do you have to show they will be able to withstand the additional students? We know the school district will get their money from the ' • Page 3 of 5 Planning commissions appeal DRC2007-00119 and DRC 2006-0540 Date OS-04-2007 developer. Show us how the money will. be used to remedy this situation. We need more high schools and middle schools now before any construction on this property. ` 8. Property Values: At-the 07-25-2007 planning public hearing there were many realtors that spoke and they all agreed that property values would drop near workforce apartments. Are you going to compensate the residence for their lost value? What will you say to the resident who owes what his house is worth now, but afrer you build owes more than it's worth? Now he is upside down and can't even sell his house. Northtown has said they have proof that workfoce low- income apartments don't affect property values, show us the proof. ` 9. Right now our area is a highly desirable place to live. We aze near Victoria Gardens, Freeways, and commerce. However if the apartments are built we'll have a hard time selling, as the realtors said there clients would not consider 12. 13. living by workforce apartments. Residences said if they knew about this they would not Have bought. How will you make our neighborhoods attractive to future buyers? 10. What facts do you have to support that Victoria Gardens retail businesses won't . Be affected by workforce apartment residence? They, like all citizens cam go there to shop but will they be shopping? Victoria Gardens is an upscale mall. As you stated at the planning meeting the lowest income level will be 12,000 a year, then 20,000 a year and then 33,000: 11. If Northtown Housing Development cannot fill the vacancies in the moderate- income levels or the low-income levels, would they be allowed to rent the units to the very low-income bracket? The Planning Commission said they had one week to look at this project as recorded at the 07-25-2007 hearing. You also stated there was over 300 pages of information to review and you drove by the site one time. It is our opinion you did not spend enough time looking at the grave hardships this project will cause our community. We the citizens request the planning commission look at our neighbor hoods, schools, street conditions, traffic conditions, pedestrian access, parks and overall concept of this project again. We believe you will see it is much too large to put next to us and for our community to bear. The Planning Commission said at the hearing 07-25-2007 that Rancho Cucamonga is very behind on workforce apartments. They also said land was allotted years ago for this vary use. That way they could keep getting their tax credits.- Why didn't Rancho Cucamonga keep up as time went on?Now instead of small sized workforce apartment being spread out among the community, you are trying to build this oversized workforce apartment by us. Trying to make up lost ground with the state. Now you want us the residences to pay the price for your poor coordination. It is only fair to treat our community with the same respect as the communities near existing workforce apartments. Build on a much smaller scale so you do not overwhelm us. There is nothing that says you "have to" build • • • • Page 4 of 5 date 08-04-2007 Planning Commission Appeal DRC2007-00119 and DRC2006-00540 It this big, show us the law that says you "have to". Also show us the law that says you "have to" use the density bonus. 14. What will be done for the residences of this apartment complex for sound control? The noise level in this azea exceeds city standards V-13 Due to foothill blvd and the 15 freeway. A 14-foot sound wall would be required, yet the plans show rod iron fencing? . . • I S. What is being done about the building separations? The current fire department required set backs and distances between structures aze not met? This is a high fire hazard area. What type of fire.sprinkler system will be installed in these buildings? NFPA chap. 13 or 13R? Has the available water requirement been met for fire use at the site? How many gpm is required? 16. In the LSA summary of this land it is noted there is qualifying wetland. Is it lawful to build on wetlands in California? Is it lawful to build on stream beds? If so please provide codes, laws and/or other proof of this. _ ,. _. 17. Focused Survey August 2006: A. Burrowing Owl: This animal is protected by an international treaty. The report states the nesting season for these animals is between February and April and . could last till August. The focused survey was done in late August. They did not detect any Burrowing Owl at this time (no wonder!). The peak-nesting season is between April ] 5th and July 15`". Why wasn't the focused survey done during peek nesting season? B. As stated it the LSA report there aze suitable burrows for Burrowing Owls along the banks of the east Etiwanda creek channel and adjacent banks within the center section of the site. Another Focused survey needs to be held at the peek-nesting season. C. The residences wish to use another company rather than LSA Associates, inc. This way the information can be cross-referenced for accuracy. The I50-meter zone of influence Vansects needs to be performed. Access to adjacent properties can be obtained by calling the property owners. Northtown has their phone numbers. Ow residences will comply if property access is needed. D. San Bernardino Kangazoo Rat: The San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat is known to exist in the Etiwanda Creek Channel. Has a focused'survey been performed yet? Please provide survey results, mitigation info ect. E. Slender-homed Spineflower: Will you~be doing a focused survey between April and June ,the spring blooming season? Thisfederally listed plant would impact this project significantly. .. _.. 18. Flood and Water Control: What studies have been preformed regazding the current water under mining East Street? This leads to the proposed site? How can you guarantee the safety of any future resident on that property? Even when the current flood control channel is finished there is still an underlying problem. What will be done? • page 5 of 5 date 08-04-2007 • Planning Commission Appeal DRC2007-00119 and DRC2006-00540 19. Fontana residences north of this proposed work force apartment complex. They will not be provided with adequate police protection. Starting in December per. Mrs. Astroda the Fontana police dept. will not respond to house alarms. How will theirchildren be protected if both parents work? 20. There is a 220-foot powerline easement that is along the west property line of this proposed site. This would be the east property line of ow residential homes. As many residences have said "this is a perfect place to commit violent crimes" as _._., .._ .. _ .. -'they would not be seen. This is also a place for transients to hang out. It is chain linked fenced, but there are sections cut out. They patch it up then it gets cut again. What measwes will be done to permanently keep people out of the easement? 21. What kind of outside lighting will be installed around the exterior walls/fencing of ` this proposed complex? What kind of full time security will be provided for the surrounding communities? 22. This project is to Big. Yes there is a need for work force apartments, but this is to many units in one area. They need to consider planning 3 100 unit complexes spread out among the city in smaller more plentiful and available lots thus increasing ranchos quota without exceeding its infrastructure. In closing we the residents feel that the local infrastructwe of the affected area is • inadequate to support a project of this magnitude. There would need to be significant changes in the local infrastructure as well as social infrastructwe before the city of Rancho Cucamonga should even consider a vote on this development. Neighborhood Committee Represenitives: Kenneth Van Horn 909-463-6000 .Joseph Sibree 909-646-0608 Eric Gail 909-646-7495 Brian J O'Connell 909-472-9441 ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ SAMPLE LETTER Attention: Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Dr. Donald J. Kurth Attention: Mayor, City Council Members and Clerk Mayor P.O. Box 807 Diane Williams Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Mayor Pro Tem NOTE: Please make copies and distribute to City Council Members Rex Gutierrez and Clerk. Council Member L. Dennis Michael August O1; 2007 Council Member - ~ Sam Spagnolo Dear Mayor, Cit Council Members and Clerk: Council Member My name is ~Y~"!4y ~.~ ilY z`iS Debra Adams 1 live at ~O `J ~vy~ l/~ City Clerk I oppose the San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density James Frost Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. City Treasurer The development is too large. Our community cannot bear the additional burdens this large rp oject will bring such as: crime, traffic conditions, air pollution, negative impact on schools, extinction of wildlife and devaluation of properties and quality of life. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. Again, my • response to yet another large project. in my community is: NO! The city has already placed enormous burdens on our neighborhood with the jail, dump and realignment of the school district. joe~ S wtiti-v Joe Smith (PLEASE SIGN LETTER) All letters must include: 1. Your name and address. 2. San Servaine Villas Development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-0(1199. 3. State opposition: I oppose, I do not want, no, etc... 4. Optional: State specific personal reasons for opposition: crime, traffic, schools, gang activity, graffiti, devaluation of property values, misuse of parks, etc... 5. Send the original letter to the mayor. Ask for copies of your letter to be distributed to city council members by placing a note on the frant of the letter, or include five copies for council members. 6. If you do not have a computer, please hand write a simple note or letter to let the mayor know you are against the San Servaine Vilias Development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007- • 00199. Often, handwritten letters are perceived as more effective. \`\ \. Date 08-09-2007 Page 1 of 3 • Sr~marv of Reasons Wh Wy a Appealed This nroiect Include these numbers on your letter if possible. Please.include your own reasons why you don't want these low-income apartments built next to as also. DRC 2007-00119and DRC 2006-00540. Construction of 225 unit wori~'orce apartments ( low-income) 1. This apartment community to large. We the citizens have not been satisfied that Northtown Housing development corp. will be able to control what will happens in our neighborhoods with the overbearing influx of pedestrians and traffic. 2. There are no curbs, gutters or side walks for residences to walk on foothill blvd.. This is very unsafe as the residences would have to walk to the bus stop that's on Etiwanda or would need to walk to Food 41ess, Wal-Mart ect It will be inevitable that someone gets run over or killed. 3. There are no sidewalks on Cornwall or Chestnut ave. This is the short cut to Food 4 less. Residences would have to walk in the street to get there and jaywalk across Etiwanda. This is unsafe and someone will get nm over or killed also. 4.There will be over a thousand people in this complex when occupied. Northtown Housing dev. corp. has provided the residences with a 6,000 sq. $ clubhouse and a pool. • There is no large grassy field for the kids to play soccer, football ect There is no basketball court ect Kids today don't need to sit in fi+ont of a computer they Hoed exercise. They have designed it to big with buildings to close, not thinking about the kids. S. Where will the kids play out doors? Will the kids jaywalk across Foothill and use the private park in "Heritage"? These residences are paying high taxes for there own park. They moved in and paid 650k - 750k because they wanted a safe private park. 6.Traffic on East Street This proposed apartment complex will only exit east on Foothill Elvd_ due to a new median on foothill. The traffic will use East Street to go to the 15 fvvy. East Street already is very congested due to the high school to the north. All high school kids in fieldstone must walk. to school (no bus service) Many paz+ents drive thew kids to school. 'this is another had area were someone will get hit by a car. How will you improve safety?? - %. Traffic on Fooitill B1vd_ bctween~t.wanda and r.34t Street: Already traffic in the morning backs up from Eliwanda to Cornwall. when this happens traffic diverts o$ foothill blvd, toms south on Cornwall st, right on Chestnut and exits at tiwaada Bind. i7ttr neighborhood aUeady has a unsafe condition as they sPec~ down our streets. 13ow mill things be any better when @ic apartm~mt resident make z u-iurrr ai foothill and East Street and foothill and Ci>rnwal, adding more traffic . • i ` V ~~ C L~~ ~~ 4~~ J _ To The Mayor Of Rancho Cucamonga And All the City Council Members, Donald J. Kurth, • Diane Williams, Sam Spagnola, L. Dennis Michael, Rex Gutierrez, Planning Commission Members, Stewart, - ~ ._ .... Fletcher, Munoz Howdyshell, Wimberly. Planning Director, James R Troyer Senior Planner. Mike Diaz Redevelopment analyst. Janice Reynolds Traffic Engineer. Jon Gillespie To all listed above, My name is Laura A.J.Mendez, I live at 8113 Cornwall Ave. Rancho Cucamonga Ca. 91739 1 oppose the San Servaine Villas Development dre2006-0050 & Density bonus agreement dre2007-00119. This is the reason why I am opposed to the project, the traffic that goes through the neighborhood • is already out of control, The traffic comes off of Foothill blvd., to use our neighborhood as a shortcut as well as off of Etiwanda. My children use the bus for school and have to cross the street - to catch the bus, as a mother I am temfied everyday that they go to school, worried [hat one day a car racing down or up the block will hit one of the kids. We have called the city in the past regarding this subject and the response has been, " It's a city street and anyone can use it". The City Government has never paid any attention to our neighbohood or our part of the city until now, when it only benefits you the city, not us. Where is our Park that you the city aze so proud of having, " We have so many parks" This neighborhood was built in 1956 and still no park for us. When my oldest child started school she said the kids would call us Ghettowanda, Well many of the residents have done many improvements to their properties because we have taken pride in our neighborhood. No one else has helped from "The City Govertunent" except for one clean up day a couple of years ago. We had a wood fence that had been blown down numerous times because of the winds, an old fence along with all the neighbors facing foothill blvd. We were finally able [o put up a block wall, the city said that we had [o beamify the wall to keep up with the city standards, Funny, you never paid attention before when the fence was in shambles, now it seems all you want is money via permits from us. The police force can't even control the homeless people that hang out on our block, the field behind us where they want to put 1000 plus extra people or the Food 4 Less shopping center. How do you expect them to control an apartment complex with low income , no recreation and no place to go. You want Ghettowanda, You Got It. We vote for every election, 1 personally voted for everyone on the board. Please don't make me feel like 1 made a big mistake. We pay our taxes and are hard working people, Ye[ no one-has ever come knocking on my door from the city council to see how we felt about this • project. C/0 Mayor Donald J. Kurth • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall _ 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730. From: The Jauregui.Family 8220 Cornwall Ave Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 To the attention of the Planning Commission Members: My name is Rosario Perez, I live at 8220 Cornwall Ave in Rancho Cucamonga. I am writing to you for my family strongly opposes the San Servaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus. Agreement DRC2007-00119. My Crrandmother bought this house in 1984 and has been handed down to my mother and now to myself. Our street. runs duectly into Foothill Blvd. And faces the homes where this development is to be taken place. As a long time , Eriwanda/Rancho Cucamonga resident, we have seen this community grow drastically in the last 10 yeazs. I can recall growing up here, there was nothing really around us. Nothing but fiel8s as _ far as I could see. Slowly the Wahnart and Food 4 Less shopping center came along and walking to Wahnart with my friends was the most excitement we ever got. I watched Summit Elementary _ . where I attended become Summit Jr. High which I also attended. I went to Etiwanda High School and that school grew fast because as the community expanded, more students were enrolled. And I thought then there was too many people. Now, we have so many shopping centers, malls,.. . • movie theaters, and more than enough homes surrounding us and more aze still being added. The change I see in my home town where I grew up is the congestion of cazs and the economy . flourishing, it seems as if there is a Star Bucks at every corner from by the Sacred heart church to the corner of Spruce and Foothill. Who really needs to have all that coffee? To me it sure does feel crowded here in Rancho Cucamonga. Our stores are crowded, our schools aze _:.. _. overwhelmingly crowded which is why now that I have children of my own that will grow up in the same town as I did, they keep building more and more schools to accommodate the growing population. My oldest son went to Terra Vista Elementary. Because of the increase of new students, they built 2 more schools up the street on Etiwanda and the district now says my son is not to go to Terra Vista Elementary, he is now to go to Perdew Elementary. Forget about the security he had at his school, the friendships he gained and the confidence he showed us throughout the yeaz. Now he is to start a new school, new surroundings, new emotions that I feel aze unfair to him. Yes families-move all the time and kids grow accustomed to that, but we don't need to. We were here first, simple as that. We should have the right of way. • • Now growing up here in this.neighborhood was always calm, not ever really was there disturbances or feaz. We all knew one another, we are all friendly neighbors. Yes•a lot of families have moved on from when I was younger, but many families like us still remain loyal to this neighborhood. I can rest easy knowing my children can play as I did, still by the same tree we used to play freeze tag. That's why it disturbs me so much that there are plans fo build a complex that will add more congestion, more problems and fiustrations that our community does • not want nor do we need it. The worst part is that I do not like to think negative about anyone in ~-. ~.. this world. I want to believe that if this development goes through we will be able to make it • work and we can,.all be civil and live in peace, but reality is that no one can tell what will happen after it's done. As the saying goes "If it isn't broke don't try and fix it." Our neighborhood is great. It's quiet, safe, friendly, and it's been in our, family for over 20 yeazs. We deserve to _ continue on our traditions and one day if God allows, this home will belong to my sons. One thing is certain, after my Grandmother passed away in 1990, my mother and I promised to never let go of the home, the foundation my grandma started when she bought this home in 1984. We take pride in our home, our grass is always "golf course" green. Our home has grown with lots of love, and now my mother rests easy knowing I am the provider and she no loriger has to worry, her grandchildren aze her world, and protecting them is our top priority. Please do not allow this .housing development to disrupt our community. It's not wise for the community, for our already growing population, for our safety, all the hazd work my family and others just like us invested in our homes so that our children can be children and grow up to value the things that matter most in this world. I would hate to see a tragedy that could have been prevented but because of lack of appreciation for the hazd working residents of our neighborhood and our community we will be the ones who will pay that cost. I grew up happy here, this is our home. Our children deserve the same happy childhood. Keep them safe. ,They aze our future. I thank you for your time and understanding. I appreciate'the opportunity to express my concern and those of my family and I hope I was able to show you our point of view. Again I thank you for your valued time. God Bless You and Your Family. Sincerely, C~ l~~"~ ' -eJ--+~ Rosazio S. Perez - ~~_ • u i._ ~_. r-. -u . J --- //~l_/G [Ul/_Gx~-- `r~ T --_L~O;~/ C-'LT'~~<G,~~r,~ i --- -~-f lI -~ fns E~~ _v ~~,~_-7i i - _Z'"_ ~29_,2s', - - ~~Ll_/~/C/l~0 61,~d~r~/~v S~ Sc,~Uff_'/-mot/-G -- I ~ ~~ ~Q~L/-!ds"?~ _~~~G~-/J_2~i~~i~~d O d7- O~ --I --~/~i1_si~'cl is ~__pu",~ ~Ei~'~~?j~~-,_~;r/1J _- - --~~.~~2l~ci'1![~ _.~!.S°6,~C~r1~7_'CJ_L_c~r G/~~~c_;p ~c _ 1 ~~~?J ~/7"L~D/j~~.11" ~/~.E~i9~~/ %y C''oa;/~.~f(~f.9rG _Git/ d~L%c~.~S ~/.CE, ~aa0 - ------ .~~ - ~~ ~ ~'Z. _- ,~GSr1 --~--10~,2Cy7 ~ OJ --T/~~__~c~------ ~/ C /_tt_ ~-- I ' - - _ ~ '/_tl_~c~_/IJa ~~1irJ ~1~ _ T T _ tio~ ~ ~~~~,T ~~ .~ ~E~~~~a~.~od~- ~ ~~o f/,~ ~Nsu~ T ~~ %/7%~' /7?/a6~//TGr~Oc~ G'AnJ o,~t/CLj ~C _ ~d ~/1'1t=~D </ f~! i~(~ ~is/y,J/~JU,J' oQ~ciLT~" 1 -_k/~ ~c~JL ~. did ~u/ /~/1~~r1S/~ :S" lyE zfl~l ~G~'crs. 7f~re~ ~ ~tJa /,~~By I -~~i.~~ ~~~ ~~ .9`~ ~e ~ ~_ 8.~E-_~.._zd_~' ~~~' ~>~'~~is~ is ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~C~G/~ __Lc~dl-1~ ~ f~ ~~~-/S~/~ LOU ~. _ ~ ltiTy 7~E ~uTu.e-G> j G/~._,9,e~_ c3o.yGc,P~~ --_/f!9T -- l~~c~ (JJ~C~.S AS' -- i . • --+-- 7/G _ _/~c~ ~'l~Ty _,G~~,~ __GG _ _;8r~ ~~si2/ES1 - ----!-- -4I G!% __4viOU --Oc1.t,--~~%i9~~c ~'_- -g,G-._ 7/HG_ ~aN=---- I i ; L/OL[. Cad i1 ~ ~~~ %ffls To J~-l~ ds l(/6 _J l//_// I.GS", ~~~i~.~E ,/ ~~fL~/~~J-~.J' ..S~GC.BeDu~/ n f I / ~ a l7~L~O C~«~ C?3=~ d~ /alt= i~/7E~-f 6~~/r ~ __-' -~A,2/~Co /-~A/,Q ~~~s,r1~,BGG ~~D~-C~f_fo--/~~ ~~~~~o~l-~~u may- r.~u~c- Q/ ~~~r I LL=i cis" ~Ou/.~!, _T1f~~~ ._._L~GI.~~Dr~- ~,LfrJ6 _ • --- --5~-,------- r Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner • P.O. Box 807 ~~~~~~~~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Attention:- Please make copies ror e;ty enaae;) _ ttlOV ~ ~~o~ Members, Clerk and V Senior Planner: Dear Ma or Donald J. Kurth, Ma or Pro T p~,~ l Rex Gutierrez Y Y ~I KYt''1~tS~j 1~J~1~3[~I.~,A~~~~rF;~C_'ounci( Member City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: ~i~ ^! ~^;J L Dennis Michael Council Member ' p ~ ~ My name is -! ~!'.~/7v ~ ,t ~.~ } ~~~' • Sam Spagnolo Council Member t I IIVe at ~~~ t~'1. t ;Y'~1~~~71 ~ ~ ~ ~~YS f ~il~ t ~~~ Debra Adams ~~n City Clerk . Number Street City ./ lames Frost City Treasurer - ~ Mike Diaz I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Senior Planner Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthennore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of.the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of-Community. identity: Three story building ~. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus A Bement DRC2007-00199. C~n~.c~.~..~~a~.l-c_~t~.`~.~ Signature ~~ ~51~~ Date • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt e:ta :. Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner ~~~~~~/EQ P.O. Box 807 • Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 ' Attention: Please make A101- ,ry ~ ~o~ j/ l9~Y WW G 0 cop~cs for City Council ,. Members, Clerk and p~~ Senior Planner: Mayor Pro T~t'~~l i~ri~t~/~/~ ~ ~~~h~OE`?u`ae" Cut;errez Dear Mayor Donald J Kurth ~ . , ~~~ - (''i City Council Members, Cleric and Senior Planner: Council Member ~ Dwnis Mienael Council Member My name is `:,j;llirsr:-. _ ire,-;,,tr- SamSpagnolo Council Member Debra Adams I live at ~ ~a~, {'' -~ 1-,1~, ~l ~~.:,<_<, _.. r , „Y~,- _ city clerk Number Street City -~ lames Frost City Treasurer -Mike Diaz I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and . Senior Planner Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude_ San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development. DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community. identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties . 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Sighature t Ilia i~%~~ Date You are th+elight of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta • • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 ~~~~~~~~ pp~~ - Attention: Please make Itlo~~~, ~i ~~Q~ copies for City Counal Members, Clerk and CITY 0~ R~PdCHC CUCA~f4t7NUl~~ cnue~rn~~. Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Wittjan~~; Council Member -City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. 1_ Dennis Midiael ,~'/ f Council Member My name is '~ `71 ~ f "'(ate:" ~~ iPJ ~ ~ (J {-- ~+~~ t?t=1~ / sam spag,alo 6 f Coundl Member f ~)i`7 ~' ~`IC-'.l ~f',Vr4~-, (.~C. - I--t11~~'.~y.~ r{,~i.;rr~i{•.i~'1 ~(_.~'~ ~ty Clerks I live at tames Frou ' Number Street City City Treasurer Mike Diu . ... Senior Planner 1 oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The local infrastructure is'not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartrnent project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. • Follov~ing are some of the reasons t oppose the San Sevaine Villas deve!opment DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development 6s too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of-Community, identity: Three story building 3. Iradx~aate Infrastrt.•ct:.°re 4. Crime 5. ®evaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife t0.Noise Pollution Again, 1 oppose Sari Sev 'rte Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agee (en DRC2007-0 199. Sign(((((ature t ~ J I ~j~i ~~ Date I • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:ta Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 ~~~~~~~ . Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 nuenh°°' elease ,Hake copies for CSty Council ~OV 2 ~, ~~Q~"i ~° ~~ ~d Dear Ma or Donald J. Kurth, Ma or Pro Tp~pi~ `^I>Jt~s,~, Re't c~"'e`rc` y y ~-{~~ U` ~ *,1~ ~ ~; ~ r: Council Member City Council Members, Glark and Senior n t: .,;.~ ~, L Deania Mienad ~::'• ~ ~,'i„'<`r. Council Member My name IS ~,Ik.~r ~~,., f~ ~i (_ ,~I~~~~...~ Council Moembu Debra Adams I live at ciryclerk James Frost City Treasuter . .Mike Diaz Senior Planner I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-0Oi99. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons !oppose the San Sevaine Villas development. DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of. Community, identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate ln#ras*ructure .. 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife i0.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Date Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus 99. You are the Ilght of the world A city that on a hill cannot tie hidden. Mt 5 to ~. • • • Rancho Cucamonga: City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner Box 807 ~~~~~'~~~+ . • P O . . l'°° Attention: Please [Hake Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 espies for City Council alnig n ~ ~Igy9^I 1IVV WW 1311( Members, Cleric and Senior Planner: Dear Ma or Donald J. Kurth, Ma or Pro T ~ ~ ha „hfi.;-. y y L't'~~ ,.~t"vii~'^t ,-C:~ ~1 Fil~ li :l - w . RezGnfierrez Council Member . ,, .. .. , ,. : ~ . , City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. ~, ;-; ,~~ fin„ L Dennis Michael ~ ~ ' V~ ~ `~ ' ~~ (~ ~ !<( i Council Member Sam Spagnolo - s i M name y Council Member ." ' % _ 4 ~ ---f ~-. 1 / ~~ ,-~t~fG3rt~.~N''i'~ tck„-~%~~~} l live at ~,~ i ~_.;~~i ~(~by~< ~! ~ Debra Adams iryClerk ~ . Number Street City ~ /1 .. (~ i ~-~~ " G~ / -~ , ~ tames Frost City Treasurer ' . 1 j z% kc Diaz 7' hL ! t oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Senior Planner Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. • Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community, identity: Three story building 3. Inadayuate Infras~uctu: e 4, Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DR 2007-OOi99. Si nature Da '~-~ You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta ., '. Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner ~~~~~~~~r .a" P O Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga CA 91729 ' af[en5on: Please make copies for City Comril pp'~n (p } ItlU~ G U ~U~ { MemM ^ Cla~k and Senior Planner: Mayor Pro T~~}~n~'fi~/ it1r~'h'IS~~%~~~~r~~%[`itl;'~ Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth pl M b , _ City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. ~^ ~^' ~ ~t, ` ~'~ ,n em er L Dennis Michael Council Member My name IS 7t.VF A r.{ ~ iL~ ~!'c ja t'3C~.., Sam Spagnolo Council Member " Debra Adams live at ? ~~ ~ ;~~ F , i I n , _ -- Y_r~,. -1.. f'. „ .~ ~'l c;ry Clerk ` % Number Street City James Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Scnior Planner 1 oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community. identity: Three story building 3. !nadeauate lnfeas*.r~icture 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agree enflDRC2 07-00199. Si( ature f~~~3~a ? Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. not s:la .. - • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Counci{ Members, • Clerk and Senior Planner ~~~~'~~ ~~.e~ Box 807 P O . . Rancho Cucamon a, CA 91729 ~y ~/ g Itl~ V n ~ ~~~~ Attention: Please make copies for C'<ty Council Members, Clerk and _ ,Senior Planner: :j 1 d U," hbt:it..~~l~ (:1.1L!ii~~ilJ~i~.~:Jtex Gutierrez l . Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Mane ~lllGar~s•,~ Counril Member City Council Members, Cleric and Senior Planner. v Dennis Mienael Counci[ Member t 'i^, (~-r, C-i~~'Z My name is ~,; ^ n c~s1 Sam Spagnolo Conncil Member .. .~ ti 1. ~ `..;i ~~ ~^~ t~,-u , ~.~~-cam..... r- < ~~f Cam ~ Debra Adams - live at James Frost Number Street City Ciry Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-0Oi99. The focal infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. • Foljowing are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community, identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9: Extinction of YI/ildlife 10. Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00 1 99- Sighatdre 1 ~`~ \\ J ~ l ~t~ Date • You are the light of the world- A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta ~.' Rancho Cucamonga, City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner ~~.:;,~`;~k~ P.O. Box 807 Attention: Pteasetnake Rancho Cucamon a, CA 91729 ~7 ~p g ~V~ y !7 ~~ :~~g~" ~ 11 } ~ i t copies for City Coundl . . = Members, Clerk and -~.- , ~ -.. , _.. Senior Ptatrner: ~i~~~IJP ,~~~;l,i-~~I/caiGia~~t~~ex~nt;~ Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Witfiarias;~•:- ~ Council Member City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: ~ ` `` " r- Deanis Micbad Council Member ~ Sam Spagnolo r~, ~- ~~ `~ ~ ~'~--'•,-ti _-- My name is ~ Council Member . `•71i_ ~~ ' c ~'l Debra Adams City Clerk ~ >'-_. , r ~ t,r~ . I I IIVe at I ~. t James Frost Number Street City City Treasurer ~ _ t_' xn :.;:~ t ..,i .-r.:,l .1~5ke Diaz Senior Planner I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up:to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area_ Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community, identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Irfrastrueture 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. ®vercrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. ~-ir Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10. Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agree ent DRC2007-00199. n (~ ~j U~ i ~ X 1 X,t ~ t;v ~_ _.. Sighature ~~~13~0~ Date You are the Ilght of the world. A city that on a hell cannot be hidden. Mt s i a :.: • • • Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, ' - Clerk and Senior Planner ~ ._ ~"~~'~..~~-j'yfjv~} • P.O. Box 807 Attention: Please make Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 t „ S~~>j ~ t ~~~ ~ copies for Cety Connril Members, Clerk and . CI I°Y (.~ F??yi''iL.l";E.i l.Jl~8.if4(~t~~l~~~`7r`~Senior Planner: Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Dian~lNlLatrs~.; Connell Member City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: r< Dennis Michael Council Member i-. ~>, ~ ~ .. ~ ~ / o'li-, 4 7•~~ ,. j : e is ( `/'{ ~ r ~ l M a Sam Spagnolo , y n m Conncit Member .1 ~ I IIVe at ~ i ~-f ~ ~~/sY"//J%i1 fi' Y ~~( _-,, p j ~ {<_~vt Cl ~'t Debra Adams Ciry Clerk Number '-Street ~ City Lames Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner t oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 'The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a projec# of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of urifts up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. • Following are some of the reasons t oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradecation of Community. idenfity: Three story building 3. laeaderyuate tnfrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. ~iir Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.ldoise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus ~e ent DR 2007-0~1~99: i .- .- Sighature Date • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta Rancho Cucamonga:City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.~. BOX 807 ~°' I 1~~~.. ~~c • Attention: Please make .° Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 copies for City Council ~~~~nnt~ t~ .,, 41i~ ~ ECU V ~~ i i ~ MemlrK, Cleric and Senior Planner. . e 'l ane W~I Ii ~ms, y ,, Rex Gutierrez u M a ~ ~ , lJi IEy,Fkk~ tyli i~ ~ ~~~ C'ty Counc I Members Cleric and Sen or P ~ i'~` ~ ~~ , . .... Council Member ' \ ,_ v ~ My name is ~ ~ `' L^ - ~ y ~~~ \ Sam Spagnolo ~ - Council Member live at r? 3•.: i_l;. ''-ti.i C C--~- `~.c..; _:~-o ~`~: cr, ;..A~>.._ ~.• ~ Debra Adams City Clerk Number Street City lames Fmst o;ryTreasun;r Mike Diaz Senior Plarueer I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. ` The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons !oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community. identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime ' 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agfe~ ent DRC2007-00199. . ~(-` Sighatur - _ Ah~ i3~ak Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:ta • .. Rancho Cucamonga City Hall ' Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, • Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 g3 ~ ~« • ~• y `i~~t-"~ ~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Attention: Please make copies ror cty cnnndi qq~~~~}} t~ ~i ~ i i Z~~;~ Memlwls, Cleric and iYV Senior Planner: Dear Ma or Donald J. Kurth, Ma or Pro Terrj-Mane; iili ~ s ~ eex ~11C"~ y y is ~ ,,,~ ~, ,.~ . i3~ 6~1, - <<."Council Member City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. •, ~ , ~, ' z Dennis M;cnael ~ I I i ~ `~ ~ ~ E~ ~ ~ M t~ I ~ ~ Council Member sam sPa~tolo name s 1 V y Council Mcmber I `` /l 1 ~', t ~LG} Z f ~ 1 Cl r ~` Q~ ,~,, `,, ' (~ "gal l ~ 1~C T l ` Debra Adams city c~~lt ,. -- I live at f _1 IV • Y~ 1Y .~ l ' Number Street City ~, lames Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner t oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199_ The local infrastruotiire is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude- San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. • Following are some of the' reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community. identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10. Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. ~~ ~ • ~" Signature t Date • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta ' . `... Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 ~~~~°~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 iVU V u ._Id~'+ t Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro hem,Dia~g:iW~liams~,l;~t~;r~,a, City Council Members, (,lerk and Senioi Pl~n`~er: -,,-•. ,-., -r:; i I ~ ~., ~ : r ~. ,_._, .. My name is I live at I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Attention: ~ Please make copies for City Counr''1 Members, Cleric and Senior Planter: Rer Gutierrez Council Member L Dennis Michael Counctil Mcmber Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams City Clerk James Frost City Treasurer Mme Diaz Seniot Planner The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the t~mmuniry that consists of single and two-story dwellings. FolOowing are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development. DRC2006-00540 and Densrty Bonus Agreement~DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradecation of Community identity: Three story building 3. lrsadeyuate lnfrast.~~~cture 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic t3. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of 1Nildlife 10.Noise Pollution I oppose San Sevaine Villas developrrient DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Date ' You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta ~' '.. • • Rancho Cucamonga City Ball Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 ~, t ~~ ~ ~~ ` nnenainn: ~~ ~~ ao- Rancho Cucamon a, CA 91729 ~ 9 copies for City Counol pp ppp} ~ ,~,~ id J~~ ~, ; 3 ;;~~ f Members, Clafc and Senior Planner: Dear Ma or Donald J. Kurth, Ma or Pro T , D ne lNltliams , ` Rex cn~errrz City Council Members, Clerk and Senior PT ~ln r :.'. ., _ _ , ,, , „ _t, { ,. ;.. }} Council Member ' r' -'! name is ~± !`~ i It 11;?,, }'~.~ ~,t<..,_.~ M Sams a olo p gn y Council Member _ _ _ __ ` / J Fl I~}`'~~ ~ ~ ~ ~i l t~llf ~!'; ~'~~-~1-It f"iKq~( }C~ ~' Debra Adams CiryClerk _ , ~ , , 1 , . _ t. ~ IIIVeat Number Street City lames Frosr Cicy Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC200ti-00540 and Density Bonus Agreemen4 DRC2007-00199. The local infrastructure is not adequate to.support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height an a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. • Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community. identity: Three story build"eng 3. Inadequate infrasta uctu~e 4. Crime 5. Devaluatrion of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8, Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-60540 and Density Bonus Ag~rOeement DR))C2007-00199. ~'If,t.t~,tlL~. I~QI.~ _~A Si Nature . ~ ~, _._ Date • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ia ". Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, Gity Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O: 60X-807 ..,,, _r_,.,., r"j~'~ %i~ 9~s ~B Attention: Please make , _,a ' Rancho Cucamon a CA 91729 g ~ copies for CSty Caunal Members, Clerk and ~~ i~ _ iY~V • 1 ~~ ~~ ':~ ... iJ =3t~ Senior Planner: . Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Terr,.Diar>E ~{illiams, Rcx Gutierrez Counril Member City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Pl~n{1~rL''' "° ~~ ~~'~ ~ .?~,.AF,I++"~d`~ , ~ Deanis Michael. `; r`i r~ ;,: Council Member .----- My name is ~ L' w'a's%`-- ~ ' I Li C^ Sam Spagnolo Council Member Debra Adams lliveat %~`'1'-j ~--~ rC~1.f~- GT i1t.F-i~;~.~C-~~~~=~ti;,FGirrcierk Number Street City James Frost Ciry Treasumr . . Mike Diaz Senior Planner { oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furtherrnore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Folfovring are some of the reasons I appose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 arid Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community. identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate !nfrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, 1 oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. Signature Date You are the Ilght of the world. A crty that on a hdl cannot be hidden. Mt 5 to • • • Rancho Cucamonga:City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, "' Clerk and Senior Planner pp • P.O. Box 807 ~ t-*~~Q ai"..4 ~~t%' ~-~°' ~ Attention: ~ Please make Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 copies ror City council ;;~~ ii~1~ ~ ~~+j~~y,~. ~ A I Members, Clerk and 2~ Y ~, ~ ~ ~-~ a Senior Planner: Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Teri ~jaBe,U~lilll~rr~s~;4;t~ 1il,f ' Rex Gutietrez :: ,+Coancil Member City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. ~ ,_~.~ .. i_ Dennis M;chael ,-.'.' ;' Council Member ~!/:.' `~`.~:t ~?-" s ~'% ~`~,," ~~ c i ~ot n , , . , My name i er o n en ... Debra Adaats /> live at /-"'.G~ l~ ji.'.li~ (_/" City Clerk Number Street City lames Frost City Treasurer Mike Div. Senior Planner t oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of~single and two-story dwellings. • Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area ~. Ecadication of Community. identity: Three story buitdeng v_ Inadef{fia`ae IniiwStrtiCti;re 4. Crime 5. ®evaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution ' 9. Extinction of W6ldlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. °'~~ ~ "_ Signature •'' Date • You are the light of the world: A city-that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:ta , ',..: Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner ,° ~" '~~ ~~ ~. P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga CA-91729 ~~~if ~ ,, ~,;~1 e - ~ } Attention: t?lease make espies for City Couoal , • .~ ~~ ` 1 Membe , Clerk and rs ry ~ . -t3-.•t ~"F7;. le"'~ :3 ',{'~ SeniorLNrlrler: i._,! I ~ I, , ~-'; ~~ ,, ('..r 'L; t,~~IM1.It.. "~~;;•12ex Gutierrez Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Wlifiams;,; Counril Member City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. >_ Dennis Micnael ~ + _ Council Member ~ My name is / 3 / '< , jl./} ~ `f } ~ ~ r. ,:, , ~ , v i ~ ~ :, ~ ~.,= ~°~,/,•~ Sam Spag~oto Council Member . - i 1 live at ~ i I r ~~' ~•~ 1 .~:: ~ ~ Vi~t 4~_h~ F'_1.:=- Debra Adams c;ty clerk Number Street ' City City TFeasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The Ioca1 infrastn_~cture is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons 1 oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-OOi99. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Erad'ecation of Community. identity: 'three story building 3. Inade.;uate !n#rastr~ct~r e 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowrded Schools 7. Traffic - 8. • Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agr e~nent DRC2 09=p01 }!~''~ ' Signature . EI-Ir~~U~ Date You are the Ilght of the world A city that on a hlll cannot be hidden. Mt s to :: u Rancho Cucamonga-.City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, • Clerk and Senior Planner Y' P.O. Box 807 ~~~-,jam ~~ ~~w' Rancho Cucamonga CA 91729 Attention: Please males copies for Gty Council . .... ~~~~,~ ~? %) ~1~~~ Memners, Clerk and Senior Planner: Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem ~~a'?te,.jlVilli~i'as;C~ i~l.i~la.~rj:;3~;,~~"M ~r City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. !' ^'! +~''..'-';( i_ Deons Michael -'"-`~ Council Member ~!"~+~,,, -~- - e~~~r. ~ 6.t Sam Spagnolo My name is C ~ Lx ~ ~f ~ v `,V E'a~L~,` t Council Member } ~ < _.i ~~ • Debra Adams live at t .~'1 i'+. (>~ ~Z l X ~ I, ~ t_, ;,^~.~s • ^ City Clerk Number Street City J ~~ Frost City Treasurer .Mike Diaz Senior Planner I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The lxal infrastructure is not adequate.fo support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density ?25-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up 4o three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fft into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. • Foljowing are some of the reasons 1 oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community. identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic s. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.tUoise Pollution Again, 1 oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus _.Agr/e~en DRC~ 07-00199. ~C-.- ! ~ ~~`y Signature 41- i ~-~~ Date • You are fhe light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:t4 .~ ~ .. ,. Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner ~~it`~~ P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 ~§,~ r• c, }~s7. AttenfioR: Please make ~ ~~ L ~ _~;sy copies for City Counal Members, Clerk and ' psi l r'~i" `."nF iirf"'~ ~`.)rj!,Ar'.t~1i~,i Senior Planner: -Rex Gutierfez Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Wdhams~ CoRRCilMember City Council Members, Cleric and Senior Planner. t< Dennis M;cbael My name is 1 live at Number Street Counal Member Sam Spagnolo Counril Member ~~ --. ,,~ ~ ~ ~ Debra Adams ~~ { -~ /-' ~ Ciry Clerk . . Cdy ~ ~ Jamrs Frost ~ ~r:~- Ji City Treasurer ~ ~ Mike Diaz . .~ .. SeRIRf PIanRCi 1 oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The loco! infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a smatl and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons !oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is 800 large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community. identity: Three story build'eng 3. lradequate L:frast: ucture 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10. Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus ei3fraent11RG2Q } 00199. ` __ L~z~~.,y ~\ i,/~~~~ Signature /ill/' ~J~ Da#e You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta • • • Rancho Cucamonga Ciry Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, Dear Mayor Donald J. City Council Member My name is CA 91729 Attention: Please make il~~~~ ~l }, ~~~j ~ copies for City Coundl ` u Members, Clerk and Senior Planver. ~~'~ Ear `-` r't- i:;' r- a?rl~Rex 41t[ierrez Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diarie 1~Ilhlams,-,, conacil Member s, Clerk and Senior Planner: -~" J_ Dennis Michael /% ~ Covocil Member F ~/j~ : `,(,.{~ Sam Spap~roto T Council Member ~-n live at 1` ~,`f ~~ ~ !~~t 1.~ `' Y~.. Number Street I oppose the San Sevaine Villas developmel Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199 ") /~ Debra Adams ~'<~~ ,, City Clerk Clty James Frost City Treasurer - Mike Diaz Senior Planner tt DRC2006-00540 and The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment truilding does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development. DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surraund'ang Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10. Noise Pollution • Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas developrrient DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Date / J You are the light of the world. A city that an a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:ta ~~ ~. Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, Cleric and Senior Planner ~~~r 7~. ~~ ~ P.O. Box 807 °- ' • Rancho Cucamonga CA 91729 I//~~I, 'i ~`~ 7 ' 14 Attention: Please make co ies for Ci Co il iJ f 3 r b ='31 ~ f p ty unc , Members, Cleric and ~` '~ Senior Planner. Dear Mayor Donald J Kurth Mayor Pro Tem Diane:W illiarraS;~'''i"`~'"`'"% ` c . , , Cou il Member City Council Members, Clerk and Senior Planner: v Dennis M;chael ~ r1 "' ~ Council Member ~, i ~ , , .~ '`li;..~ .; r._.... 1 ,;(~:, . -~ :, i My name is Sam Spagnolo ~ Council Member k o r Debra Adams ` _ . .: '~ live at ~ ~ 1! t r City Clerk Number Street C~, James Frost City Treasurer - ~ Mike Diaz Senior Planner I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The local infrastructure is not adequate to supports project cf this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. Following are some of the reasons i oppose the San Sevaine Villas development. • DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community. identity: Three story building 3. Inaderuate Infrasiructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas developmeht DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. _, r, Signature ~ i ',,. 1 It-~~ r~ i Date You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt 5:ta • ' ' .. Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, • Clerk and Senior Planner P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 f~ ~°~~ Attention: Please make ~l ! +;~ ?. ~ copies for City Council ~`~~' ~ ~ ~~` = "i~~ i Members, Clerk and Senior Planner. ~;i"t"+'~~"='~'.1, '' t 6,~ltt.~'hf `(',r"=,Rex Gutiertez Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tein Dlahe Wtlhams ,~, conndl Member Ciry Council Members, Clerk and,Senior Planner. ' `' ~ DemtiS M;~hael Council Member ~ ~ , - Sam Spagnolo My name is ~~.l~Ft'.i,~y: 4~A;~"~!~:i Council Member Debra Adams I IIVe at t~i.2:3 !'t+,v'•.G(Lr_; ^.i' ,- P.6h;,!h~. (~a:'~1t--t,(5r.17_:,t5- CityCierk Number '~ Street City tames Frost City Treasurer Mike Diaz Senior Planner 1 oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The local infrastructure is not adequate to support a proms ct of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identity of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. • Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Viiias development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of. Community. identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic 8. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife 10.Noise Pollution Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus 7-00199. Date • You are the light of the world. A city that on a hill cannot be hidden. Mt s:ta ~_ ' ...: Rancho Cucamonga City Hall Attention: Mayor, City Council Members, r'ro r"Itr~ , Clerk and Senior Ptanner ~~~~'"' ' °""~' P.~. BOX 807 I~~~ ~ {) ~~~!7 Attevtion: Please make Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 copies far City Coondl CI"~~~ tlr_ ~:'•It_,f'.^ { ';^ ;r~.;,~Members,Clerkand ~-`"Senior Ptanner: `.,r.,~ ` ~.:.~~ i:.:'r'~-' Dear Mayor Donald J. Kurth, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams, Rex Gutierrez Council Member City Counci! Members, Clerkand Senior Planner. t_ 0~5 M;cnael ~ Council Member My name is ~J P,(2Oti'Le,- I ~-'~~~~-~ la Counc Mcmber I live at 12.`iLl C~inl~-~l- C~- ~,nn~:i-~= C,~~wn~..,.- Ikbra Adams cityc~er~ Number Street City lames Frost . Ciry Treasurer - Mike Lhaz Senior Planner I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. The local infrastructure is not adequate #o support a project of this magnitude. San Sevaine Villas is ahigh-density 225-unit rental assistance apartment project. This large project consists of units up to three stories in height on a small and densely populated area. Furthermore, this three-story apartment building does not fit into the existing identify of the community that consists of single and two-story dwellings. - Following are some of the reasons I oppose the San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00199. 1. The development is too large: 225 units on a small area 2. Eradication of Community. identity: Three story building 3. Inadequate Infrastructure 4. Crime 5. Devaluation of Surrounding Properties 6. Overcrowded Schools 7. Traffic S. Air Pollution 9. Extinction of Wildlife - 10.Noise Pollution Again, I oppose San Sevaine Villas development DRC2006-00540 and Density Bonus You are the light of the world. A ctty that on a hell cannot be hidden Mt 514 • • • ' To: Mayor Donald J. Kurth Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams Council MemUers: Sam Spagnola L. Dennis Michael • Rex Gutierrez ] 1 /22/07 cc: City Clerk t°1~l.sEt 1P ~CJ' This letter is from the residents that live directly adjacent and to the west of the project. ~loif 2 ~ 200 We strongly Oppose the San Servaine Villas Development URC 2006-00540 and the Density Bonus Agreement DRC: 2 007-001 1 9. CITY 0~ RAP'vCHO CUCAfJIONGA r,~TV ri_e ~'S1~ Attached is a copy of the California Constitution Article 1 Declaration of Rights Section I, We are instructing you formally that if you allow this project to eo forward as proposed you will he r~u~lating our inalienable righh. In particular our right to protect our property and in This case protecting the value of our property, as this project wil! have an negative impact on our property values. Secondly, and even more importantly, this development will violate our rights afobtaining safety, happiness and privacy. You are considering approving three story anartment buildings that will he adjacent to our homes. This wil! he a complete innasi~n of prinacy as we live in a single story homes with standard six foot walls in our backyards. We will now have complete strangers able to look into our backyards and _• homes. 6Ve were. here first. When ::e bought our homes there wer e no three story apartments next to us to invade our privacy, we would not have bought our homes if there were. YOU IIAVE NO R]GHT TO INVADE OUR PRIVACY. • We all have rights as individuals. Rights that are stronger than any city code. It does not matter if you have bunt other structures throughout the city of all heights and designs. They did not infringe on our rights as put forth in the Constitution. This development does. We must insist that you have the developmental standards altered for this project so as not to invade our privacy. You are also violating oazr rights grob!aining /zippiness and sr jety. As-the right tchappiness is self evident and does not need an explanation, you will be violating our constitutional right to safety if you approve of this project as currently designed. We have been in many conversations with the developer, city and police in regards to this project. It is agreed by all parties that "any time you increase densities of people in a confined space, you will eet an increase of crime "Phis project, as proposed, increases densities of peoples even above what the city feels is safe by allowing over 17 units per acre where zoned for only 8-14 units per acre. YOU MUST NOT APPROVE THE DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT Sincerely, the residents of Cornwall Avc. R. Cuc. /- 8113 Cornwall . v . 812 3 Cornwall Ave. 8131 Cornwall Ave. P ~I - ..1 _~_ _ ~JL~~ __ _ ____ _~6-_, __ _____ __1_ ~fet14.~•-~!i(:NL~~1,~~7 \~y1-[,{:~/~l_~_Z._ 4!_ 8~39~Cornwal 9 ~ 819 Cornwall Ave J 8157 Comwtill Ave. 81 5 Cbrnwall Ave 8183 Cornwall Ave. 8191 Corn~fall Ave. CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS SECTION I . All • people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying ,~ and defending life and liberty, a uiring, possessing, and protectine pronerty, and pursuing and '~ obtaining safety, hapss, and np: vacv. CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS SEC. 2. (a) Every person may freely speak, write and publish his or her sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of this right. A law may not restrain or abridge liberty of speech or press. (b) .A publisher, editor, reporter, or other person connected with or employed upon a newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, or by a press association or wire service, or any person who has been so connected or employed, shall not be adiudged in contempt by ajudicial, legislative, or administrative body, or any other body having the power to issue subpoenas, for refusing to disclose the source of_any information procured while so connected or employed for publication in a newspaper, magazine or other periodical publication, or for refusing to disclose any unpublished information obtained or prepared in gathering, receiving or processine of information for communication to the public. .Nor shall a radio or television news reporter or other person connected with or employed by a radio or television station, or any person who has been so connected or employed, be so_adjudged in contempt for refusing to disclose the source of any information procured while so connected or __ _ _-- employed for news or news commentary_purposes on radio or television, or fcr refusing to disclose any unpublished infoctnation obtained or prepared in gathering, receiving or processing of information for communication to the public. As used in this subdivision,_"unpublished information" includes information not disseminated to the, publiclby theperson-from whom disclosure is sought, whether or not related information has been disseminated and includes, but is not limited to, all notes, outtakes, photographs, tapes or other data of whatever sort not itself • disseminated to the public through a medium of communication, whether or not published information based upon or related to such material has been disseminated. CALIFORrNIA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS SEC. 3. (a) The people have the right to instruct their representatives, petition overnment for redress of grievances, and assemble freely to consult for the common good. (b) (1) The people have the ri t e access to infornaron concernim~ the conduct of the neomle's business an ,therefore, the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies shall be open to public scrutiny. (2) A statute, court rule, or other aut_ ttority, includi~ those in effect on the_e..ffective'date of this subdivision, shall be _ broadly construed ~f.it. furthers a people s~~right of access and narrowly construed if it limits the rieht of access..4 statute,. court rule, or other.authority adopted_after the effective date o£this ,__... subdivision that limits the right.,p~access shall be adopted with findings dem4n~tratin~the interest protec~ed by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest: (3) Nothing in this subdivi~jon supersedes or modifies the right of nrivacy guaranteed >~ Section I or affects the constnaction of any statute, courtrule, or other authority to the extent that it protects that right to privacy, - --. including any statutory.procedur~oveming discovery or disclosure of information concerning the official performanrP.or professional qualifications ofa peace_officer. (4) Nothing.in this -- - -- subdivision supersedes or modifies any.provision of this Constitution, including the guarantees that a person m~ not he deprived of life, liberty, or property without due~rocess of law, or denied equal protection of the laws, as provided in Section 7. (5) This subdivision doe~not repeal or nulli , expressl~or by implication, an_y_constitutinnal or statutory. exception to the right of access to public_Le~ords or meetings of public bodies that is in effect on the effective date of this subdivision, including, but not limited to~any statute protecting the confidentiality of law • This is a petition to block the proposed development of a 225 apt. Facility at 13233 Foothill Blvd. Rancho Cucamonga The undersigned pers~s below indicate their opposit~~~;i~.i"~ Northtowri Housing Development Proposed at 13233 Fos~,~i~,{ Bl~df Name(Please Frint) Address Phone# Sign~:ture.,. ,.-.: ~ This is a petition to block the proposed development of a 225 apt. Facility at 73233 FoothiN Blvd. Rancho Cucamonga The undersigned persons below indicate their appos~~a~a~ahe Northtown Housing Development Proposed at 13233 Foothill,~l~d. l 5 n r 9, L;: , } L 4 t Name~Please Print) Address Phone#~ Sianatureri ~ ~--/ This is a petition to block the proposed development of a 225 apt. Facility at 13233 Foothill Blvd. Rancho Cucamonga The undersigned persons below indicate their opposetie Northtown Housing Development Proposed at 13233 Fo '~'i I ' d. Name(PleaSe Frint> Address Phone# f ~ T 9 ~ `S>r~t~~~ture ~ /`~ LETTERS • IN SUPPORT OF PROJECT I' RECEIVED .11/26/07 _ NOV 2.ii ~QQ) - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY CLERK PLEASE DISTRIBUTE TO ALL PARTIES CIN OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Subject: San Sevaine Villas Petition NOV 27.2007 DRC 2006-0050 RECEIVED -PLANNING To: Honorable Mayor Kurth Council Members • Jack Lam. Sam Spagnolo Rex Gutierrez Dennis Michaels Redevelopment Jan Reynolds Planning Director James Troyer c Senior Planner Mike Daiz City Clerk Debra Adams • To: The Honorable Mayoi and City Council Members of Rancho Cucamonga. A Petition in Support of Workforce Housing in Rancho Cucamonga We, the Undersigned, believe in and support the proposed Workforce Housing Development known as San Sevaine Villas, to be located on Foothill just east of Etiwanda Avenue. We aze primarily residents of Rancho Cucamonga, and Western San Bernardino County. However, we aze also supporters of housing who live across the area, region, state, and nation, who aze concerned that a worthy workforce housing proposal can be endangered. due to strictly political objections based upon classic Not-In-My- Back-Yard, or NIMBY, disapproval. We believe that safe, decent, and affordable housing is important for everyone, especially young people. Everyone knows the beneficial value of a stable household on children. Ih addition to providing affordable rents for ahigh-quality apartment, the development will provide an after-school program with special focus on homework and educational activities. For many hard-working parents, or single parents, this peace of mind alone makes this housing invaluable. There will also be summer programs to help keep children occupied and year-round community social events. The developer has indicated that all tenants must pass a rigorous screening process, including credit and criminal background checks. Income qualifications are stringently adhered to, and there is an annual re-certification process. There will also be security gates at the entrances and exits. Finally, there is a strict zero-tolerance policy... if the resident fails to comply with any of the regulations, they will be evicted and no one who fails the screening will be admitted as a tenant. . We believe that this development is a responsible step forward for our great city because it establishes hope for low and moderate wage earners that their life can improve. We awe it to ourselves to continue to light the path towards greater affluence and fnancial independence. We Support San Sevaine Villas! Sincerely, The Undersigned .1 • • +~ LJ •o~• .~.• ` ~ ~ ~ l ~ ,oo• ~~~ ~ ~~• `~~~ ~~ ~~~• ...• . c~ ~"~ • • ,~~ ... - ~ ~~ ..~• ~ _ 1 J J •~ }< •~.~ .~~• . ~ _~ ~~ ~ ~ /: - ~v v 1 l 1 ~~~. ~~~ • <1! • ~ _ ~~~~ J • CITY 0'F RANCHO CUCAMONGA NOV 15 2007 • RECEIVED -PLANNING _ - - i ~._, Date: October:l. ~?0O7 Olen Jones Senior Community 712 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald .i., Kurth M. D City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga; CA. Dear Sir, Subject San Scvaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Qrcamonga. My income is solely • from .Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA N ~~; 1:~ 2007 RFrrnJ~D - P! ANPIINS • (- t~ Date: October. I. 2007 Olen .]ones Senior Conununity 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca > U01 hi regards to: Northtown }-lousing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald .i.; Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: SanSevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-OOS40 ] am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Qtcamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the ltiglr rate for my rent. • Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, #a~ vj Sig ui~~ Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGf P~ 0 `/ ? S 2007 RFr-f'!=0 - P! APlP7iNa .-. ~J Date: October ~ 1. ?007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of kv~cho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, SubjecC San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, becaase i live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely • from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable }-lousing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity ]have had. Tha~~k you. Respectfit]ly, ,t ' ~ Z,2b3 Signature Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCANIOhdGF~. x ,~ ~! ?.: 20~J7 • % `„~. • D a tC: O CtO bf l' .i ~ . ' 007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 ]n regards to: IJorthtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald .i., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. • Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, f ~ ~ / o.S` Signature Olen Jones Senior Community Hilcopy CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGP. N J'J ?. '~ 20~ 1 • (~ ~ (~ • Date: October 31'.:?007 Olen Jaies Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald .1., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cuc..amonga . 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because 1 live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely • from Social Secwity; therefore it wou]d be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity ]have had. Thank you. Respectfully, Signature ~ ~~/ ~ Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy l I cin or ~a~;c~to cuca~noNea n~~fi,'l,c~ - ~~ i~~l`jii eta f;_. ~- Date: October 3 ] , 20(17 Olen Jones Senior Community 7]25 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga C'a 91701 In regards to: Northto~-vn Housing Development Corporation iVtayor: Donald L: Ktuth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga I05 00 Civic Center Drive RanchoCucamgnga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Vill.s Project number: DRC2(J06-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing ut the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. • Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the-same opportunity 1 have had. Thank yott. Respectfully, Signature Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy . CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~`1 ' ;> 20~J"1 • ~^ Date: October ;1.2007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 .Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards [o: Northrown Efousing Developmeru Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive. Rancho Cucamonga, C.A Dear Sir, Subject: San Scvaine Villas Project number: DILC200ti-00540 ~-~ r I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the ]ow income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely • from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Tharilc you. Respectfully, ~zz~~ Signahue Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy C17Y Ur RANCHO CUCAMONGA :J'1 ' ~ 20+J7 .,~,,_,;-~ ,1 ari.l?~c • Date: October 31, 2007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald ,i., Kw1h M. D. City of P.ancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Vi!]as Project number: DRC20U6-00540 1 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security, therefore it wou]d be impossible to pay Ute high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have,had. "I7tank you. Respectfully, 1 Si rahne ~~ Oleti Jones Senior Cotmunity Hi/copy CI1Y Ot RAPaCHO CUCAMONGA ,;~j') _ .~ 2097 t. :.-.. - ~~~o S • • • • Date: OctoGer ; I , ?007 Olen Jones Senior Cornnnrnity 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91 70] In regards to: Northtown Housing llevelopment Corporation Mayor: Donald .1., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA llear Sir, Subject San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-0040 i am in support to all affordable housing h~ the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely • from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same oppotKUnity I have had..Thuilc you. Respectfully, l~Gt-o .Z~~.~,-,.,,,os~ #~a~b 7 S ignatw e Olen Juries Senior Community Hi/copy GI"TY OF Fir111~;H0 CUCAMONGA - f.. 1,! 111 L1 • % ~. ~_. Date: October 31. ?007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Quamonga Ca 91701 In regards ro: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald L, Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. • " Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity 1 have had. Tltanlc you. Respectfully, Signature Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy \J .~ r~ Date: October X1.2007 "' Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 ]n regards to: Northtown I-Iousing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J.; Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga ] OS 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San 5evaine. Villas Project number: DRC2006-OOS40 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the ]ow income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely • from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped,me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity ]have had. Thank you. Respectfully, ~ ~3~~ Si u e Olen Jones Senior Conmaunity Hilcopy - Cl - z' 4F R;1tiCH0 CUCAMONGP, • ~" ,_ Dnte: October ,1, 2007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Noithtown Housiug Development CoiVoration Mayor: Donald .1., Kurth M. D. City of Ra~uho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA llear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Vistas Project number. DRC2006-00540 I am in support to al] affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in. one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. • Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. ]would like others to have the same opportunity 1 have had. Thank you. ~ ~y~7 CITY OF RAPJCHO CUCAMONGA n4~"i ~. ~~. ~~~1~ c. J ~ _ "~1 ~. • Vlen Jones Senior Comnnuiity . Hi/copy ~__ Date: October 31.2007 r- Olen Jones Senior Conununity 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 9170] In regards to Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing itr the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely • from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped the greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity ]have had. Thatilc you. Respectfully, ~~~~-,~ ~~/ /a Signature Olen Jones Senior Co~mnunity Hi/copy CITY OF i~AP]CHO CUCAP110NCF~. • ,~-. ~~ . Date: October 31.2007 Olen Jones Senior Comm~mity 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald .1., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamon~s - 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. • Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. 1 would like others to have the same opportunity 1 have had. Thank you. Respectfully, Signature - ~ /~. Olen Jones Senior Community y Hi/copy CITY Or ~>1~it~HD CUCAMOPJGA -?J`i = ~ 20J7 .-- ,: •.. _„ • (_. Dare: ncwher_ l; 2007 Olen )ones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation r Mayor: Donald .1., Kurth M. U. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 1 am in support to all affordable }lousing in the San Bernardino Cowity, because I live in one of the ]ow income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely • from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opponumty 1 have had. Thank you. Respectfully, Signature Olen Jones Senior Corrununity Hi/copy C1 ~ f t~~ ;~~iGHt~ ii;CAMONG.1 J'; `.:; 279'1 ~lrr-,'f -1, •l 1\i ~.. dir. • ~. Date: G%~ r{c ~~~ !, •_`I ~( ]n regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald ,1., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir. Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number DRC2006-00540 1 am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly: 1 would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. • Respectfully, S' ature Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy Ci ~ ! 0 ~A~i~~HO CL'C;~i~0~JG~1 • / ~. • Date: October 31.2007 Olen Tones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Kancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevsine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 • 1 am in support to all affordable housing.in the San Bernardino Cottnty, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you., Respectfully, LI I\t ~tJi {•5r,1'1 X11 It~ VUUl~Ib~IU IY Gam` :. 3 ?~JI ignatnre Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy L J ~~ -. • llate: October .1.2007 Olen Jones Senior Commtmify 7125 Amethyst r\ve Ranchi~ Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Develppment Corporation Mayor: Donald .L, Kurth M. ll. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Roject number: I?KC2006-00540 1 am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in • one of the ]ow income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible Co pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has he]ped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, Signature Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy C11Y Vi ~~~1t1h0 ~ U4: r17VIVl~I ~l r~ • r~ Date: October 31.2007 Olen .loves Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA ;_ Dear Sir, Subject: Sun Sevaine Villas Project number. DRC200G-00540 • I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity'I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, ~ ~ 3a~ a- Signature Olen Jones Senior Community _ Hi/copy 'vI i f U,- n~4t,ht.i G~+Gt1VI0Nar1 j' ~ ~,' " :; 277 (~ • llate: October ; I, 2007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga ]US 00 Civic Center llrive. Rancho Cucamonga, CA beat' Sit', Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC'200fi-005<f0 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely • from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportm~ity 1 have had. Thank you. Respectfully, 3~a`~- ~ ~~ .~ ~ ~ y. T~ St nature Olen .lones Senior Community Hi/copy CI1(0. R~~II,riO ~UCAMONGA F:~7 ~= ~; 2JDi' • Date: October 31, ?007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards lo. Northtown }lousing Development Corporation viayor: Donald J., Kurtli M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, _ Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: J;)RC2006-00540 t mn in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in • one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. iviy income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. ALfordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity 1 have had. "rhatilc you. Respectfully, _~ "-'~'~I S natu e ~ Olen Jon Senior Cbl munity Hi/copy GB ~ / Gs ~~liti~irJ GUGi~PlIONGP. • ~t i i' . ~~ 7_001 ~^ llate: October .1.2007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Do+iald .L, Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucnmonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 1 am in support to alt affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in • one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, a Signature Olen Jones Senior Community 1-Ii/copy 's ~',"' ~ i Z~J i ~~~a3 • Date: ~ r/ ' (~ ~ - ~ Mayor: Donald .I., Kurth M. ll. City of Rancho Cucamonga 1.05 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, C.A In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Prgject number: DRC2006-OOS40 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Beiroardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; • therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. l.would like others to have the same opportunity 1 have had. Thank you. Respectfully, -~ - / igna re Hi/copy ~ ~ ~ '" `1 ~`> ~' ~ S f rj i ~ '~1- Li r,I~1IV1li 1 IJVUr,IYIVIVt]r~ 1, .i ,' ._ ' iU7 • ~. f ~. • Date: October 31.2007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald .L, Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir. Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in • one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity 1 have had. Thatilc you. Respectfidly, Signature Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy CITf Or ~;--1+~'st;NLt CliC~ti90NGA ~~~? - .i `J~7i a,.l~atC. - ~ • ~~-- , , Date: October 31, 2007 Olen .Tones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Nor(htown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas ?roject number: DRC2006-00640 • I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have.the carne opportunity I have had. Tharilc you. Respectfully, nature ~} ~~ / ~ 'n Jones Senior Community 17ilcopy C!T'(OF RANCHO CUCAh,~ONGA I:i ! _.. ZJJ7 ~, „~, ~,'nlf. p-~~_ ~ r _i:,l .., ~t llr,a • %__.. , 1 • Date: October 31, 2007 Olen .tones Senior Commurity 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca )1:701 In regards tci: Northtown I-lousing Development Corporation . Mayor Donald .1., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Suhject: San Sevaine Villas Project number. DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in • one of the ]ow income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Socia] Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thant: you. Respectfully, gnature Olen Jones Senior Community I-ii/copy CIT`! GF h;~,i~~CHO CUCAA40NGA. I' ±'! :~ 207 I?rr!'~~t~-~~~ n _.. ~~-P~.~:~~~i4~1f:~ • (~ Date: October 31, 2007 C)len .cones Senior Community 7125-Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ga 9]701 In regards to: Noithtown I-lousing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 1 OS 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, C.A ~-- Dear Sir, Subject. San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC20Uti-OOS40 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in • one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, ~~= ~~z ~r Signature Olen Jones Senior Conunw~ity Hi/copy C! ~ ~ ~Ji i~l`~o'1~~7!~ ~-~IJLr~INf~14L7r~ '~_.' . '1j~i, .Y~.` 'rl ~~ ,~a~~'~'~~~ • /ice 1 I • Date: October 3l, 2007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 ]n regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in • one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. 1 would like others to have the same opportunity 1 have had. Thank you. Respectfully, ' r ) S' nat ~ ~~ ~ v - en Jones Senior Community Hi/copy CITY OF RAiVCIiO CUCAFliG[\1GA I~~ '. ':; 200T ~'r'~' ~ _~ - 'i 1, l`~I4i~1rt • ~~ ~ ~ - Date: October 31, 2007 Olen .loner Senior Conununity 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 - In regards to: Northtown I-lousing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dcar Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project numL-er: DRC2006-00540 • I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely From Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the ]tigh rate fot' my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity 1 have had. Thank you. Respectfully, Signature Olen Jones Senior Cotruuunity Hi/copy r~;`( fj Riai`bCHQ CUCAUONGA I : ~ ~! ~ . 2G07 • r ,. • Uate: October 31, 2007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 hl regards to. Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor Donald J., Kurih M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga ] OS 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject San Sevaine Villas Project number: DP~C2005-00540 1 am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. 1 would like others to have the same opportunity 1 have had. Thank you. Respectfully, ~c~ri,P...h- ~~-Pi+~l~cY'. . ~,t, 3 a2 U 6 -~ Signature Olen Jones Senior Comtnwrity Hi'COpy ~~rr or- ~a~:!c~o CiiCAMONGA '.`.'~" '~ ; 2~J0? • Date: October 31, 2007 Olen .(ones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown 1-{Dosing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 • I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same , opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, ~...~3ao5 Signature Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy CIT'( Cif RF~i~1CHq CUCANiOPJGP: l~'~;`! __ :~ 207 `,_n,,r,l~1) _ fir; !';,f,`i;1~'a`i~i • llate: October il, 2007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown }Mousing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald .L, Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga. CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in • one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. ]would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, G.` ~ ~ ~ 3a Signature Olen Tones Senior Community Hi/copy +~i; ! t.l=G~~fi~%NO CuCF~NiOPlGA t,~., ` '± 200"l ,,~ _. ~_. Date: October 31. ?007 Olen .loves Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 Lt regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mavor: Donald l., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject San Sevainc Villas Project number. DRC2006-0040 (~. 1 am in support to all affordahle housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in • one of the Ipw income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. AffordableHousinghas helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same ppportunity ]have had. Thank you. Respectfully, -- SignaYUre "~" Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy C(,'I OF RAit~GHu CUCA[!~UfdGP, ~V ! 1 ~,~" ._ ~ ?_OQl u ,~, ~. Date: October;I.?007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards ro: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Dgnald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga ] OS 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, C`A Dear Sir. Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Lerrardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely - from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. • Affordable 1-lousing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, {//~j / ~9 ~ 11 G 1~ j~j .f3,.l~la~ !./.~.i~ t'Q 1 Signahue J Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy CIiY QF [~AiVi:NO CE~CAMONGA (' ~:'; ~ 3 2007 • • Date: Mayor: Donald .L, Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regards to: Northtown Ffousiiig Deveh,tpment C'orporatio^ Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2000-00~~10' /,_. I am in support to all affordable housing in the San $ernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housin, projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would he impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing • has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, Sign ure - -v~ ~ Hi/coPY ~ ~ ~ ~.`~ Gl ~ l OF ?I~~~CHI~ CiiCANIONGA ;' ;,'! '.:200"1 • r~ • Datr. October .1.2007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca J 1701 In regards to: Northtown }-lousing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald .L, Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga. C'A Dear Sir, SubjecC San Sevaiite Villas Project numbea': DRC2006-00540 ] am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in • one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate, for my rent- Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity ]have had. Thank you. Respectfully, 1 y ~~~~-~~~.~3~~~ Signature Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy Cf ~'l OF i~F:ilsii-10 UCNNiONGP. i':, ' :::; ?O~l i' . ~_ ~--, -. Date: October 31.2007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Avc Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 ht regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor Donald J., Kurth M. U. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San $evaine Villas Project number: DRC2005-00540 • I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because 1 live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, .~~.~~)~~ ~P~3i~o Signature Olen Jones Senior Community Hilcopy ~~;~! ~ FEti~l~~ri~' GUCAf+~Oj~IGA. ~,:, , :_ ; 2G1~~ • (__., Date: October 3l. 20(17 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave P~ancho Cucamonga C'a 91701 In regards to: Northtown 1-lousing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 C'.ivic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga. CA Dear Sir, Subject San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because 1 ]ive in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Securiq~; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. • _ Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. 1 would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, `j // Signature .,i""~ Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy C1. ~ ~ rr R??{j+~a0 CUCA~~IIONGA•. °^'~ ~~ %~JJ! I.J! _ 1 ~ Date: October ~ 1. ?00? Olen Jones Senior Community 712 Amethyst .Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northlown housing Development CotForation Mayor: Donald .L, Kmah M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA r `~ Dear Sir, Subject. San Sevaine Villas Project number: DI2C300fi-00540 • I am in suppoR to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. 1 would like others to have the same opportunity 1 have had. Thank you. Respectfully, ' ~31Z~~ nature 'lea Jones Sen~ r Community Hilcopy C~;Y 0~ R.A~!CHO CUCAMONGA !'',.,'' , iJCl7 • r~ r Date: October 31, ?007 Olen .lones Senior Community 71?5 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 [n regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-OOSd0 I am in support to al] affordable housing in the San Bentardino County, because I live in • one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity 1 have had. Thank you. Respectfully, ~ o~ Signature Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy ~~"P/ j;= ~ ~itiit?rlt~ GUCQI~AOIIGrI ~~ Date: October 31, ?007 Olen Imes Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 [n regards to: Northtown }lousing Development Corporation Mavor: Donald .L, Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number- DRC200G-0040 ~- 1 am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in • one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, ' ~: ~~ `'$ignahtr t` Olen ]ones Senior Community Hi/copy Ci'~ ; ~~ ~fa~'~~.~E10 ~1JCAi~II~I~GA --~ ~ -_ I • llate: October 31, ?007 Olen .loves Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald .L, Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Pri~jeet number: DRC2006-00540 1 am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in • one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity 1 have had. Thank you. Respectfully, /~ ~ ~~o"j3.aZ Sign u e OlerX J yes Senior Community Hi/c~ y ~f~/~~ , Frf1~1JL.~~ e~~Af~oNGA ;..,.. ,- . ~ 2Jp'~ ~,__ - ,., l • Date: October 31, 2007 Olen .tones Senior Community 7121 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamatga Ca 91701 Ln regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation vtayor: Donald .L, Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir. Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: llRC2006-00540 • I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucatonga: My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you.- • Respectfully, i Signature Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy ~~C~~ E~~ ~ r fir l~~ .;coo J~c~~~~~a~~cp. `. `. ~ .~ ._ ZJf1 ~`l _ : _, ..':..'rci ~~, ~ Date: October . I. 2007 Olen .loner Senior Contnutniq~ 7127 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 Lt regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of 12ancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Uear Sir, Subject San Sevaine Villas Froject number: DRC2006-00540 ' ] am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in • one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay.the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same ~ -- opportunity Ihave had. Thank you. Respectfully, Signatu e Olen Jones Senior Comm~utity Hi/copy UI } _~ ~(~ fa}'i j}i{J JUCAP.40NuP~. ~. I. _, ~r ~7 1 ~ +°, C, Dnte: oet~he,' ,1. zoo? Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst :\ve Raucho Cucamonga Ca 91701 hi regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald .1., Kurth N(. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, , Subject: Snn $evaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 • I am in support to al] affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has he]ped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity 1 have had. Thank you. Respectfully, 'mil Signature 0 Olen Jones Senior Community f-Ti/copy I~~ T°r e~ 4„i~ic~~G c~c~~.~~E~~cra ~- i Date: October 3 t. 20117 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northuiwn Housing Development Co~pc»'ation Mayor: Donald .L, Kurth M. D. City of Raricho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject- San Sevaine Villas Project number: llRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Berardino County, because I !ive in one of the low income Housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. • Affordable Elousing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. ' Respectfully, Signature f Olen Jones Senior Community . Hi/copy -- • Date: October 31, 2007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 ]n regards to: Northrown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA r Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 i am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in • one of the low income housing projects in Rvrcho Cucamonga: My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity ]have had. Thank yoti. Respectfully, . /~ ,f/l/~ ~ '-i Cr'"[iii' ~"rC. /~ _ -., Signature ~~ ~ G Olen Jones Senior Community H i/copy P • (~ , r.., , • Date: October 31, 2007 Olen Jones Senior Conununity 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701. In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I a~u in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernazdino County, because I live in • one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely come from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay high rate in my rent. Affordable Housing helped greatly me. I like other to have the same opportunity I had. Respectfully, ~ ~~fu~2~('1X~_~'~LG~7~.in'u~ /gyp ~ ,2 ~ q 'Z Signature Olen Jones Senior Community I-li/coPY ~sj ~ ~:~ ~~;~~+:;;~,a c~;cn~,nar~G~: r-. Date: October 31, ?007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave. Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91.701 [n regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporatimr Mayor: Donald .1., Y.mth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, GA .. Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 • I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of [he ]ow income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, ~ ~.~t-~~ 1.33 Signature Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy ~. ?~hj ~.. I ~-, Date: October 31, 2007 Olen .loves Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Avc Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 Lt regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald.l., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely • come from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate in my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I had have. Thank you. Respectfully, Signature Olen Jones Senior Community. Hi/copy - ,;. • 1 _ (_ • Dare: October ::a 1 . =007 Olen Juries Senior Community 7125 Amethyst :\ve Rancho Cucamonga C;a 91711 l In regards to: Nonhtown I-lousing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald .L, Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: Sari Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00>40 1 am in support to all affordable hotuing in the San Bernardino Cotmty, because I live in • one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, ignature Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy Cs 1 `{ ~ r ~r:Pi~~~;t~ ~rwAJ`Ji~J~JG;"t _.. ~~rJ! • _~ ..... r'-' ~ -. Date: October 31, 2007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 ]n regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, C'..4 Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine V illas Project number: URC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino Cow~ty, because I live in • one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped the greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, Signatt~ Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy ~•,~ • !~- • Datr. October 31.2007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 .Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In reeards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rvtcho Cucamonga , I OS 00 Civic Center llrive .Rancho Cucamonga, CA /~ Dear Sir. Subject San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-OOS40 , 1 am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernazdino County, because I live in • one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have ha<l. Thank you. Respectfully, Signature Olen Jones Senior Community Hilcopy :......~ 207 J ~~ Date: October 31, 2007 Olen .tones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald .1., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DKC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in • one of the low incane housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the satne opportunity 1 have had. Thank you. Respectfully, r Signature Olett Jones Senior Community Hi/copy • Date: October 31, 2007 Olen .loner Senior Comm~mity 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald .1., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive. Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-OOS40 (~ • ] am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because 1 live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have ilae same opportunity ]have had. "Ihattk you. Respectfully, -~ ~~ra~ Signanue Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy • (_- Date: October 31.2007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga C:a 91701 Lr regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 (~ I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino Cow~ty, because I live in one of the ]ow income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, Signature , Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy \J • ~. i Date: October 31, 2007 Olen Jones Senior Community , 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 hi regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald .L, Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga, 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project nwnber: DRC2006-00540 • I am in support to all affordable housine in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely froth Social Security; therefore ii would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable T-Iousing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, ~/~~Q ~- 6 J lo~ Signature Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy Ct t (OF ~A~iCFIO CUCPMOPIGF, • r ;- Datc: Octoher ~ 1.2007 Olen-Tones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst :\ve hancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In i'egards~to: Northtown Himsing Development Corpor;olion Mayor: Donald l., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, C'A Dear Sir, Subject San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in • one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is.solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Itespectful]y, Signature Olen Jones Senior Com ~ii Hi/copy _. . crrr o~ i~la.~icF.o ci~cA~non~~~~ .. _i l _ Uate: October 31, 2007 Olen .tones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown }lousing Development Corporation Mayor Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dcar Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project mrmiter: DRC2006-00540 • Ism in supnort to all affin-dable housing in the San Bernardino County, because 1 live in one of the low income housing projects in Kancho Cucamonga. My' income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity 1 have had. Thank you. Respectfully. Signature • Olen Janes Senior Community Hi/copy Ci ~ (Or RAi`a+.;tlU CiiGAMONGF~, Date: f (- C%c - G~ Mayor Donald .L, Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive .Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to alI affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; - therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing • has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, -~-~ _ `~ ~ / / o S Signature Hi/copy ' Cf I f 0~ l~Ai~;t;~iJ GUCFIRII~NGA -r-.., _ _ ,..,,.~.~. , . • Mayor: Donald J., Kurth Nl. D. City of Rancho Cucaronga l05 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho C:ucnmonga, CA ht regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine. Villas Prgject number: DRC'2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because 1 live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. DAy income is very low; ' therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing • has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, Signature- l/ Hi/copy C1i1(0~ s~Ai~~f;i-ftJCtiGAitfONG!7 . ~ ~.' ". ~; iCl~7 • %~ f,,., I Hate: j ~ - ~ - ~_' 7 Mayor: Donald L; Kurth 1vd. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, Cn In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC200G-00>40 I mn in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live'in one of the low income housing, projects in Raricho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same oppm7unity I have had. • Thank you. Respectfully, w~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ -z~ ~ ignahire Hilcopy ,I~rf 0~ tZ.i=!PtiH~ I~u+~A~JIONGA ,,._,.~ ~..~ `la~J? ;~~' - • ... Date: ~ I - C7 Z - ci'~ ~-tayor: Donald .1., Kurth M. D. Ci[y of Rancho Cucamonga OS 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC'2006-0040 T am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; ' therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing • has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Think you. Respectfully, Signature .. Hi/copy • r ~~rv-'~ • `-, November ] 3, 2007 Re: Support Letters for San Sevaine Villas (DRC 2006-00540) Distribution List (_. The Honorable Donald Kurth MD Mayor Diane Williams Mayor Pro Tem Rex Guiterrez Councilmember ---=- Sam Spagnolo Councilmember Dennis Michael Councilmember Jack Lam City Manager Jan Reynolds Redevelopment Debra Adams City Clerk James Troyer Senior Planner Mike Diaz Planner • rl i'~ ij;= li~ilh`v1117 ~t,~G(at`fliJP1GF '~ . J - ' 4'tl''t,l:~ • Date: In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 -- I am insupport to all affordable housing in the San Bernazdino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the tugh rate for Tiy rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greafly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. • Thank you. Respectfully, 9~ ~ Signature Hi/copy CITY 0~ RANCHO CUCAMONGA NOV 15 2007 RECEIVED -PLANNING fL J c ~oSC .~S YaQI ~ I~47~j6 Date: j~ _ ~ . 0 ~ In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga l OS 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-OOS40 r~ I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucunonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay. the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thanl: you. Respectfully, /~ ------ Signature Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCA(V10NGA NOV 15 2007 RECEIVED- PLANNING • • • CITY OF RANCHO CUCANIONGA NOV 15 200' RECEIVED - PLANNING ~ ~- ~~ ~~GIYC~CIYi~a ~ll~G`~ O Date: ~ ~ /CJ (~ } ' In regards to: Northtovm Housing Development Corporation \Qayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very ]ow; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, I' i~a~~ U Signature Hi/copy • /,. ~-_ MGvr~ c~?~y.o~~. rl- o ~-~Y Date: In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donakl J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA .Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to alt affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would tike others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. • Respectfully; -~ .~ '/J~ ,, ~ Signature Hi/copy CIN 0'F RANCHO CUCAIViONGA °x NOV 15 2007 RECEIVED -PLANNING u .--. ~~ r Date: In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga ] OS 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernazdino County, because I live in , one of the lowlncome housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. • Thank you. Respectfully; . _ 6z=~b '~A ~Lui /« Signature Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUICANIONGA NOV 15 2007 RECENED -PLANNING • ~ ~- Date: ~ ~- Q q-~~ ± In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth IvI. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC200G-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernazdino County, because I live in , one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me gt~eatly. 1 would like others to have the same opportunity I have had.. Thank you. • Respectfully, z=~v-~~ Signature Hi/copy CITY 0~ RANCHO CUCANiONGA Nou 1 ~ 200 RECEIVED -PLANNING ~,-' Date: r In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive ' Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had.. • Thank you. Respectfully, L~ Signature Hi/copy CI iY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGk NO Y 15 200? RECEIVED -PLANNING ~~ • Date: In regards to: Northtovm Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J, Kurth Iv1. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 t I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. T would like others to have the same opportunity I have had.. Thank you. • Respectfully, 6(~.Y7 ~/ Signature Hilcopy CI1' OF RANCHO CUCAfWONGA N 0 V 15 2007 RECEIVED :PLANNING Date: In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J, Kurth NI. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because i live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impassible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had.. • Thank you. Respectfully, Sigt lure ~`7- Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCANIONGA N o ri .1. ~ 200 RECEIVED -.PLANNING • (^ Lu.~S ~ i~,'L • Date: ll-1 r" `l -p ~ In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA ~- . Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 [ am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay fhe high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had.. Thank you. Respectfully, t Signature [ [i/copy • CITY OE RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~ a ~ 1 ~ 2007 .RECEIVED - PLANNING /~ \J ~- Date: In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth NI. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga :105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project nwnber: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the Saar Bernardino County, because I live in nne of the low income housing projects in Rancho' Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible fo pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had.. • Thank you. Respectfully, f/c=GToR P~~',~L Z,~1LUi~K' Signature Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIVIONGA NOY 15 200 RECEIVED -PLANNING • ,~ . Date: // _ oc/._ o ~ ht regards to: Northtown Housing DevelopmenS Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth Iv1. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Deaz Sir, Sirbject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 r ~_. • a I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent: Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had.. Thank you. • Respectfidly, ~gnatu Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIviONGA NOV 15 2007 RECEIVED -PLANNING ~~- Date: In regards to: NorthtoNm Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Deaz Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas - Project number: DRC2006-00540 r I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would' like others fo have the same opportunity I have had.. • Thank you. Respectfully, ignatur' Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCANiONGA 9J0~ 15 2007 9~ECEIVED -PLANNING • vale: In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Deaz Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 r. i am in support to all affordable housing in the San IIemazdino County, because I live in one of the low income housing protects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing leas helped me greatly. I would-like others to have the same opportunity I have had.. Thank you. • Respectfully, ~--- ~a-r--c1 "~,J Signature Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIVtONGA NOV 15 2007 RECEIVED -PLANNING • -,, Hate: I!- ~y- 07 ~rGn CigC'(n ~Ipr C,S Jn regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 DO Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernazdino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had.. • Thank you. Respectfully, r rrce,n FS cc, ~~rc5 Signature Hi/copy CI1' 0~ RANCh10 CUCAfviONGA NUI~ 15 200? RECEIVED -PLANNING .-. i Date: In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth NI. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project nurnber: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to. all affordable housing in the San Bemazdino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very tow; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would' like others to have the same opportunity I have had.. Thank you. • Respectfully, ~~ j~ _--__. Signature I-Ii/copy CI1Y Or RANCHO CUCAtv10NGN NQV 15 200? RECEIVEt? - pLkNNiNG • (~ \J Date: In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth Ni. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 .~ I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing ' has helped me greatly. I would Like others to have the same opportunity I have had.. • Thank you. RespectfizJly, /~. ~~ . ~ G' G 'C!r ~t'YI/~ ignature -Ii/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCANIONGH, N U ~ ]. 5 2007 RECEIVED - i'LANNINC • r .. -. • Date: ~ / . 1'y 0 1 ~.' ~(n G (~5u l~irr-(.1. In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald 7., Kurth NI. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga I-05 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, ' Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I five in one of the low'income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had.. Thank you. • Respectfully, Signat~~~ Hi/copy • (~ • vale: ~l ~e~~a-~~ In regards to: Nortlttown Housing Development Cor)~oration Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga l05 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 d I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, '~'`~ ~F ~-A ~~ 1~s~1-~~ 761~~J~~~,aGg Si nat r . Dopy CITY OF RANCHO CUCANIONGA RECElVEO -PLANNING • / _~- • llatc: In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. • Respectfully, r -~-P/L.--.-.. Signature Hi/copy CITY Ot RANCHO CUCAfv10NGA Nav 1 ~ 2aa~ RECEIVED - P~ANNINu • ,~`" Date: In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 ~-- I am in support to al] affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. • Thank you. Respectfully, 9 ~ ~ ~~ ~G~G~u~ n ?~`°} Signature Hi/coPY CITY OF RANCHO CUCAtv10NGA N0 N 15 200 RECEIVED -PLANNING • l • November 1, 20007 Donald Kurth, Mayor City Council Members 10500 Civic Cen[er Drive Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 Dear Mr. Mayor and City Council Members, This tette; in is regards to the Northtowri Housing Development Corp. and their plan to build the affordable housing project San Sevaine Villas. I work the front office at Olen Jones Senior Apartments which is a beautiful affordable housing complex for seniors. Dailyl see senior citizens come to this complex to put their name on our waiting list (which is at least 2 years long) so they will be able to have a better and fulfilling life by paying the lower rents. , , Not only do I see the need for more affordable housing for seniors but also families. I am in total support of this new project. Thank you,. • C.~-c.~ci~~_. Rosibel SC~~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAb10NGA NDV l:i 20~~ RECEIVED - PLANNING • f • November I, 20007 Donald Kurth, Mayor City Council Members 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 Dear lVlr. Mayor and City Council Members, f This letter in is regards to the Northtown Housing Development Corp. plan to build the affordable housing project San Sevaine Villas. I moved to Rancho Cucamonga 4 years ago and love it here. If it wasn't forme being able to move in to an affordable apartment complex, I would not be able to reside in our beautiful city. I am in total support of Northtown Housing giving others (Families and a]so our Senior Citizens) the same opportunity that I have gotten by being able to pay an affordable rent. • Thatil; you, ~~~~~.~~ Sandra Randazzo 9635 Baseline Road # 130 Raucho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 CITY Of RANCHO CUCAtuIONGA R~O~ 1 ~ 200 • RECEIVED - PLAIVNIi~G ~~. Page 1 of 1 CHARLES L TOLLESON From: "CHARLES L TOLLESON" <Icctrc@msn.com> To: <Donna.Kendren@cityofrc.us> ~ r Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 2:38 PM To all concerned at city hall. This is about Northtown housring development corporation San Sevaine villas Project number: DRCZ006-00540 The need for affordable housing for our citizens is over whelming. I live at GLEN JONES senior citizen apartments very, very nice. Take a look at whaf these people have done with a very odd pice of property. ' There is over200 hundred on the weighting list as of now!! This list is .only at this location. This corporation needs your help to get it though the RED TAPE. Thank you for consideration CHARLES L TOLLESON ~ 3 ~ ~ g Ingod we trust LJ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA I~O~ 15 2007 6iECEIVED -PLANNING. • ~ on ~i2oo~ • CHARLESLTOLLESON Page 1 of 1 From: <postmaster@cityofrc.us> To: dcctrc@msn.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 2:38 PM Attach: ATT00063.dat ATT00064.email Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Failure) This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification. Delivery to the following recipients failed. Doruia.KendrenLcityofrc.us u CITY OF FiANCNO CUCAMONGP. you 1 ~ 200 RECEIVED -PLANNING • - 1oi17izoo~ r<,;. ;:~~;;. ,,.„,,< ~~ • Date: //- d Z -- 0 7 Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regazds to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga My income is very low; +herefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opporhuuty I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, ~~ ~ ~ ~ . Signa e ~~ Hi/copy CITY Of RANCHO CUCANIONGA N0~ 1 ~ 200 RECEIVED -PLANNING • ~_ • Date: / / - p Z _ ~~~ Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regazds to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to atl affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opporhuvty I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, 7 ~ignatu r~ Hi/cop CITY OF RANCHO GUCAN10C~1GP. NOIf 1 ~ 2007 RECEIVED - PLAIQ~III~C _... l ' 1 • Date: , l / _ ~j Z. _ O-7 Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine. Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. Ivly income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing • has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thaiilc you. Respectfully, i i ~~~ Signature Hi/copy CITY OE RANCHO CUCANiONGA NUV 15 2007 RECEIVED -PLANNING • Date: / ~ - v ~ - ~~ "~ Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga l05 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regazds to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income'is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing • has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, Signature Hi/copy CI iY 0: RANCHO CUCANIONGP. NUU 1 ~ 2007 RECENED -PLANNING • ~--. Date: // ~ OZ - p ~ Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regazds to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to alYaffordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because 1 live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rect. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. • Thank you. Respectfully; Si Hi/cop CI l~ Oc RANCFIO CUCAtv10NGP• NOV "~ 5 2~®i ~lECE1VED ' P~RNNING • ~ ~. Date: October 31, 2007 Olen Jones Senior Conununity 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 • 1 ant in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay [he high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to hove the same ~- opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, P ~NzO~ ~ .}~ Sl at~fi~ Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCANIONGA NOV 1 ~ 2007 RECEIVED - PLpNNINC ,-- i Date: October;l, ?O07 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 9 ] 701 ht regards to: Northiown F7ousing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga ]OS 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas - , Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to afl affordable housing in the San Bernardino Coun one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamon a. from Social Securit ; t3', because I live in • y therefore it would be impossible to a g My 11'come is solely Affordable Housing has helped me great! P Y the hi opportunity I have had. Thank you, y' 1 would like others [o have the soame rent. Respectfully, %~~ - lL ~f3ia7 .ignature Olen Jon Senior Community Hi/copy - CITY 0~ RANCHO CUCANIONGA NOV 1.5 2007 RECEIVED -PLANNING • ~-, . Date: / / - O ~ - U 7 Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucan~onga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Kancho Cucamonga, CA in regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Deaz Sir, Subject:'San Sevaine. Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 . I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in -one of the.low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing • has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thant: you. Respectfully, t- Signature -"' Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCA(uIONGA NO~i 15 2004 RECEIVED -PLANNING • r' ~.~ f~J Date: / / - ~v Z ~- 0 7 Mayor: Donald J, Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA in regazds to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Deaz. Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing • has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had.. Thazilc you. Respectfully, S nature LJ ~~ Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCAtv10NGA NOV 15 2U07 RECEIVE®-PLANNING • Date: ~ ~ - G _ ~ 7 Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, - Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernazdino Comrty, because l live in one of the ]ow income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; • therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing 'has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, ~i ~-~-~ Signature Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCAfviONGA NOV 1 ~ 20U~ - RECElVEO - PLANNfNC • ,- . r ~- Date: ~ (- o Z - 0 7 Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regazds to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project r_-umber: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bemazdino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opporhmity I have had. • Thank you. Respectfully, (~-. < ~' J ~,~ Signature Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMDNGA NOV 1 ~ 2007 RECEIVED -PLANNING • ~.. Date: / / - n ~ - o~ Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Ci«c Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Deal Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 ~- I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing • has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thanl: you. Respectfully, Signature Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA IV011 15 200' RECEIVED -PLANNING • %' ~.. • Date: ~ / - ~ ~ - ~ 7 Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regazds to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Deaz Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas ~., Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. • Thank you. Respectfully, ~~GGi"''u-~.''vt' Signat e Hilcopy CITY OF RANCHO CUCANIONGA SOU ~ ~ zoos RECEIVED -PLANNING • • Date: ~ / - v z. - d 7 Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing proiects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing • has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opporhmity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, ~'d7dh piYn a of ~ ~':~i~~` ~~ ~~/~~ Signature Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA NOV 1 5 200 RECEIVED -PLANNING ~~ (~ C~ Date: / / - Z ~-- ~ 7 Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Deaz Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for rrmy rent Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. • Thank you. Respectfully, 1fl ~~~z~ ~~~~ Sienature Hilcopy Ci'i'Y OF RANCHq CUCkIViUiVGA . ~f Q V Z 5 2Q07 - - RECEIVED - FLkIVNING Date: ~~ - Q "L -O 7 Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic-Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regards to: Nortlitown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 ,' I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very]ow; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing • has helped me greatly. I would Like others to have the same opportlmity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, y o Signature Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCAPv10NGA NOU 1 ~ 200 6iEGEIVEt~. - PLANNING • t r' C~ Date: ~~ - O Z - c7 7 Mayor: Donald J., I{nrth M. D, City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Deaz Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be' impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would Iike others to have the same opportunity I have had. 'Ilrank you Respectfully, ~~~~~~ Signature Hi/copy CITY 0~ RANCHO CUCAtvIONGA I~ ®'d 15 200 RECEIVED -PLANNING /~~~ J ~, Date: I~ - ~ - 07 -_.. Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA , In regards to: Northtown I-lousing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because i live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing' • has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opporhwity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, ~t i'/KJ/rr~2/s~ t"i/ Signature Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCAN~ONGA N0~ 1 ~ 20A~ ' RECEIVE~1-PLANNING • ~,.. r • f _• Date: October 31, 2007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 1 am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely • from Social Security; therefore it would. be impossible to pay [he high rate for my rent. Affordable Hotuing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity 1 have had. Thank you. Respectfully, ~~ ~.Y Signature Olen Jones Se for Community Hi/copy CITY 0~ RANCHO CUCAf~iONGA NNY i ~ COQ? RECEI~/EO - I~LAfVNING • -. ~ • _ . _. Date: October 31, 2007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald7.,.Ku~2h M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 • I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I Live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, c~~-~~ Signature Olen Jones Senio Hilcopy r Community ~_„ / CITY Of RgIVCHO CUCNNiO~OF~ ~o~ ~ ~ zaa~ RECEIVEd - ~~-p~INlNG • ~ _, ~J Date: ~~ - D~ - p 7 Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Q~camonga, CA In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. • Thank you. Respectfully, '~1- ~.~.I L-.. Signature Hi/copy loo~(~-l ~(.~ ~~.(~~ c~ fit- , etivl C~ c Gel Gq.tntiL~ NCt ~ I . ~ ~'I l -] 'S O Ci.I`( OF RANCHO CUCANiONGf~. NOV 15 2007 RECEIVED -PLANNING • ,- -~ Date: ~`- `- 'ZOC~ 7 Mayor: Donald .1.. Kwth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. M,y income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing • has helped me greatly. 1 would like others to have the same opporttrnity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, ~~ ~,~ ~~ Signature Hi/copy CiiY Oz RANCFIO CUCNNIONGr+. NOV 15 2Q07 RECEIVED - ?CANNING • ~~ ~ ~` Date: ~ I - (- 07 Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga IOS 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-OOS40 I am in support to all affordable housing ir. the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore. it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. • Thank you. Respectfully, . i ahue ~ (' ~'`~c~- Hi c py C11' 0. RANCHO CUCANIONGA I~OV 15 200 RECEIVED -PLANNING J I • Date: October 31, 2007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurih M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA t -` Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 • I atn in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped the greatly. I would like others to have the satne opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, CITY pE RANCHO CUCANIONGA NOU 1 ~ 2~0~ ~iECEIVED -PLANNING Z~~ Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy G~ Signature ,~3 • . _, .-. Date: ~~ - D/ - O'~ Mayor: Donald J., Kurdt M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, C.A In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing • has helped me greatly. 1 would like others to have the same opportunity 1 have had. 'thank you.. Respectfully, S gnature / ~o ~ l ~/~_ ~s Hi/copy l / CITY OF RANCHO CUCAtuiONGEt. NOd 15 20A~' RECEIVED -PLANNING. • ~- \ l • Date: // ;~7-lJ~ Mayor: Donald .i., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006=00540 I 1 am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County; because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is ver}~ low; • therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, Signature Hi/copy CITY OF RRNCHO CUCAMONGA NON 15 2007 RECEIVED -PLANNING • (_. ~-~ Date:/~ ~_J Mayor: Donald L, Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive P~ancho Cucamonga, CA In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has Helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. • Thank you. Respectfully, ~~2 .. ~gnature Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCAfv1ONGA NOS 1 ~ 2007 RECEIVED -PLANNING • Date: fl:~J 77 Mayor: Donald .1., Kurth Ivt. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga _ 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA hi regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 i am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing • has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same oppotlunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, ,~ J Signature i" ~~ Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA t~ov i ~ 2UU? L J RECEIVED - p ANNINC l~ Date: llama- d`J Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because f live in one of the low income housing projecis in Rancho Cucamonga., My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity Ihave had. • Thank you. Respectfully, ;'~ ~ ~~ `~~ ~ ~, Signature' HiJcopy CITY OF RANCHO CUCANiONG N 0 V 1 ~ 2007 DECEIVED - ?LANN Dafe: // ~'~~ Mayor: Donald 7., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because 1 live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing • has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. CITY OF RANCHO CUCANiONGA N Q y 15 2007 RECEI~/ED -PLANNING Respectfully, r~ 1~~ Date: %~ ~'!~~ Mayor: Donald .1., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga lOS 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA L7 regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-OOS4G I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is very low; therefore it would he impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housine has helped. me greatly. 1 would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. • Thank you. Respectfully, ,~. Signature Hilcopy CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA N 0 V 15 2007 RECEIVED -PLANNING • ~_ • .. Date: `/'Z.-O~ Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, C.A In regards to: No~thtown Housing Development Corporation Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 ~~ I am,in support to all affordable howing in the San Eernardino County, because 1 live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucantonga. My income is very low; d~erefore it would. be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing • has helped me greatly. I would Iike others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, Signature Hi/copy cooP~`n0~`GP c~i~i o~:.t~~e~~Gi~o ~o1i ,;:~ _ . ,. ~; Qt~1~1`~'" -^-•_ n :r.- • Date: October 3l; 2007 Oleri Jones Senior Comtmmity 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corpotatio^ Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Ra~tcho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 1 am in support to all affordable housing in the. San Bentardino Count , one of the low income housing p~-ojects in Rancho from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to y because I live in • Cucamonga. My income is solely Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity ]have had, Thank pay the high rate for myrent. you. Respectfully, Signatur ~ ~~/ ~ Olen Jones Senior Conununity Hi/copy nlt~ . ~. /Jr ~giV~,N~ ~GvgMoN(l , 'z`~ ~ G~ _i 7p~~ ~~ _-~_ri ~IlItIP • Date: October 31, 2007 Olen Jones Senior Community 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 9] 701 In regards to: Northtown housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Korth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 1 OS 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-OOS40 I am i.n suppo~-t to al] affordable housin one of the low income housin g m the San from Social Security; therefore it would be im Bernardino County, because ]live in • g projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely Affordable Housing has helped me Possible to oPPor[unity 1 have had. Thank freatly. I would like others]t h~~e the samey rent. you. Respectfully, Signature Olen Jones Senior Convnunity Hi/copy C17Y OF RAelCNO CUCAMONGA ~a C `1 "' `~ 2U07 • ~~. ~._. Date: October 3 ] , 2007 Olen Tones Senior Community 7] 25 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Co~poratio^ Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga . 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Vilias Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable hotsing in the San Bernardino County, because J live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely • AffordablelHousinghri helped me greatlbe impould 1 keoothers t have the same rent. oppoihmity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, 22 `(~/ ~ ~~ v~ ignature // Olen Jones Senior Commuhity Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CI;CAMONGA NO`~3 ? 5 2U~17 RFr,FI~;~GD -PLANNING • ' ~.... ~_ / 1 ~~ Date: October;l, 2007 Olen Jones Senior Conutnmity 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 in regards to: Northtown Housing Development Co+poration Mayor: Donald .1., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely • from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate fa- my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. 1 would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Thank you. Respectfully, ~~ i o ~ Signature Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy CITY 0"r RAiVCHt7 CUCAMONGA PdCI'1 1 ~ 2071 • ~.. ,~. Date: October;l, 2007 Olen Jones Senior Commnmity 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subiect: San Sevaine Villas Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am in support to'all affordable housing in the San Bernardino County, because I live in one of the low income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga, My income is solely from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the hi • gh rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. Tharilc you. Respectfully, Signature Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA N 0 ~l 15 2007 RECEIVED _ t'LANNING I( • Date: October 31, 2007 Olen Jones Senior Conununity 7125 Amethyst Ave Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91701 In regards to: Northtown Housing Development Corporation /.' f Mayor: Donald J., Kurth M. D. City of Rancho Cucamonga 105 00 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA Dear Sir, Subject: San Sevaine Villas ' Project number: DRC2006-00540 I am ui support to all affordable housing in the San ]jentardino County, because I live in one of [he ]ow income housing projects in Rancho Cucamonga. My income is solely • from Social Security; therefore it would be impossible to pay the high rate for my rent. Affordable Housing has helped me greatly. I would like others to have the same opportunity I have had. That~lc you. Respectfully S~gnatur-e~- Olen Jones Senior Community Hi/copy CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA N O V 15 2007 RECEIV~O -PLANNING • 11/08/2007 00:06 760241`r,F3577 LARRY ARCINAGE~n PAGE 01 CITY OF RANCHO CUCANION~AN M¢yar ALb ,t. Kuxnt, M. D. NOV 0 8 2007 RAxcxo CUCAMONGA THE. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA RECEIVED - PLANf01NC Mayor ProTem DfANE WILLiAM$ • Cornn[me-mbtrt Rax GcmEaaaz L. DExNrs MrcxAet $AM SPAGNOLO City M¢nagcr Jncx t-n~,+, Alcr October 30, 2007 SUBJECT: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-D0540 AND RELATED DENSITY BONUSAGP.EEME-P}T-DRC2007-OC71o -- - -. -. _. _ . __. AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISIONS OF JULY 25, 2007 THAT APPROVED THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF 225 WORKFORCE APARTMENT UNITS ON 12.87 ACRES OF LAND IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (8-14 UNITS PER ACRE) IN ADDITION TO A RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT TO MODIFY SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS RELATED TO THE AFOREMENTIONED WORKFORCE APARTMENT PROJECT LOCATED AT 13233 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD. Dear Property Owner/Interested Parties: Thank you for your interest regarding the proposed San Sevaine Villas workforce apartment community at 13233 Foothill Boulevard. Although other dates were previously considered and tentatively set, this item has now been formally agendized for the December 5, 2007 regular CRy Council meeting. The meeting will take place in the Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m, This project will be the first public hearing item on the agenda. All interested parties are welcome to attend the meeting and participate in the public hearing. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a. m. to 6:00 p.m. at (909) 477-2750. sU Sincerely, Michael Diaz Senior Planner MPD/Is t' _v2- ~-.vo~ t~ ti"~ ~~ ~~ 'nom ~- _ ~~~ ~~ ~. .~~.~ 10500 Civic Ccnmr Dc. • P.O. Aox 807 • Rancho Cucamon6.a, CA 91729-0807 • Tcl 909-4~-Z700 • Fu 9097.1849 • rvwµ.,ci,nntho_cucamon~t.aus mr''~~ • Page 1 of 1 r ~ -. Diaz, Michael Paul From: Schrader, Lois Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 11:14 AM To: Diaz, Michael Paul Subject: San Sevaine Received a phone call from Mr. Robert L. Archimage of Inland Development Corp. said he owns property at East and Foothill (APN: 1100-207-04-000 )and he is in support of the project. Lois J. Schrader Planning Commission Secretary City of Rancho Cucamonga, California (909)477-2750 Isch rode@ci. ra ncho-cu ca monga. ca. u s • • 11 /14/2007 ry /^1 ~-` I F~Fi October 19, 2007 R t/ FO p~,r 2 ~~DO~ City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA G) /7 3U RE: Project number DRC2006-00540 To Whom It May Concern: I am aloes-income senior citizen who thankfully has gotten a nice place to live because of the Northtown Housing Development's Olen Jones apartment complex. I am sure that there are many more people in my situation in our city who could use some help in finding affordable housing. I would like to ask our City Council to please give approval to the San Sevaine housing development that is before you. They will be very good neighbors and will fit right.in with the area. Thank you in advance for your help. • Sincerely, Daisy Benham 7125 Amethyst Ave. Apt. 2206 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 ;. ,. , • ._-= ,~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~ ~~- CITY OF RANCHO CUCA~ONGA October 9`h 2007 To: Mike Diaz Senior Planner James Troyer Planning.Director Members of the City Council From: Jose Martin Acosta Subject: San Sevaine Villas Construction ©CT 16 2007 RECEIVED -PLANNING I write this letter as a current resident and beneficiary of one of the Northtown Affordable Development Projects. Thanks to the ongoing and untireable efforts of Northtown Affordable Development, I can proudly say that I am a homeowner together with my family for 15 years now. Families like mine need an opportunity for home ownership and financial stability. This is why I believe that the San Sevaine Villas should be developed. Sincerely yours, ~~ ,--~ ,-~ ~. c To: Mike Diaz; Senior Planner ~`~~ • James Troyer; Planning Director Members of the City Counsel ~[~; C1 ~ %~~$ ~~ a~ ~~9~y,~~~ c['u(,/can~ar~c~ I ave iv m anc o ucamonga an urr i I have a/so been instructing an ESL class at Northtown Community Center for the last 4 years through Chaffey Adult Schoo% In this time, I have had students who have lived in Villa De Norte. I have seen how this has enabled them to earn the 'American Dream': Since 1976 I have witnessed much growth to our community. I fee/ that there is not enough affordable housing in Rancho Cucamonga. I strongly believe it wou/d be beneficial in many ways to our environment to erect the San Sevaine Villas near Foothill Blvd. and Etiwanda Ave. The apartments would give good families a chance to get ahead in life. The apartments are within walking distance to emp/oyment opportunities, on a major public transportation route, and in a desirable Schoo! district: One way to improve the lives of everyone in the community is to start where it is tru/y needed. By creating affordable housing in this area /t continues the standard of -,~iving~ve-all-lo~eabout_RanchQCuramonga._Zbe_chitdr_e2wQUld_g~etter education, allowing them the desire and opportunity to go on to higher /earning. Employment becomes easier for these tenants, as they will have the ability to get • to work and maintain their employment. By making it affordable to-them they are able to save and eveniva//y become home owners in this same community. When peop/e are not struggling to keep their heads above water, crimes committed out of necessity are lessened. I wholly support the building of the San Sevaine Villas. Respectfu//y, .................. Ten Araiza u • ,--.. RECEEVED u.. .a'i~ r • September 21, 2007 Mike Diaz Senior Planner lames Troyer Planning Director Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga F"` CITY OF R,SA;CI-!0 C[[~U~.~//CAMONGA C1f'4V.i_(1f~ I am a resident of Villa Del Norte and I just wanted to say that the years that I have lived here have been beneficial to my family and me. In the years I've been here my children have been using the facilities of the Northtown Community Center. It has also helped other children and their families. The programs that the Community Center offers, such as Computer classes, English classes, Healthy Teens, (which give students better ideas on what to do in their future) and the Financial Literacy classes has been very helpful to the people in the'neighborhood and has helped out the people in the community to better manage their finances. I see a IoLOf traditional family values here at the Villa Del Norte apartments. Residents there are neighborly and friendly and I really like living there. I am sure that when the San Sevaine Apartments are built those families will also like living there as much as my family and me like living at Villa Del Norte. Thank You, ~d~~ Mrs. Tue day Sanchez 9955 Feron Blvd Apt. C Rancho Cucamonga • ,._ -,. t CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SEP 19 2001 • RECEIVED -PLANNING September 18, 2007 Mike Diaz Senior City Planner James Troyer Planning Director Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga I have been associated with Northtown Housing Development Corporation since 2001. As a part-time employee I had the opportunity to work in an environment that gives hope to the residents of the Northtown community. My role was to assist in activities and • seazch out grants to expand existing programs. What I experienced in the years I worked at Northtown was the completing of many goals set by the Corporation for the development and positive growth for the community. Many of the residents of the Northtown azea participate in the programs offered by this well respected organization. Their commitment to quality.of life in the community is truly amazing. I would encourage the Rancho Cucamonga City Council to give NHDC the opportunity to complete the San Sevaine Villas Project. Based on NHDC's history of positive outcomes I do believe the result of this project will be more positive growth and success for the Rancho Cucamonga area. Sincerely, ~'c?/tZ .~ ~d'1~ Susan H. Jackson, MS, M.F.T. Family Therapist Loma Linda University Behavioral Medicine Center • .. ~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMON(~A • September 7, 2007 SEP 7.8 200 Deaz Mike Diaz, f~ECEIVEC - P? ANNINC My name is JosB Ceiezo, and I am writing this letter in regazds to the entitlement process for the Northtown Housing Development Corporation Affordable Housing project on Foothill Blvd. I had the opportunity to live in Villa Del Norte, another one of NHDC's affordable housing projects. 11 years ago, my family and I had just come back to the United States after-being in Mexico for 3 years; it was then Villa Del Norte opened, and we became the ls` tenants at one of the units. We came with nothing but a couple of suitcases and my parents were in desperate need of adequate housing for the family: parents, me and my 2 other siblings; a 10 yr. old son, and a 4 yr. old daughter. Finding affordable housing for a family of 5 back then was extremely difficult and trying to find mazket rate housing for all of us was all but out of the question due to economical reasons. Even a 2 bedroom market rate apartment, in which we would have been extremely cramped and uncomfortable, was out of our price range. At the time, my dad worked 2 jobs as a waiter and a cook, and my mom would clean houses in order to make ends meet. They sacrificed the comfort of the familiar thousands of miles away for the unknown, and for opportunity of their children to have a better future here in the US. ' When my family and I moved in, my parents were a bit concerned about the neighborhood, and for good reason. The park adjacent to the project was known for some prevalent gang activities at the • rime, but the rent was a perfect fit for us, and it enabled us to live comfortably in our 2 story townhouse, so we began our new unlmown journey. As the years progressed, there was a definite change that this new development brought not only to the pazk next door, but to the surrounding neighborhood. With the addition of this aesthetically pleasing and easily recognizable family oriented housing complex, the neighborhood began to change into a pedestrian friendly area in which many children could go to the pazk, run to the store, or families could cut across the pazk to go to church on Sunday mornings. This got even better with the addition of the NHDC Community Center added next to the pazk, another socially responsible contribution by NHDC. They took a shabby, dilapidated old site and transformed it into a place which has served the community for countless purposes: a site for free lunches during the summer, Christmas toy giveaways, and even an event center. This provided to be extremely valuable as many low income family parents tend to work late hours, this community center provides children with a safe alternative to being on the streets. The opportunities provided to me living here did not stop there as NHDC also sponsored me for an annual $1,500 scholarship for my years in college at the University of Southern California. There I majored in Architecture and graduated with a Bachelors in Arts in Architecture in May 2006. I found their support to be extremely helpful as my parents could not really give me much money for school as they were on an extremely tight budget. I even came back during the summers to volunteer time at the community center to try and give back to the community which gave me so much. During my studies at USC, I developed a love for housing and urban design. That combined with the knowledge of how affordable housing can have a positive impact on families and the • surrounding neighborhood, I decided to dedicate my professional career to Affordable Housing Projects, combining my love for housing design, urban design theories, and social responsibilities. I now work at a firm in Downtown Los Angeles called Torti Gallas & Partners, which specializes in various housing types including Mixed Use Development, Urban design, and Affordable Housing. Living-in Villa Del Norte provided my family and me with many great memories of being able to live in a place we all came to call home. However, we realized that this program is intended to be a stepping stone for bigger things to come. 3 moths ago, my family made yet another unlmown journey into home ownership. I must say that it was a lot more involved and even scary at times, but we realized that living in Villa Del-Norte provided us with an amazing stepping stone to move onto the coveted American Dream. Now, it will be someone else to begin their jowney in ow former apartment„and hopefully.one day, they too.will move on to bigger things, making room for others to follow.. ,. ..:.,. , . . ,. It is therefore without any hesitation or reservations that I endorse the~affordable housing . project~that NHDC seeks,to advance in the city of Rancho Cucamonga, I am speaking as a former resident of Villa Del Notre, and as an architect intern who advocates the dire need for affordable housing in Southern California. It is ow responsibility to provide safe,and adequate housing for. everyone, and do it in a way that is both architecturally and socially innovative. . Please do'not Hesitate to contact me for further comments Sincerely, osB Manuel Cerezo Castillo SC School of Architecture Class of `06 Tom Gallas'and Partners, Inc 523 West 6th Street,:Suite 212 Los Angeles, CA 9.0014 Tel: 213-607-0070',, ext. 3072 Fax:213=607-0077 www.tortieallas.com • • r ,.~ CtiY OF RANCHO CUCAfJiONGA • September 14, 2007 Mike Diaz Senior Planner James Troyer Planning Director Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga --. SEP 7.8 2007 RECENEQ - I7~ANPJlNi: My name is Silvestre Valencia and I have been a resident of Rancho Cucamonga for eleven yeazs. I came from Pico Rivera and moved to the Northtown Villa Del Norte affordable housing apartments. During the time I lived at Villa Del Norte I was the only person in my family of five who was working because my wife was ill and my three children were all little. I lived at the apartments for seven years and it not only helped me to save money, but I also qualified for the Northtown First Time Homebuyers Program. Because of this program, I was able to move out of the apaztments and buy my own home. NHDC also sponsors our soccer team made up of local Northtown youth. Without their spcnsorship, many of these at risk kids would nct be able to play and be unsupervised and get into trouble. I support the San Sevaine Villa project because it is going to give opportunities to low income families to save money so that they can achieve their dream of being a homeowner like me. Sinc ~ 1 , Silvestre Valencia 10163 25`h Street Rancho Cucamonga Ca 91730 • P256 RESOLUTION NO. 07- Z 69 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO APPROVE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540, THE DESIGN REVIEW FOR 225 WORKFORCE APARTMENT UNITS AND A COMMUNITY BUILDING ON 12.87 ACRES OF LAND IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED AT 13233 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, IN THE AREA BETWEEN THE ETIWANDA SAN SEVAINE FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL ON THE EAST, AND THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR ON THE W EST; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0229-041-10. A. Recitals 1. Pete Pitassi Architects, on behalf of Northtown Housing Development Corporation, filed an application for Development Review DRC2006-00540, the design review of 225 workforce apartment units and a community building, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application." The application was submitted on June 20, 2006 and deemed complete on January 22, 2007. 2. Am Initial Study and Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was prepared and circulated on July 2, 2007 in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines. 3. On July 25, 2007, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application. The Planning Commission unanimously approved said Development Review through the adoption of their Resolution No. 07-47 and found that the original Mitigated Negative Declaration was adequate. At the same hearing, the related Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00119 was reviewed by the Planning Commission and their Resolution No. 07-46 was unanimously adopted recommending approval by the City Council. 4. On August 6, 2007, a timely appeal was received on the project approvals and recommendations made by the Planning Commission. 5. Following the appeal, staff determined that additional analysis of potential air quality and traffic impacts was appropriate based upon comments received from the South Coast Air Quality Management District on July 25, 2007 and issues raise in the appeal. Thereafter, LSA Associates was commissioned to prepare two additional studies related to airqualityand traffic. A revised Initial Study was prepared and then circulated on October 29, 2007, which incorporated the findings of the two new studies. Staff reviewed the findings of the studies and determined that, with the additional analysis and with revised mitigation measures, there was no substantial evidence of a significant impact to air quality or traffic as determined in the original Initial Study circulated for the project. Further, based on the information contained in the staff report forthis item and in the revised and re- circulated Initial Study and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, the mitigation measures contained in the re-circulated Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, are more effective in mitigating or avoiding potential significant effects than the measures contained in the original Initial Study. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07-" DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540 -.PETE PITASSI ARCHITECTS December 5, 2007 Page 2 6. On December 5, 2007, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public hearing on December 5, 2007, including written and oral staff reports, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 12.87 acres of land located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard near the City's eastern border with the City of Fontana/Unincorporated San Bernardino County. More specifically, the property is situated between the existing Etiwanda San Sevaine Flood Control Channel on the east and the Southern California Edison Corridoron the west; and b. The properties to the north are undeveloped commercial properties and the Southern California Edison (SCE) utility corridor in the General Commercial and Open Space zone, and to the south is undeveloped land in the Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. On the east side of the site is the San Sevaine Flood Control Channel and single-family residential uses in the City of Fontana. To the immediate west are SCE Transmission Lines in the Open Space zone and further west is asingle-family residential tract in the Low Density Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) District; and c. The applicant proposes the development of 225 workforce apartment units and a community recreational building center. The project also provides on-site parking and recreational amenities including a swimming pool, half basketball court, tot-lot, picnic tables and BBO grilles, and large lawn areas for open play; and d. The project design complies with the development standards of the Medium Residential District as modified by the proposed Density Bonus Agreement (also referred as Housing Incentive Agreement) as described therein, requesting a 25 percent density bonus and modifications to the specific development building setback/separation standards; and e. The design of the new units is a contemporary interpretation of the Tuscan architectural style. The exterior design elements forthe new apartment units include fullytiled roofs, trimmed out windows and door openings, and walls clad in stucco and accented with fully grouted faux stone veneer typically associated with the proposed style. Moreover, landscaping and recreational amenities are well distributed around the site. P257 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby specifically finds and concludes as follows: CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07 '• P258 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540 -PETE PITASSI ARCHITECTS December 5, 2007 Page 3 a. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan in that the multi-family development is consistent with the Medium Residential land use designation forthe site. In addition, the approval of the related Density Bonus Agreement will further implement a specific objective of the General Plan Housing Element to provide affordable housing units for all economic segments of the community including low to moderate income households; and b. The proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The proposed multi-family residential use is a permitted use within the underlying Medium Residential zoning designation for the site, and requiring only design review and approval. Further, the project is consistent with Affordable Housing Incentive/Density Provisions section of the Development Code that allows applicants to request a density bonus (25 percent requested) and development incentives (3 incentives requested) to facilitate the construction of affordable housing units within the City as mandated by State law; and c. The proposed use is in compliance with each applicable provisions of the Development Code. The site plan, architecture, and on-site improvements are consistent with the development standards and design guidelines as provided in the Development Code for multi-family residential development, including density, building height, setbacks, provision of on-site recreational amenities, and parking, except as modified for setback and building separation standards as specified in the Density Bonus Agreement. Moreover, the architecture for the project is well done and features high quality details and exterior materials such as fullytiled roofs, trimmed out windows and door openings, and walls clad in stucco and accented with fully grouted faux stone veneer. Moreover, landscaping and recreational amenities are well distributed throughout the site as described in the staff reports for the project and depicted on plans reviewed by the Design Review Committee and approved by the Planning Commission; and d. That the proposed design of the related project, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The project includes numerous site improvements and required improvements to the public right of way adjacent to the site, including installation of full street improvements and center median along Foothill Boulevard and a new traffic signal at East Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. The development of the site as proposed at this location will contribute to, and tie in with, other physical improvements (e.g., storm drains and roadway improvements) in the area that are currently underway or anticipated in the near future. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative. Declaration, togetherwith all written and oral reports included forthe environmental assessmentfor the application, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant adverse effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigated Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07-" P259 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540 -PETE PITASSI ARCHITECTS December 5, 2007 Page 4 b. Following the filing of a timely appeal, City staff determined that additional analysis of potential air quality and traffic impacts was appropriate based on comments received from South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). A revised initial study was prepared and circulated which incorporated the findings of the lwo new studies prepared by LSA Associates. Staff reviewed the findings of the studies and determined that, with the additional analysis and with revised mitigation measures, there was no substantial evidence of a significant impact to air quality or traffic as determined in the original Initial Study circulated for the project. Further, based on the information contained in the staff report for this item and in the revised and re-circulated Initial Study and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, the mitigation measures contained in the re-circulated Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, are more effective in mitigating or avoiding potential significant effects than the measures contained in the original Initial Study. c. The City Council has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The City Council further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council. Based on these findings, the City Council hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. d. The City Council has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The City Council therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. e. The City Council furtherfinds, based on the information contained in the staff report for this item and in the revised and re-circulated Initial Study and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, that the mitigation measures contained in the re-circulated Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, are more effective in mitigating or avoiding potential significant effects than the measures contained in the original Initial Study, and that those modified mitigation measures will not cause any potentially significant effect on the environment. f. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, the City Council hereby denies the appeal and approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference: Planning Department 1) This approval is for the site plan, exterior building design, and landscaping fora 225-unit workforce apartment community and associated site improvements as described in this report and depicted CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07-"' DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540 -PETE PITASSI ARCHITECTS December 5, 2007 Page 5 on approved plans on file with approval for the project shall be Council approval and execution (DRC2007-00119). the Planning Department. Final contingent upon subsequent City of the Density Bonus Agreement 2) If the Density Bonus Agreement is approved by the City Council, all plans submitted for plan check shall conform to plans approved by the Design Review Committee on March 6, 2007, and the Planning Commission on July 25, 2007. 3) No exterior changes to the design of the project, including exterior materials, shall be permitted without prior City review and approval. 4) The design and height of decorative metal fences, gates, railings, and perimeter walls shall be submitted for final Planning Director review and approval during plan check. All decorative exterior metal elements shall be finished with high quality powder coat paint and properly maintained by the property owner in good condition at all times thereafter. 5) Primary daily pedestrian and vehicle access to the site shall be only from Foothill Boulevard via the main entry gate nearest the Community Building. The use of the access gate on Foothill Boulevard at the western end of the project shall be limited only to residents exiting the site and for emergency vehicles/responders ingress and egress. 6) On-site structures (e.g., buildings, carports, fences, walls, gates, exterior lights, recreation equipment, etc.) and facilities (including parking lots) within the complex shall be maintained in good and presentable condition at all times. Any damaged areas shall be promptly repaired and restored to original condition/appearance to the greatest extent possible. All graffiti shall be promptly removed when discovered by on-site management or as notified bythe City of Rancho Cucamonga. Engineering Department 1) Foothill Boulevard frontage improvements are to be in accordance with City "Major Divided Highway" standards starting from Cornwall Avenue up to easterly project boundary as required and including: a) Provide curb and gutter, curvilinear sidewalk, street trees (along .. development frontage only), 9500 Lumens HPSV street lights, drive approaches, R26(s) "No Stopping" signs and asphalt pavement, as required. b) Provide adeceleration/right-turn lane for the main entrance driveway. c) Proposed gated entrance is to be in accordance with City's "Residential Project Gated Entrance Design Guide" standard. P260 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07-" P261 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540 -PETE PITASSI ARCHITECTS December 5, 2007 Page 6 d) Revise traffic signing and striping, as required. e) Left-turn lane for eastbound Foothill Boulevard at East Avenue shall have a 250-foot pocket length. f) Provide pavement transitions as needed per City Standards. g) The drive approach on the Exit Access only shall be 35 feet wide, per City Standard 101, Type C. h) The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover cost for the construction of improvements from future development as it occurs from the south side of the street. If the developer fails to submit said reimbursement agreement within six months of the improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. For those improvements specified above that are outside the development frontage and require right-of-way from other properties, this development shall make a good faith effort to obtain the necessary right-of-way. If the property owner is unwilling to grant the right-of-way, then this development shall not be obligated to install the listed improvements. Appropriate transitions within the existing right-of-way will be required. 2) Construct Foothill Boulevard median island including landscaping and irrigation from Cornwall Avenue to East Avenue per City Standards, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover one-half the City adopted costfor the construction of the median island from future development as it occurs from both sides of the street. If the developer fails to submit said reimbursement agreement within six months of the median improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. 3) The Foothill Boulevard frontage shall be designed in accordance with the City adopted Foothill Boulevard Historic Route 66 Visual Improvement Plan including street lights. This designates a "Suburban Parkway Enhancement Area" featuring colored pavement emblazoned with the Route 66 logo, special sidewalk treatment, artwork and a historic post and a cable roadway safety barrier. Said enhancement within the parkway area shall be maintained by the developer and shall be included in the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs). a) This designates also the installation of the Entry Monument depicted as Exhibits C and E of the Visual Improvement Plan. 4) An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66KV electrical) on the opposite side of Foothill Boulevard shall be paid to the City prior to final map approval or building permit, whichever comes first. The fee shall be one-half the City adopted unit amount times the length of the project frontage. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07-" P262 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540 -PETE PITASSI ARCHITECTS December 5, 2007 Page 7 5) The development proposes to drain via underground storm drain facilities to the eastern boundary of the project at the junction of City Master Plan Line 9 and the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Channel. The San Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) is currently constructing the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Channel Project and is anticipating completion in December 2008. The proposed project cannot develop until the SBCFCD is completed or authorization from SBCFCD is obtained. In addition, the project will require completion of the portion of City Master Plan Storm Drain Line 9 from its existing terminus at the northwest corner of the project site easterly in Foothill Boulevard and southerly in the SBCFCD right-of-way to connect to the existing 120-inch diameter storm drain connection in the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Channel approximately 500 feet south of Foothill Boulevard. a) Drainage fees for the site shall be credited to the cost of permanent master plan facilities, in accordance with City policy. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover oversizing costs, in excess of fees, from future development within the same tributary area. If the developerfails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within 6 months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. 6) Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of the proposed 120-inch storm drain on the south side of Foothill Boulevard. 7) Prior to grading permit issuance, Best Management Practices (BMPs) identified in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be shown on the Grading Plan. 8) Maintenance of BMPs identified in the WQMP shall be addressed in the project CC&Rs. 9) Prior to occupancy of any residential units in the proposed development, the developer shall install a traffic signal and minimal necessary street improvements related to the traffic signal at the intersection of East Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. Rancho Cucamonga has listed this intersection as a transportation City benefit and therefore, installation of permanent improvements are eligible for transportation fee credit/reimbursementfrnm the City's transportation backbone account. Submittal of a request for reimbursement shall be made within 6 months of public improvement acceptance by the City Council or rights to reimbursement shall be waived. Environmental Mitigation Air Quality 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07-" P263 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540 -PETE PITASSI ARCHITECTS December 5, 2007 Page 8 2) Prior to the issuance of any Grading Permits, the developer shall submit construction plans to City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low-emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. The contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning Staff. 3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high volume, low-pressure spray, or by using pre- coated/natural-colored building materials, water-based or low volatile organic compound (VOC) coating, and coating transfer or spray equipment with high transfer efficiency. 4) All asphalt shall meet'or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 5) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • W ater active sites at least twice daily (locations where grading is to occur will be thoroughly watered prior to earthmoving). • Re-vegetate disturbed areas as quickly as possible. • Pave construction access roads at least 100 feet onto the site from the main road. • Pave, water, or chemically stabilize all on-site roads as.soon as feasible. • Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads on to paved roads, or wash trucks and any equipment leaving the site. • Reduce traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to 15 mph or less. • Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, or maintain at least two feet of freeboard (vertical space between the top of the load and top of the trailer) in accordance with the requirements of the California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 23114. • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07-`* P264 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540 -PETE PITASSI ARCHITECTS December 5, 2007 Page 9 Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. Sweep all streets once per day if visible soil materials are carried to adjacent streets (recommended water sweepers using reclaimed water). Suspend excavation and grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. • Miriimize at all times the area disturbed by clearing, grading, earthmoving, or excavation operations. 6) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWOCB]) daily to reduce PM10 emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 7) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWOCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions. 8) The construction contractor shall select the construction equipment used on site based on low-emission factors and high energy efficiency. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans include a statement that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specification. 9) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel-powered equipment in lieu of gasoline-or-diesel-powered engines where feasible. 10) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-Grading Plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. During smog season (May through October), the overall length of the construction period will be extended, thereby decreasing the size of the area prepared each day, to minimize vehicles and equipment operating at the same time. 11) The construction contractor shall time the construction activities so as to not interfere with peak-hour traffic and minimize obstruction of through lanes adjacent to the, site; if necessary, a flag person shall be retained to maintain safety adjacent to existing roadways. 12) The construction contractor shall support and encourage ridesharing and transit incentives for the construction crew. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07-** P265 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540 -PETE PITASSI ARCHITECTS December 5, 2007 Page 10 13) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 14) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. Biology 1) Prior to the removal of any Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS) habitat from the site, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) including approved mitigation forthe removal the extant RAFSS habitat from the site. 2) Prior to any on-site grading/construction activity on-site grading/construction, the applicant shall perform apre-construction nest survey to determine whether active Burrowing owl nests are present. The study shall be performed no more than 30-days prior to construction activity and be made available to the Planning Directorfor City verification. 3) Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits forthe project, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and Regional Water Quality Control Board, for the removal and/or alteration of on-site riparian habitat within the jurisdiction of the abovementioned resource agency. 4) Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits forthe project, the applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with the requirements of the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), for the removal and/or alteration of on-site wetland waters. 5). Prior to the removal of any on-site heritage trees as define by the Rancho Cucamonga Tree Preservation Ordinance, the applicant shall apply for and comply with the provisions of said Ordinance including approval of a Tree Removal Permit. 6) Prior toany on-site grading/construction activity or the removal of trees for which a Tree Removal Permit has been issued, the applicant shall perform apre-construction tree/nest survey to determine whether active bird nests are present. Study shall be performed no more than 30-days prior to construction activity and be made available to the Planning Director for City verification. 7) Prior to any on-site grading/construction activity on-site grading/construction, the applicant shall perform apre-construction nest survey to determine whether active Burrowing Owl nests are present. Study shall be performed no more than 30-days prior to construction activity and be made available to the Planning Directorfor City verification. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07-" P266 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540 -PETE PITASSI ARCHITECTS December 5, 2007 Page 11 Cultural Resources 1) Prior to issuance of grading permit, the developer shall retain a qualified archeologist to prepare an archeological resource assessment. If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will: • Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from demolition or significant modification. without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. • Cdnsider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. • Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of the area. • Propose mitigation measures and recommend conditions of approval to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, following appropriate CEQA guideliries. • Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. 2) Prior to issuance of Grading Permit, the developer shall retain a qualified paleontologist archeologist to prepare a paleontological resource assessment. If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologistto monitorconstructionactlvities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow . the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07-" P267 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540 -PETE PITASSI ARCHITECTS December 5, 2007 Page 12 Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has. completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum. Geology and Soils 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAOMD and RWOCB) daily to reduce PN1,o emissions, in accordance with SCAOMD Rule 403 or replanted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according td a schedule established by the City to reduce PM,o emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM,o emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAOMD and RWOCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,o emissions. Hydrology 1) Prior to issuance of Grading Permits, the permit applicant shall submit to Building Official for approval, Storm W ater Pollution Prevention Plan (SW PPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07-" P268 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540 -PETE PITASSI ARCHITECTS December 5, 2007 Page 13 that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. . 3) During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. 4) During construction, to remove pollutants, street cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. Post- Construction Operational: 5) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared by Dam Guerra & Associates (April 12, 2006) to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 6) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of Grading Permits. 7) Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP shall identify the structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. 8) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the W aste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. Noise i) Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall submit to the Planning Director and Building Official for review and approval, building plans that demonstrate compliance with the noise attenuation CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07-*` P269 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540 -PETE PITASSI ARCHITECTS December 5, 2007 Page 14 recommendations of the acoustical engineer as contained in the Acoustical Analysis prepared by Gordon Bricken & Associates (September 2006), and on file with the Planning Department. 2) Construction or grading shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. 3) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times maybe required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. 4) Any perimeter walls proposed with the project shall be constructed as early as possible in first phase. 5) .Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, ihcluding Saturday, or at any ' time on Sunday or a national holiday. Additionally, if heavytrucks used for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips (counting both to and from the construction site), then the developer shall prepare a noise mitigation plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. Transportation/Trafiic 1) Prior to occupancy of any residential units in the proposed development, the developer shall install a traffic signal and minimal necessary street improvements related to the traffic signal at the intersection of East Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. Rancho Cucamonga has listed this intersection as a transportation City benefit and therefore, installation of permanent improvements are eligible for transportation fee credit/reimbursementfrnm the City's transportation backbone account. Submittal of a request for reimbursement shall be made within 6 months of public improvement acceptance by the City Council or rights to reimbursement shall be waived. 6. The City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga is hereby directed to (a) certify to the adoption of this of this Resolution, and (b) forthwith transmit a certified return-receipt requested to Pete Pitassi Architects on behalf of Northtown Housing Authority Corporation and Mr. Kenneth Van Horn at the addresses identified in City records. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2007. CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P270 RESOLUTION NO. 07-Z7O A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING AN APPEAL AND APPROVING DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT (ALSO REFERRED TO AS HOUSING INCENTIVE AGREEMENT) DRC2007-00119, TO IMPLEMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00540, ALLOWING A DENSITY BONUS, AND MODIFYING SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF 225 WORKFORCE APARTMENT UNITS ON VACANT PROPERTY IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED AT 13233 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, IN THE AREA BETWEEN THE ETIWANDA SAN SEVAINE FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL ON THE EAST, AND THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR ON THE WEST - APN: 0229-041-10; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals 1. On February 20, 2007, Pitassi Architects, Inc.; on behalf of Northtown Housing Corporation, filed ari application for Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00119, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Density Bonus Agreement is referred to as "the application." 2. An Initial Study and Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was prepared and. circulated on July 2, 2007 in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines. 3. On July 25, 2007, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. The Commission approved the related Development Review DRC2006-00540 by adoption of their resolution No. 07-47 and recommended approval of Density Bonus Agreement DRC2007-00119 to the City Council by adoption of their resolution No. 07-46. 4. On August 6, 2007, a timely appeal was received on the project approvals and recommendations made by the Planning Commission. 5. Following the appeal, staff determined that additional analysis of potential air quality and traffic impacts was appropriate based upon comments received from the South Coast Air Quality Management District on July 25, 2007, and public comments made during the public hearing on that same date. Thereafter, LSA Associates was commissioned to prepare two additional studies related to air quality and traffic. A revised Initial Study was prepared and then circulated on October 29, 2007, which incorporated the findings of the two new studies. Staff reviewed the findings of the studies and determined that with the additional analysis and with revised mitigation measures, there was no substantial evidence of a significant impact to air quality or traffic as determined in the original Initial Study circulated for the project. Further, based on the information contained in the staff report for this item and in the revised and re-circulated Initial Study and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, the mitigation measures contained in the re-circulated Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, are more effective in mitigating or avoiding potential significant effects than the measures contained in the original Initial Study. 6. On December 5, 2007, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO.07-** DRC2007-00119 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING CORPORATION December 5, 2007 Page 2 7. The subject property of the Density Bonus Agreement is legally described herein. 8. A true and correct copy of the proposed Density Bonus Agreement is attached as Exhibit "A". All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is herebyfound, determined, and resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referehbed public hearing on December 5, 2007, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 12.87 acres of land located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard near the City's eastern border with the City of Fontana/Unincorporated San Bernardino County. More specifically, the property is situated between the existing Etiwanda San Sevaine Flood Control Channel on the east and the Southern California Edison Corridoron the west; and b. The properties to the north are undeveloped commercial properties and the Southern California Edison (SCE) utility corridor in the General Commercial and Open Space zone, and to the south is undeveloped land in the Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. On the east side of the site is the San Sevaine Flood Control Channel and single-family residential uses in the City of Fontana. To the immediate west are SCE Transmission Lines in the Open Space zone and further west is asingle-family residential tract in the Low Density Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) District; and c. The application to which the Density Bonus Agreement applies contemplates the construction of 225 workforce housing units and associated improvements, on 12.87 acres of land at the above described location which are permitted within the Medium residential zoning district; and d. The design of the new units is a contemporary interpretation of the Tuscan architectural style, featuring fully tiled roofs, trimmed out windows and door openings, and walls clad in stucco and accented with fully grouted faux stone veneer typically associated with the proposed style. On July 25, 2007, the Planning Commission approved the project contingent upon City Council approval of the Density Bonus Agreement; and e. The Agreement proposes a 25 percent (45 units) density increase and modification specific building setback/separation standards for the construction of said workforce apartment units pursuant to California Government Code Sections 65915-65918 and Development Code Chapter 17.40. P271 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07-" DRC2007-001 1 9-NORTHTOWN HOUSING CORPORATION December 5, 2007 Page 3 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the proposed project to which the Density Bonus Agreement is associated with is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan in that, if approved, the multi-family development is consistent with the Medium Residential land use designation for the site. In addition, the approval will further implement a specific objective of the General Plan Housing Element to provide affordable housing units for all economic segments of the community including low to moderate income households; and b. The proposed project associated with the Density Bonus Agreement is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The proposed multi-family residential use is a permitted use within the underlying Medium Residential zoning designation forthe site, and requiring only design review and approval. Further, the project is consistent with Affordable Housing Incentive/Density Provisions section of the Development Code that allows applicants to request a density bonus (25 percent requested) and development incentives (3 incentives requested) to facilitate the construction of affordable housing units within the city as mandated by State law; and c. The proposed use is in compliance with each applicable provisions of the Development Code. The site plan, architecture, and on-site improvements are consistent with the development standards and design guidelines as provided in the Development Code for multi-family residential development, including density, building height, setbacks, provision of on-site recreational amenities, and parking, except as modified for density, setback and building separation standards as specified in the Density Bonus Agreement. Moreover, the architecture for the project is well done and features high quality details and exterior materials such as fully tiled roofs, trimmed out windows and door openings, and walls clad in stucco and accented with fully grouted faux stone veneer. Moreover, landscaping and recreational amenities are well distributed throughout the site as described in the staff reports for the project and depicted on plans reviewed by the Design Review Committee and approved by the Planning Commission; and d. That the proposed design, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The project includes numerous site improvements and required improvements to the public right of way adjacent to the site, including installation of full street improvements and center median along Foothill Boulevard and a new traffic signal at East Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. The development of the site as proposed at this location will contribute to, and tie in with, other physical improvements (e.g., storm drains and roadway improvements) in the area that are currently underway or anticipated in the near future. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, togetherwith all written and oral reports included forthe environmental assessmentfor the application, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant adverse effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigated Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: P272 a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07-`* DRC2007-001 1 9 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING CORPORATION December 5, 2007 Page 4 imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, Citystaff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. Following the filing of a timely appeal, City staff determined that additional analysis of potential air quality and traffic impacts was appropriate based on comments received from South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). A revised initial study was prepared and circulated which incorporated the findings of the two new studies prepared by LSA Associates. Staff reviewed the findings of the studies and determined that, with the additional analysis and with revised mitigation measures, there was no substantial evidence of a significant impact to air quality or traffic as determined in the original Initial Study circulated for the project. Further, based on the information contained in the staff report forthis item and in the revised and re-circulated Initial Study and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, the mitigation measures contained inthe re-circulated Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, are more effective in mitigating or avoiding potential significant effects than the measures contained in the original Initial Study. c. The City Council has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The City Council further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council. Based on these findings, the City Council hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. d. The City Council has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The City Council therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. e. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings contained in Sections 1, 2, 3, and 4, the City Council hereby denies the appeal of the Planning Commission recommendation and approves the Density Bonus Agreement attached to this Resolution. 6. The City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga is hereby directed to (a) certify to the adoption of this of this Resolution, and (b) forthwith transmit a certified return-receipt requested to Pete Pitassi Architects on behalf of Northtown Housing Authority Corporation and Mr. Kenneth Van Horn at the addresses identified in City records. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2007 P273 CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P274 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN T0: City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attn: APN: 0229-041-10 Exempt from recording fees pursuant to Govt. Cod. Sec. 27383 (Space above far DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT This AFFORDABLE HOUSING AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into as of 2007, by and between the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation (the "City"), and NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, a Califomia nonprofit public benefit corporation (the "Developer"}, with reference to the following facts: A. The Rancho Cucamonga City Council has adopted a Density Bonus Ordinance (Ordinance No. 749 on November 2, 2005, codified in Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Chapter 17.40) (the "Ordinance") to conform with State Density Bonus Law (Government Code Sections 65915 and 65917), which allows a density bonus for the provision of housing affordable to very low income, lower income, moderate income, and senior households. B. Developer is the owner of certain real property in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property") - C. Developer has received a discretionary approval from the City to construct a total oftwo hundred twenty-five (225) residential rental units known as San Sevaine Villas (the "Development's on the Property. Pursuant to the Ordinance and Government Code 65915; the Developer has requested that the City grant Owner for the Development a density bonus offorty- five (45) units (the "Density Bonus") and the following modifications to building sepazation and set back requirements (collectively, the "Concessions"): • Reduction of building to curb setback from twenty-five feet (25') to twenty feet (20') in five locations in the Development as shown on the attached Exhibit B (Conceptual Site Plan). • Reduction of building to property line setback from thirty feet (30') to twenty feet (20') in one location in the Development as shown on the attached Exhibit B (Conceptual Site Plan). 11244-0001~976247v2.doc tx+~ lr3lr A P275 • Reduction of minimum building to building sepaaation from forty feet (40') to twenty feet (20') fora 3-story building to 3-story building separation and from thirty feet (30') to seventeen feet (17') fora 3-story building to 2-story building separation in the two locations shown on the attached Exhibit B (Conceptual Site Plan). in exchange, the Owner shall provide at the Development fifty-six (56) units which will be affordable and rented to Moderate Income Households, and seventy-four (74) units which will be affordable and rented to Very Low Income Households and thirty-six (36) units which will be affordable and rented to Extremely Low Income Households, all as have particulazly set forth in that certain Regulatory Agreement between the Developer and the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency's dated November 9, 2005; which was recorded on November 30, 2005 as Document No. 2005-0857344 in the Official Records of San Bernardino County, California (the ``Regulatory Agreement'. The Owner shall provide an additional fifty- nine (59) units which will be affordable and rented to Low Income tenants for a term of 55-years, subject to a regulatory agreement under the State Tax Credit Allocation progam, (collectively the "Affordable Units"). NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits received by the Developer and the City, the Developer and City agree as follows: Section 1. Definitions. Capitalized tetrris used herein but not defined shall have the meanings ascribed thereto in the Regulatory Agreement. In addition to those terms defined in the Recitals, the following terms are specially defined in this Agreement: (a) "Affordable Rent" means the maximum total chazge for a Unit.permitted by Section 2.4 of the Regulatory Agreement. (b) "Affordable Units" is defined in Recital C. (c) "Property" is defined in Recital B. Section 2. Grant of Density Bonus and Concessions. In consideration for the Affordable Units being provided at the Development, and consistent with the Ordinance and the State Density Bonus Law, the City hereby grants the Developer the Density Bonus and the Concessions (as described in Recital C) for the Development. Section 3. Satisfaction of Ordinance Oblieation and Conditions of Approval. The requirements of the Ordinance shall be satisfied with respect to the Property if the Developer complies with the Regulatory Agreement, the Loan Agreement between the Developer and the Agency dated September 1, 2005 (the "Loan Agreement") and the documents described in the Loan Agreement (the "Other Loan Documents"). Section 4. Mazketing and Rental of Affordable Units. Developer shall comply with any and all applicable fair housing laws in the marketing and rental of the Affordable Units. Developer shall accept as tenants, on the same basis as all other prospective tenants persons who aze recipients of federal certificates or vouchers for rent subsidies pursuant to the existing housing program under Section 8 of the United States Housing Act, or its successor. 1 1244-0001 \976247 v2.dce P276 Section 5. Default and Remedies. Upon a default by Developer which is not cured after any applicable notice and expiration form applicable cure period expressly described in the Regulatory Agreement, Loan Agreement or Other Loan Documents, the City may terminate this Agreement, and the City may exercise any and all other remedies available to it at law, in equity, under the Regulatory Agreement, the Loan Agreement or any loan documents described in the Loan Agreement. Section 6. Remedies Cumulative. No right, power, or remedy given to the City by the terms of this Agreement is intended to be exclusive of any other right, power, or remedy; and each and every such right, power, or remedy shall be cumulative and in addition to every other right, power, or remedy given to the City by the terms of any such document, the Ordinance, or by any statute or otherwise against Developer and any other person. Section 7. Attomevs Fees and Costs. The City shall be entitled to receive from the Developer or any person violating the requirements of this Agreement, in addition to any remedy otherwise available under this Agreement or at law or equity, whether or not litigation is instituted, the costs of enforcing this Agreement, including without limitation reasoaabie attorneys' fees. Section 8. Hold Harmless and Indemnification. Developer will indemnify and hold harmless City and its elected officials, officers, employees, and agents in their official capacity (the "Indemnitees'~, and any of them, from and against all loss, all risk of loss and all damage (including expense) sustained or incurred because of or by reason of any and all claims, demands, suits, actions, judgments and executions for damages of any and every kind and by whomever and whenever made or obtained, allegedly caused by, arising out of or relating in any manner to this Agreement. The provisions of this Section shall survive expiration or other termination of this Agreement. Section 9. Notices. All notices required pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and maybe given by personal delivery or by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, to the party to receive such notice at the addresses set forth below: TO THE CITY: City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attn: TO THE DEVELOPER: Northtown Housing Development Corporation 8599 Haven Avenue, Suite 205 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attn: Executive Director Any party may change the address to which notices aze to be sent by notifying the other parties of the new address, in the manner set forth above. 11244-0001~976247v2.doc P277 Section 10. Integrated Agreement. This Agreement and the documents referred to in this Agreement constitute the entire Agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter thereof. Section 11. Amendment of Agreement. This Agreement maybe amended only upon the written consent of the City and the Developer. Section 12. No Joint Venture or Partnership. Nothing contained in this Agreement or any document executed pursuant to this Agreement shall be construed as creating a joint venture or partnership between City and Developer. Section l3. Applicable Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by California law. Venue for any dispute arising out of this Agreement shall be San $emazdino County. Section 14. Waivers. Any waiver by the City of any obligation or condition in this Agreement must be in writing. No waiver will be implied from any delay or failure by the City to take action on any breach or default of Developer or to pursue any remedy allowed under this Agreement or applicable law. Any extension of time granted to Developer to perform any obligation under this Agreement shall not operate as a waiver or release from any of its obligations under this Agreement. Consent by the City to any act or omission by Developer shall not be construed to be a consent to any other or subsequent act or omission or to waive the requirement for the City's written consent to future waivers. Section 15. Title of Parts and Sections. Any titles of the sections or subsections of this Agreement aze inserted for convenience of reference only and shall be disregazded in interpreting any part of the Agreement's.provisions. Section 16. Multiple Originals: Counterparts. This Agreement maybe executed in mulfiple originals, each of which is deemed to be an original, and maybe signed in counterparts. Secfion 17. Recording of Agreement. The Parties shall cause this Agreement to be recorded against the Property, in the Official Records of the County of San Bernazdino. Section 18. Severability. In the event any limitation, condition, restriction, covenant, or provision contained in this Agreement is to beheld invalid, void or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction, or if any provision of this Agreement is rendered invalid or unenforceable pursuant to any California statute which became effective after the effective date of this Agreement, the remaining portions of this Agreement shall nevertheless remain in full force and effect. Section 19. Exhibits. The following exhibits aze attached to this Agreement: Exhibit A Legal Description of the Property Exhibit B Conceptual Site Plan 4 11244-0001\976247v2.doc P278 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the day and yeaz Srst above written: DEVELOPER: NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation By: Antonio I. Gracia, Executive Director CITY: CTTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation sy: Its: 11244-00011976247v2.doc P279 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) )ss. COUNTY OF ) On , 20_, before me, Notary Public in and for the State of California, personally appeazed personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose narne(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature STATE OF CALIFORNL4 ) )ss. COUNTY OF ) (Seal) On , 20~ before me, Notary Public in and for the State of California, personally appeazed personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that byhis/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature (Seal) 11244-0001~976247v2.doc P280 Exhibit A Property De9cript ion ALL TRAT P08TIOt7 OP THE NORTHWBBT 1/4 OP 88CTION 9, TOWNSHIP 1 SODTfi, RANGE 6 N88T, 8AN BERNARDINO 'MERIDIAN, I]P THB COUNTY OP eAN HBRNARDIIiO, BTATB OP CALIPORT72A, ACCORDING TO GOV8RNt48AT BVRVEY, LYING 8A8T OP THB WBBT LINE OF THAT CERTAIN BABFMSNT CONVEYED BY BANTA F8 LAND IMPROVBIgN'P COF@ANY TO BOUTHBRN CALIFORNIA SDISON COMPANY, IN D88D DATED OC1C8IIt 1{, 1940, AND ABCORD® OCTO8II1 28, 1940, I1P BOOX 1441 OP OFFICIAL RBCORDB, PACE 66. SXC8PT THAT PORTION THEREOF D88CRIBED A8 POLJAWB: COMMENCING AT TID; NORTH8A8T CORNEA OF THB NORTAWEBT 1/{ OP BBCTION 9, TOWNB$IP '1 BOOTB, RANGB 6 WEBT, BAN BERNARDINO MSRIDIAL7; T'EiStdCE SODTH OD° 30' 15" NEBT fi50.11 FEET ~TO TH8 TRDE POINT OF HSGIA'NIRG; TAENCS ~60UTN 89. 93' 35• NEBT 1071.37 DEBT; TH8NC8 NORTH 21. 16' 03• EABT 646.6 FEET; THENCE BODTFI 99•~93~ ]$' W88T $69.10 FEET; TRSNCB~BOUTA 21. 1fi', 07! WEBT 9738.36 FSST; ~ .' T88NC8 NORTB 89. 93' 40. 8A8T 7099.60 PEST; 'T88NC8 NORTH 00. 30~ 15. 8A8T 1959.90 PEST, TO THB TRUE POINT OF BEGII~7ING. AL80 BZCBPT T30;RREFROM ALL OIL, 67A8 AND OTBER HYDROCARBfffi AND MIRSRAIa SUB9TAHC88 )EXCE:PT WATRA) LYII70 NOT LBSB THAN 100 FEET SESAiP TH8 BDRYACB OP~BAZD HEAL PROPERTY, AS RYPRPTBD ARD RESERVED IN THH D88D FROM BANTA P8 LAND IMPROVE7~1T COMPANY, A CORPORATION, TO OLZVER A. JOBNBON AND CRYBTAL M. JO[DQSON, HOSDAND AND. WIFE, AB JOINT THlANTB, DATED MAY 27', 19{6 AND REC091DSD JUNY 7, 1j46, A8 INBTRDMHN'T N0, -65, IN HOOK 1890 OF OFFICIAL ABCORDB, PAVE 491., 1S T88 OFFICE OF xEH'croDNTY RECORO~ oP BASD eoDNTr, WRSCt aecsrEB, "PROVIDED TfiAT TR8 FZRBT PARTY, ITB BOCCEB801N3 AND ABBIGNB, BBALL NOT EAVE.~TR8 RIGHT TO ENTER UPON THE BDRFACS DF BAZD AS0.L PROPERTY 80R TH8 PORp088 OF EXTRACTING, AND REMOVING ANY OF SUCH R88ERVED BUBBTANC88, OR POR ANY OTHHR PURPD888". R .. .. ..,~ ~., - -~ f . ._ .~,,.r, . . .,.. _ . _.. ... -- - of aof. ...) fi or.oo ...,. i J ~~ f Lr_,I~- m ~ ~ m /l _ .,~ ~-111 x W° ~ `K ~ j ~ ~ iK 4 \~~ nl.. f \J E X W p ~ ....I L i, ~11.1(L~('~J.J_lll ~ ~ ~ L: P~'~ an d o • ~ 5. -' : ~ ~ --• roe ~~ ~ d _ r ~ m ° ~ ~ -A .a = ~oCOf e _ r J_ N _ ~' a l r-; . ail `- ~, ~; F i ~ `] ' ; m m F 9 '~"'-i I ~~ ~ W UI W G W C I R '--' ' T_ I ?.Of ~Ni •. . P. ~ a L' K O P U N u M u' ~ o-~, @ 4` ~~~ , J i I pppp+! - i IF-. pa ~ ~ r ~ fir- 'J '~ i ' t:~ ~ . ~ . _ Q ;' : ~ f C „~ ~ 4 i _ _ ~ ~ ,,,, r • fa .I -9~'•` 1/ ~ ~Tak ~ J~,.~j-„~COCJ lY~J ~J~/ f Nrj t4 ~V i I ~ J© :P ~~ tOYi /A N ~~ p`a .. ~ r r. i ., i' % J~ /~ ~% \ \ / RE v Tf~ l ~ N \ C / V C/1 .` - _ _ _._ ~ \ +v.,~.. E5CityCounty2007 Table 2: E-5 City/County Population and Housing Estimates, 11112007 COUNTYICITY San Bernardino County •-----------POPULATION------------ ---------------------------------HOUSING UNITS ------°°-----~ --------SINGLE ------- -----MULTIPLE ---- HOUSE- GROUP MOBILE OCCU- PCT TOTAL HOLD QUARTERS TOTAL DETACHED ATTACHED 2T04 SPLUS HOMES PIED VACANT PERSONS PER HOUSE- Adelanto 27,1391 28,057 ~ 1088 8304 -84431 148 ~ 3821 ~ 8231 508 7013 1555: 3.715 Apple Valley 70 2971 69,934 363 24 866 19 3221 _ 7261 2 089 1 6661 10431 22 886 7 96 3.056. _ 1 eaf Lake 1 ~ 7 ~ ~ 7 1 7 Chino 81224 69, 30 4 ~ 114941 19,978' ~ 14227j 9527 9011 3,3 0' 5281 1935 332, 3.610, Chino HITS . 766661 .., 76,5171 , 151`1 - 22,853 ,Y .,_ _ 18370f6 . __, 1378 3081 2,111 _.. _ 6861 22433 184; 3.5001 COIIOn 51 797 51 5331 264 16 197 9 6071 602E 1 063 4,110 _ 815 14 999 7 40! 3 436; Fontana 181 840 181 081) 5591 48 075 38 243 1 208 t 644 . 5 821 1 159' 45 544 5 26_ 3.976 Gland Terrace 12,3801 _ 12,171 _ 209 4 4 515 2 904 191 265f 905 _ 250 _ .-_ 4 275 _ -_- 5 32''. _ 2.847 HeSpefia . _. 85,876: , 85,5451 .._ 33P ____ 27,874 _ .._ 22557 _ _.. ... 8931 . 1166 1 1,9561 iJ00, 26,071 6.47 3.2811 Highland 52186 51,9461 240 16,525 1238 _ _ 555 598 _ _2,129 ~ __861L 14891 928; 3.465 Loma Linda 22451 21,487] ~ 964 9,072 3836 9391 1310' 2,4251 562 8,4561 679] 2.5411 Montclair 36 622 36,010 ~ 612 9,562 5 559 758 1 0421 1 _342 ~ 661 _. ~ 9 282 2 93 3.080 Needles 5759 5,7481 11f 2,892 1533 71 I 254 367 628 2199 2396, 2.61d' Ontario 172 701 171,6031 1 098 46,9591 27 530 3 6491 4 0571 9,512 r 2,211 __ 45 238 . _._-_ 1 3 661 I 3.793 Rancho Cucamonga _ 172 331 _ 168,7051 _ 3 626 .. 54,412 _ __ 1 35 139 .. ._ _ 1 3 059 . _ 1,942 .. 12,8921 1,380 52,771 3 02 3.1971 Redlands 71 375 69,409 1 966 26,527 17 1371 9001 2,4361 5 135 9191 25 2461 4 83, 2.7491 Rialto 4 1 99 0641 98 260 1 804 26 637 18 918 5061 1 830 1 3,500 1 803E 25 221 5 321 3.696 San BEfnardine 205010 . 19639 66121 66486 39084 27171 5733 1 14 d67 4485' 59146 11041 33541 Twentynine PaImS 24 830 8 19 473 5 35~ 8 955 4 973 1 303 i 691 445 543 6 933 22 561 2.809 Upland 75169 74,584 585 26613 15285 1770 2677 6,036 845 25655 360] 2.907. 1 1 3, ? 3 - ....`531? ~ B 4fi~ ~ -~-`' ~ ~ ~~~ 3 ~~ - ! 7 ~~ -~ ~-4 1 ~ 1 1 Yuooa Valley 0441 2 207 , 7563 ' 40 675 3 6, 707 8,269 12 fi2 j 2.507; Balance O(County 295 9781 ' ~ 288,067E ~ 7 911L 128,4801 - -103 3341.,,. _ , _4 2001_ _ 4 0841 2_2401. -., . _ 14,62 j 92,1881 , __,_ 28 25~ _..~ 3.125, Incorporated 1,732,035 1889247 .. _,_,. 42,788 _ 548,429 373,313 24,049 35,797 85,663 29,607 505,426 7.84 3.342 COUnty TOlal 2,028,013 1877,314 50,699 676,909 476,647 28,249 39,881 87,903 44,229 597,614 11.71 3.309 California Department of Finance Page 1 of 1 Demographic Research Unit ~ N OD N STAFF REPORT RANQ IO CIJCAMONGA FIRE PROTECITON DISTRICT Date To: From: By: Subject: December 5, 2007 President and Members of the Board of Directors Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager Peter M. Bryan, Fire Chief Janet Walker, Management Analyst II P283 r_~~ ~ , RANCHO C,UCAAtONGA ANNEXATION OF PARCELS 0229-181-03 & 11 TO AN EXISTING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (CFD 85-1) RECOMMENDATION Consideration of adoption of a resolution making determinations and authorizing the submittal of the levy of special taxes to the qualified electors of territory proposed to be annexed (Sandoval Pipeline Engineering- Annexation No. 07-9) to an existing Community Facilities District and calling a special election. BACKGROUND Sandoval Pipeline Engineering (APNs 0229-181-03 & 11) has submitted a proposal to build an 81,572 sq.ft. office/warehouse on 4.77 acres and is conditioned by the City and Fire District to annex to the existing Community Facilities District (CFD) 85-1 in order to mitigate the development's impact upon fire protection services. On November 7, 2007, the Board initiated formal annexation proceedings by adopting a resolution approving a boundary map (Exhibit "A") of the territory proposed to be annexed and the Resolution of Intention to Annex APNs 0229-181-03 & 11 into the existing CFD 85-1. This resolution, among other things, declared the intention of the Board of Directors to levy a special tax within the territory proposed to be annexed to finance fire protection and suppression services and setting a public hearing regarding the proposed annexation to be held on December 5, 2007. Through adoption of this resolution before the Board this evening, the Board will accomplish the following: • Make certain determinations as set forth in the resolution • Call for a special election to be conducted on December 12, 2007 • Authorize submittal of the levy of the special tax to qualified electors P284 Annexation of Territory to an existing CFD 85-1 December 5, 2007 ANALYSIS The annexation of APNx 0229-181-03 & 11 into CFD 85-1 will satisfy the conditions of development relating to mitigating impacts upon fire protection services. Ramiro Sandoval Jr. and Esther Lozano, property owners, are in full support of the annexation of the property being annexed. The Registrar of Voters has certified there are no registered voters residing within the territory to be annexed. Therefore, the election will be a landowner's vote, the landowner having one vote per acre or portion thereof of land within the territory proposed to be annexed. Ramiro Sandoval Jr. and Esther Lozano, property owners, have executed a "Consent and Waiver" of time frames relating to the election. Exhibit "A" of the Resolution sets forth the rate and method of apportionment of the special tax proposed to be levied within the territory to be annexed which is consistent with the special tax levied upon all territory currently within CFD 85-1. At the special election to be held on December 12, 2007, the landowners will cast their vote ballot(s). The Board Secretary will then canvas the ballot(s). At the next Board meeting, the Board will consider adopting the resolution declaring the election results. If 2/3 of the votes are cast in favor of the levy of the special tax, the Board may declare the property to be annexed. A representative for the property owner will be present during the meeting should any questions arise regarding these proceedings. The Public Notice regarding the Public Hearing has been advertised in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin. Resp ctfully submitted, a ~~ Peter M. Bry Fire Chief Attachments P285 RESOLUTION NO. FD 07- OG.~~f A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY (ANNEXATION NO. 07-9) TO AN EXISTING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (CFD 85-1 ), CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION AND AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF THE LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS WHEREAS, the BOARD OF DIRECTORS (the "Board of Directors") of the RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT (the "Fire Protection District"), RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, has previously declared its intention and held and conducted proceedings relating to the annexation of territory to an existing community facilities district pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982", being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California, and specifically Article 3.5 thereof (the "Act"). The existing Community Facilities District has been designated as COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1 (the "District"); and, WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing relating to the annexation of territory to the District, the extent of the territory to be annexed (the "Annexation Area"), the furnishing of certain public services and all other related matters has been given; and, WHEREAS, it has now been determined that written protests have not been received by 50% or more of the registered voters residing either within the Annexation Area or the District and/or property owners representing more than one-half (1/2) or more of the area of land within the Annexed Area orwithin District; and, WHEREAS, inasmuch as there have been less than twelve (12) persons registered to vote within the Annexation Area for each of the 90 preceding days, this legislative body desires to submit the levy of the required special tax to the landowners of the Annexation Area, said landowners being the qualified electors as authorized by law. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District does hereby resolve as follows: SECTION 1. RECITALS The above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2. DETERMINATIONS It is determined by this Board of Directors that: A. all proceedings prior hereto were valid and taken in conformity with the requirements of law, and specifically the provisions of the Act; B. less than twelve (12) registered voters have resided within the Annexation Area for each of the ninety (90) days preceding the close of the public hearing and, consequently, the qualified electors shall be the landowners of the Annexation Area and each landowner who is the owner of record as of the close of the public hearing, or the authorized representative thereof, shall have one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of land that she or he owns within the Annexation Area; C. the time limit specified by the Act for conducting an election to submit the levy of the special taxes to the qualified electors of the Annexation Area and the requirements for impartial analysis and ballot P286 Resolution No. FD 07- Page -2- arguments have been waived with the unanimous consent of the qualified electors of the Annexation Area; D. the Secretary, acting as the election official, has consented to conducting any required election on a date which is less than 125 days following the adoption of any resolution annexing the Annexation Area to the District; and E. the public services proposed to be financed from the proceeds of special taxes to be levied within the Annexation Area are necessary to meet increased demands placed upon the Fire Protection District as a result of development and/or rehabilitation occurring in the Annexation Area. SECTION 3. BOUNDARIES OF ANNEXED AREA The boundaries and parcels of land in the Annexation Area and on which special taxes are proposed to be levied in order to pay the costs and expenses for the public facilities and services described in Section 4 below are generally described as follows: All that property and territory proposed to be annexed to the District, as said property is shown on a map as previously approved by this legislative body, said map entitled "Boundary Map of Community Facilities District No. 85-1 Annexation No. 07-9 Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, County Of San Bernardino, State Of California" (the "Annexation Map"), a copy of which is on file in the Office of the Secretary and shall remain open for public inspection. SECTION 4. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES The services that are authorized to be financed from the proceeds of special taxes levied within the District are certain services which are in addition to those services required for the territory within the District and will not be replacing services already available. A general description of the services authorized to be financed by the District is as follows: The performance by employees of functions, operations, maintenance and repair activities in order to provide fire protection and suppression services. The District shall finance all direct, administrative and incidental annual costs and expenses necessary to provide such services. The same types of services which are authorized to be financed by the District from the proceeds of special taxes levied within the District are the types of services proposed to be financed from the special taxes proposed to be levied within the Annexation Area. If and to the extent possible such services shall be provided in common with District and the Annexation Area. SECTION 5. SPECIAL TAX Except where funds are otherwise available and subject to the approval of the qualified electors of the Annexation Area, a special tax sufficient to pay for such services required for the Annexation Area, secured by recordation.of a continuing lien against all non-exempt real property in the Annexation Area will be levied annually within the boundaries of the Annexation Area. For particulars as to the rate and method of apportionment of the proposed special tax, reference is made to the attached and incorporated Exhibit "A" which sets forth in sufficient detail the method of apportionment to allow each landowner or resident within the Annexation Area to clearlyestimate the maximum amount of the special tax that such person will have to pay. P287 Resolution No. FD 07- Page -3- The special taxes shall be collected in the same manner as ad valorem property taxes and shall be subject to the same penalties, procedure, sale and lien priority in any case of delinquency, as applicable for ad valorem taxes; however, as applicable, this Board of Directors may, by resolution, establish and adopt an alternate or supplemental procedure as necessary. Any special taxes that may not be collected on the County tax roll shall be collected through a direct billing procedure by the Treasurer of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, acting for and on behalf of the District. SECTION 6. SPECIAL TAX ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES Pursuant to and in compliance with the provisions of Government Code Section 50075.1, this Board of Directors hereby establishes the following accountability measures pertaining to the levy by the District of the special taxes within the Revised Annexation Area as described in Section 5 above: A. Each such special tax shall be levied for the specifc purposes section in Section 5. above. B. The proceeds of the levy of each such special tax shall be applied only to the specific applicable purposes set forth in Section 5. above. C. The District shall establish a separate account into which the proceeds of the special taxes levied within the District shall be deposited. D. The Fire Chief or his or her designee, acting for and on behalf of the District, shall annually file a report with the Board of Directors as required pursuant to Government Code Section 50075.3. SECTION 7. ELECTION The proposition related to the levy of the special tax shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the Annexation Area, said electors being the landowners, with each landowner having one (1) vote for each acre or portion thereof of land which he or she owns within said annexed territory. The special election shall be held on the 12th day of December 2007, and said election shall be a special election to be conducted by the Secretary (hereinafter "Election Official"). If the proposition for the levy of the special tax receives the approval of more than two-thirds (2/3) of the votes cast on the proposition, the special tax maybe levied as provided for in this Resolution and the Board of Directors may determine that the Annexation Area is added to and part of the District. SECTION 8. BALLOT The ballot proposal to be submitted to the qualified voters at the election shall generally be as follows: PROPOSITION A RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1, AUTHORIZATION FOR SPECIAL TAX LEVY Shall Community Facilities District No. 85-1 of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District be authorized to levy special taxes within the territory shown on "Boundary Map of Community Facilities District No. 85-1 Annexation No. 07-9 Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, County Of San Bernardino, State Of California" (the "Annexation Map") P288 Resolution No. FD 07- Page -4- pursuant to the rate and method of apportionment of special taxes (the "Special Tax Formula")set forth in Ordinance No. FD 44 to finance authorized services and administrative expenses? SECTION 9. VOTE The appropriate mark placed in the voting square after the word "YES" shall be counted in favor of the adoption of the proposition, and the appropriate mark placed in the voting square after the word "NO" in the manner as authorized, shall be counted against the adoption of said proposition. SECTION 10. ELECTION PROCEDURE The Election Official is herebyauthorized to take any and all steps necessary for the holding of said election. Said Election Official shall perform and render all services and proceedings incidental to and connected with the conduct of said election, and said services shall include, but not be limited to the following: A. Prepare and furnish to the election officers necessary election supplies for the conduct of the election. Cause to be printed the requisite number of official ballots, tally sheets and other necessary forms. C. Furnish and address official ballots for the qualified electors of the Annexation Area. D. Cause the official ballots to be mailed and/or delivered, as required by law. E. Receive the returns of the election. Sort and assemble the election material and supplies in preparation for the canvassing of the returns. G. Canvass the returns of the election. H. Furnish a tabulation of the number of votes given in the election. Make all arrangements and take the necessary steps to pay all costs of the election incurred as a result of services performed for the District and pay costs and expenses of all election officials. J. Conduct and handle all other matters relating to the proceedings and conduct of the election in the manner and form as required by law. P289 Resolution No. FD 07- Page -5- PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of 2007. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAINED: Donald J. Kurth, M.D., President ATTEST: Debra J. Adams, Secretary I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, SECRETARY of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, at a Regular Meeting of said Board held on the _ day of 2007. Executed this day of 2007 at Rancho Cucamonga, California. J. Adams, Secretary P290 Resolution No. FD 07- Page -6- EXHIBIT "A" COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1 ANNEXATION NO. 07-9 RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAXES The rate and method of apportionment, limitations on and adjustment to the Special Tax shall be as follows: To pay for fire suppression services and to finance fre suppression facilities, the Maximum Special Tax in Community Facilities District No. 85-1, Annexation No. 07-9 for Fiscal Year 2007-2008 shall be: Structures Maximum Annual Special Tax Residential 1 DU = ($143.31) Multi-Family 2 DU: 1.75 = ($143.31) 3 DU: 2.25 = ($143.31) 4 DU: 2.65 = ($143.31) 5-14 DU: 2.65 = ($143.31) + {.35 (TU-4) ($143.31)} 15-30 DU: 6.15 = ($143.31) + {.30 (TU-14) ($143.31)} 31-80 DU: 10.65 = ($143.31) + {.25 (TU-30) ($143.31)} 81 - up DU: 23.15 = ($143.31) + {.20 (TU-80) ($143.31)} Commercial ($143.31) per acre + $.078 per SF Industrial ($143.31) per acre + $.095 per SF Note: DU =Dwelling Unit TU =Total Units SF =Square Foot ANNUAL ADJUSTMENT The maximum Special Tax shall be annually adjusted commencing on July 1, 2007 and each July 1 s` thereafter for (a) changes in the cost of living or (b) changes in cost of living and changes in population as defined in Section 7901 of the Government Code, as amended, whichever is lesser. P291 Resolution No. FD 07- Page -7- REDUCTION IN SPECIAL TAX Commercial and industrial structures shall be granted a reduction in the Special Tax for the installation of complete sprinkler systems. In addition, multi-floor commercial and industrial structures shall be granted a reduction in Special Tax for each separate floor above or below the main ground floor of the structure. LIMITATION ON SPECIAL TAX LEVY The Special Tax shall only be levied on Developed Property. Developed Property is defined to be property: which is not owned by a public or governmental agency; which is not vacant; - where a "certificate of occupancy" or "utility release" from the City of Rancho Cucamonga has been issued; which has an existing building or structure onsite; - which does not have as its sole use power transmission towers, railroad tracks, and flood control facilities. Areas granted as easements for such purposes shall be subtracted from the total acreage of the underlying lot. The annual levy of the Special Tax shall be based upon an annual determination by the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District of the amount of other revenues available to meet budget requirements. As used in this formula, "available revenue" shall include ad valorem taxes, State of California augmentation, tax increment revenues received from the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and any other source of revenue except the Special Tax. The Board of Directors shall take all responsible steps to retain maximum Redevelopment Agency funding to which, by agreement, they may lawfully receive. To the extent available revenues are insufficient to meet budget requirements, the Board of Directors may levy the Special Tax. For further particulars regarding the rate and method of apportionment of the Special Tax, reference is made to the Final Report Mello-Roos Community Facilities District No. 85-1 for Fire Suppression Facilities/Services -Foothill Fire Protection District, a copy of which is on fle in the office of the Fire Chief of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. STAFF REPORT RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECITON DISTRICT Date: December 5, 2007 To: President and Members of the Board of Directors Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: Peter M. Bryan, Fire Chief By: Janet Walker, Management Analyst II Subject: ANNEXATION OF PARCEL 0229-171-23 TO AN EXISTING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (CFD 85-1) RECOMMENDATION Consideration of adoption of a resolution making determinations and authorizing the submittal of the levy of special taxes to the qualified electors of territory proposed to be annexed (Arrow Rancho Park -Annexation No. 07-10) to an existing Community Facilities District and calling a special election. BACKGROUND Arrow Rancho Park (APN 0229-171-23) has submitted a proposal to build a 31,154 sq.ft. industrial building on 2.28 acres and is conditioned by the City and Fire District to annex to the existing Community Facilities District (CFD) 85-1 in order to mitigate the developments impact upon fire protection services. On November 7, 2007, the Board initiated formal annexation proceedings by adopting a resolution approving a boundary map (Exhibit "A") of the territory proposed to be annexed and the Resolution of Intention to Annex APN 0229-171-23 into the existing CFD 85-1. This resolution, among other things, declared the intention of the Board of Directors to levy a special tax within the territory proposed to be annexed to finance fire protection and suppression services and setting a public hearing regarding the proposed annexation to be held on December 5, 2007. Through adoption of this resolution before the Board this evening, the Board will accomplish the following: • Make certain determinations as set forth in the resolution • Call for a special election to be conducted on December 12, 2007 • Authorize submittal of the levy of the special tax to qualified electors P293 Annexation of Territory to an existing CFD 85-1 December 5. 2007 ANALYSIS The annexation of APN 0229-171-23 into CFD 85-1 will satisfy the conditions of development relating to mitigating impacts upon fire protection services. Rancho Arrow Highway LLC, property owner, is in full support of the annexation of the property being annexed. The Registrar of Voters has certified there are no registered voters residing within the territory to be annexed. Therefore, the election will be a landowner's vote, the landowner having one vote per acre or portion thereof of land within the territory proposed to be annexed. Rancho Arrow Highway LLC, property owner, has executed a "Consent and Waiver" of time frames relating to the election. Exhibit "A" of the Resolution sets forth the rate and method of apportionment of the special tax proposed to be levied within the territory to be annexed which is consistent with the special tax levied upon all territory currently within CFD 85-1. At the special election to be held on December 12, 2007, the landowners will cast their vote ballot(s). The Board Secretary will then canvas the ballot(s). At the next Board meeting, the Board will consider adopting the resolution declaring the election results. If 2/3 of the votes are cast in favor of the levy of the special tax, the Board may declare the property to be annexed. A representative for the property owner will be present during the meeting should any questions arise regarding these proceedings. The Public Notice regarding the Public Hearing has been advertised in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin. Respectfully submitted, ~~~~ Peter M. Bryan ~~ Fire Chief Attachments P294 RESOLUTION NO. FD 07- O(o.5~ A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY (ANNEXATION NO. 07-10) TO AN EXISTING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (CFD 85-1 ), CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION AND AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF THE LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS WHEREAS, the BOARD OF DIRECTORS (the "Board of Directors") of the RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT (the "Fire Protection District"), RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, has previously declared its intention and held and conducted proceedings relating to the annexation of territory to an existing community facilities district pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982", being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California, and specifically Article 3.5 thereof (the "Act"). The existing Community Facilities District has been designated as COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1 (the "District"); and, WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing relating to the annexation of territory to the District, the extent of the territory to be annexed (the "Annexation Area"), the furnishing of certain public services and all other related matters has been given; and, WHEREAS, it has now been determined that written protests have not been received by 50% or more of the registered voters residing either within the Annexation Area or the District and/or property owners representing more than one-half (1/2) or more of the area of land within the Annexed Area orwithin District; and, WHEREAS, inasmuch as there have been less than twelve (12) persons registered to vote within the Annexation Area for each of the 90 preceding days, this legislative body desires to submit the levy of the required special tax to the landowners of the Annexation Area, said landowners being the qualified electors as authorized. by law. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District does hereby resolve as follows: SECTION 1. RECITALS The above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2. DETERMINATIONS It is determined by this Board of Directors that: A. all proceedings prior hereto were valid and taken in conformity with the requirements of law, and specifically the provisions of the Act; B. less than twelve (12) registered voters have resided within the Annexation Area for each of the ninety (90) days preceding the close of the public hearing and, consequently, the qualified electors shall be the landowners of the Annexation Area and each landownerwho is the owner of record as of the close of the public hearing, or the authorized representative thereof, shall have one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of land that she or he owns within the Annexation Area; C. the time limit specified by the Act for conducting an election to submit the levy of the special taxes to the qualified electors of the Annexation Area and the requirements for impartial analysis and ballot P295 Resolution No. FD 07- Page -2- arguments have been waived with the unanimous consent of the qualified electors of the Annexation Area; D. the Secretary, acting as the election official, has consented to conducting any required election on a date which is less than 125 days following the adoption of any resolution annexing the Annexation Area to the District; and the public services proposed to be financed from the proceeds of special taxes to be levied within the Annexation Area are necessary to meet increased demands placed upon the Fire Protection District as a result of development and/or rehabilitation occurring in the Annexation Area. SECTION 3. BOUNDARIES OF ANNEXED AREA The boundaries and parcels of land in the Annexation Area and on which special taxes are proposed to be levied in order to pay the costs and expenses for the public facilities and services described in Section 4 below are generally described as follows: All that property and territory proposed to be annexed to the District, as said property is shown on a map as previously approved by this legislative body, said map entitled "Boundary Map of Community Facilities District No. 85-1 Annexation No. 07-10 Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, County Of San Bernardino, State Of California" (the "Annexation Map"), a copy of which is on file in the Office of the Secretary and shall remain open for public inspection. SECTION 4. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES The services that are authorized to be fnanced from the proceeds of special taxes levied within the District are certain services which are in addition to those services required for the territory within the District and will not be replacing services already available. A general description of the services authorized to be financed by the District is as follows: The performance by employees of functions, operations, maintenance and repair activities in order to provide fire protection and suppression services. The District shall finance all direct, administrative and incidental annual costs and expenses necessary to provide such services. The same types of services which are authorized to be financed by the District from the proceeds of special taxes levied within the District are the types of services proposed to be financed from the special taxes proposed to be levied within the Annexation Area. If and to the extent possible such services shall be provided in common with District and the Annexation Area. SECTION 5. SPECIAL TAX Except where funds are otherwise available and subject to the approval of the qualifed electors of the Annexation Area, a special tax sufficient to pay for such services required for the Annexation Area, secured by recordation of a continuing lien against all non-exempt real property in the Annexation Area will be levied annually within the boundaries of the Annexation Area. For particulars as to the rate and method of apportionment of the proposed special tax, reference is made to the attached and incorporated Exhibit "A" which sets forth in sufficient detail the method of apportionment to allow each landowner or residentwithin the Annexation Area to clearly estimate the maximum amount ofthe special tax that such person will have to pay. P296 Resolution No. FD 07- Page -3- The special taxes shall be collected in the same manner as ad valorem property taxes and shall be subject to the same penalties, procedure, sale and lien priority in any case of delinquency, as applicable for ad valorem taxes; however, as applicable, this Board of Directors may, by resolution, establish and adopt an alternate or supplemental procedure as necessary. Any special taxes that may not be collected on the County tax roll shall be collected through a direct billing procedure by the Treasurer of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, acting for and on behalf of the District. SECTION 6. SPECIAL TAX ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES Pursuant to and in compliance with the provisions of Government Code Section 50075.1, this Board of Directors hereby establishes the following accountability measures pertaining to the levy by the District of the special taxes within the Revised Annexation Area as described in Section 5 above: A. Each such special tax shall be levied for the specifc purposes section in Section 5. above. B. The proceeds of the levy of each such special tax shall be applied only to the specific applicable purposes set forth in Section 5. above. C. The District shall establish a separate account into which the proceeds of the special taxes levied within the District shall be deposited. D. The Fire Chief or his or her designee, acting for and on behalf of the District, shall annually file a report with the Board of Directors as required pursuant to Government Code Section 50075.3. SECTION 7. ELECTION The proposition related to the levy of the special tax shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the Annexation Area, said electors being the landowners, with each landowner having one (1) vote for each acre or portion thereof of land which he or she owns within said annexed territory. The special election shall be held on the 12th day of December 2007, and said election shall be a special election to be conducted by the Secretary (hereinafter "Election Official"). If the proposition for the levy of the special tax receives the approval of more than two-thirds (2/3) of the votes cast on the proposition, the special tax maybe levied as provided for in this Resolution and the Board of Directors may determine that the Annexation Area is added to and part of the District. SECTION 8. BALLOT The ballot proposal to be submitted to the qualified voters at the election shall generally be as follows: PROPOSITION A RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1, AUTHORIZATION FOR SPECIAL TAX LEVY Shall Community Facilities District No. 85-1 of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District be authorized to levy special taxes within the territory shown on "Boundary Map of Community Facilities District No. 85-1 Annexation No. 07-10 Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, County Of San Bernardino, State Of California" (the "Annexation Map") P297 Resolution No. FD 07- Page -4- pursuant to the rate and method of apportionment of special taxes (the "Special Tax Formula")set forth in Ordinance No. FD 44 to finance authorized services and administrative expenses? SECTION 9. VOTE The appropriate mark placed in the voting square after the word "YES" shall be counted in favor of the adoption of the proposition, and the appropriate mark placed in the voting square after the word "NO" in the manner as authorized, shall be counted against the adoption of said proposition. SECTION 10. ELECTION PROCEDURE The Election Official is herebyauthorized to take any and all steps necessary for the holding of said election. Said Election Official shall perform and render all services and proceedings incidental to and connected with the conduct of said election, and said services shall include, but not be limited to the following: A. Prepare and furnish to the election officers necessary election supplies for the conduct of the election. Cause to be printed the requisite number of official ballots, tally sheets and other necessary forms. C. Furnish and address official ballots for the qualified electors of the Annexation Area. D. Cause the official ballots to be mailed and/or delivered, as required bylaw. E. Receive the returns of the election. F. Sort and assemble the election material and supplies in preparation for the canvassing of the returns. G. Canvass the returns of the election. H. Furnish a tabulation of the number of votes given in the election. Make all arrangements and take the necessary steps to pay all costs of the election incurred as a result of services performed for the District and pay costs and expenses of all election officials. J. Conduct and handle all other matters relating to the proceedings and conduct of the election in the manner and form as required by law. P298 Resolution No. FD 07- Page -5- PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of 2007. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAINED: Donald J. Kurth, M.D., President ATTEST: Debra J. Adams, Secretary I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, SECRETARY of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, at a Regular Meeting of said Board held on the _ day of 2007. Executed this day of 2007 at Rancho Cucamonga, California. Debra J. Adams, Secretary P299 Resolution No. FD 07- Page -6- EXHIBIT "A" COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1 ANNEXATION NO. 07-10 RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAXES The rate and method of apportionment, limitations on and adjustment to the Special Tax shall be as follows: To pay for fire suppression services and to finance fire suppression facilities, the Maximum Special Tax in Community Facilities District No. 85-1, Annexation No. 07-10 for Fiscal Year 2007-2008 shall be: Structures Maximum Annual Special Tax Residential 1 DU = ($143.31) Multi-Family 2 DU: 1.75 = ($143.31) 3 DU: 2.25 = ($143.31) 4 DU: 2.65 = ($143.31) 5-14 DU: 2.65 = ($143.31) + {.35 (TU-4) ($143.31)} 15-30 DU: 6.15 = ($143.31) + {.30 (TU-14) ($143.31)} 31-80 DU: 10.65 = ($143.31) + {.25 (TU-30) ($143.31)} 81 - up DU: 23.15 = ($143.31) + {.20 (TU-80) ($143.31)} Commercial ($143.31) per acre + $.078 per SF Industrial ($143.31) per acre + $.095 per SF Note: DU =Dwelling Unit TU =Total Units SF =Square Foot ANNUAL ADJUSTMENT The maximum Special Tax shall be annually adjusted commencing on July 1, 2007 and each July 15'thereafter for (a) changes in the cost of living or (b) changes in cost of living and changes in population as defined in Section 7901.of the Government Code, as amended, whichever is lesser. P300 Resolution No. FD 07- Page -7- REDUCTION IN SPECIAL TAX Commercial and industrial structures shall be granted a reduction in the Special Tax for the installation of complete sprinkler systems. In addition, multi-floor commercial and industrial structures shall be granted a reduction in Special Tax for each separate floor above or below the main ground floor of the structure. LIMITATION ON SPECIAL TAX LEVY The Special Tax shall only be levied on Developed Property. Developed Property is defined to be property: which is not owned by a public or governmental agency; which is not vacant; - where a "certificate of occupancy" or "utility release" from the City of Rancho Cucamonga has been issued; which has an existing building or structure onsite; - which does not have as its sole use power transmission towers, railroad tracks, and flood control facilities. Areas granted as easements for such purposes shall be subtracted from the total acreage of the underlying lot. The annual levy of the Special Tax shall be based upon an annual determination by the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District of the amount of other revenues available to meet budget requirements. As used in this formula, "available revenue" shall include ad valorem taxes, State of California augmentation, tax increment revenues received from the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and any other source of revenue except the Special Tax. The Board of Directors shall take all responsible steps to retain maximum Redevelopment Agency funding to which, by agreement, they may lawfully receive. To the extent available revenues are insufficient to meet budget requirements, the Board of Directors may levy the Special Tax. For further particulars regarding the rate and method of apportionment of the Special Tax, reference is made to the Final Report Mello-Roos Community Facilities District No. 85-1 for Fire Suppression Facilities/Services -Foothill Fire Protection District, a copy of which is on file in the office of the Fire Chief of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. STAFF REPORT RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT' Date: To: From: By: Subject: December 5, 2007 President and Members of the Board of Directors Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager Peter M. Bryan, Fire Chief Janet Walker, Management Analyst II P301 :~ ' ~fi~'~ ~~ ~.:,t ~_,, .,~ >t .~ . RANCHO C',UCAD-TONGA ANNEXATION OF SUBTPM 18794 TO AN EXISTING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (CFD 85-1) RECOMMENDATION Consideration of adoption of a resolution making determinations and authorizing the submittal of the levy of special annexed (CalEast Phelan 8th & Community Facilities District a BACKGROUND taxes to the qualified electors of territory proposed to be Vineyard, LLC -Annexation No. 07-8) to an existing nd calling a special election. CalEast Phelan 8th & Vineyard, LLC (SUBTPM 18794) has submitted a proposal to subdivide 19.35 acres in conjunction with the development of an Industrial/Warehouse complex totaling 11 buildings and 11 parcels and is conditioned by the City and Fire District to annex to the existing Community Facilities District (CFD) 85-1 in order to mitigate the development's impact upon fire protection services. On October 17, 2007, the Board initiated formal annexation proceedings by adopting a resolution approving a boundary map (Exhibit "A") of the territory proposed to be annexed and the Resolution of Intention to Annex SUBTPM18794 into the existing CFD 85-1. This resolution, among other things, declared the intention of the Board of Directors to levy a special tax within the territory proposed to be annexed to finance fire protection and suppression services and setting a public hearing regarding the proposed annexation to be held on December 5, 2007. Through adoption of this resolution before the Board this evening, the Board will accomplish the following: • Make certain determinations as set forth in the resolution • Call for a special election to be conducted on December 12, 2007 • Authorize submittal of the levy of the special tax to qualified electors P302 Annexation of Territory to an existing CFD 85-1 December 5, 2007 ANALYSIS The annexation of SUBTPM 18794 into CFD 85-1 will satisfy the conditions of development relating to mitigating impacts upon fire protection services. CalEast Phelan 8`h & Vineyard, LLC, property owner, is in full support of the annexation of the property being annexed. The Registrar of Voters has certified there are no registered voters residing within the territory to be annexed. Therefore, the election will be a landowner's vote, the landowner having one vote per acre or portion thereof of land within the territory proposed to be annexed. CalEast Phelan 8`h & Vineyard, LLC, property owner, has executed a "Consent and Waiver" of time frames relating to the election. Exhibit "A" of the Resolution sets forth the rate and method of apportionment of the special tax proposed to be levied within the territory to be annexed which is consistent with the special tax levied upon all territory currently within CFD 85-1. At the special election to be held on December 12, 2007, the landowner will cast their vote ballot(s). The Board Secretary will then canvas the ballot(s). At the next Board meeting, the Board will consider adopting the resolution declaring the election results. If 2/3 of the votes are cast in favor of the levy of the special tax, the Board may declare the property to be annexed. A representative for the property owner will be present during the meeting should any questions arise regarding these proceedings. The Public Notice regarding the Public Hearing has been advertised in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin. R pectfully submitted, l~~ Pete M. Bry Fire Chief Attachments P303 RESOLUTION NO. FD 07- O~F A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY (ANNEXATION NO. 07-8) TO AN EXISTING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (CFD 85-1 ), CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION AND AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF THE LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS WHEREAS, the BOARD OF DIRECTORS (the "Board of Directors") of the RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT (the "Fire Protection District"), RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, has previously declared its intention and held and conducted proceedings relating to the annexation of territory to an existing community facilities district pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982", being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California, and specifically Article 3.5 thereof (the "Act"). The existing Community Facilities District has been designated as COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1 (the "District"); and, WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing relating to the annexation of territory to the District, the extent of the territory to be annexed (the "Annexation Area"), the furnishing of certain public services and all other related matters has been given; and, WHEREAS, it has now been determined that written protests have not been received by 50% or more of the registered voters residing either within the Annexation Area or the District and/or property owners representing more than one-half (1/2) or more of the area of land within the Annexed Area orwithin District; and, WHEREAS, inasmuch as there have been less than twelve (12) persons registered to vote within the Annexation Area for each of the 90 preceding days, this legislative body desires to submit the levy of the required special tax to the landowners of the Annexation Area, said landowners being the qualified electors as authorized by law. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District does hereby resolve as follows: SECTION 1. RECITALS The above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2. DETERMINATIONS It is determined by this Board of Directors that: A. all proceedings prior hereto were valid and taken in conformity with the requirements of law, and specifically the provisions of the Act; less than twelve (12) registered voters have resided within the Annexation Area for each of the ninety (90) days preceding the close of the public hearing and, consequently, the qualified electors shall be the landowners of the Annexation Area and each landowner who is the owner of record as of the close of the public hearing, or the authorized representative thereof, shall have one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of land that she or he owns within the Annexation Area; C. the time limit specified by the Act for conducting an election to submit the levy of the special taxes to the qualifed electors of the Annexation Area and the requirements for impartial analysis and ballot P304 Resolution No. FD 07- Page -2- arguments have been waived with the unanimous consent of the qualified electors of the Annexation Area; D. the Secretary, acting as the election official, has consented to conducting any required election on a date which is less than 125 days following the adoption of any resolution annexing the Annexation Area to the District; and the public services proposed to be financed from the proceeds of special taxes to be levied within the Annexation Area are necessary to meet increased demands placed upon the Fire Protection District as a result of development and/or rehabilitation occurring in the Annexation Area. SECTION 3. BOUNDARIES OF ANNEXED AREA The boundaries and parcels of land in the Annexation Area and on which special taxes are proposed to be levied in order to pay the costs and expenses for the public facilities and services described in Section 4 below are generally described as follows: All that property and territory proposed to be annexed to the District, as said property is shown on a map as previously approved by this legislative body, said map entitled "Boundary Map of Community Facilities District No. 85-1 Annexation No. 07-8 Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, County Of San Bernardino, State Of California" (the "Annexation Map"), a copy of which is on file in the Office of the Secretary and shall remain open for public inspection. SECTION 4. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES The services that are authorized to be financed from the proceeds of special taxes levied within the District are certain services which are in addition to those services required for the territory within the District and will not be replacing services already available. A general description of the services authorized to be financed by the District is as follows: The performance by employees of functions, operations, maintenance and repair activities in order to provide fire protection and suppression services. The District shall finance all direct, administrative and incidental annual costs and expenses necessary to provide such services. The same types of services which are authorized to be financed by the District from the proceeds of special taxes levied within the District are the types of services proposed to be financed from the special taxes proposed to be levied within the Annexation Area. If and to the extent possible such services shall be provided in common with District and the Annexation Area. SECTION 5. SPECIAL TAX Except where funds are otherwise available and subject to the approval of the qualified electors of the Annexation Area, a special tax sufficient to pay for such services required for the Annexation Area, secured by recordation of a continuing lien against all non-exempt real property in the Annexation Area will be levied annually within the boundaries of the Annexation Area. For particulars as to the rate and method of apportionment of the proposed special tax, reference is made to the attached and incorporated Exhibit "A" which sets forth in sufficient detail the method of apportionment to allow each landowner or resident within the Annexation Area to clearly estimate the maximum amount of the special tax that such person will have to pay. P305 Resolution No. FD 07- Page -3- The special taxes shall be collected in the same manner as ad valorem property taxes and shall be subject to the same penalties, procedure, sale and lien priority in any case of delinquency, as applicable for ad valorem taxes; however, as applicable, this Board of Directors may, by resolution, establish and adopt an alternate or supplemental procedure as necessary. Any special taxes that may not be collected on the County tax roll shall be collected through a direct billing procedure by the Treasurer of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, acting for and on behalf of the District. SECTION 6. SPECIAL TAX ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES Pursuant to and in compliance with the provisions of Government Code Section 50075.1, this Board of Directors hereby establishes the following accountability measures pertaining to the levy by the District of the special taxes within the Revised Annexation Area as described in Section 5 above: A. Each such special tax shall be levied for the specific purposes section in Section 5. above. B. The proceeds of the levy of each such special tax shall be applied only to the specific applicable purposes set forth in Section 5. above. C. The District shall establish a separate account into which the proceeds of the special taxes levied within the District shall be deposited. D. The Fire Chief or his or her designee, acting for and on behalf of the District, shall annually file a report with the Board of Directors as required pursuant to Government Code Section 50075.3. SECTION 7. ELECTION The proposition related to the lery of the special tax shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the Annexation Area, said electors being the landowners, with each landowner having one (1) vote for each acre or portion thereof of land which he or she owns within said annexed territory. The special election shall be held on the 12th day of December 2007, and said election shall be a special election to be conducted by the Secretary (hereinafter "Election Official"). If the proposition for the levy of the special tax receives the approval of more than two-thirds (2/3) of the votes cast on the proposition, the special tax may be levied as provided for in this Resolution and the Board of Directors may determine that the Annexation Area is added to and part of the District. SECTION 8. BALLOT The ballot proposal to be submitted to the qualified voters at the election shall generally be as follows: PROPOSITION A RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1, AUTHORIZATION FOR SPECIAL TAX LEVY Shall Community Facilities District No. 85-1 of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District be authorized to levy special taxes within the territory shown on "Boundary Map of Community Facilities District No. 85-1 Annexation No. 07-8 Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, County Of San Bernardino, State Of California" (the "Annexation Map") P306 Resolution No. FD 07- Page ~- pursuant to the rate and method of apportionment of special taxes (the "Special Tax Formula")set forth in Ordinance No. FD 44 to finance authorized services and administrative expenses? SECTION 9. VOTE The appropriate mark placed in the voting square after the word "YES" shall be counted ih favor of the adoption of the proposition, and the appropriate mark placed in the voting square after the word "NO" in the manner as authorized, shall be counted against the adoption of said proposition. SECTION 10. ELECTION PROCEDURE The Election Official is herebyauthorized to take anyand all steps necessary for the holding of said election. Said Election Official shall perform and render all services and proceedings incidental to and connected with the conduct of said election, and said services shall include, but not be limited to the following: A. Prepare and furnish to the election officers necessary election supplies for the conduct of the election. B. Cause to be printed the requisite number of official ballots, tally sheets and other necessary forms. C. Furnish and address official ballots for the qualified electors of the Annexation Area. D. Cause the official ballots to be mailed and/or delivered, as required by law. E. Receive the returns of the election. F. Sort and assemble the election material and supplies in preparation for the canvassing of the returns. G. Canvass the returns of the election. H. Furnish a tabulation of the number of votes given in the election. Make all arrangements and take the necessary steps to pay all costs of the election incurred as a result of services performed for the District and pay costs and expenses of all election officials. Conduct and handle all other matters relating to the proceedings and conduct of the election in the manner and form as required by law. P307 Resolution No. FD 07- Page -5- PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of 2007. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAINED: Donald J. Kurth, M.D., President ATTEST: Debra J. Adams, Secretary I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, SECRETARY of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, at a Regular Meeting of said Board held on the day of 2007. Executed this day of 2007 at Rancho Cucamonga, California. Debra J. Adams, Secretary P308 Resolution No. FD 07- Page -6- EXHIBIT "A" COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1 ANNEXATION NO. 07-8 RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAXES The rate and method of apportionment, limitations on and adjustment to the Special Tax shall be as follows: To pay for fire suppression services and to finance fire suppression facilities, the Maximum Special Tax in Community Facilities District No. 85-1, Annexation No. 07-8 for Fiscal Year 2007-2008 shall be: Structures Maximum Annual Special Tax Residential 1 DU =($143.31) Multi-Family 2 DU: 1.75 = ($143.31) 3 DU: 2.25 = ($143.31) 4 DU: 2.65 = ($143.31) 5-14 DU: 2.65 = ($143.31) + {.35 (TU-4) ($143.31)} 15-30 DU: 6.15 = ($143.31) + {.30 (TU-14) ($143.31)} 31-80 DU: 10.65 =($143.31)+{.25(TU-30) ($143.31)} 81 - up DU: 23.15 = ($143.31) + {.20 (TU-80) ($143.31)} Commercial ($143.31) per acre + $.078 per SF Industrial ($143.31) per acre + $.095 per SF Note: DU =Dwelling Unit TU =Total Units SF =Square Foot ANNUAL ADJUSTMENT The maximum Special Tax shall be annually adjusted commencing on July 1, 2007 and each July 151 thereafter for (a) changes in the cost of living or (b) changes in cost of living and changes in population as defined in Section 7901 of the Government Code, as amended, whichever is lesser. P309 Resolution No. FD 07- Page -7- REDUCTION IN SPECIAL TAX Commercial and industrial structures shall be granted a reduction in the Special Tax for the installation of complete sprinkler systems. In addition, multi-floor commercial and industrial structures shall be granted a reduction in Special Tax for each separate floor above or below the main ground floor of the structure. LIMITATION ON SPECIAL TAX LEVY The Special Tax shall only be levied on Developed Property. Developed Property is defined to be property: which is not owned by a public or governmental agency; which is not vacant; - where a "certificate of occupancy" or "utility release" from the City of Rancho Cucamonga has been issued; which has an existing building or structure onsite; - which does not have as its sole use power transmission towers, railroad tracks, and flood control facilities. Areas granted as easements for such purposes shall be subtracted from the total acreage of the underlying lot. The annual levy of the Special Tax shall be based upon an annual determination by the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District of the amount of other revenues available to meet budget requirements. As used in this formula, "available revenue" shall include ad valorem taxes, State of California augmentation, tax increment revenues received from the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and any other source of revenue except the Special Tax. The Board of Directors shall take all responsible steps to retain maximum Redevelopment Agency funding to which, by agreement, they may lawfully receive. To the extent available revenues are insufficient to meet budget requirements, the Board of Directors may levy the Special Tax. For further particulars regarding the rate and method of apportionment of the Special Tax, reference is made to the Final Report Mello-Roos Community Facilities District No. 85-1 for Fire Suppression Facilities/Services -Foothill Fire Protection District, a copy of which is on file in the office of the Fire Chief of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. STAFF REPORT BUILDING .iND S.iFET1' DEP.iRTD1ENT Date: December 5. 2007 RANCHO C,UCAMONGA To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager ~/ From: Trang Huynh, Building & Safety Official] ./A,~jA~ ' Subject: ADOPTION OF THE 2007 EDITION OF TH°°E ALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS CODE RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council hold the second reading of the accompanying ordinance and conduct the advertised public hearing precedent to the adoption of the 2007 Edition of the California Building Standards Code. BACKGROUND The Building Standards Commission recently adopted the 2007 Edition of the California Building Standards Code, which is also known as the California Code of Regulations, Title 24 (CCR, T-24). The 2007 California Codes include the California Building Code, the California Plumbing Code, the California Mechanical Code, and the California Electrical Code. The accompanying ordinance will bring all of the City's Building and Construction Regulations into compliance with the latest codes adopted by the California Building Standards Commission. Under State statute, specific referenced model codes must be adopted by the local jurisdictions within 180 days of the publication date of the model codes. The effective date for local enforcement of the new codes will be January 4, 2008. Additionally, any modifications made by local agencies to the technical regulations adopted by the California Building Standards Commission may only become effective if the local jurisdiction makes express findings of needs for changes due to local conditions. Further, these modifications must be directly related to local climatic, geographic, or topographical conditions in the form of a Resolution, and must be filed directly with the Building Standards Commission after its adoption. The Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings and the Uniform Housing Code. 1997 Edition, included in the adoption completes our Building and Construction Regulations for buildings and structures in the City. ANALYSIS P310 The 2007 California Codes are based on the International Building Code, 2006 Editions, published by the International Code Council (ICC); the Uniform Plumbing and Mechanical Codes, 2006 Editions, published by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials (IAMPO); P311 ADOPTION OP THE 2007 EDITION OF TI-fE CALIFORNIA BUII,DING STANDARDS CODE Pr\GE 2 DrcE tiasER 5, 2007 and the National Electrical Code, 2005 Edition, published by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). At this time of code adoption, California starts to use the International Building Code (IBC) which is a major change compared to the normal Uniform Building Code (UBC). The IBC has new requirements for wind design, seismic regulations and requirements for construction for buildings in the urban wild land interface area, which are better for California jurisdictions. In addition, the IBC is more of a performance based code rather than a prescriptive code like the UBC. Performance based code allows the designers to use different recognized engineering manuals and principles in designing the structures without restricting the designs based on only one set of procedures. Over the years, the City has adopted a number of technical amendments to the building codes because of the special local climatic, geological, and topographical conditions. All applicable amendments are carried over into the new codes with some minor adjustments and rearrangements due to the new requirements and the new chapters' names of the IBC. At the beginning of each Municipal code section shown in the Ordinance, there are tables of the code sections which identify the local amendments. No new fees or changes to the current permit fee structures are proposed as part of this code adoption process. It should be noted that the amendments to the administrative provisions and regulations, addressing elements of construction that are not regulated by the California Building Standards Commission, do not need to meet the test of being necessary due to climatic, geographic or topographic conditions. SUMMARY State law requires that we adopt certain model codes covered by the accompanying Ordinance. The building, mechanical, plumbing and electrical codes adopted as part of the Ordinance meet the responsibilities of State mandates. The Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings and the Uniform Housing Code 1997 Edition included in the adoption completes our Building and Construction Regulations and provides for consistency with our neighboring jurisdictions. Respectfully submitted, ~ ~~2~~'w~ ~//~ Trang O. Huynh, P.E. Building and Safety Official TOH:Ic Attachment: Ordinance No. P312 ORDINANCE NO. 7 S AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTERS 15.04, 15.12, 15.16, 15.20, 15.24, 15.28 AND 15.32, OF TITLE 15 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE, INCORPORATING THE "INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE, VOLUMES 1 AND 2", 2006 EDITION INCLUDING APPENDICES THERETO; THE 2007 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE, INCORPORATING THE "UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE", 2006 EDITION; INCLUDING APPENDICES THERETO; THE 2007 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE, INCORPORATING THE "UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE", 2006 EDITION, INCLUDING APPENDICES THERETO; THE 2007 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE, INCORPORATING THE "NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE", 2005 EDITION, INCLUDING APPENDICES; TOGETHER WITH CERTAIN AMENDMENTS, DELETIONS, ADDITIONS, AND EXCEPTIONS. A. RECITALS. (i) Article 2 of Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Division 1 of Title 5 of the California Government Code authorizes the adoption, by reference of the Codes specified in the title of the Ordinance. (ii) At least one copy of each of said Codes certified as full, true and correct copies thereof by the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga have been filed in the Office of the City Clerk in accordance with the provisions of Government Code Section 50022.6. (iii) A duly noticed public hearing, as required by California Government Code Section 50022.3, has been conducted and concluded priorto the adoption of this Ordinance. (iv) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this ordinance have occurred. B. ORDINANCE. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby find, determine and ordain as follows: Ordinance No. Page 2 SECTION 1: In all respects as set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance. SECTION 2: Chapters 15.04, 15.12, 15.16, 15.20, 15.24, 15.28 and 15.32 of Title 15 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, entitled Buildings and Construction, are hereby amended as provided for herein, provided that said amendments shall not apply to or excuse any violation thereof occurring prior to the effective date of this Ordinance and provided further that the provisions of Title 15 as exist prior to the adoption of this ordinance shall continue to be applicable to construction for which permits have been issued prior to the effective date of this Ordinance. SECTION 3: Chapter 15.04 of Title 15 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "CHAPTER 15.04 CODES ADOPTION Section: 15.04.010 Codes adoption. 15.04.010 Codes adoption. 2007 California Building Code, incorporating the "International Building Code, Volumes 1 and 2", 2006 Edition, including appendices thereto; the 2007 California Mechanical Code, incorporating the "Uniform Mechanical Code", 2006 Edition; including appendices thereto; the 2007 California Plumbing Code, incorporating the "Uniform Plumbing Code", 2006 Edition, including appendices thereto; the 2007 California Electrical Code, incorporating the "National Electrical Code ", 2005 Edition; including appendices thereto; the "Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Building", 1997 Edition; and the "Uniform Housing Code, 1997 Edition; are hereby adopted in their entirety as the Building and Construction Regulations of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, together with the amendments, deletions, additions, and exceptions set forth in Chapters 15.04, 15.12, 15.16, 15.20, 15.24, 15.28 and 15.32 below." P313 SECTION 4: Chapter 15.12 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended to read, as follows: Ordinance No. Page 3 "CHAPTER 15.12 BUILDING CODE Sections: 15.12.005 Adoption of Appendix Chapter 1. 15.12.010 Section 105.2 of Appendix Chapter 1 Amended - Work Exempt from permit. 15.12.020 Section 112.1 and 112.3 of Appendix Chapter 1 Amended - Board of Appeals. 75.12.030 Section 903 Amended -Automatic Sprinkler System. 15.12.040 Table 1505.1 Amended -Minimum Roof Classes. 15.12.050 Section 1609.3 Amended -Basic Wind Speed. 15.12.060 Section 1614, 1614.1, 1614.1.1 Amended -Minimum Seismic Base Shear Provisions of ASCE 7-02. 15.12.070 Appendix Chapters Deleted. 15.12.080 Section J101.1 of Appendix J Amended -Scope. 15.12.090 Section J 101 of Appendix J Amended -Special Requirements for Hazardous Conditions. 15.12.100 Section J103.2 of Appendix JAmended -Exemptions. 15.12.110 Section J104 of Appendix JAmended - As Built Plans. 15.12.120 Section J110.3 of Appendix JAmended -Temporary Erosion Control During Grading. 15.12.130 Section J112 of Appendix JAdded -Protection of Adjacent Property. 15.12.140 Section J113 of Appendix J Added -Dust Control. 15.12.005 Adoption of Appendix Chapter 1 of the California Building Code. Appendix Chapter 1 of the California Building Code is hereby adopted and shall become the administrative provisions of the City of Rancho Cucamonga for regulating the construction, erection, enlargement, alteration, repair, moving, removal, demolition, conversion, occupancy, equipment, use and occupancy and maintenance of all buildings and/or structures in the City. 15.12.010 Section 105.2 Of Appendix Chapter 1 Amended -Work exempt from permit. Section 105.2 of the Building Code is hereby amended by amending item 2 and adding a new item 14 to read as follows: 2. Wood, chain-link, plastic, metal or similar fences not over 6 feet in height or masonry, concrete fence not over 3 feet in height above the lowest adjacent grade unless supporting a surcharge or impounding class I, II or III-A liquids. P314 14. Flag pole not to exceed 20 feet in height above ground in a residential lot Ordinance No. Page 4 15.12.020 Section 112.1 and 112.3 Of Appendix Chapter 1 Amended -Board of Appeals. The Section of 112.1 and 112.3 of Appendix Chapter 1 is hereby amended to read as follows: 112.1. General. In order to hear and decide appeals of orders, decisions or determination made by the Building and Safety Official relative to the application and interpretation of this code, there shall be and is hereby created a Board of Appeals consisting of 3 members and 2 alternates who are qualified by experience and training to pass on matters pertaining to building construction and who are not employees of the jurisdiction. The Building and Safety Official shall be an ex officio member of and shall act as Secretary to said Board but shall have no vote on any matter before the Board. The Board shall adopt rules of procedure for conducting its business, and shall render all decisions and findings in writing to the appellant with a duplicate copy to the Building and Safety Official. 112.3. Qualifications. Deleted. 15.12.030 Section 903 in Amended -Automatic Sprinkler System. Refer to the code amendments adopted for Section 903 of California Fire Code -Automatic Sprinkler Systems, all of which are incorporated by reference herein. 15.12.040 Table 1505.1 Amended -Minimum roof classes Table 1505.1 is hereby amended to read as follows: Table 1505.1 Minimum Roof Covering Classification for different types of construction for new buildings, re-roofs or additions. IA IB IIA IIB IIIA IIIB IV VA VB A A A A A A B B B 15.12.050 Section 1609.3 Amended -Basic Wind Speed. Section 1609.3 is hereby amended to by adding a sentence at the end of the section to read as follows: For areas north of Banyan Street, new structures shall be designed for a minimum wind speed Vrm of 85 miles per hour. 15.12.060 Section1614, 1614.1, 1614.1.1 -Amended -Minimum Seismic Base Shear Provisions of ASCE. 7-02 adopted. Section 1614, 1614.1 and 1614.1.1 are hereby added to the Building Code to read as follows: Section 1614 Modifications to ASCE 7 P315 1614.1 General. The Text of ASCE 7 shall be modified as indicated in this Section. Ordinance No. Page 5 1614.1.1 ASCE 7, Section 12.8.1.1 Modify ASCE 7 Section 12.8.1.1 by amending Equation 12.8-5 as follows: Cs = 0.044 SosI (Eq. 12.8-5) 15.12.070 Appendix Chapters Deleted. Appendices chapters B, C, D, F, H in the Building Code are hereby deleted. 15.12.080 Section J101-1 of Appendix JAmended -Scope J101.1 Scope. The provisions of this chapter apply to grading, excavation and earthwork construction, including fills and embankments. Where conflicts occur between and technical requirements of this chapter and the soils report, the soils report shall govern. The designs of the above work as described above need to meet the recognized and accepted civil and geotechnical engineering practices and principles. 15.12.090 Section J 101 of Appendix JAmended -Special Requirements for Hazardous Conditions. Section J101.3 is hereby added to read as follows: J101.3 Special Requirements for Hazardous Conditions. Whenever the Building and Safety Official determines that any existing excavation or embankment or fill on private property has become a hazard to life and limb, or endangers property, or adversely affects the safety, use or stability of a public way or drainage channel, the owner of the property upon which the excavation or fill is located, or other person or agent in control of said property, upon receipt of notice in writing from the Building and Safety Official, shall within the period specified therein repair or eliminate such excavation or embankment to eliminate the hazard and to be in conformance with the requirements ofthis code. 15.12.100 Section J103.2 of Appendix J -Amended -Exemptions. Section J 103.2 is hereby amended to read as follows: J103.2 Exemptions: A grading permit is not required for the following: P316 1. When approved by the Building and Safety Official, grading in an isolated, self- contained area if there is no danger to private or public property. Ordinance No. Page 6 2. An excavation below finished grade for basements and footings of a building, retaining wall or other structure authorized by a valid building permit. This shall not exempt any fill made with the material from such excavation or exempt any excavation having an unsupported height greater than 5 feet (1524mm) after the completion of such structure. 3. Cemetery graves. 4. Refuse disposal sites controlled by other regulations. 5. Excavations for wells or tunnels or utilities. 6. Mining, quarrying, excavating, processing or stockpiling of rock, sand, gravel, aggregate or clay where established and provided for by law, provided such operations do not affect the lateral support or increase the stresses in or pressure upon any adjacent or contiguous property. 7. Exploratory excavations under the direction of soil engineers or engineering geologists. 8. An excavation that (1) is less than 2 feet (610mm) in depth or (2) does not create a cut slope greater than 5 feet (1524mm) in height and steeper than 1 unit vertical in 2 units horizontal. 9. A fill less than 1 foot (305mm) in depth and placed on natural terrain with a slope flatter than 1 unit vertical in 5 units horizontal (20% slope), or less than 3 feet (914mm) in depth, not intended to support structures, that does not exceed 50 cubic yards (38.3m) on any one lot and does not obstruct a drainage course. Exemption from the permit requirements of this chapter shall not be deemed to grant authorization for any work to be done in any manner in violation of the provisions of this chapter or any other laws or ordinances of this jurisdiction. 15.12.110 Section J104 of Appendix JAmended - As-built plans. Section J 104.5 is hereby added to read as follows: J104.5 As-built plans. The permittee shall provide a copy of as-built plans to the City for a permanent record at the end of the approved grading work. 15.12.120 Section J110.3 of Appendix J Amended -Temporary Erosion Control during grading. Section J110.3 is hereby added to read as follows: J110.3 Temporary Erosion Control durin4 grading work. The permittee shall put into effect and maintain all precautionary measures necessary to protect adjacent watercourses and public or private property from damage by erosion, flooding, and deposition of mud or debris origination from the site during the grading operation. P317 Ordinance No. Page 7 15.12.130 Section J712 of Appendix J Added -Protection of adjacent property. Section J112 is hereby added to read as follows: J112 Protection of Adjacent Property. During grading operations, the permittee shall be responsible for the prevention of damage to adjacent property and no person shall excavate on land sufficiently close to the property line to endanger any adjoining public street, a sidewalk, alley, or other public or private property without supporting and protecting such property from settling, cracking, or other damage which might result. 15.12.140 Section J113 of Appendix J -Added -Dust Control. Section J113 is hereby added to read as follows: J113. Dust Control. The owner of the site or the project contractor shall put into effect and maintain all precautionary measures necessary to prevent dust blowing from the site to adjacent properties. SECTION 5: Chapter 15.16 of Title 15 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended to read, as follows: "CHAPTER 15.16 MECHANICAL CODE Sections: 15.16.010 Section 110.1 of Appendix Chapter 1 Amended -General. 15.16.020 Section 115.2 of Appendix Chapter 1 Amended -Permit fees. 15.16.030 Section 115.3 of Appendix Chapter 1 Amended -Plan review fees. 15.16.040 Table 1-1 of Appendix Chapter 1 Deleted - Mechanical permitfees. 15.16.050 Section 504.3 Amended -Domestic Dryer Vent. 15.16.010 Section 110.1 of Appendix Chapter 1 Amended -General. Section 110.1 of the Mechanical Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 110.1. General. In order to hear and decide appeals of orders, decisions or determination made by the Building and Safety Official relative to the application and interpretation of this code, there shall be and is hereby created a Board of Appeals consisting of 3 members and 2 alternates who are qualified by experience and training to pass on matters pertaining to building construction and who are not employees of the jurisdiction. The Building and Safety Official shall be an ex officio member of and shall act as Secretary to said Board but shall have no vote on any matter before the Board. The Board shall adopt rules of procedure for conducting its business, and P318 Ordinance No. Page 8 shall render all decisions and findings in writing to the appellant with a duplicate copy to the Building and Safety Official. 15.16.020 Section 115.2 of Appendix Chapter 1 Amended -Permit fees. Section 115.2 of the Mechanical Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 115.2. Permit Fees. The fee for each permit shall be as established by Resolution of the City Council. 15.16.030 Section 115.3 of Appendix Chapter 1 Amended -Plan review fees. Section 115.3 of the Mechanical Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 115.3. Plan Review Fees. When Section 115.2 requires submittal documents, a plan review fee shall be paid at the time of submitting plans and specifications for review. Said plan review fee shall be as set forth by Resolution of the City Council. Where plans are incomplete or changed so as to require additional plan review, an additional plan review fee shall be charged. 15.16.040 Table 1-1 Deleted -Mechanical permit fees. Table 1-1-Mechanical Permit Fees of the Mechanical Code is hereby deleted. 15.16.050 Section 504.3.2.1 Amended -Domestic Dryer Vent. A sentence is hereby added to the first paragraph of section 504.3.2-.1 to read as follows: 504.3.2.1 Domestic Dryer Vents. A vent clean-out shall be provided at the lower termination of vertical vent pipe. The cleanout door shall be accessible and tight fitting. SECTION 6: Chapter 15.20 of Title 15 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended to read, as follows: "CHAPTER 15.20 PLUMBING CODE Sections: 15.20.010 Section 102 of Appendix Chapter 1 Amended -Board of Appeals 15.20.020 Section 103.4.1 Amended -Permit fees. 15.20.030 Section 103.4.2 Amended -Plan review fees. 15.20.040 Table 1-1 Deleted -Plumbing permit fees. P319 15.20.050 Appendix Chapters Deleted. Ordinance No. Page 9 15.20.060 Section 701.1.2 Amended -ABS and PVC Materials. 15.20.070 Section 701.1.2.2 Amended -ABS and PVC Material for Residential Construction 15.20.010 Section 102 of Appendix Chapter 1 Amended -Board of Appeals Section 102.4 is hereby added to read as follows: 102.4. Board of Appeals In order to hear and decide appeals of orders, decisions or determination made by the Building and Safety Official relative to the application and interpretation of this code, there shall be and is hereby created a Board of Appeals consisting of 3 members and 2 alternates who are qualified by experience and training to pass upon matters pertaining to building construction and who are not employees of the jurisdiction. The Building and Safety Official shall be an ex officio member of and shall act as Secretary to said Board but shall have no vote on any matter before the Board. The Board shall adopt rules of procedure for conducting its business, and shall render all decisions and findings in writing to the appellant with a duplicate copy to the Building and Safety Official." 15.20.020 Section 103.4.1 Amended -Permit fees. Section 103.4.1 is hereby amended to read as follows: 103.4.1. Permit Fees. The fee for each permit shall be as established by Resolution of the City Council. 15.20.030 Section 103.4.2 Amended -Plan review fees. Section 103.4.2 is hereby amended to read as follows: 103.4.2. Plan Review Fees. When a plan or other data is required to be submitted by 103.2.2, a plan review fee shall be paid at the time of submitting plans and specifications for review. Said plan review fee shall be as set forth by Resolution of the City Council. Where plans are incomplete or changed so as to require additional review, an additional review fee shall be charged. 15.20.040 Table 1-1 Deleted -Plumbing permit fees. Table 1-1 is hereby deleted. 15.20.050 Appendix Chapter Deleted. Appendices E, F, of the California Plumbing Code are hereby deleted. P320 15.20.060 Section 701.1.2 Amended -ABS and PVC Materials. A sentence is added to the end of Section 701.1.12 to read as follows: Ordinance No. Page 10 ABS and PVC materials can not be used in the fre-resistive buildings. Non- combustible material such as cast iron must be used. 15.20.70 Section 701.1.2.2 Amended -ABS and PVC Materials for Residential Construction. A sentence is added to the end of Section 701.1.2.2 to read as follows: Forthree stories or more, non-combustible material such as cast iron material shall be used for the entire building. SECTION 7: Chapter 15.24 of Title 15 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended to read, as follows: "CHAPTER 15.24 ELECTRICAL CODE Sections: 1524.010 Section 80.15 ofAnnex GAmended -Board of Appeals. 15.24.020 Section 230.71 Amended -Maximum Number of Disconnects. 15.24.010 Section 80.15 of Annex GAmended -Board of Appeals. Section 80.15 Annex G is hereby amended to read as follows: 80.15. Board of Appeals. In order to hear and decide appeals of orders, decisions or determination made by the Building and Safety Official relative to the application and interpretation of this code, there shall be and is hereby created a Board of Appeals consisting of 3 members and 2 alternates who are qualified by experience and training to pass on matters pertaining to building construction and who are not employees of the jurisdiction. The Building and Safety Official shall be an ex officio member of and shall act as Secretary to said Board but shall have no vote on any matter before the Board. The Board shall adopt rules of procedure for conducting its business, and shall render all decisions and findings in writing to the appellant with a duplicate copy to the Building and Safety Official. 15.24.020 Section 230.71 Amended -Maximum Number of Disconnects Section 230.71 is amended to provide that any reference to six (6) means of disconnects or sets of disconnects shall be reduced to one (1). SECTION 8: Chapter 15.28 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended to read, as follows: "CHAPTER 15.28 P321 CODE FOR THE ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS Ordinance No. Page 11 Sections: 15.28.010 Section 205.1 Amended -General. 15.28.010 Section 205.1 Amended -General. Section 205.1 of the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings is hereby amended to read as follows: 205.1. General. In order to hear and decide appeals of orders, decisions or determination made by the Building and Safety Official relative to the application and interpretation of this code, there shall be and is hereby created a Board of Appeals consisting of 3 members and 2 alternates who are qualifed by experience and training to pass upon matters pertaining to building construction and who are not employees of the jurisdiction. The Building and Safety Official shall be an ex officio member of and shall act as Secretary to said Board but shall have no vote on any matter before the Bcard. The Board shall adopt rules of procedure for conducting its business, and shall render all decisions and findings in writing to the appellant with a duplicate copy to the Building and Safety Official." SECTION 9: Chapter 15.32 of Title 15 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended to read, as follows: "CHAPTER 15.32 HOUSING CODE Sections: 15.32.010 Section 203.1 Amended -Board of Appeals. 15.32.010 Section 203.1 Amended -Board of Appeals. Section 203.1 of the Housing Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 203.1. Board of Appeals. In order to hear and decide appeals of orders, decisions or determination made by the Building and Safety Official relative to the application and interpretation of this code, there shall be and is hereby created a Housing Advisory and Appeals Board consisting of 3 members and 2 alternates who are qualified by experience and training to pass upon matters pertaining to building construction and who are not employees of the jurisdiction. The Building and Safety Official shall be an ex officio member of and shall act as Secretary to said Board but shall have no vote on any matter before the Board. The Board shall adopt rules of procedure for conducting its business, and shall render all decisions and findings in writing to the appellantwith a duplicate copy to the Building Official. Appeals to the Board shall be processed in accordance with the provisions contained in Section 1201 of this code. Copies of all P322 Ordinance No. Page 12 rules of procedure adopted by the Board shall be delivered to the Building and Safety Official, who shall make them accessible to the public." SECTION 10: It shall be unlawful for any person, firm partnership, or corporation to violate any provision or to fail to comply with any of the requirements of this Ordinance or the Codes adopted hereby. Any person, firm, partnership, or corporation violating any provision of this Ordinance or the Codes adopted hereby or failing to comply with any of its requirements shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be ~unished by a fine not exceeding One Thousand Dollars ($1,0000) or by imprisonment not exceeding six (6) months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Each person, firm, partnership or corporation shall be deemed guilty of separate offense for each and every day or any portion thereof during which any violation of any of the provisions of this Ordinance or the Codes adopted hereby is committed, continued or permitted by such person, firm, partnership or corporation, and shall be deemed punishable therefore as provided in this Ordinance. SECTION 17: The violation of any of the provisions of this Ordinance or the Codes adopted hereby shall constitute a nuisance and may be abated by the City through civil process by means of restraining order, preliminary or permanent injunction or in any other manner provided by law for the abatement of such nuisances. SECTION 12: The City Council hereby declares that should any provision, section, paragraph, sentence or word of this Ordinance or the Code hereby adopted be rendered or declared invalid by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences and words of this Ordinance and the Codes hereby adopted shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 13: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage at least once in The Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. P323 Ordinance No. Page 13 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of . , 2007 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAINED: Donald J. Kurth M.D., Mayor ATTEST: J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, CITY CLERK ofthe City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a Regular Meeting of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the day of 2007, and was passed at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the day of 2007. Executed this day of 2007, at Rancho Cucamonga, California. P324 Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk P325 STAFF REPORT l - BUILDING AND SAFE7T DEPdRTMENT RANCHO Date: December 5, 2007 C,UCAMONGA To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: Trang Huynh, Building & Safety Official,r~~' Subject: APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION OF THE ITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, SETTING FORTH FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO LOCAL CONDTIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA WHICH MAKE CERTAIN MODIFICATIONS AND CHANGES TO THE 2007 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE, THE CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE, THE CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE, AND THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE NECESSARY RECOMMENDATON: It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached Resolution of Findings with respect to local conditions which make certain modifications and changes to the 2007 Edition of the California Building Standards Code necessary. BACKGROUND: The City is in the process of adopting the California Building Standards Code which includes the 2007 Edition of California Building Code, California Plumbing Code, California Mechanical Code, California Electrical Code and some code amendments to these codes. Health and Safety Code Section 17958.7(a) permits the City to make modifications or changes to the California Building Standards Code which are reasonably necessary because of the local climatic, geographic and topographic conditions. In addition, Health and Safety Code Section 17958.7 also requires that the City, before making any modifications or changes to the California Building Standards Code, shall make express findings that such changes or modifications are necessary. The attached Resolution addresses the findings for the technical amendments which the department is proposing at this time. It should be noted that the amendments to the administrative provisions and regulations do not need to meet the test of being necessary due to climatic, geographic and topographic conditions. The approved Resolution together with the Ordinance 784 adopting the California Building Standards Code as amended will be filed with the California Department of Housing and Community Development and the California Building Standards Commission by the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Respectfully submitted ~~~~~ Trang Q. Huynh Building and Safety Official TOH:Ic Attachment: Resolution 07- P326 RESOLUTION NO. 07- z 7 ~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, SETTING FORTH FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO LOCAL CONDITIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUAMONGA WHICH MAKE CERTAIN MODIFICATIONS AND CHANGES TO THE 2007 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE, THE CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE, THE CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE, AND THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE NECESSARY. WHEREAS, Health and Safety Code Section 17958 provides that the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall adopt Ordinances and regulations imposing the same of modified or changed requirements as are contained in the regulations adopted by the State pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 17722; and WHEREAS, the State of California is mandated by Health and Safety Code Section 17922 to impose the same requirements as are contained in the most recent edition of the Califomia Building Code, the California Plumbing Code, the Califomia Mechanical Code, and Che California Electrical Code (hereinafter referred to collectively as "Codes"); and WHEREAS, Health and Safety Code Section 17598.7(a) permits the City to make modifications or changes to the Codes, which are reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geographic or topographic conditions; and WHEREAS, Health and Safety Code Section 1798.7 requires that the City Council, before making any modifications or changes to the Codes, shall make an express finding that such changes or modifications are reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geographic or topographic conditions; and NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. The Building and Safety Department has recommended that changes and modifications be made to the Codes and have advised that certain said changes and modifications to the California Building Code, 2007 Edition and the California Plumbing Code, 2007 Edition and the Califomia Mechanical Code, 2007 Edition, the California Electrical Code, 2007 Edition, are reasonably necessary due to local conditions in the City of Rancho Cucamonga as described below: Resolution No. p327 Page 2 A. CLIMATIC CONDITIONS 1. Hot, dry Santa Ana winds are common to all areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga and San Bernardino County in general. These winds, which can cause small fires which spread quickly, are a contributing factor to the high fire danger in the area, and create the need for an increased level of fire protection. This added protection will supplement normal fire department response available and provide immediate protection for life and safety of multiple occupancy occupants during fire occurrences. 2. San Bernardino County and the City of Rancho Cucamonga are located in a semi-arid Mediterranean type climate which predisposes all fuels to rapid ignition and spread of fire. Therefore, there exists a need for additional fire protection measures. B. GEOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS San Bernardino County and the City of Rancho Cucamonga are located in Seismic Zone 4. There aze earthquake faults that run along the northern, eastern and southwestern boundaries of the County. The Cucamonga Fault and San Andreas Fault are the major earthquake faults lying on the northern part of the City. They can create major damages and pose one of the greatest hazards to lives and properties in the county. The San Jose Fault together with the Whittier Fault on the southwest location of the county and the San Jacinto Fault on the eastern par[ of the County can also create major earthquakes with tremendous damages. Experts predict a major earthquake might occur in our area within the next 50 years. This situation creates a need for additional fre, life, safety protection measures. 2. Traffic and circulation congestion presently existing in the City of Rancho Cucamonga ofren places fire department response time to fire occurrences at risk. This condition will be exacerbated by any major disaster, including any earthquake wherein damage to the highway system will occur. This condition makes the need for additional on-site protection for property occupants necessazy. C. TOPOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS I. The City is built on soil with high degrees of landslides, rockslides from the adjacent foothills and mountains. In addition, the majority of the City has steep hills and streets with great potential of flooding and erosion problems which inhibit fire fighting and rescuing capabilities. Amendments to the 2007 Editions of the California Codes as contained in City of Rancho Cucamonga Ordinance No. 784 are found reasonably necessary based on the climatic geographic and/or topographic conditions cited above in this Resolution and are listed as follows: Resolution No. p328 Page 3 BUILDING CODE SECTION FINDINGS Appendix Chapter 1 Administrative Section 105.2 Chapter 1 B-1, C-1 Section 112.1 and 112.3 Administrative Section 903 A-1, A-2, B-1, B-2, C-1 Table ]505-1 A-1, A-2, B-1, B-2, C-1 Section 1609.3 A-1, A-2, C-1 Section 1614, 1614.1.1 B-1, B-2, C-1 Appendix Chapters Deleted Administrative Section J101-1 C-1 Section J101, Appendix J A-1, B-1, C-1 Section J103.2 Appendix J A-1, B-1, C-1 Section J104 Appendix J Administrative Section J110.3 Appendix J G-1 Section J112 Appendix J C-1 Section J113 Appendix J A-1, C-1 Mechanical Code Section 1 ] 0.1 Chapter 1 Administrative Section 115.2 Appendix Chapter 1 Administrative Section 115.3 Appendix Chapter 1 Administrative Table 1.1 Administrative Section 504.3.2.1 A-1, A-2 Plumbing Code Section 102 Appendix Chapter 1 Administrative Section 103.4.1 Administrative Section 103.4.2 Administrative Table 1.1 Administrative Appendices E, F Administrative Section 701.1.2 A-1, A-2, B-1, B-2 Section 701.1.2.2 A-l, A-2, B-1, B-2 Electrical Code Section 80.15 Annex G Administrative Section 230.71 A-1, A-2, B-1, B-2, C-1 Resolution No. P329 Page 4 Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and cause a certified copy of the same and Ordinance No. 784 to be forthwith transmitted to the California Building Standards Commission. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2007. Donald J. Kurth, M.D.,Mayor I, Debra J. Adams, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day of , 2007, and was finally adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the day of , 2007 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAINED: ATTEST: City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga P330 STAFF REPORT RANCT-IO CUCANtoNGA FIRE PROTECITON DISTRICT Date: December 5, 2007 To: Board President Donald Kurth, MD and Members of the Board of Directors Jack Lam, AICP, District CEO From: Peter Bryan, Fire Chief By: Rob Ball, Fire Marshal Subject: Adoption of the 2007 California Fire Code ". RANCHO C,'UCAMONGA RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Board of Directors of the Fire District approve an ordinance that adopts the 2007 California Fire Code together with the local amendments and District standards, all of which will constitute The Fire Code of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS This code adoption cycle brings a significant change in that the State decided to move from the Uniform Fire Code to the International Fire Code as the model code around which the 2007 California Fire Code has been built. To date, 48 of the 50 United States are using the International Codes at the state and/or local level. As one of the newest and certainly largest members of the ICC family, California, through the Office of the State Fire Marshal and the many local fire departments and districts, will now have a major influence on the codes used throughout the country. Among the notable changes with the adoption of this code are: Repealing the District's more restrictive definition of what a high rise building is and the associated upgrades currently required in the District for buildings 55 feet or more in height. It was determined that advances in fire protection and emergency notification technologies, along with improved staffing levels and model code provisions, that it is no longer necessary for the District to be more restrictive than the State's standard requirements for high rise buildings. The model code requires the installation of fire sprinklers in all buildings that are 55 feet or more in height. In many cases where there is a greater risk to life and property, the model code requires fire sprinklers and/or fire alarms in buildings that are 30 feet or more in height or that are four or more stories in height. P331 ADOPTION OF THE 2007 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE DECEMBER 5, 2007 PAGE2 The ordinance adopting the Fire Code will also repeal Ordinance 15, the fire sprinkler and fire alarm ordinance that dates back to the days of the Foothill Fire District. As mentioned above, the model code now requires fire sprinklers and fire alarms in most of the buildings and occupancies that would have been subjected to the provisions of Ordinance 15. Also, there was a strong desire on the part of many of the San Bernardino County fire departments to standardize the local fire sprinkler requirements. It was determined that the most widely used threshold for requiring fire sprinklers is the point when a proposed new building exceeds 5,000 square feet. This is a little more restrictive than the 7,500 square feet threshold of Ordinance 15 but this change will make Rancho Cucamonga consistent with most of the other fire departments in the County. This change will also provide a measure of consistency for the developers and architects who do work in Rancho Cucamonga and the surrounding area. Since this change will affect many construction projects that will be undertaken after the adoption of the code, we met with Mr. Frank Williams and some of his staff at the local Building Industry Association office to make them aware of our desire to be consistent with neighboring agencies. The change to 5,000 square feet was not a concern to Mr. Williams. As in the past, one-and two-family dwellings are exempt from the fire sprinkler requirements. • The District-required fire apparatus access of 5-50 along two sides of buildings four or more stories in height has been replaced by the model code requirement for an aerial apparatus access road for all buildings exceeding 30 feet in height. This access is required along one entire side of the building and is required to be the standard fire lane width of 26 feet and to be within 15-30 feet of the building. The code now contains a section that addresses firefighter safety. It contains provisions that apply to trapdoors and the identification of shaftways, prohibitions against creating pitfalls or boobytraps, a prohibition against the use of vision-obscuring intrusion alarms, and a requirement for reliable communication systems. The California version of the International Fire Code contains a chapter devoted specifically to fire prevention and building codes for the wildland-urban interface fire areas such as those in the northern part of the District. The inclusion of such a chapter, along with the State's recent completion of the high fire hazard zone mapping project and the creation of new building standards for homes and buildings constructed in the wildland-urban interface fire areas, has provided the District with the opportunity to develop its own Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area Standard. In the past, projects in this area of the District were required to submit plans and tell us which vegetation management standard they had used in the design of the project. The most commonly used standards were the LA County, Orange County, and Ventura County standards. All of these standards differ slightly from each other and have differing approved plant lists. Rancho Cucamonga's standard is a comprehensive fire hazard reduction P332 ADOPTION OF THE 2007 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE DECEMBER 5, 2007 PAGE3 program based on the International Wildland-Urban Interface Code with additions and deletions that take into consideration District amendments to the Fire Code and conditions that are specific to our high fire hazard areas. The standard also defines vegetation management zones and details the requirements for each zone. These requirements are based on nationally recognized standards and State regulations and are consistent with those used by other Southern California agencies that have interface areas. The District's standard also provides an approved plant list that essentially mirrors the San Bernardino County Approved Plant List. One of the main goals in the creation of this adopting ordinance was to provide a single, user-friendly document that contains all of the fire and life safety codes, standards, regulations, and rules that are applicable in the District. In an effort to accomplish this goal, the adopting ordinance contains a single page matrix inserted prior to the local amendments that shows at a glance which Chapters and Appendices of the State and model codes have been adopted and which Chapters and Appendices contain local amendments. The adopting ordinance also includes references to the District's standards. These references have been inserted in the corresponding sections of the model code in an effort to alert architects, developers, design engineers, and others who need to be aware of all of the local requirements that there is a standard that must also be addressed in any submittal. The adopting ordinance has also been formatted to follow the Chapter and Section formatting of the model code. As a result of this effort to create a more comprehensive, easier to use fire code document, the adopting ordinance runs many more pages than previous code adoption ordinances. I believe that the ordinance presented for your consideration and approval is one that combines the advances in code development that are evident in the model code provisions with our local requirements that have proven effective over the years into a single document that should provide a thorough awareness of all of the District's fire and life safety regulations. Once the Board adopts this ordinance, the Council will need to ratify the ordinance in order to make it effective for the City. Mr. D. Craig Fox has advised us that the ratification can be done as a consent calendar item. Respectfully submitted, ~ ~ ~iq~ ~i ~ -~, 1 /"'/" ' '~j~J '" ~1~ Peter M. Bryan Fire Chief P333 ORDINANCE NO. FD 46 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2007 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE, WITH ERRATA, TOGETHER WITH CERTAIN CHANGES, MODIFICATIONS, AMENDMENTS, ADDITIONS, DELETIONS, AND EXCEPTIONS; PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF PERMITS AND COLLECTION OF FEES; AND REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES. The Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District hereby ordains as follows: SECTION 1. Repeal of Conflicting Ordinances Ordinance No. FD 39 of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, Ordinance No. 15 of the Foothill Fire Protection District, as predecessor to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and any provisions of any other District ordinances that are in conflict with the Code hereby adopted, are hereby repealed provided, however, that such repeal shall not affect or excuse any violation of either Ordinance or any such conflicting provisions, occurring prior to the effective date hereof. SECTION 2. Fire Code Adopted The Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (hereinafter District) hereby adopts by reference as the District's Fire Code, the 2007 Edition of the California Fire Code, with errata, including Appendix Chapter 1; Appendix Chapter 4; Appendices A, B, C, and H; Chapter 33 of the 2006 International Fire Code; and Referenced Standards, with the changes, modifications, amendments, additions, deletions, and exceptions prescribed in Section 4 of this ordinance, and the same are hereby adopted for safeguarding of life and property from fire; explosion; and hazardous materials, substances, devices, conditions, processes, activities, operations, practices, and functions; and providing for the issuance of permits and the collection of fees. Each and all of the regulations, provisions, penalties, conditions, and terms of said Fire Code, a copy of which is on file in the office of the Secretary of the Board of Directors of the District, are hereby referred to, adopted, and made a part hereof as if fully set out in this ordinance. 2.1 Definitions 2.1.1 The terms "Board of Directors" and "Directors" shall mean the governing body of the District. 2.1.2 The terms "department", "Department", "district", "District", "fire department", "fire district", "Fire District", `jurisdiction", and "Jurisdiction" where used in the Fire Code and this ordinance to identify the local fire authority shall mean the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. 2.1.3 The term "fire code official" shall mean the fire chief or his/her designee charged with the implementation, administration, and enforcement of the Fire Code. 2.1.4 The term "governing body" shall mean the Board of Directors of the District. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 1 of 54 P334 2.1.5 The term `jurisdiction" shall mean all of the territory, land, buildings, structures, and premises within the legal boundary of the District. 2.2 Fees 2.2.1 Reasonable fees, not to exceed fully burdened actual costs, maybe collected by the fire code official for fire protection planning, fire prevention services, inspections, and permit issuance as allowed by the Fire Code, this ordinance, and as prescribed by any and all District fee resolutions. 2.3 Distinguishing Between Model Code Language; California Amendments; and Local Additions, Amendments, Deletions, and Other Changes 2.3.1 International Fire Code model code language appears in regular type. 2.3.2 California amendments to the model code language appear in italics. 2.3.3 Local additions, amendments, noteworthy deletions, and other material changes are identified by the use of underlining. 2.3.4 Code sections that have not been amended or changed in any manner are occasionally included in this ordinance to keep the additions, amendments, deletions, and other changes in context. SECTION 3. Fire Code Adoption Matrix 3.1 The following Fire Code Adoption Matrix is provided as a single reference showing which chapters and appendices of the 2007 Edition of the California Fire Code and 2006 Edition of the International Fire Code are adopted by this ordinance and which chapters and appendices have been amended by this ordinance. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 2 of 54 Fire Code Adoption Matrix P335 ChBptCr/ Appl:ntlix Tltie Adopt State Code Chapter/ Appendix without Amendments Adopt Stale Code Chapter/ Appendix wish Local Amendments Adopt lFC 6todel Code with S[ale/LOCaI Amendments NotAdop/ed- Reference Only 1 General Code Provisions X 2 Definifiovs X 3 General Precautions A ains[ Fire R 4 Emer encv Plannin and Pre aredness R 5 Fire Service Features x b Buildin Services and Svstems X 7 Fire-Resistance-Rated Construction R e Interior Finish, Decorative Materials and Furnishins X 9 Fire Protection Svstems R 10 Means ofE ress R tl Aviation Facilities R 12 Drv Cleanin R 13 Comhustible Dust-Producin O erations R 14 Fire Safelv Darin Construction and Demolition x 15 Flammable Finishes X 16 Fruit and Cro Ri enin R ]7 Fumi a[ion anJ Thermal Insecticidal Fo in R 16 Semiconductor Fabrication Facilities x 19 Lumber Yards and Woodworkin Facilities R 20 Manufacture of Or anic Coatin s R 21 Industrial Oveus x 22 Motor Fuel-Dis eosin Facilities and Re air Gara es x 23 Hi h-Piled Combustible S[ora e R 24 Tents, Cano ies and Other Membrane Structures x 25 Tire Rebuildin and Tire Stara e X 26 Weldin and Other Hot Work x 27 Hazardous Materials-General Provisions x 28 Aerosols R 29 Combustible Fibera R 30 Com ressed Gases X 31 Corrosive Materials x 32 Crvo enic Fluids R 33 Ex Iosives and Fireworks X 34 Flammable and Combustible Li aids X 35 Flammable Cases x 36 Flammable Solids % 37 Hi hlv Toxic and Toxic Materials X 38 Li uefied Petroleum Gases R 39 Or anic Peroxides R 40 Oxidizers x 41 Pvro horic Materials X 42 Pvroxvlin Cellulose Nitrate Plasdcs R 43 Unstable Reactive Materials X 44 Wafer-Reacfive Solids and Li aids R 45 Rofercneed 8tsvdards R 46 Mofion Picture and TV Production x 47 Re uiremen[s for Wildland-Urban Interface Areas R A . Cha ter 1 Administration X App. Chapter 4 S ecial Detailed Re .Based on Use and Occu ancv x A . A Board otA cats % A . B Fire-Flow Re uirements for Buildin s R A . C Fire Hydrant Locations and Distribution x A . D Fire A aralus Access Roads X A . E Hazard Cate Dries x A . F Hazard Rankin X A . C Crvo enic Fluids- Wei ht and Volume E uivalents R _ APP H Hazardous Materials Management Plans x _ Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 3 of 54 P336 SECTION 4. Local Amendments to the Fire Code. Except as modified by a change, modification, amendment, addition, deletion, or exception in this section, and as reflected in the Fire Code Adoption Matrix in Section 3, above, all sections, subsections, tables, chapters and appendices are adopted as published in the 2007 California Fire Code and Chapter 33 of the 2006 International Fire Code, and made part of the Fire Code. Only those sections, subsections, tables, chapters and appendices so modified are set forth below in this section. CHAPTER 3 GENERAL PRECAUTIONS AGAINST FIRE SECTION 301 GENERAL 301.2 Permits. Permits shall be required as set forth in Appendix Chapter 1, Sections 105.6 and 105.7. SECTION 307 OPEN BURNING, BONFIRES, AND RECREATIONAL FIRES 307.1 General. A person shall not kindle or maintain or authorize to be kindled or maintained any open burning, bonfire, or recreational fire unless conducted and approved in accordance with this section. 307.1.1 Prohibited open burning. Open burning, bonfires, and recreational fires that are offensive or objectionable because of smoke or odor emissions or when atmospheric conditions or local circumstances make such fires hazardous shall be prohibited. Resardless of an issued permit, open buminQ, bonfires, and recreational fires are prohibited in a wildland-urban interface fire area as defined by the provisions of Chanter 47 when red flae weather conditions have been declared. 307.2 Permit required. A permit shall be obtained from the fire code official in accordance with Section 105.6 prior to kindling a fire for recognized silvicultural or range or wildlife management practices, prevention or control of disease or pests, a bonfire, or a recreational fire in a wildland-urban interface fire area as defined by the provisions of Chapter 47. Application for such approval shall only be presented by and permits issued to the owner of the land upon which the fire is to be kindled. 307.2.1 Authorization. Where required by state or local law or regulations, open burning shall only be permitted with prior approval from the state or local air and water quality managemenC authority, provided that all conditions specified in the authorization are followed. 307.3 Extinguishment authority. The fire code official is authorized to order the extinguishment by the permit holder, another person responsible, or the fire department of open burning, bonfires, and recreational fires that in the opinion of the fire code official, create or add to a hazardous or objectionable situation. 307.4 Location. The location for open burning shall not be less than 50 feet from any structure, and provisions shall be made to prevent the fire from spreading to within 50 feet of any structure. Exceptions: 1. Fires in approved containers that are not less than 15 feet from a structure. 2. The minimum required distance from a structure shall be 25 feet where the pile size is 3 feet or less in diameter and 2 feet or less in height. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 4 of 54 P337 307.4.1 Bonfires. A bonfire shall not be conducted within 50 feet of a structure or combustible material unless the fire is contained in a barbecue pit. Conditions which could cause a fire to spread within 50 feet of a structure shall be eliminated prior to ignition. 307.4.2 Recreational fires. Recreational Fires shall not be conducted within 25 feet of a structure or combustible material. Conditions which could cause a fire to spread within 25 feet of a structure shall be eliminated prior to ignition. 307.5 Attendance. Open burning, bonfires, or recreational fires shall be constantly attended until the fire is extinguished. A minimum of one portable fire extinguisher complying with Section 906 with a minimum 4-A rating or other approved on-site fire-extinguishing equipment, such as dirt, sand, water barrel, garden hose or water truck, shall be available for immediate utilization. 307.6 Standby personnel. The fire code official is authorized to require standby personnel in accordance with Section 403.3 during any open bumine, bonfire, or recreational fire that poses an adverse risk to public safety SECTION 308 OPEN FLAMES 308.2.2 Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Areas. Reeardless of an issued permit, or implied or expressed consent contained within this code open flames and open flame devices are prohibited in a wildland-urban interface fire area as defined by the provisions of Chapter 47 when red flae weather conditions have been declared. 308.3.1 Open-flame cooking devices. Charcoal burners and other open-flame cooking devices shall not be operated on balconies or within 10 feet of combustible construction. Exception: One- and two-family dwellings. 308.3.1.1 Liquefied-petroleum-gas-fueled cooking devices. LP-gas burners having an LP-gas container with a water capacity greater than 2.5 pounds [nominal 1 pound LP-gas capacity] shall not be located on balconies or within 10 feet of combustible construction. 308.3.7 Group A occupancies. Open-flame devices shall not be used in a Group A occupancy. Exceptions: 1. Open-flame devices are allowed to be used in the following situations, provided approved precautions are taken to prevent ignition of a combustible material or injury to occupants: 1.1 Where necessary for ceremonial or religious purposes in accordance with Section 308.3.5. 1.2. On stages and platforms as a necessary part of a performance in accordance with Section 308.3.6. 1.3. Where candles on tables are securely supported on substantial noncombustible bases and the candle flames are protected. Candles shall be in accordance with Section 308.3.2. 2. Heat-producing equipment complying with Chapter 6 and the California Mechanical Code. 3. Gas lights are allowed to be used provided adequate precautions satisfactory to the fire code official are taken to prevent ignition of combustible materials. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 5 of 54 P338 308.7 Standby Personnel. The fire code official is authorized to require standby personnel in accordance with Section 403.3 whenever the use of open flames poses an adverse risk to public safety. SECTION 309 POWERED INDUSTRIAL TRUCKS AND EQUIPMENT 309.1 General. Powered industrial trucks, electric carts/cars, and similar equipment including, but not limited to, floor scrubbers and floor buffers, shall be operated and maintained in accordance with this section. Permits shall be required as set forth in Appendix Chapter 1, Section 105.6. SECTION 314 INDOOR DISPLAYS 314.1 General. Indoor displays constructed within any occupancy shall comply with Sections 314.2 through 314.4. Permits shall be required as set forth in Appendix Chapter 1, Section 105.6. 314.4 Vehicles. Liquid- or gas-fueled vehicles, boats or other motorcraft shall not be located indoors except as follows: 1. Batteries are disconnected. 2. Fuel in fuel tanks does not exceed one-quarter tank or 5 gallons (whichever is least). 3. Fuel tanks and fill openings are closed and sealed to prevent the escape of vapors and locked to rep vent tampering. 4. Fuel tanks are inspected for leaks and determined to be free from leaks. 5. Vehicles, boats or other motorcraft equipment are not fueled or defueled within the building. 6. The location of vehicles ore ui ment do not obstruct means of egress. 7. When a compressed natural gas (CNGI or liquefied petroleum gas (LP-gas) powered vehicle is approved by the fire code official to be parked inside a place of assembly. al] the following conditions shall be met: a. The quarter-turn shutoff valve or other shutoff valve on the outlet of the CNG or LP-gas container shall be closed and the engine shall be operated until it stops. Valves shall remain closed while the vehicle is indoors. b. The hot lead of the battery shall be disconnected. c. Dual-fuel vehicles equipped to operate on gasoline and CNG or LP-Qas shall comply with all of the provisions. 314.4.] Approved competitions and demonstrations. Liquid and gas-fueled vehicles and equipment approved by the fire code official for use in a competition or demonstration within a building shall comply with Sections 314.4.1.1 through 314.4.1.3. 3]4.4.1.1 Fuel storage. Fuel for vehicles or equipment shall be stored in approved containers in an approved location outside of the structure in an approved manner not less than 50 feet from [he structure. Storage shall be in accordance with Chapter 34. 314.4.].2 Fueline. Refueling shall be performed outside of the structure in an approved location not less than 20 feet from the structure. 314.4.1.3 Spills. Fuel spills shall be cleaned up immediately. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 6 of S4 P339 SECTION 316 STORAGE OF IDLE PALLETS* 316.1 General Storage of idle pallets shall be in accordance with this section. Permits shall be required as set forth in Appendix Chapter 1, Section 105.6. 316.2 Storage location. Idle pallets shall be stored outside or in a separate building designed for pallet storage unless stored indoors in accordance with Section 316.3. 316.3 Indoor storage. Idle pallet storage shall be permitted in a building used for other storage or other pumose when arranged and protected in accordance with NFPA 13 unless the following conditions are met: 1. Pallets are stored no more than 6 feet in height. 2. Pallet piles are limited to 500 square feet or 200 cubic feet. Individual piles shall be separated from other piles by a clear space of not less than 8 feet and separated from commodities b~ clear space of not less than 25 feet. 3. The aggregate volume of pallets does not exceed 2,500 cubic feet per fire area. 4. Storage is in accordance with Section 3404.3.3.9 as amended where applicable. 3] 6.4 Outdoor storage. Idle pallets stored outside shall be stored in accordance with Tables 316.4.1 and 316.4.2 and Section 316.5. 316.5 Outdoor pile dimensions. Idle pallet stacks shall not exceed 15 feet in height nor shall cover an area greater than 500 square feet. Pallet stacks shall be arranged to form stable piles. Piles shall be separated by a minimum of 8 feet. Piles shall be a minimum of 10 feet from propert l Table 316.1 Required Clearance Between Outside Idle Pallet Storage and Other Yard Storage Pile Size Minimum Distance (ft Under 50 allets 20 50-200 allets 30 Over 200 allets 50 Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 7 of 54 P340 Table 316.4.2 Re aired Clearance Between Outside Idle Pallet Stora a and Structures Minimum Distance of Wall from Stora a ft Under 50 50 to 200 Over 200 Wall Construction Pallets Pallets Pallets Masonry with no openings 0 0 15 Masonry ~sith wired glass in openings, outside sprinklers, and 0 10 20 1-hour doors Masonry with wired or plain glass, outside sprinklers, and 3/4-hour 10 20 30 doors Wood or metal with outside 10 20 30 s rinklers Wood, metal, other 20 30 50 *Based on NFPA Standard 1 SECTION 317 WRECKING YARDS AND JUNK YARDS 317.1 General. Automobile wrecking yards and funk vards shall be in accordance with this section. Permits shall be required as set forth in Appendix Chapter 1, Section 105.6. 317.2 Fire apparatus access roads. Fire apparatus access roads shall be provided and maintained in accordance with Section 503. 317.3 Welding and other hot work. Welding and other hot work shall be in accordance with Chapter 26. 317.4 Combustible waste material. Combustible waster material and combustible vegetation shall be stored, arranged, and maintained in accordance with Section 304. 317.5 Fire protection. Fire protection shall be in accordance with Chapter 9. The fire code official is authorized to require additional fire protection svstems in accordance with Section 901.4.3 such as, but not limited to, fixed master stream monitors. 317.6 Tires, motor vehicle fluids, hazardous materials, and lead-acid batteries. The storage, use, and handling of tires, motor vehicle fluids, and hazardous materials shall be in accordance with this section 317.6.1 Tires. The storage of tires shall be in accordance with Chapter 25. 317.6.2 Motor vehicle fluids. The storage, use, and handling of motor vehicle fluids shall be in accordance with this section and Chapters 27 and 34. 317.6.2.1 Leaking Fluids. Motor vehicle fluids shall be drained from salvage vehicles when such fluids are leaking. Supplies or equipment capable of mitigating leaks from fuel tanks, crankcases, brake svstems, and transmissions shall be kept available on site. Single-use Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 8 of 54 P341 plugging diking and absorbent materials shall be disposed of as hazardous waste and removed from the site in a manner approved by applicable state regulations. 317.6.3 Lead-acid batteries. Lead-acid batteries shall be removed from salvage vehicles and stored in an approved manner. 317.6.4 Air bag svstems. Air bag svstems shall be handled as a hazardous material in accordance with Chapter 27 and other applicable state regulations. 317.7 Burning operations. Burning operations shall be in accordance with state air quality and other applicable regulations. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 9 of 54 P342 CHAPTER4 EMERGENCY PLANNING AND PREPAREDNESS SECTION 403 PUBLIC ASSEMBLAGES AND EVENTS 403.1 General. Public assemblaees• carnivals, fairs, exhibits, trade shows, and similar indoor or outdoor events• special amusement buildings• and seasonal sales lots shall comply with the provisions of this code and RCFPD Standards 4-1, 4-2, 4-3, and 4-4. 403.2 Permits. Permits shall be required as set forth in Appendix Chanter 1, Section 105.6. 403.3 Standby personnel. When, in the opinion of the fire code official, it is essential for public safety in a place of assembly or any other place where people congregate, because of the number of persons; the nature of the performance, exhibition, display, contest, or activity; or the presence of oven burnine. men flames, or fireworks, the owner, agent, or lessee shall provide one or more qualified standby personnel, as required and approved by the fire code official, to remain on duty during the times such places are open to the public, or when such activity is being conducted. Standbypersonnel shall be in a uniform or be otherwise readily identifiable and distinguishable. Standbv personnel shall remain on duty during the times such places are open to the public or when such activity is being conducted, until relieved of such duty by another person who meets the qualifications of this section, or until released from duty by the fire code official. 403.3.1 Duties. Standbv personnel shall keep diligent watch for fires, obstructions to means of egress, and other hazards during the time such place is open to the public or such activity is being conducted and take prompt measures for remediation of hazards, extinguishment of fires that occur, and assisting in the evacuation of the public from the structures. 403.4 Public safety plan. In other than Group A or E occupancies, where the fire code official determines that an indoor or outdoor gathering of persons could have an adverse impact on public safety through diminished access to buildings, structures, fire hydrants, fire apparatus access roads, persons in need of emergency medical care unrestricted access to the public way and/or similaz risks to general public safety or where such gatherings could adversely affect public safety services of any kind, the fire code official shall have the authority to order the development of, or prescribe a plan for, the provision of an approved level of public safety. 403.4.1 Contents. The public safety plan, where required by Section 403.4, shall address such items as emergency vehicle ingress and egress, fire protection, emergency medical services, emergency egress, public assembly areas and the directing of both attendees and vehicles (including the parking of vehicles), vendor and food concession distribution, and the need for the presence of law enforcement, fire, and emergency medical services personnel at the event. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 10 of 54 P343 TABLE 405.2 FIRE AND EVACUATION DRILL FREQUENCY AND PARTICIPATION Group or Occu anc Frequency Participation Grou A Quarterl Em to ees Grou B ` Annually Em to ees Grou E Month) a All occu ants Grou I Quarterl on each shift Em to ees Grou R-1 Quarterl on each shift Em to ees Grou R-2 Four annual) All occu ants Grou R-4 Quarterl ~ on each shift Em to gees High-rise buildin s Annually Employees a. the frequency shall be allowed to be modified in accordance with Section 408.3.2, Title 19 CCR and the Education Code. b. Fire and evacuation drills in residential care assisted living facilities shall include complete evacuation of the premises in accordance with Section 408.10.5. Where occupants receive habilitation or rehabilitation training, fire prevention and ire safety practices shall be included as pan of the training program. c. Group B buildings having an occupant load of 500 or more pcrsons or more than 100 persons above or below the lowest level of exit discharge. d. Applicable to Group R-2 college and university buildings in accordance with Section 408.3. SECTION 408 USE AND OCCUPANCY-RELATED REQUIREMENTS 408.3 Group E occupancies and Group R-2 college and university buildings. Group E occupancies shall comply with the requirements of Sections 408.3.1 through 408.3.4, Sections 401 through 406, Title 19 CCR, and the Education Code. Group R-2 college and university buildings shall comply with the requirements of Sections 408.3.1 and 408.3.3 and Sections 401 through 406. 408.9 Group R-2 occupancies. Group R-2 occupancies shall comply with the requirements of Sections 408.9.1 through 408.9.3, and Sections 401 through 406. 408.9.1 Emergency guide. A fire emergency guide that complies with RCFPD Standard 4-5 shall be provided. 408.9.2 Maintenance. Emergency guides shall be reviewed by the owner, owner's association, and/or the manager at least annually and approved in accordance with Section 401.2. 408.9.3 Distribution. A copy of the emergency guide shall be given to each tenant prior to initial occupancy. Each tenant shall sign a form supplied by the owner or owner's agent acknowledging in-person receipt of the fire emergency guide. Tenants shall sign a similar form when updated versions of the emergency guide are provided. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 1 I of 54 P344 CHAPTER 5 FIRE SERVICE FEATURES SECTION 503 FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS 503.1.2 Additional access. The fire code official is authorized to require more than one fire apparatus access road based on the potential for impairment of a single road by vehicle congestion, condition of terrain, climatic conditions or other factors that could limit access. Additional access shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard 5-1 and Chanter 47. 503.2 Specifications. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed, engineered, installed and arranged in accordance with Sections 503.2.1 through 503.2.7 and RCFPD Standard 5-1. 503.2.1 Dimensions. Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 26 feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 14 feet 6 inches. Street widths are to be measured from ton face of curb to ton face of curb on streets with curb and Butter, and from flowline to flowline on streets with rolled curbs Exceptions: 1. Approved Bates in accordance with Section 503.5 and 503.6 2. Roadways at entry medians constructed for private commercial, industrial, or residential developments shall be a minimum of 20 feet on each side. The roadway shall not be part of a radius turn. This exception does not apply to public streets. 3. Dimensions maybe reduced when in the opinion of the fire code official there are practical difficulties with providin tB he required dimensions. 4. Dimensions maybe increased when in the opinion of the fire code official required dimensions are not adeguate to provide fire apparatus access. 503.2.3 Surface. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all weather driving capabilities. Permanent fire apparatus access roads utilizing surface material other than concrete or asphalt (alternative materials) shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard 5-2 and approved by the fire code official. 503.2.4 Turning radius. The required tuming radius of a fire apparatus access road shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard 5-1. 503.2.5 Dead ends. Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved area for tuming around fire apparatus in accordance with RCFPD Standard 5-1. 503.2.7 Grade. The grade of the fire apparatus access road shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard 5-1 and Section 503.7.3. 503.2.8 Identification. Identification of fire apparatus access roads shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard 5-1. 503.3 Marking. Approved signs or other approved notices shall be provided for fire apparatus access roads to identify such roads or prohibit the obstruction thereof shall be provided as required by the fire code official. Signs or notices shall be maintained in a clean and legible condition at all times and shall Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 12 of 54 P345 be replaced or repaired when necessary to provide adequate visibility. Fire apparatus access road marking shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard 5-1. 503.4 Obstruction of Fre apparatus access roads. Fire apparatus access roads shall not be obstructed in any manner, including the parking of vehicles. The minimum widths and clearances established in Section 503.2.1 shall be maintained at all times. Water run-off and flood control dips, speed bumps, traffic calming devices, or other surface irregularity shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard 5-1. 503.6 Security gates. The installation of security gates across a fire apparatus access road shall be approved by the fire code official. Where security gates are installed, they shall have approved means of emergency operation. The security gates and the emergency operation shall be maintained operational at all times. Residential vehicular Bates shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard 5-3. Commercial and industrial vehicular gates shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard 5-4. 503.7 Aerial fire apparatus access roads. Buildings or portions of buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet in height above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access shall be provided with approved fire appazatus access roads capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. 503.7.1 Dimensions. Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 26 feet. Overhead utility and power lines and other vertical obstnictions shall not be located within the aerial fire appazatus access roadway. 503.7.2 Proximity to building. At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. 503.7.3 Grade. The grade of aerial fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed five percent (5%). SECTION 504 ACCESS TO BUILDING OPENINGS AND ROOFS 504.1 Required access. Exterior doors and openings required by this code or the California Building Code shall be maintained readily accessible for emergency access by the fire department. An approved access walkway leading from fire apparatus access roads to exterior openings shall be provided when required by the fire code official. 504.1.1 Access identification. Required exterior access doors, including exit doors, in the warehouse or manufacturing areas of any building with a gross floor area greater than l 0,000 square feet shall be marked in accordance with RCFPD Standard 5-5 to allow for quick identification by firefighters both inside and outside of the building. 504.4 Roof access. Aerial fire apparatus ladder access to the roof and parapet ladders shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard 5-6. SECTION 505 PREMISES IDENTIFICATION 505.1 Address numbers. New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Address Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 13 of 54 P346 numbers shall be Arabic numerals or alphabet letters. Addressing ofmulti-family residential buildings shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard S-7. Addressing of commercial and industrial buildings shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard S-8. For all other buildings, numbers shall be a minimum of 4 inches high with a minimum stroke width of O.S inch. Acceptable dimensions of address numbers and letters will be determined by the fire code official to ensure that they are plainly legible and visible. SECTION 506 KEY BOXES 506.1 Where required. Where access to or within a structure or an azea is restricted because of secured openings or where immediate access is necessary for life-saving or fire-fighting purposes, the fire code official is authorized to require a key box to be installed in an approved location. The key box shall be of an approved type and shall contain keys and/or other devices/information such as electronic card keys or access codes to gain necessazy access as required by the fire code official. Key boxes shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard S-9. SECTION 507 HAZARDS TO FIREFIGHTERS 507.4 Fog or smoke emitting systems. No alarm system shall be installed in any new or existing building or portion of a buildine which, as a part of its operation discharges any gas, vapor, liquid, smoke, or other product when the primary intent of system dischazge is to obscure the vision of any person, cause disorientation, or incapacitate any person within the building or portion thereof. Nothing in this section is intended to preclude the connection of an alarm system to any fire suppression s sv tem• 507.5 Fire department communications. When it is determined by test that portable fire department communication equipment is ineffective in any new or existing building, the fire code official can require an acceptable communication system or acceptable communication equipment to be installed within the building to permit emergency communication between fire suppression personnel, command officers, and the dispatch center. SECTION 508 FIRE PROTECTION WATER SUPPLIES 508.1 Required water supply. An approved water supply capable of supplying the required fire flow for fire protection shall be provided to premises upon which facilities, buildings or portions of buildings are hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The approved water supply shall be in accordance with this section, Appendix B as amended, and RCFPD Standazd 5-10. 508.3 Fire flow. Fire flow requirements for buildings or portions of buildings and facilities shall be in accordance with Appendix B as amended and RCFPD Standard 5-10. 508.5 Fire hydrant systems. Fire hydrant systems shall comply with Sections S08.S.1 through S08.S.6, Appendix C, and RCFPD Standazd 5-10. 508.5.1 Where required. Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 300 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 14 of S4 P347 access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on- site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the fire code official. Exception: For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.?, the distance requirement can be increased by the fire code official. SECTION 510 FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS TO EQUIPMENT 510.2 Multi-tenant or multi-unit buildings. When an automatic fire sprinkler system or systems or a fire alarm system or systems are installed in buildings constructed for multiple tenants and/or units and the installed systems protect multiple tenant spaces or units, the fire sprinkler riser(s), fire alarm control unit and all other related valves, eau¢es, and/or controls for such systems shall be located in an attached or included room or approved weather resistant enclosure with an exterior access door of not less than 3'-0" by 6'-8". SECTION 511 SITE PLANS 511.1 General. The owner of or person responsible for a building or facility shall provide the fire code official with a site plan in accordance with RCFPD Standard 5-11. The owner or responsible person shall provide an updated site plan to the fire code official when any element of the site plan changes. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 15 of 54 P348 CHAPTER 6 BUILDING SERVICES AND SYSTEMS SECTION 601 GENERAL 601.2 Permits. Permits shall be required as set forth in Appendix Chapter 1, Sections 105.6 and 105.7. SECTION 605 ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT, WIRING, AND HAZARDS 605.] 1 Electric heating equipment. Electric heating equipment shall comply with Sections 605.11.1 through 605.11.4. 605.11.1 Listed and labeled. Only listed and labeled electric heating equipment shall be used. 605.11.2 Power supply The power supply for electric heating equipment shall be in accordance with the California Electrical Code. 605.17.3 Installation and maintenance. Electric heating equipment shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions, the California Buildine Code, the California Meclanical Code, and the California Electrical Code. 605.11.4 Guard against contact. The heating element shall be permanently guarded so as to prevent accidental contact by persons or material. SECTION 606 MECHANICAL REFRIGERATION 606.8 Refrigerant Detector. Machinery rooms shall contain a refrigerant detector with an audible and visual alarm. The detector, or a sampling tube that draws air to the detector, shall be located in an area where refrigerant from a leak will concentrate. The alarm shall be actuated at a value not greater than the corresponding TLV-TWA values shown in the California Mechanical Code for the refrigerant classification. Detectors and alarms shall be placed in approved locations. In addition, emergency shutoff shall also be automatically activated when the concentration of refri gerant vapor exceeds 25 percent (25%) of LFL. 606.10.1.2 Manual Operation. When required by the fire code official, automatic crossover valves shall be capable of manual operation. The manual valves shall be located in an approved location immediately outside of the machinery room, in a secure metal box and marked as Emergency Controls. SECTION 609 COMMERCIAL COOHING OPERATIONS 609.1 General. Commercial cookingoperations, commercial cooking appliances, and commercial kitchen exhaust hoods shall comply with the requirements of this section the California Mechanical Code, and NFPA 96. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 16 of 54 P349 CHAPTER 8 INTERIOR FINISH, DECORATIVE MATERIALS AND FURNISHINGS SECTION 807 DECORATIVE MATERIALS OTHER THAN DECORATIVE VEGETATION IN NEW AND EXISTING BUILDINGS 807.4.3.2 Artwork. Artwork and teaching materials shall be limited on the walls of corridors to not more than 20 percent (20%) of the wall area. Artwork and teaching materials on the walls, windows, and doors of classrooms shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard 8-1. 807.4.4.2 Artwork. Artwork and teaching materials shall be limited on walls of corridors to not more than 20 percent (20%) of the wall area. Artwork and teaching materials on the walls. windows and doors of day care facilities shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard 8-l. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 17 of 54 P350 CHAPTER 9 FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS SECTION 901 GENERAL 901.4.2 Non-required fire protection systems. Any fire protection system or portion thereof not required by this code or the California Building Code shall be allowed to be furnished for partial or complete protection provided such installed system meets the requirements of this code and the California Building Code. Partial systems shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard 9-1. 901.7 Systems out of service. Where a required fire protection system is out of service, the fire department and the fire code official shall be notified immediately and, where required by the fire code official, the building shall either be evacuated or an approved fire watch shall be provided for all occupants left unprotected by the shut down until the fire protection system has been returned to service. Where utilized, fire watches shall be provided with at least one approved means for notification of the fire department and their only duty shall be to perform constant patrols of the protected premises and keep watch for fires. Afire watch shall he in accordance with RCFPD Standard 9-2. 901.8 Removal of or tampering with equipment. It shall be unlawful for any person to remove, tamper with, intentionally damage or destroy, or otherwise disturb any fire hydrant, fire detection and alarm system, fire suppression system, fire appliances required by this code, or other appurtenance installed as a component of a fire protection system except far the purpose of extinguishing fire, approved training, recharging or making necessary repairs, or when authorized by the fire code official. The fire code official is authorized to approve means forpreventing and deterring the unlawful removal of and/or tampering with fire protection equipment. SECTION 903 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEMS 903.2 Where required. Approved automatic sprinkler systems shall be provided throughout: 1. In new buildings and structures when the gross floor area exceeds 5,000 square feet. 2. In existine buildings and structures less than 5,000 square feet where an addition results in the gross floor area of the building exceeding 5,000 square feet. 3. In existing buildings and structures with a gross floor area greater than 5,000 square feet that are approved for an addition to the building. 4. In existing buildings and structures with a gross floor area greater than 5,000 square feet when, in the opinion of the fire code official, a change in use results in a more hazardous occupancy classification and an automatic sprinkler system is not otherwise required by this section as amended. 5. In the locations described in this section. Exceptions: 1. Spaces or areas in telecommunications buildings used exclusively for telecommunications equipment, associated electrical power distribution equipment, batteries and standby engines, provided those spaces or areas are equipped throughout with an automatic fire alarm system and are separated from the remainder of the building by fire barriers consisting of not less than 1-hour fire-resistance-rated walls and 2-hour fire-resistance-rated floor/ceiling assemblies when approved by the fire code official. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 18 of 54 P351 2. Automatic fire sprinkler protection for fixed guideway transit systems shall be as per Section 903.2.17. 3. Group E occupancies shall be in accordance with Section 903.2.2. 4. Group R occupancies shall be in accordance with Section 903.2.7. 5. Group U private Qazages accessory to a Group R-3 occupancy. 903.2.1 Group A. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout buildings and portions thereof used as Group A occupancies as provided in this section. For Group A-1, A-2, A- 3, and A-4 occupancies, the automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout the floor area where the Group A-l, A-2, A-3 or A-4 occupancy is located, and in all floors between the Group A occupancy and the level of exit discharge. For Group A-5 occupancies, the automatic sprinkler system shall be provided in the spaces indicated in Section 903.2.1.5. 903.2.1.1 Group A-1. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided for Group A-1 occupancies where one of the following conditions exists: 1. The fire area has an occupant load of 300 or more; 2. .The fire area is located on a floor other than the level of exit discharge; or 3. The fire area contains amulti-theater complex. 903.2.1.2 Group A-2. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided for Group A-2 occupancies where one of the following conditions exists: 1. The fire area has an occupant load of 100 or more; or 2. The fire area is located on a floor other than the level of exit discharge. 903.2.1.3 Group A-3. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided for Group A-3 occupancies where one of the following conditions exists: 1. The fire azea has an occupant load of 300 or more; or 2. The fire area is located on a floor other than the level of exit discharge. Exception: Deleted 903.2.1.4 Group A-4. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided for Group A-4 occupancies where one of the following conditions exists: 1. The fire area has an occupant load of 300 or more; or 2. The fire area is located on a floor other than the level of exit discharge. Exception: Deleted 903.2.1.5 Group A-5. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided for Group A-5 occupancies in the following areas: concession stands, retail areas, press boxes, and other accessory use areas in excess of 1,000 square feet. 903.2.2 Group E. Except as provided for in Sections 903.2.2.1 for a new public school campus and 907.2.3.6.1 ire alarm and detection) for modernization of an existing public school campus building(s), an automatic sprinkler svstem shall be provided for all Group E occupancies. 903.2.3 Group F-1. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout all buildings containing a Group F- 1 occupancy where one of the following conditions exists: 1. Where a Group F-1 fire area is located more than three stories above grade plane; or 2. Where the combined area of all Group F-1 fire areas on all floors, including any mezzanines, exceeds 5.000 square feet. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 19 of 54 P352 903.2.6 Group M. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout buildings containing a Group M occupancy where one of the following conditions exists: 1. Where a Group M fire area is located more than three stories above grade plane; or 2. Where the combined area of all Group M fire areas on all floors, including any mezzanines, exceeds 5,000 square feet. 903.2.8 Group S-1. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout all buildings containing a Group S-1 occupancy where one of the following conditions exists: 1. A Group S-1 fire area is located more than three stories above grade plane; or 2. The combined area of all Group S-1 fire areas on al] floors, including any mezzanines, exceeds 5~ square feet. 903.2.8.1 Repair garages. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout all buildings used as repair garages in accordance with the California Building Code, as follows: 1. Buildings with a repair garage servicing vehicles parked in the basement. 903.2.9 Group S-2. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout buildings classified as enclosed pazking garages in accordance with Section 406.4 of the California Building Code or where located beneath other groups. Exception: Deleted 903.2.9.1 Commercial parking garages. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout buildings used for storage of commercial trucks or buses where the gross floor azea exceeds 5,000 square feet. 903.3 Installation requirements. Automatic sprinkler systems shall be designed and installed in accordance with Sections 903.3.1 through 903.3.7. Automatic sprinkler svstems designed for and installed in buildings and structures in a wildland-urban interface fire area shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard 47-1. 903.3.1.2 NFPA 13R sprinkler systems. Where allowed in buildings of Group R, up to and including four stories in height, automatic sprinkler systems shall be installed throughout in accordance with NFPA 13R. 903.3.1.2.1 Balconies and decks. Sprinkler protection shall be provided for exterior balconies, decks, and ground floor patios of dwelling units. Sidewal] sprinklers that are used to protect such aeeas shall be permitted to be located such that their deflectors are within 1 inch to 6 inches below the structural members and a maximum distance of 14 inches below the deck of the exterior balconies and decks that are constructed of open wood joist construction. 903.3.1.2.2 Attic spaces. A single intermediate temperature sprinkler shall be installed in each attic. Sprinklers shall be installed at the rate of one (1) head per 1,000 square feet or portion thereof of attic space. 903.3.].2.3 Apparatus access mitigation. Where fire apparatus access exceeds 150 feet, sprinkler protection shall be provided for all bathrooms and closets in addition to all other sprinkler protection requirements of Section 903.3.1.2. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 20 of 54 P353 903.4 Sprinkler system monitoring and alarms. All valves controlling the water supply for automatic sprinkler systems, pumps, tanks, water levels and temperatures, critical air pressures, and water-flow switches on all sprinkler systems shall be electrically supervised. Exceptions: 1. Automatic sprinkler systems protecting one- and two-family dwellings protected by an NFPA 13D system with less than 100 sprinklers. 2. Limited area systems serving fewer than 20 sprinklers. 3. Jockey pump control valves that are sealed or locked in the open position. 4. Valves controlling the fuel supply to fire pump engines that are sealed or locked in the open position. 5. Trim valves to pressure switches in dry, pre-action and deluge sprinkler systems that are sealed or locked in the open position. 903.4.3 Floor control valves. Approved supervised indicating control valves shall be provided at the point of connection to the riser on each floor in all multi-story buildings. SECTION 904 ALTERNATIVE AUTOMATIC FIRE-EXTINGUISHING SYSTEMS 904.2.1 Commercial hood and duct systems. Each required commercial kitchen exhaust hood and duct system required by Section 609 to have a Type I hood shall be protected with an approved automatic fire-extinguishing system installed in accordance with this code, manufacturer's specifications, and NFPA 96. SECTION 905 STANDPIPE SYSTEMS 905.4 Location of Class I standpipe hose connections. Class I standpipe hose connections shall be provided in all of the following locations: 1. In every required stairway, a hose connection shall be provided for each floor level above or below grade. Hose connections shall be located at an intermediate floor level landing between floors, unless otherwise approved by the fire code official. 2. On each side of the wall adjacent to the exit opening of a horizontal exit. Exception: Where floor areas adjacent to a horizontal exit aze reachable from exit stairway hose connections by a 30-foot hose stream from a nozzle attached to 100 feet of hose, a hose connection shall not be required at the horizontal exit. 3. In every exit passageway, at the entrance from the exit passageway to other areas of a building. 4. In covered mall buildings, adjacent to each exterior public entrance to the mall and adjacent to each entrance from an exit passageway or exit corridor to the mall. 5. Where the roof has a slope less than four units vertical in 12 units horizontal (33.3-percent slope), each standpipe shall be provided with a hose connection located either on the roof or at the highest landing of a stairway with stair access to the roof. An additional hose connection shall be provided at the top of the most hydraulically remote standpipe for testing purposes. 6. Where the most remote portion of a floor or story is more than 150 feet from a hose connection, the fire code official is authorized to require that additional hose connections be provided in approved locations. 7. Every new building with any horizontal dimensions greater than 300 feet shall be provided with either access doors or a Class I standpipe so that all portions of the building can be reached with 150 feet of hose from an access door or hose connection. Required access doors shall be Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 21 of 54 P354 located in the exterior walls of the buildine and shall be accessible without the use of a ladder. The door dimensions shall be not less than 3 feet in width and not less than 6 feet 8 inches in height. SECTION 906 PORTABLE FIRE EX'['INGUISHERS 906.6 Unobstructed and unobscured. Portable fire extinguishers shall not be obstructed or obscured from view. In rooms or areas in which visual obstruction cannot be completely avoided, means acceptable to the fire code official shall be provided to indicate the locations of extinguishers. SECTION 907 FIRE ALARM AND DETECTION SYSTEMS 907.1 General. This section covers the application, installation, performance, and maintenance of fire alarm systems and their components in new and existing buildings and structures. The requirements of Section 907.2 are applicable to new buildings and structures. The requirements of Section 907.3 are applicable to existing buildings and structures. Fire alarm and detection svstems, remote annunciation, reset and silence procedures, listing certification, monitoring, notification appliances, equipment disconnect interfaces and a posted zone map in new and existing buildings shall be in accordance with RDFPD Standards 9-3 and 9-4. SECTION 9l0 SMOKE AND HEAT VENTS 910.3.2.2 Sprinklered buildings. Where installed in buildings equipped with an approved automatic sprinkler system, smoke and heat vents shall be designed to operate automatically means of cheat-responsive device rated at least 100° F above the operating temperature of the sprinkler. SECTION 912 FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONS 912.1 Installation. Fire department connections shall be installed in accordance with the NFPA standard applicable to the system design and shall comply with Sections 912.2 through 912.6 and RCFPD Standard 5-10. 912.4 Signs. A metal sign with letters at least 1 inch in size shall be mounted on all fire department connections serving automatic sprinklers, standpipes, or fire pump connections. Such signs shall be in accordance with RDFPD Standard 5-10. SECTION 913 FIRE PUMPS 913.2 Protection against interruption of service. The fire pump, driver, and controller shall be protected in accordance with NFPA 20 against possible interruption of service through damage caused by explosion, fire, flood, earthquake, rodents, insects, windstorm, freezing, vandalism and other adverse conditions. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 22 of 54 P355 913.2.1 Alternate source of power. Notwithstanding the availability of a public utility to provide electric service for a fire pump, electrically driven fire pumps shall beprovided with an alternate source of power in accordance with NFPA 20 due to a history of extended power interruptions along the California Power Grid during times ofhiQh demand, high heat, and damage to the power grid caused by destructive natural events common in Southern Califomia such as wildfires, Santa Ana winds, and earthquakes. SECTION 914 FIRE PROTECTION BASED ON SPECIAL DETAILED REQUIREMENTS OF USE AND OCCUPANCY 914.12 Warehouses. Group M, S-1, and S-2 warehouses shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard 9-5. Permits shall be required as set forth in Appendix Chapter 1, Sections 105.6 and 105.7. Ordinance No. PD 46 Page 23 of 54 P356 CHAPTER 10 MEANS OF EGRESS [B] SECTION 1003 GENERAL MEANS OF EGRESS 1003.8 Public swimmine pools. Public swimming pool enclosures, Bates, and means of egress shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard 10-1. [B] SECTION ]008 DOORS, GATES AND TURNSTILES 1008.1.8.6 Delayed egress locks. Approved, listed, delayed egress locks shall be permitted to be installed on doors serving any occupancy except Group A, E and H occupancies in buildings that are equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 and an approved automatic smoke or heat detection system installed in accordance with Section 907, provided that the doors unlock in accordance with Items 1 through 6 below. A building occupant shall not be required to pass through more than one door equipped with a delayed egress lock before entering an exit. Delayed egress devices shall corrfornr to all of the following: 1. The doors unlock upon actuation of the automatic sprinkler system or automatic fire detection system. 2. The doors unlock upon loss of electrical power to any one of the following: 2.1 The egress-control device itself. 2.2 The smoke detection system. 2.3 Means of egress illumination as required by Section 1006. 3. The door locks shall have the capability of being unlocked by a signal from a switch located in an approved location. 4. The initiation of an irreversible process which will release the latch in not more than 15 seconds when a force of not more than 15 pounds is applied for 1 second to the release device. Initiation of the irreversible process shall activate an audible signal in the vicinity of the door. Once the door lock has been released by the application of force to the releasing device, relocking shall be by manual means only. The time delay established for each egress-control device shall not be field adjustable. For applications listed in Section 109.1 regulated by the Division of the State Arclritect- Access Compliance, see Chapter IIB, Section 1133B.2.5 of the California Building Code. Exeeptiou: In facilities housing Alzheimer's or dementia clients, a delay of not more than 30 seconds is permitted. 5. A sign shall be provided on the door located above and within 12 inches of the release device reading: PUSH UNTIL ALARM SOUNDS. DOOR CAN BE OPENED IN 15 [30] SECONDS. Sign lettering shall heat least 1 inch in height and shall have a stroke of not less than 1/8 inch. 5.1 A tactile sign shall also be provided in Braille and raised characters, which complies with Section 11178.5.1 /tem 1, of the California Building Code. 6. Emergency lighting shall be provided at the door. 7. Actuation of the panic bar or other door-latching hardware shall activate an audible signal at the door. 8. The unlatching shall not reguire more than one operation. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 24 of 54 P357 9. Regardless of the means of deactivation, relocking of t]zeggress-control device shall be by mm~ual memis only at the door. 1008.1.8.6.1 Permits. Permits shall be required as set forth in Appendix Chapter 1, Sections 105.6 and 105.7. [B] SECTION 1011 EXIT SIGNS 1011.1 Where required. Exits and exit access doors shall be marked by an approved exit sign readily visible from any direction of egress travel. Access to exits shall be marked by readily visible exit signs in cases where the exit or the path of egress travel is not immediately visible to the occupants. Exit signs shall be located as necessary in the opinion of the fire code official to clearly indicate the direction of egress travel. Exit sign placement shall be such that no point in a comdor is more than 100 feet or the listed viewing distance for the sign, whichever is less, from the nearest visible exit sign. Exit signs in commercial and industrial occupancies shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard 9-5 where applicable. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 25 of 54 P358 CHAPTER II AVIATION FACILITIES SECTION 1]02 DEFINITIONS EMERGENCY HELICOPTER LANDING FACILITY (EHLF). A landing area on the roof of a high rise building that is not intended to function as a heliport or helistop but is capable of accommodating fire or medical helicopters eneaged in emer en~cy operations. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) approval is not required for an emergency helicopter landing facility. SECTION 1108 EMERGENCY HELICOPTER LANDING FACILITY (EHLF) 1108.1 General. An emergency helicopter landing facility shall be provided where required by and shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with RCFPD Standard 11-I. 1108.2 Permits. Permits shall be required as set forth in Appendix Chapter 1, Sections 105.6 and 105.7. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 26 of 54 P359 CHAPTER 14 FIRE SAFETY DURING CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION SECTION 1401 GENERAL 1401.3 Construction permits. Construction or buildine Hermits shall not be issued until the fire code official inspects and approves required fire appazatus access and water supply for the construction site. The issuance of building Hermits with re¢ard to the requirements of this section shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standazd 14-1. SECTION 1404 PRECAUTIONS AGAINST FIRE 1404.5 Fire watch. When required by the fire code official for building demolition that is hazardous in nature, qualified personnel shall be provided to serve as an on-site fire watch. Fire watch personnel shall be provided with at least one approved means for notification of the fire department and their sole duty shall be to perform constant patrols and watch for the occurrence of fire. A fire watch shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard 9-2. SECTION 1410 ACCESS FOR FIRE FIGHTING 14]0.1 Required access. Approved vehicle access for fire fighting shall be provided to al] construction or demolition sites. Vehicle access shall be provided to within 100 feet of temporary or permanent fire department connections. Vehicle access shall be provided by either temporary or permanent roads capable of supporting vehicle loading under all weather conditions. Vehicle access shall be maintained until permanent fire appazatus access roads are available. Temporazy fire apparatus access roadways shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard 14-2. SECTION 1412 WATER SUPPLY FOR FIRE PROTECTION 1412.1 When required. An approved water supply for fire protection, either temporary or permanent, shall be made available np ~or to combustible material arriving on the site. Temporary water supply and fire hydrants shall be in accordance with RCFPD Standard 14-2. Exception: Combustible forms used for foundation work. SECTION 1418 WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE FIRE AREAS 1418.1 General. Fire safety during construction and demolition in a wildland-urban interface fire area shall be in accordance with this chapter, this section, Chapter 47, and RCFPD Standard 47-1. 1418.2 Fire protection plan. A fire protection plan as required by RCFPD Standard 47-1 shall be submitted and approved in conjunction with the submittal and approval of plans fora ¢radinQ or construction permit. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 27 of 54 P360 1418.3 Vegetation management. Approved Zone 1 vegetation management shall be provided prior to combustible material arriving on the site and shall be maintained throughout the duration of construction The fire code official is authorized to require additional vegetation management and/or defensible space when warranted, in the opinion of the fire official, by site-specific conditions. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 28 of 54 P361 CHAPTER 17 FUMIGATION AND THERMAL INSECTICIDAL FOGGING SECTION 1701 GENERAL 1701.1 Scope. Fumigation and thermal insecticidal fogging operations within structures shall comply with this chapter and the California Food and Agriculture Code, Divisions 6 and 7. Where there are conflictingprovisions the regulations contained in the Food and Agriculture Code shall prevail. 1701.2 Permits. Permits are not required to conduct fumigation and insecticidal fogging operations per California State Fire Marsha] Informational Bulletin issued 10-03-00. Instead, provide required notification to the fire code official in accordance with Section 1703.3 and the California Business and Professions Code Section 8505.5. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 29 of 54 P362 CHAPTER 19 LUMBER YARDS AND WOODWORKING FACILITIES SECTION 1904 FIRE PROTECTION 1904.4 Water supply. An approved fire hydrant /water supply system capable of supplyine 1,500 gpm fire flow for 2 hours shall be provided within 1 SO feet of all portions of the yard. When required fire flow cannot be provided, the fire code official can impose additional restrictions on pile sizes, locations, and separations. SECTION 1910 WOOD PALLETS 1910.1 General. The indoor and outdoor storaae of wood pallets shall be in accordance with Section 316. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 30 of S4 P363 CHAPTER 23 HIGH-PILED COMBUSTIBLE STORAGE SECTION 2302 DEFINITIONS HIGH-PILED COMBUSTIBLE STORAGE. Storage of combustible materials in closely packed piles or combustible materials on pallets, in racks, or on shelves where the top of storage is greater than 12 feet in height. High-piled combustible storage also includes certain high-hazard commodities, such as rubber tires, Group A plastics, flammable liquids, idle pallets and similar commodities, where the t~ of storage is greater than 6 feet in height. SECTION 2306 GENERAL FIRE PROTECTION AND LIFE SAFETY FEATURES 2306.6.1 Access doors. Where building access is required by Table 2306.2, fire department access doors shall be provided in accordance with this section. Access doors shall be accessible without the use of a ladder. 2306.6.1.1 Number of doors required. A minimum of one access door shall be provided in each 100 lineal feet, or fraction thereof, of the exterior walls which face required fire apparatus access roads. 2306.6.1.2 Door size and type. Access doors shall not be less than 3 feet in width and 6 feet 8 inches in height. Roll-up doors shall not be used unless approved. 2306.6.1.3 Locking devices. Only approved locking devices shall be used. 2306.6.1.4 Identification. Required access doors in any building with a gross floor azea greater than 10,000 square feet shall be marked in accordance with RCFPD Standard 5-5 to allow for Buick identification by firefighters both inside and outside of the building. 2308.3 Flue spaces. Flue spaces shall be provided in accordance with Table 2308.3. Required flue spaces shall be maintained. 2308.3.1 Pallet/commodity stops. In double-row racks, pallet/commodity stops shall be provided along the longitudinal flue space at each level. The stop shall be steel or other ferrous material %<" thick and in the mounted position shall extend a minimum of 4 inches above the shelf or cross member. This requirement can be applied to existing high-piled combustible storage facilities when, in the opinion of the fire code official, required flue spaces aze not being maintained. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 31 of 54 P364 CHAPTER 26 WELDING AND OTHER HOT WORK SECTION 2601 GENERAL 2601.1 Scope. Welding, cutting, open torches, and other hot work operations and equipment shall comply with this chapter and RCFPD Standard 26-1. 2601.3 Restricted areas. Hot work shall only be conducted in areas designed or authorized for that purpose by the personnel responsible for a Hot Work Program. Hot work shall not be conducted in the following areas unless approval has been obtained from the fire code official: 1. Areas where the sprinkler system is impaired. 2. Areas where there exists the potential of an explosive atmosphere, such as locations where flammable gases, liquids or vapors are present. 3. Areas with readily ignitable materials, such as storage of large quantities of bulk sulfur, baled paper, cotton, lint, dust or loose combustible materials. 4. Onboard ships at dock or ships under construction or repair. 5. Outdoors in a wildland-urban interface fire area. 6. Other areas or locations as specified by the fire code official. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 32 of 54 P365 CHAPTER 32 CRYOGENIC FLUIDS SECTION 3204 STORAGE 3204.3.1.1 Location. Stationary containers shall be located in accordance with Section 3203.6. Containers of cryogenic fluids shall not be located within diked areas containing other hazardous materials. Storage of flammable cryogenic fluids in stationary containers outside of buildings is prohibited in any location determined by the fire code official to create an unacceptable hazard to persons and/or property. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 33 of 54 P366 CHAPTER 33 (2006 INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE) EXPLOSIVES AND FIREWORKS Chapter 33, as set forth in the 2007 California Fire Code, is deleted and replaced by Chapter 33, in its entirety, as set forth in the 2006 International Fire Code, subject to the following amendments: SECTION 3301 GENERAL 3301.1.1 Explosive material standard. In addition to the requirements of this chapter, NFPA 495 and Title 19 CCR, Chapter 10 shall govern the manufacture, transportation, storage, sale, handling and use of explosive materials. 3301.1.3 Fireworks. The possession, manufacture, storage, sale, handling, and use of fireworks are prohibited. Exceptions: 1. Storage and handling of fireworks as allowed in Section 3304 and Title 19 CCR, Chapter 6. 2. Manufacture, assembly and testing of fireworks as allowed in Section 3305 and Title 19 CCR, Chapter 6. 3. The use of fireworks for display as allowed in Section 3308 and Title 19 CCR, Chapter 6. 4. The possession, storage, sale, handling and use of specific types of Division 1.4G fireworks where allowed by applicable laws, ordinances and regulations, provided such fireworks comply with Title 19 CCR, Chapter 6; CPSC 16 CFR, Parts 1500 and 1507; and DOTn 49 CFR, Parts 100-178, for consumer fireworks. 3301.1.4 Rocketry. The storage, handling and use of model and high-power rockets shall comply with the requirements of NFPA 1122, NFPA 1125, and NFPA 1127, Title 19 CCR Chapter 6, and RCFPD Standard 24-1 (33-1). 3301.1.5 Ammonium nitrate. The storage and handling of ammonium nitrate shall comply with the requirements of NFPA 490, Chapter 40, and Title 19 CCR, Chanter 10. Exception: Storage of ammonium nitrate in magazines with blasting agents shall comply with the requirements of NFPA 495 and Title 19 CCR, Chapter 10. 3301.7 Seizure. The fire code official is authorized to remove or cause to be removed or disposed of in an approved manner, at the expense of the owner, explosives, explosive materials or fireworks offered or exposed for sale, stored, possessed or used in violation of this chapter, local ordinances, and Title 19 CCR Chapter 6. Any seizure or removal pursuant to this section shall be in compliance with all applicable regulations, statutes, and laws. SECTION 3308 FIREWORKS DISPLAY 3308.11 Retail display and sale. The retail display and sale of all fireworks, including Safe & Sane, is prohibited. 3308.12 Firing. All aerial fireworks displays shall be electrically fired. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 34 of 54 P367 CHAPTER 34 FLAMMABLE AND COMBUSTIBLE LIQUIDS SECTION 3404 STORAGE 3404.2.7.6 Repair, alteration or reconstruction of tanks and piping. The repair, alteration or reconstruction, including welding, cutting and hot tapping of storage tanks and piping that have been placed in service, shall be in accordance with NFPA 30 and RCFPD Standard 34-1. 3404.2.9.5.1 Locations where above-ground tanks are prohibited. Storage of Class I and lI liquids in above-ground tanks outside of buildings is prohibited in any location determined by the fire code official to create an unacceptable hazard to persons and/or property. 3404.2.13 Abandonment and status of tanks. Tanks taken out of service shall be removed in accordance with Section 3404.2.14 and RCFPD Standard 34-1, or safeguarded in accordance with Sections 3404.2.13.1 through 3404.2.13.2.3, API 1604. 3404.2.14 Removal and disposal of tanks. Removal and disposal of tanks shall comply with Sections 3404.2.14.1 and 3404.2.14.2 and RCFPD Standard 34-1. 3404.3.3.9 Idle combustible pallets. Storage of empty or idle combustible pallets inside an unprotected liquid storage area shall be limited to a maximum pile size of 500 square feet and to a maximum storage height of 6 feet. Storage of empty or idle combustible pallets inside a protected liquid storage area shall comply with NFPA 13 and NFPA 230. Pallet storage shall be separated from liquid storage by aisles that are at least 8 feet wide. SECTION 3406 SPECIAL OPERATIONS 3406.2.4.4 Locations where above-ground tanks are prohibited. The storage of Class I and II liquids in above-ground tanks is prohibited in any location determined by the fire code official to create an unacceptable hazard to persons and/orproperty. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 35 of 54 P368 CHAPTER 38 LIQUEFIED PETROLEUM GASES SECTION 3804 LOCATION OF CONTAINERS 3804.2 Maximum capacity within established limits. Within the limits established bylaw restricting the storage of liquefied petroleum gas for the protection of heavily populated or congested areas, the aggregate capacity of any one installation shall not exceed a water capacity of 2,000 gallons in an location determined by the fire code official to create an unacceptable hazard to persons and/or rp operty. Exception: In particular installations, this capacity limit shall be determined by the fire code official, after consideration of special features such as topographical conditions, nature of occupancy, and proximity to buildings, capacity of proposed containers, degree of fire protection to be provided and capabilities of the local fire department. SECTION 3807 SAFETY PRECAUTIONS AND DEVICES 3807.5 Container orientation. Containers in multiple-container stationary installations and containers in storage shall be oriented with relation to one another such that the length axes of the containers are arp allel. Exception: Portable containers. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 36 of 54 P369 CHAPTER 45 REFERENCED STANDARDS ICC Standard Referenced reference in code number Title section number IFC-06+ 2006 Intemational Fire Code Chapter 33 ` In addition to specific references in this code, the 2006 Intemational Fire Code is a nationally recognized fire safety standard approved by the fire code official pursuant to Appendix Chapter 1 Section 102.7. NFPA Standard Referenced reference in code number Title section number 96-04* Ventilation Control and Fire Protection of 609, 904.2.1 Commercial Cookin¢ Operations * The 2007 Edition becomes effective upon adoption of the Standard by NFPA. Standards of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Number Standard Title 4-t Carnivals, Fairs, and Outdoor Public Assembla es 4-2 Exhibits and Tradeshows 4-3 S ecial Amusement Buildin s 4-4 Seasonal Sales Lots 4-5 Fire Emergency Guide for Multi-Family Dwellings 61 Fire Department Access Roadways 62 Permanent Alternative Material All-Weather Fire Access Road 5-3 Residential Vehicular Gates 5-4 Commercial 8 Industrial Vehicular Gates 5-5 Identification of Access Doors in Commercial/Industdal Buildings 66 Root Access 5-7 Multi-Family Residential Building Addressing Standard 5-8 Commercial/Industrial Building Addressing Standard S9 Knox Box Installation 5-10 Requirements for the Design. Submittal and Review of Underground Fire Protection Water Supply Systems 5-11 Site Plan Criteria for Fire District Mapping 8-1 Fire Safety for Schools and Classrooms 9-1 Partial Fire Protection Systems 9-2 Fire Watch 9-3 Installation of and/or Modification to Fire Alarm System 9-4 Fire Alarm Notifcation Assurance g-5 Warehouses 10-1 Swimming Pool Enclosures 11-1 Emergency Helicopter Landing Facility 14-1 Release of Construction Permits 14-2 Temporary Fire Departrnent Access Roadways and Fire Hydrants 261 Hot Work 33-1 Model Rockets 34-1 Underground Hazardous Materials Storage Tank Abandonment/Removal 47-1 Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area Standard Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 37 of 54 P370 CHAPTER 47 REQUIREMENTS FOR WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE FIRE AREAS SECTION 4701 GENERAL 470].1 Scope. The mitigation of conditions where a wildfire burning in vegetative fuels may readily transmit fire to buildings and threaten to destroy life, overwhelm fire suppression capabilities, or result in large property losses shall comply with this chapter and RCFPD Standard 47-1. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 38 of 54 P371 APPENDIX CHAPTER 1 ADMINISTRATION SECTION 101 GENERAL 101.1 Title. These regulations shall be known as the Fire Code of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD or District), herein referred to as "this code." SECTION l02 APPLICABILITY 102.1 Construction and design provisions. The construction and design provisions of this code shall apply to: 1. Structures, facilities, and conditions arising after the adoption of this code. 2. Existing structures, facilities, and conditions not legally in existence at the time of adoption of this code. 3. Existing structures, facilities, and conditions when identified in specific sections of this code. 4. Existing structures, facilities, and conditions which, in the opinion of the fire code official, constitute a distinct hazard to life or property. 5. Existing structures buildings, and facilities under oin construction after the adoption of this code in which the cross floor area of reconstruction or remodel is fiftv percent (50%) or more of the existing building prior to the submittal of a building_permit application. 6. Existing structures, buildings, and facilities undergoing constmction after the adoption of this code in which the gross floor area is increased by fiftv percent (50%) or more. 102.6 Referenced codes and standards. The codes and standards referenced in this code shall be those that are listed in Chapter 45 and RCFPD standards approved by the fire code official after the adoption of this code. Such codes and standards shall be considered part of the requirements of this code to the prescribed extent of each such reference. Where differences occur between the provisions of this code and the referenced standards, the fire code official shall determine which requirement meets the intent of this code. 102.9 Conflicting Provisions. Where there is a conflict between a general requirement and a specific requirement the fire code official shall determine which requirement meets the intent of this code. Provisions of the California Code of Regulations that are included in this code specifically or by reference shall prevail except where this code contains a more restrictive requirement. SECTION 103 DEPARTMENT OF FIRE PREVENTION Deleted SECTION l04 GENERAL AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITIES 104.1 General. The fire code official is hereby authorized to implement, administer, and enforce the provisions of this code and shall have the authority to render interpretations of this code, and to adopt policies, procedures, rules, and regulations in order to clarify the application of its provisions. Such interpretations, policies, procedures, rules, and regulations shall be in compliance with the intent and Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 39 of 54 P372 purpose of this code and shall not have the effect of waiving requirements specifically provided for in this code. 104.1.1 Appointment. The fire code official shall be appointed by the fire chief and shall continue in his/her position in accordance with the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Rules and Regulations. 104.1.2 Deputies. In accordance with the prescribed procedures of this jurisdiction and with the concurrence of the appointing authority, the fire code official shall have the authority to appoint a deputy fire code official, other related technical officers, inspectors, and other employees. 104.1.3 Other enforcement officers. The following persons are hereby authorized, during the course of their official duties, to enforce the provisions of this code and to make arrests and issue citations as authorized b 1. The San Bemardino County Sheriff and any Deputy Sheriff 2. Officers of the United States Forest Service 3. The State Forest Ranger and Peace Officers of the Califomia Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 4. Officers of the Califomia Highway Patrol 5. Law enforcement and authorized members of fire agencies operating under automatic or mutual aid agreements within the boundaries of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District 6. Officers ofthe San Bernardino Countv Weed Abatement Section 7. Employees of the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Fire Construction Services and Code Enforcement divisions. 104.1.4 Liability. The fire code official, officer or employee charged with the enforcement of this code, while acting for the jurisdiction, shall not thereby be rendered liable personally, and is hereby relieved from all personal liability for any damage accruing to persons or property as a result of an act required or permitted in the discharge of official duties. 104.1.5 Legal defense. Any suit instituted against any officer or employee because of an act performed by that officer or employee in the lawful discharge of duties and under the provisions of this code shall be defended by the legal representative of the jurisdiction until the final termination of the proceedings. The fire code official or any subordinate shall not be liable for costs in an action, suit or proceeding that is instituted in pursuance of the provisions of this code; and any officer of the District, acting in good faith and without malice, shall be free from liability for acts performed under any of its provisions or by reason of any act or omission in the performance of official duties in connection therewith. 104.8 Modifications. Whenever there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the provisions of this code, the fire code official shall have the authority to grant modifications for individual cases, provided the fire code official shall first find that special individual reason makes the strict letter of this code impractical and the modification is in compliance with the intent and purpose of this code and that such modification does not lessen the health, life and fire safety requirements. The details of action granting modifications shall be recorded and entered in the files of the District. 104.12 Cost recovery. Costs incurred by the District for fire suppression, investigation, rescue, emergency medical care, responses to a traffic collision or accident, and containment/mitigation of a hazardous materials release are recoverable in accordance with Health and Safety Code Sections 13009 Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 40 of 54 P373 and 13009.1. Any person who negligently or intentionally; or in violation of law, causes an emergency response is liable for the costs of securing such emergency, including those costs set out in Government Code Section 53150 et seq. Any expense incurred by the District For securing such an emergency situation shall constitute a debt of such person and shall be collectible by the District in the same manner as in the case of an obligation under contract, expressed or implied. Fire inspection costs are recoverable in accordance with the District's Fee Resolution. SECTION 105 PERMITS 105.3.1 Expiration. An operational permit shall remain in effect until reissued, renewed, or revoked or for such a period of time as specified in the permit. Construction permits and fees shall be in accordance with the policies, procedures, and ordinances of the Building and Safety Department having iurisdiction; either the City of Rancho Cucamonga or the County of San Bernardino. Permits are not transferable and any change in occupancy, operation, tenancy, or ownership shall require that a new permit be issued. 105.5.1 Non-pavment of permit fee. The fire code official is authorized to revoke a permit issued under the provisions of this code when the permittee fails to pay permit fees in accordance with the terms of the Permit Application or when a check or credit/debit card submitted for pavment of the permit fee(s) is returned or declined. 105.6 Required operational permits. The fire code official is authorized to issue operational permits for the operations set forth in Sections 105.6.1 through 105.6.66. 105.6.1 Access control. An operational permit is reuuired to maintain a motorized gate across a fire apparatus access road. 105.6.2 Aerosol products. An operational permit is required to manufacture, store or handle an aggregate quantity of Leve12 or Level 3 aerosol products in excess of 500 pounds net weight. 105.6.3 Amusement buildings. An operational permit is required to operate a special amusement building. 105.6.4 Aviation facilities. An operational permit is required to use a Group H or Group S occupancy for aircraft servicing or repair and aircraft fuel-servicing vehicles. Additional permits required by other sections of this code include, but are not limited to, hot work, hazardous materials and flammable or combustible finishes. 105.6.5 Battery charger operation. An operational permit is required for a battery charger operation where the total quantity of electrolyte in all batteries is more than 50 gallons. 105.6.6 Carnivals, fairs, and outdoor public assemblages. An operational permit is required to conduct a carnival, fair, or similar outdoor public assemblage event. 105.6.7 Cellulose nitrate film. An operational permit is required to store, handle or use cellulose nitrate film in a Group A occupancy. 105.6.8 Combustible dust-producing operations. An operational permit is required to operate a grain elevator, flour starch mill, feed mill, or a plant pulverizing aluminum, coal, cocoa, Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 41 of 54 P374 magnesium, spices or sugar, or other operations producing combustible dusts as defined in Chapter 2. 105.6.9 Combustible fibers. An operational permit is required for the storage and handling of combustible fibers in quantities greater than 100 cubic feet. Exception: A permit is not required for agricultural storage. 105.6.10 Commercial cooking operation. An operational permit is required for a commercial cookinn operation regulated by Section 609. 105.6.11 Compressed gases. An operational permit is required for the storage, use or handling at normal temperature and pressure (NTP) of compressed gases in excess of the amounts listed in Table 105.6.8. Exception: Vehicles equipped for and using compressed gas as a fuel for propelling the vehicle. 105.6.]2 Covered mall buildings. An operational permit is required for: 1. The placement of retail fixtures and displays, concession equipment, displays of highly combustible goods and similar items in the mall. 2. The display of liquid- or gas-Fred equipment in the mall. 3. The use ofopen-flame or flame-producing equipment in the mall. 105.6.13 Cryogenic fluids. An operational pennit is required to produce, store, transport on site, use, handle or dispense cryogenic fluids in excess of the amounts listed in Table 105.6.10. Exception: Permits are not required for vehicles equipped for and using cryogenic fluids as a fuel for propelling the vehicle or for refrigerating the lading. 105.6.14 Cutting and welding. An operational permit is required to conduct cutting or welding operations within the jurisdiction. 105.6.15 Deep sedation /general anesthesia. An operational permit is required to operate a facility that renders clients incapable ofself-preservation by means of deep sedation, IV sedation, or by the use of general anesthesia. 105.6.16 Delayed egress. An operational permit is required for a delayed egress system. 105.6.] 7 Dipping operations. An operational permit is required to conduct dipping operations regulated by Chapter 15. 105.6.]8 Dry cleaning plants. An operational permit is required to engage in the business of dry cleaning or to change to a more hazardous cleaning solvent used in existing dry cleaning equipment. 105.6.19 Emergency helicopter landing facility. An operational permit is required for an emergency helicopter landin fg acilit~ 105.6.20 Exhibits and trade shows. An operational permit is required to operate indoor or outdoor exhibits and trade shows and indoor displays regulated by Section 314. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 42 of 54 P375 105.6.21 Explosives. An operational permit is required for the manufacture, storage, handling, sale or use of any quantity of explosives, explosive materials, fireworks or pyrotechnic special effects within the scope of Chapter 33. Exception: Storage in Group R-3 occupancies of smokeless propellant, black powder and small arms primers for personal use, not for resale and in accordance with Section 3306. 105.6.22 Fire alarm central/remote station. An operational Hermit is required to operate a fire alarm central/remote station. 105.6.23 Fire hydrants and valves. An operational permit is required to use or operate fire hydrants or valves intended for fire suppression purposes which are installed on water systems and accessible to a fire apparatus access road that is open to or generally used by the public. Exception: A permit is not required for authorized employees of the water company that supplies the system or the fire department to use or operate fire hydrants or valves. 105.6.24 Flammable and combustible liquids. An operational permit is required: 1. To use or operate a pipeline for the transportation within facilities of flammable or combustible liquids. This requirement shall not apply to the off-site transportation in pipelines regulated by the Department of Transportation (DOTn) nor does it apply to piping systems. 2. To store, handle or use Class I liquids in excess of 5 gallons in a building or in excess of 10 gallons outside of a building, except that a permit is not required for the following: 2.1 The storage or use of Class I liquids in the fuel tank of a motor vehicle, aircraft, motorboat, mobile power plant or mobile heating plant, unless such storage, in the opinion of the code official, would cause an unsafe condition. 2.2 The storage or use of paints, oils, varnishes or similar flammable mixtures when such liquids are stored for maintenance, painting or similar purposes for a period of not more than 30 days. 3. To store, handle, or use Class fl or Class IIIA liquids in excess of 25 gallons in a building or in excess of 60 gallons outside a building, except for fuel oil used in connection with oil- burning equipment. 4. To remove Class I or Class II liquids from an underground storage tank used for fueling motor vehicles by any means other than the approved, stationary on-site pumps normally used for dispensing purposes. 5. To operate tank vehicles, equipment, tanks, plants, terminals, wells, fuel-dispensing stations, refineries, distilleries and similar facilities where flammable and combustible liquids are produced, processed, transported, stored, dispensed or used. 6. To place temporarily out of service (for more than 90 days) an underground, protected above-ground, orabove-ground flammable or combustible liquid tank. 7. To change the type of contents stored in a flammable or combustible liquid tank to a material which poses a greater hazard than that for which the tank was designed and constructed. 8. To manufacture, process, blend, or refine flammable or combustible liquids. 9. To engage in the dispensing of liquid fuels into the fuel tanks of motor vehicles at commercial, industrial, govemmental or manufacturing establishments. ] 0. To utilize a site for the dispensing of liquid fuels from tank vehicles into the fuel tanks of motor vehicles at commercial, industrial, governmental or manufacturing establishments. 11. To remove an under roe und' protected above-Around, or above-ground flammable or combustible liquid tank. 12. To store, handle, or use flammable or combustible liquids is excess of the maximum allowable quantity. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 43 of 54 P376 105.6.25 Floor finishing. An operational permit is required for floor finishing or surfacing operations exceeding 350 square feet using Class I or Class II liquids. 105.6.26 Fruit and crop ripening. An operational permit is required to operate afruit- or crop- ripening facility or conduct afruit-ripening process using ethylene gas. 105.6.27 Hazardous materials. An operational permit is required to store, transport on site, dispense, use or handle hazardous materials in excess of the amounts listed in Table 105.6.20 and RCFPD Standard 47-1. 105.6.28 HPM facilities. An operational permit is required to store, handle or use hazardous production materials. 105.6.29 High-piled storage. An operational permit is required to use a building or portion thereof as a high-piled storage area exceeding 500 square feet. 105.6.30 Hot work fixed site. An operational permit is required for affixed-site hot work area such as welding booths and similar areas as described in Chapter 26. 105.6.31 Hot work operations. An operational permit is required for hot work including, but not limited to: 1. Public exhibitions and demonstrations where hot work is conducted. 2. Use of portable hot work equipment inside a structure. Exception: Work that is conducted under a construction permit'. 3. Hot work conducted within a hazardous fire area. 4. Application of roof coverings with the use of an open-flame device. 105.6.32 Hot work program. An operational permit is required to carry out a Hot Work Program. This program allows approved personnel to regulate their facility's hot work operations. The approved personnel shall be trained in the fire safety aspects denoted in this chapter and shall be responsible for issuing permits requiring compliance with the requirements found in Chapter 26. These permits shall be issued only to their employees or hot work operations under their supervision. 105.6.33 Industrial ovens. An operational permit is required for operation of industrial ovens regulated by Chapter 21. ]05.6.34 Large family daycare. An operational permit is required to operate a large family daycare. 105.6.35 Lumber yards and woodworking plants. An operational permit is required for the storage or processing of lumber exceeding 100,000 board feet (8,333 ft3). 105.6.36 Liquid- or gas-fueled vehicles or equipment in assembly buildings. An operational permit is required to display, operate or demonstrate liquid- or gas-fueled vehicles or equipment in assembly buildings. 105.6.37 LP-gas. An operational permit is required for: 1. Storage and use of LP-gas. Exceptions: Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 44 of 54 P377 1. A permit is not reouired for individual containers with a 500-gallon water capacity or less serving occupancies in Group R-3. 2. A permit is not required for individual containers with a water capacity of 2.5 pounds [nominal 1 pound LP-gas capacity] or less used with portable appliances or equipment. Operation of cargo tankers that transport LP-gas. 105.6.38 Magnesium. An operational permit is required to melt, cast, heat treat or grind more than 10 pounds of magnesium. ] 05.6.39 Miscellaneous combustible storage. An operational permit is required to store in any building or upon any premises in excess of 2,500 cubic feet gross volume of combustible empty packing cases, boxes, barrels or similar containers, rubber tires, rubber, cork or similar combustible material. 105.6.40 Motor fuel-dispensing facility. An operational permit is required to operate an automotive, marine, or fleet motor fuel-dispensing facility. 105.6.41 Open burning. An operational permit is required for the kindling or maintaining of an open fire or a Fire on any public street, alley, road, or other public or private ground. Instructions and stipulations of the permit shall be adhered to. Exception: Recreational fires in areas not subiect to the provisions of Chapter 47. 105.6.42 Open flames and torches. An operational permit is required to remove paint with a torch; or to use a torch or open-flame device in a hazardous fire area. 105.6.43 Open flames and candles. An operational permit is required to use open flames or candles in connection with assembly areas, dining areas of restaurants, or drinking establishments. 105.6.44 Organic coatings. An operational permit is required for any organic-coating manufacturing operation producing more than 1 gallon of an organic coating in one day. 105.6.45 Pallet storage. An operational pemlit is required for the storage of pallets in excess of 200 cubic feet. ] 05.6.46 Places of assembly. An operational permit is required to operate a place of assembly. 105.6.47 Powder coating. An operational permit is required to conduct powder coating operations and processes regulated by Chapter I5. 105.6.48 Private fire hydrants. An operational permit is required for the removal from service, use or operation of private fire hydrants. Exception: A permit is not required for private industry with trained maintenance personnel, private fire brigade or fire departments to maintain, test, and use private hydrants. 105.6.49 Public assemblage. An operational permit is required for an outdoor public assemblage regulated by Section 403. 105.6.50 Pyrotechnic special effects material. An operational permit is required for use and handling of pyrotechnic special effects material. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 45 of 54 P378 105.6.51 Pyroxylin plastics. An operational permit is required for storage or handling of more than 25 pounds of cellulose nitrate (pyroxylin) plastics and for the assembly or manufacture of articles involving pyroxylin plastics. 105.6.52 Recycling and scrap metal facilities. An operational permit is required to operate a commercial recycling or scrap metal facility regulated by Section 317. 105.6.53 Refrigeration equipment. An operational permit is required to operate a mechanical refrigeration unit or system regulated by Chapter 6. 105.6.54 Reinforced plastics /resin application. An operational permit is required to handle and apply reinforced plastics and operate a resin application process or area regulated by Chapter 15. 105.6.55 Repair garage. An operational permit is required for the operation of a repair garage. 105.6.56 Rooftop heliports. An operational permit is required for the operation of a roofrop heliport. 105.6.57 Seasonal sales lot. An operational permit is required to operate an outdoor display and sales area of seasonal items such as pumpkins and Christmas trees. 105.6.58 Spraying operations. An operational permit is required to conduct a spraying operation utilizing flammable or combustible liquids, electrostatic apparatus, organic peroxides, or dual- component coatings regulated by Chapter 15. 105.6.59 Stationary storage battery system. An operational permit is required For a stationary storage battery system regu]ated by Section 608. 105.6.60 Storage of scrap tires and tire byproducts. An operational permit is required to establish, conduct or maintain storage of scrap tires and tire byproducts that exceeds 2,500 cubic feet of total volume of scrap tires and for indoor storage of tires and tire byproducts. 105.6.61 Temporary membrane structures, tents and canopies. An operational permit is required to operate anair-supported temporary membrane structure or a tent having an area in excess of 200 square feet, or a canopy in excess of 400 square feet. Exceptions: 1. Tents used exclusively for recreational camping purposes. 2. Fabric canopies open on all sides which comply with all of the following: 2.1 Individual canopies having a maximum size of 700 square feet. 2.2 The aggregate area of multiple canopies placed side by side without a fire break clearance of not less than 12 feet shall not exceed 700 square feet total. 2.3 A minimum clearance of 12 feet to structures and other tents shall be provided. 105.6.62 Tire-rebuilding plants. An operational permit is required for the operation and maintenance of atire-rebuilding plant. 105.6.63 Waste handling. An operational permit is required for the operation of waste material- handling facilities. Ordinance No. FD 46 Yage 46 of 54 P379 105.6.64 Wood products. An operational permit is required to store chips, hogged material, lumber or plywood in excess of 200 cubic feet. 105.6.65 Wrecking yards. An operational permit is required to operate a wrecking yard regulated by Section 317. 105.6.66 Additional permits. ]n addition to the permits required by Appendix Chapter 1, Section 105.6, the following permits shall be obtained from the Bureau of Fire Prevention prior to engaging in the following activities, operations, practices, or functions: 1. Production facilities. To change use or occupar¢cy, or allow the attendance of a live audience, or for wrap up parties. 2. Pyrotechnics and special effects. To use pyrotechnic special effects, open flame, use of flammable or combustible liquids and gases, welding, and the parking of motor vehicles in any building or location used for the pug pose of motion picture, television, and comnsercial production 3. Live audiences. To install seating arrangements for live audiences in approved production facilities, production studios, and sound stages. See Chapter 46. 105.7 Required construction permits. The fire code official is authorized to issue construction permits for work as set forth in Sections 105.7.1 through 105.7.13. 105.7.1 Automatic fire-extinguishing systems. A construction permit is required for installation of or modification to an automatic fire-extinguishing system. Maintenance performed in accordance with this code is not considered a modification and does not require a permit. 105.7.2 Battery charger operation. A construction permit is required to install a battery charger serving batteries in a facility that have a liquid capacity of more than 50 gallons. 105.7.3 Compressed gases. When the compressed gases in use or storage exceed the amounts listed in Table 105.6.8, a construction permit is required to install, repair damage to, abandon, remove, place temporarily out of service, close, or substantially modify a compressed gas system. Exceptions: 1. Routine maintenance. 2. For emergency repair work performed on an emergency basis, application for permit shall be made within two working days of commencement of work. The permit applicant shall apply for approval to close storage, use or handling facilities at least 30 days prior to the termination of the storage, use or handling of compressed or liquefied gases. Such application shall include any change or alteration of the Facility c]osure plan filed pursuant to Section 2701.6.3. The 30-day period is not applicable when approved based on special circumstances requiring such waiver. 105.7.4 Delayed egress device or system. A construction Hermit is required for installation or modification of a delayed egress device or delayed egress system. 105.7.5 Emergeney helicopter landing facility. A construction permit is required for construction and installation of an emergency helicopter landing facility 105.7.6 Fire alarm and detection systems and related equipment. A construction permit is required for installation of or modification to fire alarm and detection systems and related equipment. Maintenance performed in accordance with this code is not considered a modification and does not require a permit. Ordinance No. PD 46 Page 47 of 54 P380 105.7.7 Fire pumps and related equipment. A construction permit is required for installation of or modification to fire pumps and related fuel tanks, jockey pumps, controllers, and generators. Maintenance performed in accordance with this code is not considered a modification and does not require a pernrit. 105.7.8 Flammable and combustible liquids. A construction permit is required: 1. To repair or modify a pipeline for the transportation of flammable or combustible liquids. 2. To install, construct or alter tank vehicles, equipment, tanks, plants, terminals, wells, fuel- dispensing stations, refineries, distilleries and similar facilities where flammable and combustible liquids are produced, processed, transported, stared, dispensed or used. 3. To install, alter, remove, abandon or otherwise dispose of a flammable or combustible liquid tank. 105.7.9 Hazardous materials. A construction permit is required to install, repair damage to, abandon, remove, place temporarily out of service, close, or substantially modify a storage facility or other area regulated by Chapter 27 when the hazardous materials in use or storage exceed the amounts listed in Table 105.6.20. Exceptions: 1. Routine maintenance. 2. For emergency repair work performed on an emergency basis, application for permit shall be made within two working days of commencement of work. ]05.7.10 Industrial ovens. A construction permit is required for installation of industrial ovens covered by Chapter 21. Exceptions: 1. Routine maintenance. 2. For repair work performed on an emergency basis, application for permit shall be made within two working days of commencement of work. 105.7.11 LP-gas. A construction permit is required for installation of or modification to an LP-gas system. 105.7.12 Mechanical refrigeration. A construction permit is required for the installation or modification of mechanical refrigeration equipment or a mechanical refrigeration s s 105.7.13 Private fire hydrants. A construction permit is required for the installation or modification of private fire hydrants. 105.7.14 Spraying or dipping. A construction permit is required to install or modify a spray room, dip tank or booth. 105.7.15 Standpipe systems. A construction permit is required for the installation, modification, or removal from service of a standpipe system. Maintenance performed in accordance with this code is not considered a modification and does not require a permit. 105.7.16 Stationary storage battery systems. A permit is required to install a stationary storage battery system havinu a liquid capacity of more than 50 eallons. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 48 of 54 P381 105.7.17 Temporary membrane structures, tents and canopies. A construction permit is required to erect anair-supported temporary membrane structure or a tent having an area in excess of 200 square feet, or a canopy in excess of 400 square feet. Exceptions: 1. Tents used exclusively for recreational camping purposes. 2. Funeral tents and curtains or extensions attached thereto, when used for funeral services. Fabric canopies and awnings open on all sides which comply with all of the following: 3.1. Individual canopies shall have a maximum size of 700 square feet. 3.2. The aggregate area of multiple canopies placed side by side without a fire break clearance of not less than 12 feet shall not exceed 700 square feet total. 3.3. A minimum clearance of 12 feet to structures and other tents shall be maintained. SECTION 106 INSPECTIONS 106.5 Fees. Inspection fees, if anv, shall be in accordance with a District Fee Resolution. SECTION 108 BOARD OF APPEALS 108.1 Board of appeals established. In order to hear and decide appeals of orders, decisions, or determinations made by the fire code official relative to the application and interpretation of this code, there shall be and is hereby created a board of appeals. The board of appeals shall be in accordance with Appendix A as amended. The board of appeals shall be appointed by the governing body and shall serve in accordance with the provisions of Appendix A as amended. The fire code official shall be an ex officio member of said board but shall have no vote on any matter before the board. The board shall adopt rules of procedure for conducting its business and shall render all decisions and findings in writing to the appellant with a duplicate copy to the fire code official. SECTION 109 VIOLATIONS 109.2.3 Prosecution of violations. If the notice of violation is not complied with promptly, the fire code official is authorized to request the legal counsel of the jurisdiction to institute the appropriate legal proceedings at law or in equity to restrain, correct, or abate such violation or to require removal or termination of the unlawful occupancy of the structure in violation of the provisions of this code or of the order or direction made pursuant hereto. In addition to, or in place of, anv other remedy which is allowed by law, administrative penalties maybe imposed in connection with anv violation of this code or District ordinance. 109.3 Violation penalties. Persons who shall violate a provision of this code or shall fail to comply with any of the requirements thereof or who shall erect, install, altei, repair, or do work in violation of the approved construction documents or directive of the fire code official, or of a permit or certificate used under provisions of this code, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000 or by imprisonment not exceeding six months, or both such fine and imprisomnent. The fire code official with the concurrence of the chief and the district attorney, is authorized to use administrative citations and fines as allowed by an ordinance of the Board of Directors in place of the Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 49 of 54 P382 violation penalties contained in this section. Each day that a violation continues after notice has been served shall be deemed a separate offense. In addition to, or in place of, the foregoing penalties, administrative penalties pursuant to the District's Administrative Citation Ordinance maybe imposed in connection with anv violation of this code or anv District ordinance. Any person violating or who has violated anv section of this code or District ordinance maybe issued an administrative citation in accordance with the Administrative Citation Ordinance. SECTION 111 STOP WORK ORDER 111.4 Failure to comply. Any person who shall continue any work after having been served with a stop work order, except such work as that person is directed to perform to remove a violation or unsafe condition, shall be subject to violation penalties as specified in Section 109.3. Each day that work continues in violation of a stop work order shall be deemed a separate offense. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 50 of 54 P383 APPENDIX A BOARD OF APPEALS A101.2 Membership. The membership of the board shall consist of five voting members having the qualifications established by this section. Members shall be nominated by the fire code official or the chief administrative officer of thejurisdiction, subject to confirmation by a majority vote of the governing body. Members shall serve without remuneration or compensation, and shall be removed from office prior to the end of their appointed terms only for cause. Where there is a practical difficulty with impaneling a board with the members outlined herein the make up of the board may be altered in accordance with a plan agreed to by the fire code official the governing body and the appellant. A101.3 Terms of office. Members shall be appointed to hear and rule on a specific appeal. The term of office shall be for the duration of the appeal process for a specific appeal. Upon completion of all required duties for said appeal, the board shall automatically be dissolved. AlOl.3.1 Initial appointments. Deleted A101.3.2 Vacancies. Vacancies shall be filled in the manner in which original appointments are required to be made. A101.3.3 Removal from office. Members shall be removed from the board prior to the end of the appeal process only for cause. Continued absence of any member from regular meetings of the board shall, at the discretion of the applicable governing body, render any such member liable to immediate removal from office. A101.7 Meetings. The board shall be established and convene its first meeting within 30 days after notice of appeal has been received. A101.8 Conflict of interest. Members with a material or financial interest in a matter under appeal shall not be eligible to serve on the board. Appointees to the board who are found to have a material or financial interest in the matter before the board shall be immediately removed from the board for cause and shall be ineligible to serve on future boards. A101.10 Procedures. The board shall be operated in accordance with the California Code of Civil Procedure and may establish rules and regulations for its own procedure not inconsistent with the provisions of this code and applicable state law. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 51 of 54 P384 APPENDIX B FIRE-FLOW REQUIREMENTS FOR BUILDINGS SECTION B]OS FIRE-FLOW REQUIREMENTS FOR BUILDINGS B105.1 One- and two-family dwellings. The minimum fire-flow requirements for one- and two- family dwellings having afire-flow calculation area which does not exceed 3,600 square feet shall be 1,000 gallons per minute. Fire-flow and flow duration for dwellings having afire-flow calculation area in excess of 3,600 square feet shall not be less than that specified in Table B105.1. Exception: A reduction in required fire flow of 50 percent (50%), as approved, is allowed when the building is provided with an approved automatic sprinkler system. The resulting fire-flow shall not be less than 1 000 gallons per minute for the prescribed duration as specified in Table B105.1. B105.2 Buildings other than one- and two-family dwellings. The minimum fire-flow and flow duration for buildings other than one- and two-family dwellings shall be as specified in Table B 105.1. Exception: A reduction in required fire-flow of up to 50 percent (50%), as approved, is allowed when the building is provided with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2. The resulting fire-flow shall not be less than 1,500 gallons per minute (5678 Umin) for the prescribed duration as specified in Table B105.1. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 52 of 54 P385 SECTION 5. Violation Penalties It shall be unlawful for any person, firm, partnership, or corporation to violate any provision or to fail to comply with any of the requirements of this Ordinance or the Codes adopted hereby. Any person, firm, partnership, or corporation violating any provision of this Ordinance or the Codes adopted hereby or failing to comply with any of its requirements shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine not exceeding One Thousand Dollars (S 1,000.00) or by imprisonment not exceeding six (6) months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Each person, firm, partnership, or corporation shall be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or any portion thereof during which any violation of any provision of this Ordinance or the Codes adopted hereby is committed, continued, or permitted by such person, firm, partnership, or corporation, and shall be deemed punishable therefore as provided in this Ordinance. SECTION 6. Abatement of Nuisance The violation of any of the provisions of this Ordinance or the Codes adopted hereby shall constitute a nuisance and maybe abated by the Board through civil process by means of restraining order, preliminary or permanent injunction, or in any other manner provided by law for the abatement of such nuisances. SECTION 7. Severability The Board hereby declares that should any provision, section, paragraph, sentence, or word of this Ordinance or the Code hereby adopted be rendered or declared invalid by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences, and words of this Ordinance and the Codes hereby adopted shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 8. Rights Reserved Nothing in this ordinance or in the Fire Code hereby adopted shall be construed to affect any suit or proceeding pending in any court, or any rights acquired, or any liability incurred, or any cause or causes of action, or any existing agreement under any ordinance hereby repealed as cited in Section 1 of this ordinance; nor shall any just or legal right or remedy of any character be ]ost, impaired, or affected by this Ordinance. SECTION 9. Publication The Secretary of the District shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and shall cause the same or a summary thereof to be published and posted as required bylaw. SECTION ] 0. Date of Effect This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its final passage and adoption. Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 53 of 54 P386 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of 2008. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAINED: Dr. Donald Kurth, President ATTEST: Debra J. Adams, Secretary I, Debra J. Adams, Secretary of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced for first reading by the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District at a regular meeting of said Board held on the day of 2007, and was finally passed, approved, and adopted by the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District at a regular meeting of said Board held on the .day of , 200 . Executed this day of , 200_at Rancho Cucamonga, California. Debra J. Adams, Secretary Ordinance No. FD 46 Page 54 of 54 STAFF REPORT RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Date: December 5, 2007 To: Board President Donald Kurth, MD and Members of the Board of Directors Jack Lam, AICP, District CEO From: Peter Bryan, Fire Chief By: Rob Ball, Fire Marshal Subject: Findings of Fact Resolution P387 ~'~ RANCHO C,UCAMONGA RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Board of Directors of the Fire District adopt a resolution that makes express findings of fact as required by Health and Safety Code Section 17958.7. These findings of fact, based on local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions are necessary to provide the legal justification for making local changes and/or amendments to the California Fire Code. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Health and Safety Code Section 17958 provides that the District shall adopt ordinances and regulations imposing the same, modified, or changed requirements as those that are contained in the regulations adopted by the State of California. Health and Safety Code Section 17958.5(a) permits the District to make changes or modifications to the California Fire Code when such changes are reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions. Section 17958.7 of the Health and Safety Code requires that the Board, before making any changes or modifications to the California Fire Code, make an express finding that such changes or modifications are reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions. Counsel has advised that the express findings should be adopted in a resolution of the Board that is separate from the ordinance that adopts the Fire Code. However, to comply with the requirements of the Health and Safety Code, both the adopting ordinance and the findings resolution need to approved and adopted in conjunction with each other. As in years past, District staff has determined that local climatic, geological, and topographical conditions do exist that make changes and modifications to the California Fire Code reasonably necessary. I am asking the Board to simply formalize those findings by way of this resolution. Respectfully submitted, Peter M. Bryan Fire Chief P388 RESOLUTION NO. F~ ©~3I A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, SETTING FORTH FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO LOCAL CLIMATIC, GEOLOGICAL, AND TOPOGRAPHICAL CONDITIONS WHICH MAKE CHANGES, MODIFICATIONS, AMENDMENTS, ADDITIONS, DELETIONS, AND EXCEPTIONS TO THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE REASONABLY NECESSARY. A. Recitals. 1. The Board of Directors (herein after "Board") of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (herein after "District") has determined that: a. The Health and Safety Code Section 17958 provides that the District shall adopt ordinances and regulations imposing the same, modified, or changed requirements as are contained in the regulations adopted by the State of California (herein after "State") pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 17922; and b. The State is mandated by Health and Safety Code Section 17922 to impose the same requirements as are contained in the most recent edition of the California Fire Code; and c. Health and Safety Code Section 17958.5(a) permits the District to make changes or modifications to the California Fire Code which are reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions; and d. Health and Safety Code Section 17958.7 requires that the Board, before making any changes or modifications to the Califorriia Fire Code, shall make an express finding that such changes or modifications are reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions. The Board has determined that local climatic, geological, and topographical conditions do exist that make changes and modifications to the California Fire Code reasonably necessary and that those conditions are: a. Geological i. The District has within its boundaries active seismic hazards along five known earthquake faults. Seismic activity events within the District occur throughout the year and a fire potential exists with these events. Existing structures and planned new development are at serious risk from an earthquake. This risk includes fire, collapse, and the disruption of water supply for firefighting purposes. Areas can become isolated and/or be subject to delayed responses as a result of bridge, overpass, and road damage and debris. 11232-0001\964465v1.doc P389 ii. Due to its location along the foothills of the San Bemardino Mountains, the District is subjected to flood conditions during rain episodes. Some of the major arterial streets in the District are designed to function as part of the flood control system and are at times impassable as a result of high, swift-moving running water. Other streets are often damaged and/or clogged with debris during flooding episodes creating delayed responses by emergency apparatus. In the wildland-urban interface fire areas, roads are often washed out or obstructed by landslides. iii. The District's jurisdiction includes a significant amount of Wildland- Urban Interface Fire Area comprised of both State and Loca] Responsibility Areas. The native vegetation in these areas of the south aspect of the San Bemardino Mountains is capable of and has in the past produced wildfire conflagrations that threaten large numbers of homes and businesses and have in the past destroyed homes and other buildings. b. Topographical i. The District is situated on an inclined plane that increases from approximately 1,400 feet in elevation on the south side of the District to approximately 2,400 feet in elevation on the north side of the District. This elevation change occurs across approximately seven miles creating several roads with steep slopes that slow fire apparatus and produce extended response times. ii. The District contains two freeways and several main arterial streets that connect several of the foothill cities. Traffic conditions on any given day, absent geological or climatic complications, are sufficient to cause delayed responses by fire apparatus. The District also has several at-grade railroad crossings that are used daily by commuter and freight trains. Train traffic across these grades causes extended response times or the need to dispatch additional units that can respond from the opposite of the train crossing. iii. The flood control system in the District relies on many mid-block, at- grade drainage channels that create dips in roads that require fire apparatus to slow their response in order to prevent damage to the vehicles. Other rises and troughs designed to carry flood waters during rain episodes that are built into major arterial streets create elevation changes dramatic enough to produce fire apparatus damage if they are not traversed at significantly reduced speeds. Reduced speeds along these main thoroughfares create extended response times. 2 11232-0001\9644GSvl.doc P390 c. Climatic i. The District is bounded on the east and the west by canyons that channel seasonal Santa Ana winds from the desert to the ocean. Santa Ana winds in the District have a history of sustained velocities of 40-60 miles per hour with gusts in excess of 80 miles per hour. The winds create damage that includes downed power lines, downed utility poles, fallen trees, and blowing dust and debris. These hazards create extended response times. The wind and its resulting damage often result in the loss of electric power supplied by the public utility resulting in the possibility of fire alarn~s, fire pumps, other fire and life safety protection equipment, and traffic signals being rendered ineffective. ii. The summer and early fall months often see periods of high temperatures and low humidity that quickly dry out the native chaparral and other foothill vegetation as well as the historic windrows planted when the area was a mostly agricultural area. The combination of low humidity, Santa Ana winds, and high temperatures creates ideal wildfire weather conditions capable of producing catastrophic wildland conflagrations. The District has experienced a number of fires during the course of its existence. Such fires quickly deplete the District's resources and the resources of neighboring jurisdictions as these fire events are generally large regional events that span several cities and many miles. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District hereby finds and resolves as follows: 1. The facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Changes, modifications, amendments, additions, deletions, and exceptions to the California Fire Code are reasonably necessary in the District. 3. The reasonably necessary changes, modifications, amendments, additions, deletions, and exceptions to specific sections of the California Fire Code are listed along with the applicable findings in a matrix appended to this resolution, marked as Exhibit A, and incorporated by reference herein. 4. The aforementioned changes, modifications, amendments, additions, deletions, and exceptions have been incorporated in detail in Ordinance FD 46. ~. The Secretary of the Board shall file copies of this Resolution and Ordinance FD 46 with the California Building Standards Commission and Department of Housing and Community Development, as required by Health and Safety Code Section 1798.7. 3 1 1232-0001 V 64465 vl .doc P391 PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2007. President I, ,Secretary to the Board of Directors, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved and adopted by the Board of Directors, at a Regular Meeting of said Board held on the day of , 2007. Executed this day of , 2007, at Rancho Cucamonga, California. Secretary to the Board of Directors 1123?-0001\96446Svl.doc Exhibit'A' Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Findings of Fact Matrix P392 Section Applicable Finding(s) Note 301 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired Specific sections deleted to avoid confusion. 307 2.a.iii, 2.c.i, 2.c.ii i 308 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired 309 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired 314 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired 316 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired 317 2.a.i, 2.a.ii, 2.a.iii, 2.b.i, 2.b.ii, 2.b.iii 403 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired 405 Not a construction rovision; fndin not re uired 408 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired 503 2.a.i, 2.a.ii, 2.c.i 504 2.a.i, 2.a.ii, 2.b.i, 2.b.ii, 2.b.iii 505 2.a.i, 2.a.ii, 2.b.i, 2.b.ii, 2.b.iii, 2.c.i 506 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired 507 2.a.i, 2.b.i 508 2.a.i, 2.a.iii, 2.b.i, 2.b.ii, 2.b.iii, 2.c.i 510 2.a.i, 2.a.ii, 2.b.i, 2.b.ii, 2.b.iii, 2.c.i 511 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired 601 Not a construction provision; Ending not required Permit requirements made non-specific to avoid confusion. 606 2.a.i, 2.a.ii, 2.b.i, 2.b.ii, 2.b.iii, 2.c.i 609 2.a.i, 2.a.ii, 2.b.i, 2.b.ii, 2.b.iii 807 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired 901 Not a construction provision; finding not required Referenced standard clarifies code provisions; does not alter construction provisions. 903 2.a.i, 2.a.ii, 2.a.iii, 2.b.i, 2.b.ii, 2.b.iii, 2.c.i, 2.c.ii 904 Not a construction provision; finding not required Additional standards requiring compliance for proper installation added for clarification. 905 2.a.i, 2.a.ii, 2.b.i, 2.b.ii, 2.b.iii, 2.c.i 906 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired Clarification only 907 2.a.i, 2.a.ii, 2.b.i, 2.b.ii, 2.b.iii, 2.c.i, 2.c.ii 910 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired Specific details added to ensure desired operation. 912 Not a construction provision; finding not required Referenced standard clarifies code provisions; does not alter construction provisions. 913 2.c.i 914 2.a.i, 2.a.ii, 2.b.i, 2.b.ii, 2.b.iii 1003 Not a construction provision; finding not required Referenced standard clarifies code provisions; does not alter construction provisions. 1008 Not a construction provision; finding not required Amended to require a permit for greater oversight and maintenance. 1011 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired Language added to clarify intent of the section. 1102 New definition; findin not re uired 1108 2.a.i, 2.a.ii, 2.b.i, 2.b.ii, 2.b.iii, 2.c.i Alternate aviation facility available for fire and rescue operations. 1401 Not a construction provision; finding not required Internal policy clarification that is closely code related. 1404 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired 1410 2.a.ii Clarifies acceptable temporary access 1412 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired 1418 Not a construction rovision; fndin not re uired 1701 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired Exhibit'A' P393 Section Applicable Finding(s) Note 1904 2.a.i, 2.a.ii, 2.a.iii, 2.b.i, 2.b.ii, 2.b.iii, 2.c.i, 2.c.ii 1910 Not a construction rovision; fndin not re uired 2302 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired Removes optional provision 2306 2.a.i, 2.a.ii, 2.b.i, 2.b.ii, 2.b.iii 2601 Not a construction rovision; fndin not re uired 3204 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired 3301 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired 3308 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired 3404 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired 3406 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired 3804 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired 3807 2.a.i, 2.a.ii, 2.a.iii, 2.b.i, 2.b.ii, 2.b.iii, 2.c.i, 2.c.ii 4701 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired Ch. 45 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired A . Ch. 1 See individual sections below 101 Not a construction rovision; fndin not re uired 102 2.a.i, 2.a.ii, 2.a.iii, 2.b.i, 2.b.ii, 2.b.iii, 2.c.i, 2.c.ii 103 Not a construction provision; Ending not required Some provisions conflict with District organizational structure; necessary provisions added to Sec. 104. 104 Not a construction rovision; fndin not re uired 105 Not a construction provision; finding not required Amended to make permits more specific and to require additional construction permits. 106 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired 108 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired 109 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired 111 Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired A . A Not a construction rovision; findin not re uired A . B 2.a.i, 2.a.ii, 2.a.iii, 2.b.i, 2.b.ii, 2.b.iii, 2.c.i, 2.c.ii RANCHO CUCAMONGA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Aeenda Check ReEister 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount P394 AP - 00259474 10/31/2007 BUSINESS WEEK 99.97 AP - 00259483 10/31/2007 CALIFORNIA REDEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION 75.00 AP - 00259508 10/31/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 17.78 AP - 00259508 10/31/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 17.78 AP - 00259513 10/31/2007 FORBES 59.95 AP - 00259520 10/31/2007 H & H GENERAL CONTRACTORS INC 302,582.76 AP - 00259520 10/31/2007 H & H GENERAL CONTRACTORS INC -30,258.28 AP - 002>9530 10/31/2007 INFOBASE PUBLISHING INC 10,220.00 AP - 00259536 10/31/2007 INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL OF SHOPPING CEN' 100.00 AP - 00259592 10/31/2007 PITASSI ARCHITECTS INC 5,614.13 AP - 00259592 10/31/2007 PITASSI ARCHITECTS INC 46,287.50 AP - 00259597 10/31/2007 PROQUEST LLC 1,665.00 AP - 00259605 10/31/2007 SAN BERNARDINO CONVENTION & VISITORS I 10,000.00 AP - 00259628 10/31/2007 SYMPRO INC 1,800.00 AP - 00259631 10/31/2007 TUTOR.COM INC 7,042.25 AP - 00259664 11/7/2007 ALEXANDER, CASSANDRA 13,055.70 AP - 00259683 11/7/2007 AVERY, TIFFANY 5,835.90 AP - 00259698 11/7/2007 CALIFORNIA INTEGRATED SOLUTIONS 2,469.60 AP - 00259748 11/7/2007 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INS CO 70,393.00 AP - 00259748 11/7/2007 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INS CO 400.00 AP - 00259776 11/7/2007 HOFFER PROPERTIES LLC.c/o MANAT PHELPS ! 1,771,315.00 AP - 00259786 11/7/2007 INSIGHT PUBLIC SECTOR 168.33 AP - 00259787 11/7/2007 INTEGRITY COURIER SERVICES 54.92 AP - 00259870 11/7/2007 RRM DESIGN GROUP 1,612.03 AP - 00259949 11/7/2007 ZONES CORPORATE SOLUTIONS 2,028.50 AP - 00259950 11/7/2007 HOFFER PROPERTIES LLC.c/o MANAT PHELPS ! 1,771,315.00 AP - 00260039 11/14/2007 JONES & ASSOCIATES, DIANNE 363.00 AP - 00260043 11/14/2007 KENNETH REBER AND CASSANDRA GONZALE: 5,376.00 AP - 00260047 1 ]/14/2007 LANCE SOLL AND LUIv`GHARD 10,539.00 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 139.49 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 21.87 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 40.73 AP - 00260058 11/14/2007 LUBELSKI, DENISE 10,346.70 AP - 00260081 11/14/2007 NEWSBANK INC 5,475.00 AP - 00260083 11/14/2007 NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP. 84,590.99 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 164.91 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 26.66 AP - 00260089 11/14/2007 OLAIZ, RALPH 939.96 AP - 00260112 11/14/2007 RANCHO CUCAMONGA CHAMBER OF COMMEI 6,633.33 AP - 00260119 11/14/2007 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 536.00 AP - 00260119 11/14/2007 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 2,020.00 AP - 00260128 ] 1/14/2007 SAFCO CAPITAL CORD 26,336.02 AP - 00260199 11/15/2007 SONG, LI JUN 13,183.80 AP - 00260224 11/2]/2007 BANC OF AMERICA LEASING 221.47 AP - 00260247 11/21/2007 COPIES & INK PRINTING INC. 487.95 AP - 00260249 11/21/2007 COSTAR REALTY INFORMATION INC 1,629.91 AP - 00260262 11/21/2007 DUMBELL MAN FITNESS EQUIPMENT, THE 2,250.00 AP - 00260271 11/21/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 18.92 AP - 00260271 11/21/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORD 15.98 AP - 00260271 11/21/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 17.78 AP - 00260271 11/21/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORD 26.90 AP - 00260271 11/21/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 39.26 AP - 00260278 11/21/2007 FORTUNE 49.98 AP - 00260296 11/21/2007 HILL AND KNOWLTON INC 661.80 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 1 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:29:2 RANCHO CUCAMONGA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Agenda Check Re>?ister 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name AP - 00260296 11/21/2007 HILL AND KNOWLTON INC AP - 00260322 11/21/2007 LIM & NASCIMENTO ENGINEERING CORP AP - 00260335 11/21/2007 NAIOP INLAND EMPIRE AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT AP - 00260358 11/21/2007 PISCIUNERI, ERIN AP - 00260372 11/21/2007 RELIABLE GRAPHICS AP - 00260420 ] 1/21/2007 WORLD ECONOMIC DEV ALLIANCE R BDO MA Total Cor Check ID AP: Total for Entity: P395 Amount 8,380.00 26,224.53 6,000.00 4.67 6,672.95 133.07 4,950.00 4.218.490.45 4,218,490.45 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 2~ Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Pomait Layout Current Date: 11/28/200 Time: 14:29:2 P396 STAFF REPORT ~-- ~ t; ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Date: December 5, 2007 '~RA~!N-CHO C,UCAMONGA To: Chairman and Members of the Redevelopment Agency Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer By: Ty Quaintance, Facilities Superintendent Subject: AUTHORIZATION TO REJECT ALL BIDS FOR "EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT AND CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING" AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY CLERK TO RE-ADVERTISE THE "NOTICE INVITING BIDS" FOR "EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT" AND "EPICENTER CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING" AS SEPARATE PROJECTS TO BE FUNDED FROM RDA STADIUM COMPLEX CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND AND RDA PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FUND RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Agency authorize staff to reject all bids for "Epicenter Stadium Seat Replacement and Cross Aisle Waterproofing" and authorize the City Clerk to re- advertise the "Notice Inviting Bids" for "Epicenter Stadium Seat Replacement" and "Epicenter Cross Aisle Waterproofing" as separate projects to be funded from RDA Stadium Complex Capital Improvement Fund and RDA Public Improvements Fund. BACKGROUND ANALYSIS On October 17, 2007, the Agency authorized staff to solicit bids for the replacement of the original seating at the Epicenter as well as waterproofing the cross aisle and seat areas. Bids were opened by the City Clerk's office on Monday, November 5. Only one bid was received and was deemed non-responsive because it did not include a price for the waterproofing portion of the project. Another bid was received several days after the bid opening and rejected. See attached bid summary. These two projects require careful coordination because of the need to complete both phases outside of the baseball season schedule and due to the fact that about twenty percent of the stadium seats are mounted in a way that they intertere with the sealant replacement work. Old seats must be removed, sealant work completed and new seats installed as the final phase of work. The original specifications were written with the intent of integrating all of these work functions into one prime contract so as to allow for optimum coordination and scheduling of the work. However, each of the two seat manufacturers who endeavored to bid the complete project stated they were unable to generate timely interest from the water sealant contractors. P397 AUTHORIZATION TO REJECT ALL BIDS FOR "EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT PAGE 2 AND CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING" AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY CLERK TO RE- ADVERTISE THE "NOTICE INVITING BIDS" FOR "EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT' AND "EPICENTER CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING" AS SEPARATE PROJECTS TO BE FUNDED FROM RDA STADIUM COMPLEX CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND AND RDA PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FUND DECEMBER 5, 2007 Therefore staff is recommending rejecting all bids and re-bidding each portion of the original project as separate projects and completed after the end of the baseball season in September 2008. This approach will require significantly more coordination and administrative effort on the part of staff as well as on the part of two separate contractors but should result in a.satisfactory completion of both projects. The estimated cost for both of these projects is $1,350,000. Res ectfully Submitted, C W~ iam J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:DB:dlw P398 BID SUMMARY EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT AND CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING PROJECT Bidder's Name Total Bid Comment Irwin Seating Co. $741,627.32 Incomplete bid received for seating only-no bid amount submitted for water roofin American Seating Co. $781,136 Seating bid received via e- mail several days after bid opening and did not include a bid for waterproofin P399 RESOLUTION NO. /(fJ O ~-DZ~ A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR "EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT" AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency to construct certain improvements in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agehcy has prepared specifications for the construction of certain improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the specifications presented by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency be and are hereby approved as the specifications for the "EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT". BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to advertise as required by law for the receipt of sealed bids or proposals for doing the work specified in the aforesaid specifications, which said advertisement shall be substantially in the following words and figures, to wit: "NOTICE INVITING SEALED BIDS OR PROPOSALS" Pursuant to a Resolution of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California, directing this notice, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that said City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency will receive at the OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK IN THE OFFICES OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ON OR BEFORE THE HOUR OF 2:00 P.M. ON April 1, 2008 sealed bids or proposals for "EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT" in said City. Bids will be publicly opened and read in the office of the City Clerk, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730. A Pre-Bid Job Walk is scheduled for Wednesday, March 26, 2008 at 9:00 a.m. at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Epicenter, 8408,Rochester Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730, where bidders may present questions regarding the Bid Documents: Plans, Proposals, Specifications. Bids must be made on a form provided for the purpose, addressed to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency, California, marked, "BID FOR EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT." PREVAILING WAGE: Notice is hereby given that in accordance with the provisions of California Labor Code, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Articles 1 and 2, the Contractor is required to pay not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for work of a similar character in the locality in which the public work is performed, and not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for holiday and overtime work. In that regard, the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of-the State of California is required to and has determined such general prevailing rates of per diem wages. Copies of such prevailing rates of per diem wages are on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, and are available to any interested party on request. The Contracting Agency also shall cause a copy of such determinations to be posted at the job site. P400 Pursuant to provisions of Labor Code Section 1775, the Contractor shall forfeit, as penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, not more than twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed for each calendar day or portion thereof, if such laborer, workman or mechanic is paid less than the general prevailing rate of wages hereinbefore stipulated for any work done under the attached contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provision of said Labor Code. Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 of the Labor Code concerning the employment of apprentices by the Contractor or any subcontractor under him. Section 1777.5, as amended, requires the Contractor or subcontractor employing tradesmen in any apprenticable occupation to apply to the joint apprenticeship committee nearest the site of the public works project and which administers the apprenticeship program in that trade for a certificate of approval. The certificate will also fix the ratio of apprentices to journeymen that will be used in the performance of the contract. The ratio of apprentices to journeymen in such cases shall not be less than one to five except: 1. When unemployment in the area of coverage by the joint apprenticeship committee has exceeded an average of 15 percent in the 90 days prior to the request of certificate, or 2. When the number of apprentices in training in the area exceeds a ratio of one to five, or 3. When the trade can show that it is replacing at least 1/30 of its membership through apprenticeship training on an annual basis statewide or locally, or 4. When the Contractor provides evidence that he employs registered apprentices on all of his contracts on an annual average of not less than one apprentice to eight journeymen. The Contractor is required to make contributions to funds established for the administration of apprenticeship programs if he employs registered apprentices or journeymen in any apprenticable trade on such contracts and if other Contractors on the public works site are making such contributions. The Contractor and subcontractor under him shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices. Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex-officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. Eight (8) hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work for all workmen employed in the execution of this contract and the Contractor and any subcontractor under him shall comply with and be governed by the laws of the State of California having to do with working hours as set forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code of the State of California as amended. The Contractor shall forfeit, as a penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed in the execution of the contract, by him or any subcontractor under him, upon any of the work hereinbefore mentioned, for each calendar day during which said laborer, workman, or mechanic is required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in violation of said Labor Code. Contractor agrees to pay travel and subsistence pay to each workman needed to execute the work required by this contract as such travel and subsistence payments are defined in the applicable collective bargaining agreement filed in accordance with Labor Code Section 17773.8. The bidder must submit with his proposal, cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bidder's bond, payable to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for an amount equal to at least ten percent (10%) of the amount of said bid as'a guarantee that the bidder will enter into the proposed contract if the same is awarded to him, and in event of failure to enter into such contract said cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bond shall become the property of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. P401 If the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency awards the contract to the next lowest bidder, the amount of the lowest bidder's security shall be applied by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to the difference between the low bid and the second lowest bid, and the surplus, if any shall be returned to the lowest bidder. The amount of the bond to be given to secure a faithful performance of the contract for said work shall be one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price thereof, and an additional bond in an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price for said work shall be given to secure the payment of claims for any materials or supplies furnished for the performance of the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, or any work or labor of any kind done thereon, and the Contractor will also be required to furnish a certificate that he carries compensation insurance covering his employees upon work to be done under contract which may be entered into between him and the said City of Rancho Cucamonga for the construction of said work. No proposal will be considered from a Contractor to whom a proposal form has not been issued by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Contractor shall possess any and all contractors licenses, in form and class as required by any and all~:,...._ applicable laws with respect to any and all of the work to be performed under this contract; including but not limited to a "D34" (Prefabricated Equipment). In accordance with the provisions of the Contractor's License Law (California Business and Professions Code, Section 7000 et. seq.) and rules and regulation adopted pursuant thereto. The Contractor, pursuant to the California Business and Professions Code, Section 7028.15, shall indicate his or her State License Number on the bid, together with the expiration date, and be signed by the Contractor declaring, under penalty of perjury, that the information being provided is true and correct. The work is to be done in accordance with the profiles, plans, and specifications of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency on file in the Office of the City Clerk at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Copies of the plans and specifications, available at the office of the City Engineer, will be furnished upon request to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Upon written request by the bidder, copies of the plans and specifications will be mailed. The successful bidder will be required to enter into a contract satisfactory to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. In accordance with the requirements of Section 9-3.2 of the General Provisions, as set forth in the Plans and Specifications regarding the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, the Contractor may, upon the Contractor's request and at the Contractor's sole cost and expense, substitute authorized securities in lieu of monies withheld (performance retention). The City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, reserves the right to reject any and all bids. Questions regarding this Notice Inviting Bids for EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT may be directed to: Dave Blevins/Ty Quaintance, Public Works Maintenance Manager/Facilities Superintendent Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 477-2700, ext. 4101 or 4092 (909) 477-2731, fax By order of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Dated this 5~h day of December 2007. ADVERTISE ON: March 11, 2008 and March 18, 2008. P402 RESOLUTION NO. R~ D7-Q~ZO A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR "EPICENTER CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING" AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency to construct certain improvements in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency has prepared specifications for the construction of certain improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the specifications presented by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency be and are hereby approved as the specifications for the "EPICENTER CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING". BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to advertise as required by law for the receipt of sealed bids or proposals for doing the work specified in the aforesaid specifications, which said advertisement shall be substantially in the following words and figures, to wit: "NOTICE INVITING SEALED BIDS OR PROPOSALS" Pursuant to a Resolution of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California, directing this notice, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that said City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency will receive at the OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK IN THE OFFICES OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ON OR BEFORE THE HOUR OF 2:00 P.M. ON April 1, 2008 sealed bids or proposals for "EPICENTER CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING" in said City. Bids will be publicly opened and read in the office of the City Clerk, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730. A Pre-Bid Job Walk is scheduled for Wednesday, March 26, 2008, at 9:00 a.m. at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Epicenter, 8408 Rochester Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730, where bidders may present questions regarding the Bid Documents: Plans, Proposals, Specifications. THIS MEETING IS MANDATORY. Verification of attendance at the Pre-Bid Job Walk will be documented by signing in at the meeting. Any bidder not documented as being present at the Pre-Bid Job Walk will be excluded from the bid process. Bids must be made on a form provided for the purpose, addressed to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency, California, marked, "BID FOR EPICENTER CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING." PREVAILING WAGE: Notice is hereby given that in accordance with the provisions of California Labor Code, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Articles 1 and 2, the Contractor is required to pay not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for work of a similar character in the locality in which the public work is performed, and not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for holiday and overtime work. In that regard, the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of the State of California is required to and has determined such gerieral prevailing rates of per diem wages. Copies of such prevailing rates of per diem wages are on file in the Office of the City Clerk, of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, and are available to any P403 interested party on request. The Contracting Agency also shall cause a copy of such determinations to be posted at the job site. Pursuant to provisions of Labor Code Section 1775, the Contractor shall forfeit, as penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, not more than twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed for each calendar day or portion thereof, if such laborer, workman or mechanic is paid less thare the general prevailing rate of wages hereinbefore stipulated for any work done under the attached contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provision of said Labor Code. Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 of the Labor Code concerning the employment of apprentices by the Contractor or any subcontractor under him. Section 1777.5, as amended, requires the Contractor or subcontractor employing tradesmen in any apprenticable occupation to apply to the joint apprenticeship committee nearest the site of the public works project and which administers the apprenticeship program in that trade for a certificate of approval. The certificate will also fix the ratio of apprentices to journeymen that will be used in the performance of the contract. The ratio of apprentices to journeymen in such cases shall not be less than one to five except: 5. When unemployment in the area of coverage by the joint apprenticeship committee has exceeded an average of 15 percent in the 90 days prior to the request of certificate, or 6. When the number of apprentices in training in the area exceeds a ratio of one to five, or 7. When the trade can show that it is replacing at least 1/30 of its membership through apprenticeship training on an annual basis statewide or locally, or 8. When the Contractor provides evidence that he employs registered apprentices on all of his contracts on an annual average of not less than one apprentice to eight journeymen. The Contractor is required to make contributions to funds established for the administration of apprenticeship programs if he employs registered apprentices or journeymen in any apprenticable trade on such contracts and if other Contractors on the public works site are making such contributions. The Contractor and subcontractor under him shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices. Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex-officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. Eight (8) hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work for all workmen employed in the execution of this contract and the Contractor and any subcontractor under him shall comply with and be governed by the laws of the State of California having to do with working hours as set forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code of the State of California as amended. The Contractor shall forfeit, as a penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed in the execution of the contract, by him or any subcontractor under him, upon any of the work hereinbefore mentioned, for each calendar day during which said laborer, workman, or mechanic is required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in violation of said Labor Code. Contractor agrees to pay travel and subsistence pay to each workman needed to execute the work required by this contract as such travel and subsistence payments are defined in the applicable collective bargaining agreement filed in accordance with Labor Code Section 17773.8. P404 The bidder must submit with his proposal, cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bidder's bond, payable to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for an amount equal to at least ten percent (10%) of the amount of said bid as a guarantee that the bidder will enter into the proposed contract if the same is awarded to him, and in event of failure to enter into such contract said cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bond shall become the property of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. If the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency awards the contract to the next lowest bidder, the amount of the lowest bidder's security shall be applied by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to the difference between the low bid and the second lowest bid, and the surplus, if any shall be returned to the lowest bidder. The amount of the bond to be given to secure a faithful performance of the contract for said work shall be one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price thereof, and an additional bond in an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price for said work shall be given to secure the payment of claims for any materials or supplies furnished for the performance of the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, or any work or labor of any kind done thereon, and the Contractor will also be required to furnish a certificate that he carries compensation insurance covering his employees upon work to be done under contract which may be entered into between him and the said City of Rancho Cucamonga for the construction of said work. No proposal will be considered from a Contractor to whom a proposal form has not been issued by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Contractor shall possess any and all contractors licenses, in form and class as required by any and all applicable laws with respect to any and all of the work to be performed under this contract; including but not limited to a "C-39" (Roofing Contractor). In accordance with the provisions of the Contractor's License Law (California Business and Professions Code, Section 7000 et. seq.) and rules and regulation adopted pursuant thereto. The Contractor, pursuant to the California Business and Professions Code, Section 7028.15, shall indicate his or her State License Number on'the bid, together with the expiration date, and be signed by the Contractor declaring, under penalty of perjury, that. the information being provided is true and correct. The work is to be done in accordance with the profiles, plans, and specifications of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency on file in the Office of the City Clerk at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Copies of the plans and specifications, available at the office of the City Engineer, will be furnished upon request to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Upon written request by the bidder, copies of the plans and specifications will be mailed. The successful bidder will be required to enter into a contract satisfactory to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. In accordance with the requirements of Section 9-3.2 of the General Provisions, as set forth in the Plans and Specifications regarding the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, the Contractor may, upon the Contractor's request and at the Contractor's sole cost and expense, substitute authorized securities in lieu of monies withheld (performance retention). The City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, reserves the right to reject any and all bids. Questions regarding this Notice Inviting Bids for EPICENTER CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING may be directed to: Dave Blevins/Ty Quaintance, Public Works Maintenance Manager/Facilities Superintendent Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 477-2700, ext. 4101 or 4092 (909) 477-2731, fax P405 By order of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. Dated this 5`h day of December 2007. ADVERTISE ON: March 11, 2008 and March 18, 2008. P406 \'~ ,. STAFF REPORT ~ - ~ ; `~ ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT r y Date: December 5, 2007 RANCHO cUCAMONGA To: Chairman and Members of the Redevelopment Agency Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer By: Ty Quaintance, Facilities Superintendent Subject: AUTHORIZATION TO REJECT ALL BIDS FOR "EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT AND CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING" AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY CLERK TO RE-ADVERTISE THE "NOTICE INVITING BIDS" FOR "EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT" AND "EPICENTER CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING" AS SEPARATE PROJECTS TO BE FUNDED FROM RDA STADIUM COMPLEX CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND AND RDA PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FUND RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Agency authorize staff to reject all bids for "Epicenter Stadium Seat Replacement and Cross Aisle Waterproofing" and authorize the City Clerk to re- advertise the "Notice Inviting Bids" for "Epicenter Stadium Seat Replacement" and "Epicenter Cross Aisle Waterproofing" as separate projects to be funded from RDA Stadium Complex Capital Improvement Fund and RDA Public Improvements Fund. BACKGROUND ANALYSIS On October 17, 2007, the Agency authorized staff to solicit bids for the replacement of the original seating at the Epicenter as well as waterproofing the cross aisle and seat areas. Bids were opened by the City Clerk's office on Monday, November 5. Only one bid was received and was deemed non-responsive because it did not include a price for the waterproofing portion of the project. Another bid was received several days after the bid opening and rejected. See attached bid summary. These two projects require careful coordination because of the need to complete both phases outside of the baseball season schedule and due to the fact that about twenty percent of the stadium seats are mounted in a way that they interfere with the sealant replacement work. Old seats must be removed, sealant work completed and new seats installed as the final phase of work. The original specifications were written with the intent of integrating all of these work functions into one prime contract so as to allow for optimum coordination and scheduling of the work. However, each of the two seat manufacturers who endeavored to bid the complete project stated they were unable to generate timely interest from the water sealant contractors. P407 AUTHORIZATION TO REJECT ALL BIDS FOR "EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT PAGE 2 AND CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING" AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY CLERK TO RE- ADVERTISETHE "NOTICE INVITING BIDS" FOR "EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT' AND "EPICENTER CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING" AS SEPARATE PROJECTS TO BE FUNDED FROM RDA STADIUM COMPLEX CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND AND RDA PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FUND DECEMBER 5, 2007 Therefore staff is recommending rejecting all bids and re-bidding each portion of the original project as separate projects and completed after the end of the baseball season in September 2008. This approach will require significantly more coordination and administrative effort on the part of staff as well as on the part of two separate contractors but should result in a satisfactory completion of both projects. The estimated cost for both of these projects is $1,350,000. R~ E~~ectfully Submitted, W~4fiam J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:DB:dlw P408 BID SUMMARY EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT AND CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING PROJECT Bidder's Name Total Bid Comment Irwin Seating Co. $741,627.32 Incompiete bid received for seating only-no bid amount submitted for water roofin American Seating Co. $781,136 Seating bid received via e- mail several days after bid opening and did not include a bid for waterproofin P409 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR "EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT" AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency to construct certain improvements in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency has prepared specifications for the construction of certain improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the specifications presented by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency be and are hereby approved as the specifications for the "EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT". BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to advertise as required by law for the receipt of sealed bids or proposals for doing the work specified in the aforesaid specifications, which said advertisement shall be substantially in the following words and figures, to wit: "NOTICE INVITING SEALED BIDS OR PROPOSALS" Pursuant to a Resolution of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California, directing this notice, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that said City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency will receive at the OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK IN THE OFFICES OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ON OR BEFORE THE HOUR OF 2:00 P.M. ON April 1, 2008 sealed bids or proposals for "EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT" in said City. Bids will be publicly opened and read in the office of the City Clerk, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730. A Pre-Bid Job Walk is scheduled for Wednesday, March 26, 2008 at 9:00 a.m. at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Epicenter, 8408 Rochester Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730, where bidders may present questions regarding the Bid Documents: Plans, Proposals, Specifications. Bids must be made on a form provided for the purpose, addressed to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment. Agency, California, marked, "BID FOR EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT." PREVAILING WAGE: Notice is hereby given that in accordance with the provisions of California Labor Code, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Articles 1 and 2, the Contractor is required to pay not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for work of a similar character in the locality in which the public work is performed, and not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for holiday and overtime work. In that regard, the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of the State of California is required to and has determined such general prevailing rates of per diem wages. Copies of such prevailing rates of per diem wages are on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, and are available to any interested party on request. The Contracting Agency also shall cause a copy of such determinations to be posted at the job site. P410 Pursuant to provisions of Labor Code Section 1775, the Contractor shall forfeit, as penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, not more than twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed for each calendar day or portion thereof, if such laborer, workman or mechanic is paid less than the general prevailing rate of wages hereinbefore stipulated for any work done under the attached contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provision of said Labor Code. Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 of the Labor Code concerning the employment of apprentices by the Contractor or any subcontractor under him. Section 1777.5, as amended, requires the Contractor or subcontractor employing tradesmen in any apprenticable occupation to apply to the joint apprenticeship committee nearest-the site of the public works project and which administers the apprenticeship program in that trade for a certificate of approval. The certificate will also fix the ratio of apprentices to journeymen that will be used in the performance of the contract. The ratio of apprentices to journeymen in such cases shall not be less than one to five except: 1. When unemployment in the area of coverage by the joint apprenticeship committee has exceeded an average of 15 percent in the 90 days prior to the request of certificate, or 2. When the number of apprentices in training in the area exceeds a ratio of one to five, or 3. When the trade can show that it is replacing at least 1/30 of its membership through apprenticeship training on an annual basis statewide or locally, or 4. When the Contractor provides evidence that he employs registered apprentices on all of his contracts on an annual average of not less than one apprentice to eight journeymen. The Contractor is required to make contributions to funds established for the administration of apprenticeship programs if he employs registered apprentices or journeymen in any apprenticable trade on such contracts and if other Contractors on the public works site are making such contributions. The Contractor and subcontractor under him shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices. Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex-officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. Eight (8) hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work for all workmen employed in the execution of this contract and the Contractor and any subcontractor under him shall comply with and be governed by the laws of the State of California having to do with working hours as set forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code of the State of California as amended. The Contractor shall forfeit, as a penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed in the execution of the contract, by him or any subcontractor under him, upon any of the work hereinbefore mentioned, for each calendar day during which said laborer, workman, or mechanic is required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in violation of said Labor Code. Contractor agrees to pay travel and subsistence pay to each workman needed to execute the work required by this contract as such travel and subsistence payments are defined in the applicable collective bargaining agreement filed in accordance with Labor Code Section 17773.8. The bidder must submit with his proposal, cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bidder's bond, payable to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for an amount equal to at least ten percent (10%) of the amount of said bid as a guarantee that the bidder will enter into the proposed contract if the same is awarded to him, and in event of failure to enter into such contract said cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bond shall become the property of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. P411 If the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency awards the contract to the next lowest bidder, the amount of the lowest bidder's security shall be applied by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to the difference between the low bid and the second lowest bid, and the surplus, if any shall be returned to the lowest bidder. The amount of the bond to be given to secure a faithful performance of the contract for said work shall be one hundred percent (1.00%) of the contract price thereof, and an additional bond in an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price for said work shall be given to secure the payment of claims for any materials or supplies furnished for the performance of the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, or any work or labor of any kind done thereon, and the Contractor will also be required to furnish a certificate that he carries compensation insurance covering his employees upon work to be done under contract which may be entered into between him and the said City of Rancho Cucamonga for the construction of said work. No proposal will be considered from a Contractor to whom a proposal form has not been issued by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Contractor shall possess any and all contractors licenses, in form and class as required by any and all applicable laws with respect to any and all of the work to be performed under this contract; including but not limited to a "D34" (Prefabricated Equipment). In accordance with the provisions of the Contractor's License Law (California Business and Professions Code, Section 7000 et. seq.) and rules and regulation adopted pursuant thereto. The Contractor, pursuant to the California Business and Professions Code, Section 7028.15, shall indicate his or her State License Number on the bid, together with the expiration date, and be signed by the Contractor declaring, under penalty of perjury, that the information being provided is true and correct. The work is to be done in accordance with the profiles, plans, and specifications of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency on file in the Office of the City Clerk at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Copies of the plans and specifications, available at the office of the City Engineer, will be furnished upon request to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Upon written request by the bidder, copies of the plans and specifications will be mailed. The successful bidder will be required to enter into a contract satisfactory to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. ' In accordance with the requirements of Section 9-3.2 of the General Provisions, as set forth in the Plans and Specifications regarding the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, the Contractor may, upon the Contractor's request and at the Contractor's sole cost and expense, substitute authorized securities in lieu of monies withheld (performance retention). The City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, reserves the right to reject any and all bids. Questions regarding this Notice Inviting Bids for EPICENTER STADIUM SEAT REPLACEMENT may be directed to: Dave Blevins/Ty Quaintance, Public Works Maintenance Manager/Facilities Superintendent Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 477-2700, ext. 4101 or 4092 (909) 477-2737, fax By order of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Dated this 5`" day of December 2007. ADVERTISE ON: March 11, 2008 and March 18, 2008. P412 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR "EPICENTER CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING" AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency to construct certain improvements in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency has prepared specifications for the construction of certain improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the specifications presented by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency be and are hereby approved as the specifications for the "EPICENTER CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING". BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to advertise as required by law for the receipt of sealed bids or proposals for doing the work specified in the aforesaid specifications, which said advertisement shall be substantially in the following words and figures, to wit: "NOTICE INVITING SEALED BIDS OR PROPOSALS" Pursuant to a Resolution of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California, directing this notice, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that said City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency will receive at the OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK IN THE OFFICES OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ON OR BEFORE THE HOUR OF 2:00 P.M. ON April 1, 2008 sealed bids or proposals for "EPICENTER CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING" in said City. . Bids will be publicly opened and read in the office of the City Clerk, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730. A Pre-Bid Job Walk is scheduled for Wednesday, March 26, 2008, at 9:00 a.m. at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Epicenter, 8408 Rochester Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730, where bidders may present questions regarding the Bid Documents: Plans, Proposals, Specifications. THIS MEETING IS MANDATORY. Verification of attendance at the Pre-Bid Job Walk will be documented by signing in at the meeting. Any bidder not documented as being present at the Pre-Bid Job Walk will be excluded from the bid process. Bids must be made on a form provided for the purpose, addressed to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency, California, marked, "BID FOR EPICENTER CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING." PREVAILING WAGE: Notice is hereby given that in accordance with the provisions of California Labor Code, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Articles 1 and 2, the Contractor is required to pay not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for work of a similar character in the locality in which the public work is performed, and not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for holiday and overtime work. In that regard, the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of the State of California is required to and has determined such gerieral prevailing rates of per diem wages. Copies of such prevailing rates of per diem wages are on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, and are available to any P413 interested party on request. The Contracting Agency also shall cause a copy of such determinations to be posted at the job site. Pursuant to provisions of Labor Code Section 1775, the Contractor shall forfeit, as penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, not more than twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed for each calendar day or portion thereof, if such laborer, workman or mechanic is paid less than the general prevailing rate of wages hereinbefore stipulated for any work done under the attached contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provision of said Labor Code. Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 of the Labor Code concerning the employment of apprentices by the Contractor or any subcontractor under him. Section 1777.5, as amended, requires the Contractor or subcontractor employing tradesmen in any apprenticable occupation to apply to the joint apprenticeship committee nearest the site of the public works project and which administers the apprenticeship program in that trade for a certificate of approval. The certificate will also fix the ratio of apprentices to journeymen that will be used in the performance of the contract. The ratio of apprentices to journeymen in such cases shall not be less than one to five except: 5. When unemployment in the area of coverage by the joint apprenticeship committee has exceeded an average of 15 percent in the 90 days prior to the request of certificate, or 6. .When the number of apprentices in training in the area exceeds a ratio of one to five, or 7. When the trade can show that it is replacing at least 1/30 of its membership through apprenticeship. training on an annual basis statewide or locally, or 8. When the Contractor provides evidence that he employs registered apprentices on all of his contracts on an annual average of not less than one apprentice to eight journeymen. The Contractor is required to make contributions to funds established for the administration of apprenticeship programs if he employs registered apprentices or journeymen in any apprenticable trade on such contracts and if other Contractors on the public works site are making such contributions. The Contractor and subcontractor under him shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices. Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex-officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. Eight (8) hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work for all workmen employed in the execution of this contract and the Contractor and any subcontractor under him shall comply with and be governed by the laws of the State of California having to do with working hours as set forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code of the State of California as amended. The Contractor shall forfeit, as a penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed in the execution of the contract, by him or any subcontractor under him, upon any of the work hereinbefore mentioned, for each calendar day during which said laborer, workman, or mechanic is required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in violation of said Labor Code. Contractor agrees to pay travel and subsistence pay to each workman needed to execute the work required by this contract as such travel and subsistence payments are defined in the applicable collective bargaining agreement filed in accordance with Labor Code Section 17773.8. P414 The bidder must submit with his proposal, cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bidder's bond, payable to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for an amount equal to at least ten percent (10%) of the amount of said bid as a guarantee that the bidder will enter into the proposed contract if the same is awarded to him, and in event of failure to enter into such contract said cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bond shall become the property of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. If the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency awards the contract to the next lowest bidder, the amount of the lowest bidder's security shall be applied by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to the difference between the low bid and the second lowest bid, and the surplus, if any shall be returned to the lowest bidder. The amount of the bond to be given to secure a faithful performance of the contract for said work shall be one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price thereof, and an additional bond in an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price for said work shall be given to secure the payment of claims for any materials or supplies furnished for the performance of the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, or any work or labor of any kind done thereon, and the Contractor will also be required to furnish a certificate that he carries compensation insurance covering his employees upon work to be done under contract which may be entered into between him and the said City of Rancho Cucamonga for the construction of said work. No proposal will be considered from a Contractor to whom a proposal form has not been issued by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Contractor shall possess any and all contractors licenses, in form and class as required by any and all applicable laws with respect to any and all of the work to be performed under this contract; including but not limited to a "C-3S" (Roofing Contractor). In accordance with the provisions of the Contractor's License Law (California Business and Professions Code, Section 7000 et. seq.) and rules and regulation adopted pursuant thereto. The Contractor, pursuant to the California Business and Professions Code, Section 7028.15, shall indicate his or her State License Number on the bid, together with the expiration date, and be signed by the Contractor declaring, under penalty of perjury, that the information being provided is true and correct. The work is to be done in accordance with the profiles, plans, and specifications of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency on file in the Office of the City Clerk at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Copies of the plans and specifications, available at the office of the City Engineer, will be furnished upon request to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Upon written request by the bidder, copies of the plans and specifications will be mailed. The successful bidder will be required to enter into a contract satisfactory to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. In accordance with the requirements of Section 9-3.2 of the General Provisions, as set forth in the Plans and Specifications regarding the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, the Contractor may, upon the Contractor's request and at the Contractor's sole cost and expense, substitute authorized securities in lieu of monies withheld (performance retention). The City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, reserves the right to reject any and all bids. Questions regarding this Notice Inviting Bids for EPICENTER CROSS AISLE WATERPROOFING may be directed to: Dave Blevins/Ty Quaintance, Public Works Maintenance Manager/Facilities Superintendent Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 477-2700, ext. 4101 or 4092 (909) 477-2731, fax P415 By order of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. Dated this 5"'day of December 2007. ADVERTISE ON: March 11, 2008 and March 18, 2008. STAFF REPORT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Date: December 5, 2007 To: Chairman and Members of the Redevelopment Agency Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer By: Ty Quaintance, Facilities Superintendent P416 ~`~-~ RANCHO C,UCAMONGA Subject: APPROVAL OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR "STADIUM OUTFIELD FENCE REPLACEMENT" AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE THE "NOTICE INVITING BEDS" TO BE FUNDED FROM RDA PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FUND RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Board approve plans and specifications for the "Stadium Outfield Fence Replacement" and authorize the City Clerk to advertise the "Notice Inviting Bids' to be funded from RDA Public Improvements Fund. BACKGROUND ANALYSIS The fiscal year budget for 2007-2008 includes a capital improvement project at the Epicenter baseball stadium for the replacement of the original stadium fencing that was installed in 1992-93. Several areas of the fence have been repaired as needed; however, the construction of the fence is comprised of wood support members and the fence as a whole has reached the end of its lifecycle. Also, the Quakes have requested that padding be added to help ensure the safety of their players. This request will be incorporated into the specifications and a price for padding will be listed as a separate line item for analysis. Therefore, staff recommends that the Board approve the specifications and authorize the City Clerk to advertise the "Notice Inviting Bids." The estimated cost for this project is $100,000. Res ully~~~-~ Will' m J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:DB:dlw RESOLUTION NO. ~H C~7-'~~~ A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR STADIUM OUTFIELD FENCE REPLACEMENT AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency to construct certain improvements in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency has prepared specifications for the construction of certain improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the specifications presented by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency be and are hereby approved as the specifications for the "STADIUM OUTFIELD FENCE REPLACEMENT". BE IT.FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to advertise as required by law for the receipt of sealed bids or proposals for doing the work specified in the aforesaid specifications, which said advertisement shall be substantially in the following words and figures, to wit: "NOTICE INVITING SEALED BIDS OR PROPOSALS" Pursuant to a Resolution of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California, directing this notice, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that said City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency will receive at the OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK IN THE OFFICES OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ON OR BEFORE THE HOUR OF 2:00 P.M. ON January 16, 2008, sealed bids or proposals for "STADIUM OUTFIELD FENCE REPLACEMENT" in said City. Bids will be publicly opened and read in the office of the City Clerk, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730. A Pre-Bid Job Walk is scheduled for Thursday, January 3, 2008, at 8:00 a.m. at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Epicenter, 8408 Rochester Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730, where bidders may present questions regarding the Bid Documents: Plans, Proposals, Specifications. THIS MEETING IS MANDATORY. Verification of attendance at the Pre-Bid Job Walk will be documented by signing in at the meeting. Any bidder not documented as being present at the Pre-Bid Job Walk will be excluded from the bid process. P417 Bids must be made on a form provided for the purpose, addressed to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency, California, marked, "BID FOR STADIUM OUTFIELD FENCE REPLACEMENT." CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. STADIUM OUTFIELD FENCE REPLACEMENT December 5, 2007 Page 2 PREVAILING WAGE: Notice is hereby given that in accordance with the provisions of California Labor Code, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Articles 1 and 2, the Contractor is required to pay not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for work of a similar character in the locality in which the public work is perfdrmed, and not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for holiday and overtime work. In that regard, the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of the State of California is required to and has determined such general prevailing rates of per diem wages. Copies of such prevailing rates of per diem wages are on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, and are available to any interested party on request. The Contracting Agency also shall cause a copy of such determinations to be posted at the job site. Pursuant to provisions of Labor Code Section 1775, the Contractor shall forfeit, as penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, not more than twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed for each calendar day or portion thereof, if such laborer, workman or mechanic is paid less than the general prevailing rate of wages hereinbefore stipulated for any work done under the attached contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provision of said Labor Code. Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 of the Labor Code concerning the employment of apprentices by the Contractor or any subcontractor under him. Section 1777.5, as amended, requires the Contractor or subcontractor employing tradesmen in any apprenticable occupation to apply to the joint apprenticeship committee nearest the site of the public works project and which administers the apprenticeship program in that trade for a certificate of approval. The certificate will also fix the ratio of apprentices to journeymen that will be used in the performance of the contract. The ratio of apprentices to journeymen in such cases shall not be less than one to five except: When unemployment in the area of coverage by the joint apprenticeship committee has exceeded an average of 15 percent in the 90 days prior to the request of certificate, or 2. When the number of apprentices in training in the area exceeds a ratio of one to five. or 3. When the trade can show that it is replacing at least 1/30 of its membership through apprenticeship training on an annual basis statewide or locally, or 4. When the Contractor provides evidence that he employs registered apprentices on all of his contracts on an annual average of not less than one apprentice to eight journeymen. The Contractor is required to make contributions to funds established .for the administration of apprenticeship programs if he employs registered apprentices or journeymen in any apprenticable trade on such contracts and if other Contractors on the public works site are making such contributions. P418 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. STADIUM OUTFIELD FENCE REPLACEMENT December 5, 2007 Page 3 The Contractor and subcontractor under him shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices. Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex-officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. Eight (8) hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work for all workmen employed in the execution of this contract and the Contractor and any subcontractor under him shall comply with and be governed by the laws of the State of California having to do with working hours as set forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code of the State of California as amended. The Contractor shall forfeit, as a penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed in the execution of the contract, by him or any subcontractor under him, upon any of the work hereinbefore mentioned, for each calendar day during which said laborer, workman, or mechanic is required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in violation of said Labor Code. Contractor agrees to pay travel and subsistence pay to each workman needed to execute the work required by this contract as such travel and subsistence payments are defined in the applicable collective bargaining agreement filed in accordance with Labor Code Section 17773.8. The bidder must submit with his proposal, cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bidder's bond, payable to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for an amount equal to at least ten percent (10%) of the amount of said bid as' a guarantee that the bidder will enter into the proposed contract if the same is awarded to him, and in event of failure to enter into such contract said cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bond shall become the property of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. If the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency awards the contract to the next lowest bidder, the amount of the lowest bidder's security shall be applied by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to the difference between the low bid and the second lowest bid, and the surplus, if any shall be returned to the lowest bidder. The amount of the bond to be given to secure a faithful performance of the contract for said work shall be one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price thereof, and an additional bond in an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price for said work shall be given to secure the payment of claims for any materials or supplies furnished for the performance of the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, or any work or labor of any kind done thereon, and the Contractor will also be required to furnish a certificate that he carries compensation insurance covering his employees upon work to be done under contract which may be entered into between him and the said City of Rancho Cucamonga for the construction of said work. P419 No proposal will be considered from a Contractor to whom a proposal form has not been issued by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. STADIUM OUTFIELD FENCE REPLACEMENT December 5, 2007 Page 4 Contractor shall possess any and all contractors licenses, in form and class as required by any and all applicable laws with respect to any and all of the work to be performed under this contract; including but not limited to a Class "A" (General Engineering Contractor), Class "B" (General Building Contractor) or Class "C-13" (Fencing Contractor). In accordance with the provisions of the Contractor's License Law (California Business and Professions Code, Section 7000 et. seq.) and rules and regulation adopted pursuant thereto. The Contractor, pursuant to the California Business and Professions Code, Section 7028.15, shall indicate his or her State License Number on the bid, together with the expiration date, and be signed by the Contractor declaring, under penalty of perjury, that the information being provided is true and correct. The work is to be done in accordance with the profiles, plans, and specifications of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency on file in the Office of the City Clerk at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Copies of the plans and specifications, available at the office of the City Engineer, will be furnished upon application to the City of Rancho Cucamonga and payment of $35.00 (THIRTY-FIVE DOLLARS), said $35.00 (THIRTY-FIVE DOLLARS) is non-refundable. Upon written request by the bidder, copies of the plans and specifications will be mailed when said request is accompanied by payment stipulated above, together with an additional non-reimbursable payment of $15.00 (FIFTEEN DOLLARS) to cover the cost of mailing charges and overhead. The successful bidder will be required to enter into a contract satisfactory to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. In accordance with the requirements of Section 9-3.2 of the General Provisions, as set forth in the Plans and Specifications regarding the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, the Contractor may, upon the Contractor's request and at the Contractor's sole cost and expense, substitute authorized securities in lieu of monies withheld (performance retention). The City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, reserves the right to reject any and all bids. Questions regarding this Notice Inviting Bids for STADIUM OUTFIELD FENCE REPLACEMENT may be directed to: Dave BlevinslTy Quaintance, Public Works Maintenance Manager/Facilities Superintendent Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 477-2700, ext. 4101 or 4092 (909)477-2731, fax By order of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. Dated this 5~h day of December 2007. P420 ADVERTISE ON: December 11, 2007 and December 18, 2007. R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A F I R E P R O T E C T I O N D I S T R I C T Staff Report DATE: December 5, 2007 TO: Chairman and Members of the Redevelopment Agency Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Peter M. Bryan, Fire Chief BY: Pamela Pane, Management Analyst II SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF AN ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH RRM DESIGN GROUP FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR THE BASE LINE FIRE STATION (178), LOCATED ON BASE LINE WEST OF SPRUCE, IN THE AMOUNT OF $393,210.00, AUTHORIZE THE EXPENDITURE OF A 10% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $39,320.00, FUNDED FROM ACCOUNT NO. 2505801-5650/1645505-6311, AND APPROVAL OF A TRANSFER OF $432,530.00 (ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES AGREEMENT AWARD NOT TO EXCEED $393,210.00 PLUS 10% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $39,320.00) FROM FIRE BOND RESERVES IN ACCOUNT NO. 2660801-9505 TO ACCOUNT NO. 2505000-8660 AND AN APPROPRIATION OF $432,530.00 TO ACCOUNT NO. 2505801-5650/1645505-6311 RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval of an Architectural Services Agreement with RRM Design Group for architectural services for the Base Line Fire Station (178), located on Base Line west of Spruce, in the amount of $393,210.00, and authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $39,320.00, funded from Account No. 2505801-5650/1645505-6311 and approval of an appropriation of $432,530.00 (Agreement award not to exceed $393,210.00 plus a 10% contingency in the amount of $39,320.00) from Fire Bond Reserves in Account No. 2660801-9505 to Account No. 2505000-8660 and an appropriation of $432,530.00 to Account No. 2505801-5650/1645505-6311. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS P421 At a Special Meeting on November 8, 2007, the Board affirmed the Central Park location and directed the Fire District to proceed with architectural design for the Base Line Fire Station (178), located on Base Line Road west of Spruce Avenue. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT WITH RRM DESIGN GROUP FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES December 5, 2007 Page 2 The District has begun the process of using design concepts that can be repeated, with economy of scale, on this station, as well as the Hellman Fire Station (177) (contract awarded on October 3, 2007). Based on the new design concepts, and smaller floor plans for the stations, District staff negotiated a reduced cost for architectural design for both stations (down from the previously submitted proposals) saving approximately $200,000. This new design process will improve cost efficiency; expedite the projects; and will also be used for the future re-build project for the San Bernardino Road Station (172). The District sent out a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for Architectural Services and posted the RFQ to the City's website. Twelve submittals and two "no bids" were. received. After review of the submittals, five firms were invited for interviews. After the interviews and scoring of the firms by an interview panel, it was determined that RRM Design Group is the most responsive and responsible firm to provide architectural services for the design development, entitlement processing, construction documents, bidding, and construction administration phases for the Fire Protection District's Base Line Fire Station (178) project. Staff recommends approval of the architectural services contract with RRM Design Group for the Base Line Fire Station (178). Respectfully Submitted, Peter M. B an Fire Chief P422 P423 R A N C li O C U C A M O N G A R E D E V E L O P M E M T A G E N C Y Staff Report DATE: December 5, 2007 TO: Chairman and Redevelopment Agency Members Jack Lam, AICP, Executive Director FROM: Linda D. Daniels, Redevelopment Director BY: Jan Reynolds, Redevelopment Analyst I I SUBJECT: RATIFICATION OF MODIFICATIONS TO REGULATORY AGREEMENTS FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 10244 ARROW ROUTE (MONTEREY VILLAGE APARTMENTS); 8837 GROVE AVENUE (RANCHO VERDE VILLAGE APARTMENTS); 9181 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD (MOUNTAINSIDE APARTMENTS); AND, 7127 ARCHIBALD AVENUE (SYCAMORE SPRINGS) RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Redevelopment Agency ratify modifications to existing Regulatory Agreements related to four workforce housing projects for consistency with current State Law with regard to maximum allowable rents. This action is required to bring existing documents into compliance with current State Law. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: In August 2007, the Redevelopment Agency authorized a pledge of funds to National Community Renaissance (National CORE) to secure permanent affordability of 558 units within four existing apartment complexes. Under terms of the Agreement National CORE will restrict rents on eighty-three (83) of the units as affordable to individuals and families earning 80% of the Area Median Income. A recent review of the Regulatory Agreements, which govern the maximum incomes and allowable rents, by the City Attorney's office identified a conflict in how the maximum rents are calculated in the Regulatory Agreements and current State Law. The conflict arises only on the application of rents affordable to the 80% income P424 category. California Health and Safety Code, Section 50053(b) requires that maximum affordable rents for individuals or families earning between 61 % and 80% of the Area Median Income must not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the individual tenant's annual income. The Regulatory Agreements as they currently exist set the maximum rent at 30% of 80% of the Area Median Income, which could result in rent that may exceed the affordability of the lower income earning tenants within that income category. The modifications to the Regulatory Agreements do not result in additional costs to the Agency and all conditions and requirements of the Agency's original action remain unchanged. Because the modifications are necessary to bring the documents into compliance with existing State Law, ratification by the Redevelopment Agency is requested. Once this action is complete, the Modifications will be recorded in conjunction with the close of Extended Affordability Agreement escrow, which will occur on or before December 15, 2007. ,^Respectfully su/b~mitted, ,~ ~,~ Linda D. Daniels Redevelopment Director 2- RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/28/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount P425 AP - 00259459 10/31/2007 ADVANTAGE FITNESS PRODUCTS 160.00 AP - 00259464 10/31/2007 ALL CITIES TOOLS 16.16 AP - 00259465 10/31/2007 ALL PRO PLUMBING CORPORATION 650.00 AP - 00259466 10/31/2007 ALL STAR GLASS 291.07 AP - 00259467 10/31/2007 APPLE ONE EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 1,032.75 AP - 00259467 10/31/2007 APPLE ONE EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 1,154.25 AP - 00259482 10/31/2007 CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 46,730.12 AP - 00259485 10/31/2007 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS 135.72 AP - 00259485 10/31/2007 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS 29.05 AP - 00259492 10/31/2007 COPIES & INK PRINTING INC. 38.75 AP - 00259510 10/31/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 339.25 AP - 00259514 10/31/2007 FRANKLIN TRUCK PARTS 167.83 AP - 00259545 10/31 /2007 KME FIRE APPARATUS 85.34 AP - 00259545 10/31/2007 KME FIRE APPARATUS 623.87 AP - 00259553 10/31/2007 LOS ANGELES FREIGHTLINER 48.46 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 130.79 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 188.99 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 31.04 AP - 00259575 10/3 ] /2007 OFFICE DEPOT 20.10 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 123.00 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 832.29 AP - 00259601 10/31/2007 RELIABLE ICE EQUIPMENT INC 298.69 AP - 00259606 10/31/2007 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 1,563.32 AP - 00259613 10/31/2007 SIMPLEX GREVN'ELL LP 600.00 AP - 00259614 10/31 /2007 SMART AND FINAL 71.34 AP - 00259614 10/31/2007 SMART AND FINAL 33.56 AP - 00259614 10/31/2007 SMART AND FINAL 71.34 AP - 00259620 ] 0/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNL4 EDISON 590.53 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 1,229.76 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2,645.37 AP - 00259633 10/31/2007 UNIFIRST UA'IFORM SERVICE 53.82 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 465.36 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 465.36 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 465.36 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 465.36 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 21.43 AP-00259640 10/3]/2007 VERIZON 21.43 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 32.69 AP - 00259640 ]0/31/2007 VERIZON 32.69 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 538.07 AP - 00259665 11/7/2007 ALL CITIES TOOLS 263.99 AP - 00259688 11/7/2007 BEST BEST AND KRIEGER 295.00 AP - 00259703 11/7/2007 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS 152.14 AP - 00259703 11/7/2007 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS 44.85 AP - 00259708 11/7/2007 CERVANTES, MIGUEL 100.00 AP - 00259711 11/7/2007 CHEMSEARCH 223.60 AP - 00259712 11/7/2007 CHINO VALLEY INDEPENDENT FIRE DISTRICT 20.00 AP - 00259719 11/7/2007 COMEAU, CHAD 130.00 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 209.72 AP - 00259725 ] 1/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 55.20 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 17750 AP - 00259725 11!7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 126.18 AP - 00259725 ] 1/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 587.14 AP - 00259728 11/7/2007 DAISY WHEEL RIBBON CO INC 1,422.07 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 1 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:30:5 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT P426 Agenda Check Resister 10/31/2007 through 11/28/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259728 11/7/2007 DAISY WHEEL RIBBON CO INC 305.95 AP - 00259747 11/7/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 295.00 AP - 00259747 11/7/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 398.52 AP - 00259780 11/7/2007 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 280.53 AP - 00259780 11/7/2007 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 314.82 AP - 00259786 11/7/2007 INSIGHT PUBLIC SECTOR 67.33 AP - 00259800 11/7/2007 LANDORF, RICHARD 100.00 AP - 00259803 11/7/2007 LICHTMAN, OFER 100.00 AP - 00259804 11/7/2007 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 200.00 AP - 00259806 11/7/2007 LIFE ASSIST INC 642.86 AP - 00259806 11/7/2007 LIFE ASSIST INC 191.07 AP - 00259819 11/7/2007 MCI 8.00 AP - 00259823 11/7/2007 MOBILE SATELLITE VENTURES LP 145.56 AP - 00259830 11/7/2007 NIKKIS FLAG SHOPPE 319.87 AP - 00259830 11/7/2007 NIKKIS FLAG SHOPPE 319.87 AP - 00259830 11/7/2007 NIKKIS FLAG SHOPPE 319.87 AP - 00259830 11/7/2007 NIKKIS FLAG SHOPPE 319.87 AP - 00259830 11/7/2007 NIKKIS FLAG SHOPPE 319.87 AP - 00259830 11/7/2007 NIKKIS FLAG SHOPPE 319.88 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 11.12 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 17.76 AP - 00259854 11/7/2007 RAYNE WATER CONDITIONING INC 22.95 AP - 00259861 11/7/2007 RESCUE RIG 3,528.00 AP - 00259861 11/7/2007 RESCUE RIG 1,176.00 AP - 00259862 11/7/2007 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 1,046.00 AP - 00259884 11/7/2007 SIGN CRAFTERS OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 199.34 AP - 00259887 11/7/2007 SMART AND FINAL 136.14 AP - 00259887 11/7/2007 SMART AND FINAL 62.38 AP - 00259887 11/7/2007 SMART AND FINAL 124.50 AP - 00259894 11/7/2007 STAPLETON, JOSHUA 25.00 AP - 00259894 11/7/2007 STAPLETON, JOSHUA 280.00 AP - 00259898 11/7/2007 SUN BADGE CO 367.42 AP - 00259910 11/7/2007 TRAFFIC PROTECTORS 67.00 AP - 00259914 11/7/2007 ULTIMATE OFFICE 215.38 AP - 00259916 11/7/2007 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 53.82 AP - 00259916 11/7/2007 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 53.82 AP - 00259919 11/7/2007 UNITED SITE SERVICES OF CA INC 156.24 AP - 00259926 11/7/2007 VERIZON WIRELESS - LA 985.59 AP - 00259926 11/7/2007 VERIZON WIRELESS - LA 101.47 AP - 00259926 11/7/2007 VERIZON WIRELESS - LA 630.62 AP - 00259926 11/7/2007 VERIZON WIRELESS - LA 64.93 AP - 00259926 1 ]/7/2007 VERIZON WIRELESS - LA 164.01 AP - 00259926 11/7/2007 VERIZON WIRELESS - LA 125.63 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 33.74 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 61.50 AP - 00259936 11/7/2007 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 102.32 AP - 00259936 11/7/2007 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 81.53 AP - 00259936 11/7/2007 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 184.66 AP - 00259936 11/7/2007 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 143.89 AP - 00259936 1 ]/7/2007 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 123.10 AP - 00259936 11/7/2007 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 102.35 AP - 00259936 1 ]/7/2007 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 61.55 AP - 00259937 11/7/2007 WEST END UNIFORMS 138.13 AP - 00259947 11/7/2007 XEROX CORPORATION 147.00 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 2 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:30:5 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT p427 Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/28/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259949 11/7/2007 ZONES CORPORATE SOLUTIONS 811.43 AP - 00259957 11/14/2007 ADAPT CONSULTING INC 517.86 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 55.20 AP - 00260001 11/14/2007 DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTE 78.00 AP - 00260017 11/14/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 59.00 AP - 00260017 11/14/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 295.00 AP - 00260033 11/14/2007 INDEPENDENT ELECTRONICS 342.00 AP - 00260050 11/14/2007 LIFE ASSIST INC 1,441.65 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 548.45 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 7.23 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 12.39 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 12.77 AP - 00260062 11/14/2007 MANTEK 705.12 AP - 00260062 11/14/2007 MANTEK 477.12 AP - 00260082 11/14/2007 NIKKIS FLAG SHOPPE 2827 AP - 00260082 11/14/2007 NIKKIS FLAG SHOPPE 28.27 AP - 00260082 11/14/2007 NIKKIS FLAG SHOPPE 2832 AP - 00260082 11/14/2007 NIKKIS FLAG SHOPPE 2827 AP - 00260082 11/14/2007 NIKKIS FLAG SHOPPE 2827 AP - 00260082 11/14/2007 NIKKIS FLAG SHOPPE 2827 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 170.48 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 33.68 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 58.94 AP - 00260134 11/14/2007 SAXE-CLIFFORD, SUSAN 2,750.00 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 901.46 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 278.86 AP - 00260160 11/14/2007 STAPLETON, JOSHUA 250.00 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 98.06 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 98.06 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 20.17 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 32.70 AP - 00260271 11/21/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 37.37 AP - 00260311 11/21/2007 INSIGHT 500.98 AP - 00260312 11/21/2007 INTERSTATE BATTERIES ] 81.84 AP - 00260324 11/21/2007 LN CURTIS AND SONS 91.32 AP - 00260324 11/21/2007 LN CURTIS AND SONS 72732 AP - 00260334 11/21/2007 N F P A 320.82 AP - 00260343 ] 1/21/2007 ODOR B GONE 250.00 AP - 00260355 11/21/2007 PHENIX TECHNOLOGY INC. 49.41 AP - 00260365 11/21/2007 RANCHO CUCAMONGA CHAMBER OF COMMEI 20.00 AP - 00260388 11/21/2007 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 79.80 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2,928.74 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 33.75 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 38.86 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 37.85 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 151.17 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 171.99 AP-00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 546.33 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 536.13 AP - 00260432 11/28/2007 AFSS 50.00 AP - 00260434 11/28/2007 AIRGAS WEST 26872 AP - 00260434 11/28/2007 AIRGAS WEST 50.11 AP - 00260434 11/28/2007 AIRGAS WEST 44.84 AP - 00260434 11/28/2007 AIRGAS WEST 48.40 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 3 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_R EG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:30:5 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT P428 Asettda Check Resister 10/31/2007 through 11/28/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00260434 11/28/2007 AIRGAS WEST 55.38 AP - 00260434 11/28/2007 AIRGAS WEST 9].65 AP - 00260436 11/28/2007 ALL CITIES TOOLS 35.02 AP - 00260436 11/28/2007 ALL CITIES TOOLS 75.43 AP - 00260436' 11/28/2007 ALL CITIES TOOLS 21.55 AP - 00260441 11/28/2007 AMERICAN SCALE CO INC 185.00 AP - 00260444 11/28/2007 APPLE ONE EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 1,215.00 AP - 00260444 11/28/2007 APPLE ONE EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 1,336.50 AP - 00260444 11/28/2007 APPLE ONE EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 1,2] 5.00 AP - 00260455 11/28/2007 BAUER COMPRESSORS 461.86 AP - 00260461 11/28/2007 CADET UNIFORM SERVICE 267.54 AP - 00260461 11/28/2007 CADET UNIFORM SERVICE 268.33 AP - 00260461 11/28/2007 CADET UNIFORM SERVICE 175.85 AP - 00260461 11/28/2007 CADET UNIFORM SERVICE 207.38 AP - 00260461 11/28/2007 CADET LNIFORM SERVICE 196.33 AP - 00260461 1 ]/28/2007 CADET UNIFORM SERVICE 377.20 AP - 00260461 11/28/2007 CADET UNIFORM SERVICE 484.71 AP - 00260465 11/28/2007 CALIFORNIA OVERNIGHT 336 AP - 00260466 11/28/2007 CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES SQ983.44 AP - 00260468 11/28/2007 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS 22.03 AP - 00260468 1 ]/28/2007 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS 29.05 AP - 00260468 11/28/2007 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS 260.37 AP - 00260468 11/28/2007 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS 103.94 AP - 00260468 11/28/2007 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS 207.87 AP - 00260478 11/28/2007 CESA-SOUTHERN CHAPTER 75.00 AP - 00260508 11/28/2007 DONALDSON, KELLEY 64.33 AP - 00260520 11/28/2007 EMCOR SERVICE 412.91 AP - 00260529 11/28/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORD 20.29 AP - 00260529 11/28/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 14.85 AP - 00260529 11/28/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 16.26 AP - 00260529 I 1 /28/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 16.14 AP - 00260531 11/28/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 295.00 AP - 00260531 11/28/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 332.10 AP - 00260531 11/28/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 365.31 AP - 00260531 11/28/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 295.00 AP - 00260539 11/28/2007 FRANKLIN TRUCK PARTS 160.98 AP - 00260539 11/28/2007 FRANKLIN TRUCK PARTS -167.83 AP - 00260539 11/28/2007 FRANKLIN TRUCK PARTS 167.83 AP - 00260551 11/28/2007 GRAND HYATT SAN FRANCISCO 159.73 AP - 00260564 11/28/2007 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 167.76 AP - 00260578 11/28/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 573.00 AP - 00260582 11/28/2007 INSIGHT 100.19 AP - 00260582 ] 1/28/2007 INSIGHT 200.39 AP - 00260591 11/28/2007 KME FIRE APPARATUS 688.12 AP - 00260591 11/28/2007 KME FIRE APPARA"IUS 91.32 AP - 00260591 11/28/2007 KME FIRE APPARATUS 152.83 AP - 00260597 11/28/2007 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 707.80 AP - 00260605 11/28/2007 LN CURTIS AND SONS 296.32 AP - 00260609 11/28/2007 LU'S LIGHTHOUSE INC 121.74 AP - 00260609 11/28/2007 LU'S LIGHTHOUSE INC 453.22 AP - 00260609 11/28/2007 LU'S LIGHTHOUSE INC 85.50 AP - 00260609 11/28/2007 LU'S LIGHTHOUSE INC 13.47 AP - 00260630 11/28/2007 MONSTER GRAPHIC SOLUTIONS 1,488.03 AP - 00260639 11/28/2007 NAPA AUTO PARTS 46.91 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 4 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:30:5 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT P429 Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/28/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00260639 1 ] /28/2007 NAPA AUTO PARTS 231.61 AP - 00260639 11/28/2007 NAPA AUTO PARTS 20.46 AP - 00260639 11/28/2007 NAPA AUTO PARTS 12.98 AP - 00260639 11/28/2007 NAPA AUTO PARTS 353.70 AP - 00260645 11/28/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 103.21 AP - 00260645 11 /28/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 30.95 AP - 00260645 11/28/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 24.87 AP - 00260645 11/28/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 24.18 AP - 00260645 11/28/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 4.56 AP - 00260645 11/28/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 24.66 AP - 00260645 11/28/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 44.12 AP - 00260645 11/28/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 14.78 AP - 00260645 11/28/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 9.55 AP - 00260645 11/28/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 364.72 AP - 00260645 11/28/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 3.93 AP - 00260645 11/28/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 228.62 AP - 00260674 11/28/2007 RAULS AUTO TRIM INC 48.48 AP - 00260674 11/28/2007 RAULS AUTO TRIM INC 75.00 AP - 00260679 11/28/2007 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 1,274.00 AP - 00260690 11/28/2007 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 934.91 AP - 00260691 11/28/2007 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 107.02 AP - 00260695 11/28/2007 SBSD EVOC 1,500.00 AP - 00260702 11/28/2007 SMART AND FINAL 131.38 AP - 00260702 11/28/2007 SMART AND FINAL 140.58 AP - 00260704 11/28/2007 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 10.98 AP - 00260704 11/28/2007 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 97.63 AP - 00260704 11/28/2007 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 345.13 AP - 00260704 11/28/2007 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 142.36 AP - 00260704 11/28/2007 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 163.56 AP - 00260704 11/28/2007 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 82.75 AP - 00260713 11/28/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 454.66 AP - 00260713 1 ]/28/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 999.66 AP - 00260713 11/28/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 1,659.46 AP - 00260713 11/28/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 1,446.76 AP - 00260722 11/28/2007 SUNSET PRINTING AND ADV SPEC CO 696.56 AP - 00260727 11/28/2007 T MOBILE 46.41 AP - 00260728 11/28/2007 TAYLORS APPLIANCE 792.22 AP - 00260729 11/28/2007 TERMINIX PROCESSING CENTER 75.00 AP - 00260729 ] 1/28/2007 TERMINIX PROCESSING CENTER 63.00 AP - 00260729 11/28/2007 TERMINIX PROCESSING CENTER 65.00 AP - 00260729 11/28/2007 TERMINIX PROCESSING CENTER 48.75 AP - 00260729 11/28/2007 TERMINIX PROCESSING CENTER 37.00 AP - 00260729 11/28/2007 TERMINIX PROCESSING CENTER 37.00 AP - 00260739 11/28/2007 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 53.82 AP - 00260739 11/28/2007 UN'IFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 53.82 AP - 00260750 11/28/2007 VALLEY POWER SYSTEMS INC 521.90 AP - 00260753 11/28/2007 VERIZON 538.07 AP - 00260754 11/28/2007 \'ERIZON 35.62 AP - 00260754 11/28/2007 VERIZON 35.64 AP - 00260755 ] 1/28/2007 VERIZON 983.79 AP - 00260755 11/28/2007 VERIZON 94.56 AP - 00260755 11/28/2007 VERIZON 124.41 AP - 00260755 11/28/2007 VERIZON 166.70 AP - 00260755 11/28/2007 VERIZON 638.89 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 5 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: ]4:30:5 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT P430 At=enda Check Resister 10/31/2007 through 11/28/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00260755 11/28/2007 VERIZON 101.55 AP - 00260758 11/28/2007 WALKER, JANET 15.00 AP - 00260758 11/28/2007 WALKER, JANET 9.00 AP - 00260758 11/28/2007 WALKER, JANET 4.00 AP - 00260758 11/28/2007 WALKER, JANET 20.16 AP - 00260758 11/28/2007 WALKER, JANET 10.00 AP - 00260758 1 ]/28/2007 WALKER, JANET 10.76 AP - 00260758 11/28/2007 WALKER, JANET 14.00 AP - 00260758 11/28/2007 WALKER, JANET 5.82 AP - 00260758 11/28/2007 WALKER, JANET 10.00 AP - 00260761 11/28/2007 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 29.97 AP - 00260761 11/28/2007 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 85.43 AP - 00260761 11/28/2007 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 51.40 AP - 00260761 11/28/2007 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 68.08 AP - 00260761 11/28/2007 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 154.19 AP - 00260761 11/28/2007 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 120.15 AP - 00260761 11/28/2007 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 85.44 AP - 00260761 1 ]/28/2007 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 102.79 AP - 00260764 1 ]/28/2007 WEST MARK FIRE APPARATUS 409.26 AP - 00260767 11/28/2007 WESTERN STATE DESIGN INC 671.01 AP - 00260776 11/28/2007 XEROX CORPORATION 94.43 Total for Check ID AP: 183,442.62 Total for Entity: 183,442.62 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 6 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Pomait Layout Time: 14:30:5 STAFF REPORT RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Date: December 5, 2007 To: President and Members of the Board of Directors Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: Peter M. Bryan, Fire Chief By: Janet Walker, Management Analyst II Subject: ADOPTION OF ANNEXATION BOUNDARY MAP NO. 07-11 r' ~f`; ~.;,~ RANCHO G'UCAMONGA RECOMMENDATION Adoption of a resolution adopting a boundary map showing property (located on the northwest corner of 6th St. and Hermosa Ave.) proposed to be annexed into Community Facilities District (CFD) No. 85-1. BACKGROUND 6th & Hermosa JP/DF, LLC (APN 0209-211-41) is conditioned to annex into Community Facilities District (CFD) No. 85-1. In order to initiate formal proceedings to annex the referenced parcel into CFD No. 85-1, a Resolution adopting an annexation boundary map is presented for Board consideration and approval. The boundary map (Exhibit "A") illustrates the territory proposed to be annexed. The territory is inclusive of the entire project. Resplectfully~~s/ubmitted, Peter M. Bryan Fire Chief P431 Attachments EXHIBIT 'A' F432 AUGUST, 2007 ANNEXATION MAP NO. Q]_(~OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA MAP OF CUGAMONG4 LAN~B M.B. 4/9 LOT 11 ~I H A PARCEL 3 I' s ~•sa }~ xL.~1 NO I L~ amE~crEn~ ailowcw~uuE Ep r.a Fis~o¢mlcr r PARCEL MAP NO. 4130 PMB 37/50 % PARCEL 4 APN 0209-211-41 8 NASVS'sl•E sxBS' Napvx'ss•w isw..e' _ _ _ _ _ JG _ _ _ _ _ _ RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT CERTIFICATION fnep Ix ME ana pE ra srcPEtMY m aF Rulwp WuupxGA nPE PPphcnpN asm¢l. calrpxxlA Mrs pAr pr .xpm SECREIAXY PANCNp NCAU WGA fNE PxptEG110X p15IPIGl siA1E pf CALIiMMA I XLAEBY [FXnEY MAi ME WMN MAP SxpMMG pWVOAXILS GC 1CRPIIMY PPCPOyp !O BL ANXEYEp 1p CpA4UNIlY fAOLIPES pISMCI Xp. 55-I pE ME PANCNp CVCAYOXLA EIN[ PFahLl10M p151Flcl, cWXly cf SAN <FPNAxplxp, ilAtE Gf CALIftliNIA. NAS APnFalfp BY 1XE ppAW 6 pIFCLtP45 pf SVLN fIFC PXphCnp, pI51xILl Al A FEWLM NECnX4 mFAEpf. XEIp W mE _ pAY pi Ipp). BY IR x[50.UnW xp. MIS ANNCYAIIM 4AP ANYEMpS ME BWXpAPY MI- CW WY4UN1lY fAGJLIPES pISIRIR NO, B5-I Cf mE PAH~Ip W[ANMG,1 PIPE PFphC11W pI51XICl. LWNIi Cf SAN PEPXAxgXO. SIAIE p[ GLIfpPNIA, PPIOP PECWOEp W Al BMM Lf uAPS As5ES5YENl ANp [W NVXItY EApLITES pI51MCR, Al PAGE .IN m[ P~lIK C( ME LWNtY PECOFp[x fp'i M[ [WNIY 6 sAN pEPxAP01Xp. CKIfWHIA. scwcrwr wp WcnupxcA neE Pxphrnpx plsm¢t sort pr cALrrwny I Nev p6. 10p) - 11: 11vm Jellm I I I W W >I Q W CN rl „I I SHEET 7 OF 7 tms NAP NAS earv rILLp unpEP pocv4sxl XYNece .Nls _ per rc xWl. AI ~u. Ix BopN a NAPS ar AsxssuENt ANp cpu4wurr fAminss prsmlcrs Ar PAGE _. AE INC FEWESE pE H ME ANOUMi pE 1_ ALxEF AUUlipt/CWM0.LEF-FCLONpFN BY'. WNIY Ci SAX p[FMtapIXO CE-UEY XECONVEN LHI$ NRP PREPARED [1 Y: Associated Engineers.lnc A111 FM19NFlBY siPEET. WiMIO. a YItN ~E IEL.IepelYeuWlYm.fAx~spEl4L,ae4, uNES .NMm LS A pAh P433 RESOLUTION NO. FD 07- O6z RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, ACTING AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1, ADOPTING A BOUNDARY MAP (ANNEXATION NO. 07-11) SHOWING PROPERTY TO BE ANNEXED TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1 WHEREAS, the BOARD OF DIRECTORS of the RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT (the "Board of Directors"), desires to initiate proceedings to annex territory to an existing Community Facilities District pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982", being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California, and specifically Article 3.5 thereof. The existing Community Facilities District has been designated as COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1 (the "District"); and, WHEREAS, there has been submitted a map entitled "Boundary Map No. 07-11 to Community Facilities District No. 85-1, Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, County of San Bernardino, State Of California" (the "Boundary Map") showing the territory proposed to be annexed to the District (the "Territory"). NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District does hereby resolve as follows: SECTION 1: The above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2: The Boundary Map showing the Territory proposed to be annexed to the District and to be subject to the levy of a special tax is hereby approved and adopted. SECTION 3: A certificate shall be endorsed on the original and on at least one (1) copy of Boundary Map, evidencing the date and adoption of this Resolution, and within fifteen (15) days after the adoption of the Resolution fixing the time and place of the hearing on the intention to annex or extent of the annexation to the District, a copy of such map shall be filed with the correct and proper endorsements thereon with the County Recorder, all in the manner and form provided for in Section 3111 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. P434 Resolution No. FD 07- Page 2 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of , 2007. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAINED: Donald J. Kurth, M. D., President ATTEST: Debra J. Adams, Secretary I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, SECRETARY of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, at a regular meeting of said Board held on the day of 2007. Executed this _ day of 2007 at Rancho Cucamonga, California. Debra J. Adams, Secretary STAFF REPORT RANQ-IO GUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECITON DISTRICT Date: December 5, 2007 To: President and Members of the Board of Directors Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: Peter M. Bryan, Fire Chief By: Janet Walker, Management Analyst II P435 ~` 3 , ~. ~~~J RANCHO ~'UCAMONCA Subject: RESOLUTIONOFINTEMIONTOANNIXTERRrrORYTOCOMMUNfTYFACILfIIESDISTRICT N0.8S1 RECOMMENDATION Adoption of a Resolution of Intention to Annex Territory referred to as Annexation No. 07-11 into Community Facilities District No. 85-1, to specify facilities and services to be financed, to set and specify the special taxes to be levied within the territory proposed to be annexed and to set a time and place for a public hearing regarding the annexation. BACKGROUND 6~h & Hermosa JP/DF, LLC (APN 0209-211-41) is conditioned by the City and Fire District to annex to the existing Community Facilities District (CFD) No. 85-1 to satisfy fire protection service mitigation impacts. In order to initiate formal annexation proceedings, the Fire Board is being asked to adopt a resolution approving a boundary map of the territory proposed to be annexed and a Resolution of Intention to Annex. The Resolution of Intention generally sets forth: (a) the District's intention to annex; (b) the facilities and services which the annexed property will, in part, finance (Exhibit "A" of said Resolution) through the levy of the special tax on the annexed property; (d) the rate and method of apportionment of the proposed special tax (Exhibit "B" of said Resolution); (e) the date, time and location of the public hearing set for January 16, 2008, and (f) election requirements. Warren Diven, Special Counsel for the District, has worked with staff to establish the annexation process, timelines and draft resolutions. The resolution is considered to be P436 RESOLUTION OF INTI'ENTION TO ANNEX DECEMBER 5, ?007 PAGE2 routine and non-controversial, as the developer is in support of the annexation procedure. On January 16, 2008, there will be a public hearing for public input/concerns on this matter. Respectfully submitted, ~~ Peter M. Bry n Fire Chief Attachment P437 RESOLUTION NO. FD 07-063 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, ACTING AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO AUTHORIZE THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY (ANNEXATION NO. 07-11) TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1 WHEREAS, the BOARD OF DIRECTORS of the RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, CALIFORNIA, ("Board of Directors"), formed a Community Facilities District pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982", being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California (the "Act"). The Community Facilities District has been designated as COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1 (the "District"); and, WHEREAS, the Board of Directors desires to initiate proceedings to consider the annexation of certain real property to the District (the "Territory"); and WHEREAS, a map entitled "Annexation Map No. 07-11 to Community Facilities District No. 85-1 Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, County of San Bernardino, State of California" (the "Boundary Map") showing the Territory proposed to be annexed to the District has been submitted, which map has been previously approved and a copy of the map shall be kept on file with the transcript of these proceedings; and WHEREAS, this Board of Directors now desires to proceed to adopt its Resolution of Intention to annex the Territory to District, to describe the territory included within District and the Territory proposed to be annexed thereto, to specify the services to be financed from the proceeds of the levy of special taxes within the Territory, to set and specify the special taxes that would be levied within the Territory to fnance such services, and to set a time and place for a public hearing relating to the annexation of the Territory to the District. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District does hereby resolve as follows: RECITALS SECTION 1: The above recitals are all true and correct. LEGAL AUTHORITY SECTION 2: These proceedings for annexation are initiated by this Board of Directors pursuant to the authorization of the Act. INTENTION TO ANNEX: DESCRIPTION OF TERRITORY AND THE DISTRICT SECTION 3. This legislative body hereby determines that the public convenience and necessity requires that the Territory be added to the District and this Board of Directors declares its intention to annex the Territory to the District. A description of the Territory is as follows: P438 Resolution No. 07- Page -2- All that property within the Territory proposed to be annexed to the District, as such property is shown on the Boundary Map as previously approved by this legislative body, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the Secretary and shall remain open for public inspection. A general description of the territory included in the District is hereinafter described as follows: All that property and territory as originally included within the District and as subsequently annexed to the District, as such properties were shown on maps of the original District and the territories subsequently annexed to the District, all as approved by this Board of Directors and designated by the name of the original District. Copies of such maps are on file in the Office of the Secretary and have also been filed in the Office of the County Recorder. SERVICES AUTHORIZED TO BE FINANCED BY THE DISTRICT SECTION 4: The services that are authorized to be financed by the District from the proceeds of special taxes levied within the District (the "Services") are generally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. The District shall finance all direct, administrative and incidental annual costs and expenses necessary to provide the Services. The Services authorized to be financed by the District from the proceeds of special taxes levied within District are the types of services to be provided in the Territory. If and to the extent possible the Services shall be provided in common within the District and the Territory. P439 Resolution No. 07- Page -3- SPECIAL TAXES SECTION 5: It is the further intention of this Board of Directors body that, except where funds are otherwise available, a special tax sufficient to pay for the Services and related incidental expenses authorized by the Act, secured by recordation of a continuing lien against all non-exempt real property in the Territory, will be levied annually within the boundaries of such Territory. For further particulars as to the rate and method of apportionment of the proposed special tax, reference is made to Exhibit B (the "Special Tax Formula"), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and which sets forth in sufficient detail the method of apportionment of such special tax to allow each landowner or resident within the proposed Territory to clearly estimate the maximum amount that such person will have to pay. The special tax proposed to be levied within the Territory shall be equal to the special tax levied to pay for the Services in the District, except that a higher or lower special tax may be levied within the Territory to the extent that the actual cost of providing the Services in the Territory is higher or lower than the cost of providing those Services in the original District. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the special tax may not be levied at a rate which is higher than the maximum special tax authorized to be levied pursuant to the Special Tax Formula. The special taxes herein authorized shall be collected in the same manner as ad valorem property taxes and shall be subject to the same penalties, procedure, sale and lien priority in any case of delinquency, as applicable for ad valorem taxes; however, as applicable, this legislative body may, by resolution, establish and adopt an alternate or supplemental procedure as necessary. Any special taxes that may not be collected on the County tax roll shall be collected through a direct billing procedure by the Treasurer of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, acting for and on behalf of the District. Upon recordation of a Notice of Special Tax Lien pursuant to Section 3114.5 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, a continuing lien to secure each levy of the special tax shall attach to all non-exempt real property in the Territory and this lien shall continue in force and effect until the special tax obligation is prepaid and permanently satisfied and the lien canceled in accordance with law or until collection of the tax by the legislative body ceases. The maximum special tax rate authorized to be levied within the District shall not be increased as a result of the annexation of the Territory to the District. P440 Resolution No. 07- Page -4- PUBLIC HEARING SECTION 6: NOTICE IS GIVEN THAT ON THE 16th DAY OF JANUARY 2008, AT THE HOUR OF 7:00 O'CLOCK P.M., IN THE REGULAR MEETING PLACE OF THE LEGISLATIVE BODY, BEING THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD WHERE THIS LEGISLATIVE BODY WILL CONSIDER THE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE ANNEXATION OF THE TERRITORY TO THE DISTRICT, THE PROPOSED METHOD AND APPORTIONMENT OF THE SPECIAL TAX TO BE LEVIED WITHIN THE TERRITORY AND ALL OTHER MATTERS AS SET FORTH IN THIS RESOLUTION OF INTENTION. AT SUCH PUBLIC HEARING, THE TESTIMONY OF ALL INTERESTED PERSONS FOR OR AGAINST THE ANNEXATION OF THE TERRITORY OR THE LEVYING OF SPECIAL TAXES WITHIN THE TERRITORY WILL BE HEARD. AT SUCH PUBLIC HEARING, PROTESTS AGAINST THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF THE TERRITORY, THE LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES WITHIN THE TERRITORYORANYOTHER PROPOSALS CONTAINED IN THIS RESOLUTION MAY BE MADE ORALLY BY ANY INTERESTED PERSON. ANY PROTESTS PERTAINING TO THE REGULARITY OR SUFFICIENCY OF THE PROCEEDINGS SHALL BE IN WRITING AND SHALL CLEARLY SET FORTH THE IRREGULARITIES OR DEFECTS TO WHICH OBJECTION IS MADE. ALL WRITTEN PROTESTS SHALL BE FILED WITH THE SECRETARY PRIOR TO THE TIME FIXED FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. WRITTEN PROTESTS MAY BE WITHDRAWN AT ANY TIME BEFORE THE CONCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC HEARING. P441 Resolution No. 07- Page -5- MAJORITY PROTEST SECTION 7: If (a) 50% or more of the registered voters, or six (6) registered voters, whichever is more, residing within the District, (b) 50% or more of the registered voters, or six (6) registered voters, whichever is more, residing within the Territory, (c) owners of one-half or more of the area of land in the territory included in the District, or (d)owners of one-half or more of the area of land in the territory included in the Territory, file written protests against the proposed annexation of the Territory to the District and such protests are not withdrawn so as to reduce the protests to less than a majority, no further proceedings shall be undertaken for a period of one year from the date of the decision by the Board of Directors on the issues discussed at the public hearing. ELECTION SECTION 8: Upon the conclusion of the public hearing, if the legislative body determines to proceed with the annexation, a proposition shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the Territory. The vote shall be by registered voters within the Territory; however, if there are less than 12 registered voters, the vote shall be by landowners, with each landowner having one vote per acre or portion thereof within the Territory. NOTICE SECTION 9: Notice of the time and place of the public hearing shall be given by the Secretary by publication in a legally designated newspaper of general circulation, said publication pursuant to Section 6061 of the Government Code, with said publication to be completed at least seven (7) days prior to the date set for the public hearing. A copy of this Resolution shall be transmitted to the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as required by the Act. P442 Resolution No. 07- Page -6- PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of , 2007. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAINED: Donald J. Kurth, M.D., President ATTEST: Debra H. Adams, Secretary I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, SECRETARY of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, at a regular meeting of said Board held on the _ day of 2007. Executed this day of 2007, at Rancho Cucamonga, California Debra J. Adams, Secretary P443 Resolution No. 07- Page -7- EXHIBIT 'A' COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1 DESCRIPTION OF THE SERVICES The performance by employees of functions, operations, maintenance and repair activities in order to provide fire protection and suppression services. P444 Resolution No. 07- Page -8- EXHIBIT 'B' COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 85-1 ANNEXATION NO. 07-11 RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAXES The rate and method of apportionment, limitations on and adjustment to the Special Tax shall be as follows: To pay for fire suppression services and to finance fire suppression facilities, the Maximum Special Tax in Community Facilities District No. 85-1, Annexation No. 07-11 for Fiscal Year 2007-2008 shall be: Structures Maximum Annual Special Tax Residential 1 DU = ($143.31) Multi-Family 2 DU: 1.75 = ($143.31) 3 DU: 2.25 = ($143.31) 4 DU: 2.65 = ($143.31) 5-14 DU: 2.65 = ($143.31) + {.35 (TU-4) ($143.31)} 15-30 DU: 6.15 = ($143.31) + {.30 (TU-14) ($143.31)} 31-80 DU: 10.65 = ($143.31)+{.25 (TU-30) ($143.31)} 81 - up DU: 23.15 = ($143.31) + {.20 (TU-80) ($143.31)} Commercial ($143.31) per acre + $.078 per SF Industrial ($143.31) per acre + $.095 per SF Note: DU =Dwelling Unit TU =Total Units SF =Square Foot ANNUAL ADJUSTMENT The maximum Special Tax shall be annually adjusted commencing on July 1, 2007 and each July 15' thereafter for (a) changes in the cost of living or (b) changes in cost of living and changes in population as defined in Section 7901 of the Government Code, as amended, whichever is lesser. P445 Resolution No. 07- Page -g- REDUCTION IN SPECIAL TAX Commercial and industrial structures shall be granted a .01' cent reduction in the Special Tax for the installation of complete sprinkler systems. In addition, multi-floor commercial and industrial structures shall also be granted a .01 cent reduction (not cumulative) in Special Tax for each separate floor above or below the main ground floor of the structure. LIMITATION ON SPECIAL TAX LEVY The Special Tax shall only be levied on Developed Property. Developed Property is defined to be property: which is not owned by a public or governmental agency; which is not vacant; - where a "certificate of occupancy" or "utility release" from the City of Rancho Cucamonga has been issued; which has an existing building or structure onsite; - which does not have as its sole use power transmission towers, railroad tracks, and flood control facilities. Areas granted as easements for such purposes shall be subtracted from the total acreage of the underlying lot. The annual levy of the Special Tax shall be based upon an annual determination by the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District of the amount of other revenues available to meet budget requirements. As used in this formula, "available revenue" shall include ad valorem taxes, State of California augmentation, tax increment revenues received from the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and any other source of revenue except the Special Tax. The Board of Directors shall take all responsible steps to retain maximum Redevelopment Agency funding to which, by agreement, they may lawfully receive. To the extent available revenues are insufficient to meet budget requirements, the Board of Directors may levy the Special Tax. For further particulars regarding the rate and method of apportionment of the Special Tax, reference is made to the Final Report Mello-Roos Community Facilities District No. 85-1 for Fire Suppression Facilities/Services -Foothill Fire Protection District, a copy of which is on file in the office of the Fire Chief of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P446 Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259458 10/31/2007 ABLAC 207.48 AP - 00259460 10/31/2007 AIR CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENTS 5,006.34 AP - 00259461 10/31/2007 AIRWAVES CELLULAR INC. 604.55 • AP - 00259462 10/31/2007 ALA CFIAPTER RELATIONS OFFICE 32.00 AP - 00259463 10/31/2007 ALEXIS CONSTRUCTION CLEAN-UP INC. 14.95 AP - 00259468 10/31/2007 ARCHIVE MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC 278.42 AP - 00259469 10/31/2007 ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS INC 15,586.50 AP - 00259469 10/31/2007 ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS INC 6,883.50 AP - 00259469 10/31/2007 ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS INC 21,595.00 AP - 00259470 10/31/2007 ASTRUM UTILITY SERVICES 3,746.25 AP - 00259471 10/31/2007 AVANTS, MARGE 90.00 AP - 00259471 10/31/2007 AVANTS, MARGE 90.00 AP - 00259472 10/31/2007 BANK OF SACRAMENTO 28,090.50 AP - 00259473 10/31/2007 BLINCOW, DONALD 500.00 AP - 00259475 10/31/2007 BUTSKO UTILITY DESIGN INC. 6,638.04 AP - 00259475 10/31/2007 BUTSKO UTILITY DESIGN INC. 5,764.59 AP - 00259476 10/31/2007 CACEO 130.00 AP - 00259477 10/31/2007 CALBO 186.00 ~ AP - 00259478 10/31/2007 CALBO 100.00 AP - 00259479 10/31/2007 CALIFORNIA FRANCHISE TAX BOARD 47.58 AP - 00259480 10/31/2007 CALIFORNIA FRANCHISE TAX BOARD 25.00 AP - 00259481 10/31/2007 CALIFORNIA FRANCHISE TAX BOARD 372.03 AP - 00259482 10/31/2007 CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 96,516.09 AP - 00259484 10/31/2007 CANTEEN VENDING SERVICES 14.72 AP - 00259486 10/31/2007 CART GUY, THE 869.91 AP - 00259487 10/31/2007 CHAMPION AWARDS AND SPECIALTIES 609.87 AP - 00259488 ] 0/31/2007 CISNEROS, JENNY 65.00 AP - 00259489 10/31/2007 CLOUT c/o TIM JOHNSON CLOUT CHAIR 25.00 AP - 00259489 10/31/2007 CLOUT c/o TIM JOHNSON CLOUT CHAIR 25.00 AP - 00259489 10/31/2007 CLOUT c/o TIM JOHNSON CLOUT CHAIR 25.00 AP - 00259489 10/31/2007 CLOUT c/o TIM JOHNSON CLOUT CHAIR 25.00 AP - 00259490 10/31/2007 CMTA DIVISION 10, TREASURER 25.00 AP - 00259490 10/31/2007 CMTA DIVISION 10, TREASURER 25.00 AP - 00259491 10/31/2007 COOPER, CHERYL 57.60 AP - 00259491 10/31/2007 COOPER, CHERYL 57.60 AP - 00259491 ] 0/31/2007 COOPER, CHERYL 165.00 AP - 00259491 10/31/2007 COOPER, CHERYL 115.00 AP - 00259491 10/31/2007 COOPER, CHERYL 230.40 AP - 00259491 10/31/2007 COOPER, CHERYL 12.00 AP - 00259491 10/31/2007 COOPER, CHERYL 6.00 AP - 00259491 10/31/2007 COOPER, CHERYL 11.00 AP - 00259491 10/31/2007 COOPER, CHERYL 3.00 AP - 00259491 10/31/2007 COOPER, CHERYL 3.00 AP - 00259493 10/31/2007 CRAITEABERGER, ESTHER 291.60 AP - 00259494 10/31/2007 CREATIVE DATA PRODUCTS 1,929.61 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 590.70 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 429.77 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 904.83 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 519.13 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 132.10 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 2,555.54 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 593.36 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 120.13 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 601.77 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 1 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report: CK_AGENDA_R EG_PORTRAI T_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P447 Agenda Check ReEister 10/31l2007through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 133.18 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 543.07 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,089.70 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,853.12 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 386.31 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 2,232.17 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,640.50 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 724.13 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 122.54 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 641.67 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 545.91 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 52.10 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 258.63 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 123.87 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 115.54 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 156.95 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 2,316.14 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 2,311.97 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 3,634.17 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT SO1.S9 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 30.82 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 324.70 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,129.78 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 14>.1S AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 140.08 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 36.14 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 197.02 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,004.33 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 272.23 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 58.95 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 201.44 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 258.20 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 4,143.56 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 3,134.09 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 83.62 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY RATER DISTRICT 2,421.88 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,892.80 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 574.39 AP - 00259496 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 428.87 AP - 00259497 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 73.60 AP - 00259497 10/31!2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 73.60 AP - 00259497 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 209.91 AP - 00259497 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 73.60 AP - 00259497 10/31/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT SS.20 AP - 00259498 10/31/2007 DEER CREEK CAR CARE CENTER 1,875.00 AP - 00259499 10/31/2007 DENTAL HEALTH SERVICES 133.20 AP - 00259500 10/31/2007 DEPARTMENT OF PESTICIDE REGULATION 120.00 AP - 00259501 10/31/2007 DODSON & ASSOCIATES, TOM 4,372.50 AP - 00259502 10/31/2007 DOORWAY MAiVLJFACTUREVG CO. 130.00 AP - 00259503 10/31/2007 DUNN, ANN MARIE 192.00 AP - 00259504 10/31/2007 DYNALECTRIC 62,360.00 AP-00259504 10/31/2007 DYNALECTRIC 114,2]0.00 AP - 00259504 10/31/2007 DYNALECTRIC 91,320.00 AP - 00259504 10/31/2007 DYNALECTRIC 13,015.00 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 2 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P448 Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259504 10/31/2007 DYNALECTRIC -28,090.50 AP - 00259505 10/31/2007 EDFUND 65.08 AP - 00259506 10/31/2007 EIGHTH AVENUE GRAPHICS 160.55 AP - 00259506 10/31/2007 EIGHTH AVENUE GRAPHICS 1,427.69 AP - 00259507 10/31/2007 FAIRMONT HOSPITALITY INC 8,150.00 AP - 00259508 10/31/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 21.69 AP - 00259508 10/31/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 17.78 AP - 00259508 10/31/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 26.90 AP - 00259508 10/31/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORD 20.62 AP - 00259508 10/31/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 18.92 AP - 00259508 10/31/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 20.62 AP - 00259509 10/31 /2007 FELICIANQ ANTHONY 240.00 AP - 00259509 10/31/2007 FELICIANO, ANTHONY 120.00 AP - 00259510 10/31/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 868.00 AP - 00259510 10/31/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 398.52 AP - 00259510 10/31/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 630.00 AP - 00259510 10/31/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 930.00 AP - 00259511 10/31/2007 FITZGERALD, AIMEE 80.00 AP - 00259512 10/31/2007 FOOTHILL CARPET AND MATTRESS 5,057.64 AP - 00259515 10/31/2007 FREEMAN, KATHY 22.00 AP - 00259516 10/31/2007 GALE GROUP,THE 29.27 AP - 00259517 10/31/2007 GAMBLE PUPPET PRODUCTIONS, JIM 1,500.00 AP - 00259518 10/31/2007 GHD PROPERTIES LLC 1,000.00 AP - 00259519 10/31/2007 GUARDIAN 3,506.42 AP - 00259520 10/31/2007 H & H GENERAL CONTRACTORS INC 434,852.50 AP - 00259520 10/31/2007 H & H GENERAL CONTRACTORS INC -43,485.25 AP - 00259521 10/31/2007 HAMILTON, MONIQUE 225.00 AP - 00259522 10/31/2007 HARALAMBOS BEVERAGE COMPANY 461.54 AP - 00259523 10/31/2007 HCS CUTLER STEEL CO 91.05 AP - 00259523 10/31/2007 HCS CUTLER STEEL CO 128.45 AP - 00259524 10/31/2007 HENRY BUSINESS SERVICES, RAY K 52.20 AP - 00259525 10/3]/2007 HLP INC. 1,184.40 AP - 00259526 10/31/2007 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 45.00 AP - 00259526 10/31/2007 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 45.00 AP - 00259526 10/31/2007 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 285.00 AP - 00259526 10/31/2007 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 5,070.58 AP - 00259526 10/31/2007 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 82.16 AP - 00259526 10/31/2007 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 566.23 AP - 00259527 10/31/2007 HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 401.71 AP - 00259527 10/31/2007 HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 479.71 AP - 00259528 10/31/2007 IBM CORPORATION 13,877.94 AP - 00259528 10/31/2007 IBM CORPORATION 722.47 AP - 00259528 10/31/2007 IBM CORPORATION 576.68 AP - 00259528 10/31/2007 IBM CORPORATION 3,071.91 AP - 00259528 10/31/2007 IBM CORPORATION 356.72 AP - 00259529 10/31/2007 IMPRESSIONS GOURMET CATERING 199.34 AP - 00259531 10/31/2007 INLAND DESERT SECURITY & COMMUNICATK 565.40 AP - 00259532 10/31/2007 INLAND EMPIRE WEEKLY 680.00 AP - 00259533 10/31/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 1,000.00 AP - 00259534 10/31/2007 INSIGHT 107.84 AP - 00259535 10/31/2007 INTERACTIVE DATA CORPORATION 85.00 AP - 00259535 10/3]/2007 INTERACTIVE DATA CORPORATION 85.00 AP - 00259535 10/31/2007 INTERACTIVE DATA CORPORATION 85.00 AP - 00259537 10/31/2007 J & J MAILBOX 117.00 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 3 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_R EG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P449 Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259538 10/31/2007 J J KELLER AND ASSOC INC 418.06 AP - 00259539 10/31/2007 J M W CONSTRUCTION 53.46 AP - 00259540 10/31/2007 JDC CONCRETE 250.00 AP - 00259541 10/31/2007 K HOVANIAN HOMES 7,890.00 AP - 00259542 10/31/2007 KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN INC 112,548.13 AP - 00259542 ] 0/31/2007 KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN INC 2,480.88 AP - 00259543 10/31/2007 KARCHER PROPERTIES INC 19.50 AP - 00259544 10/31/2007 KIMLEY HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 8,550.00 AP - 00259546 10/31/2007 KORANDA CONSTRUCTION 1,800.00 AP - 00259547 ] 0/31 /2007 KSPA AM 2,490.00 AP - 00259548 10/31/2007 L S A ASSOCIATES INC 11,883.27 AP - 00259549 10/31/2007 LAMOUREUX, JULIE 1,228.00 AP - 00259550 10/31/2007 LARROB ENTERPRISES 30.00 AP - 00259551 10/31/2007 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNL4 CITIES 40.00 AP - 00259551 10/31/2007 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES 40.00 AP - 00259551 10/31/2007 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES 40.00 AP - 00259551 10/31/2007 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES .40.00 AP - 00259552 10/31/2007 LITTLE BEAR PRODUCTIONS 200.00 AP - 00259552 10/31/2007 LITTLE BEAR PRODUCTIONS 400.00 AP - 00259552 10/31/2007 LITTLE BEAR PRODUCTIONS 250.00 AP - 00259554 ]0/31/2007 LOS ANGELES TIMES 42.40 AP - 00259555 10/31/2007 MADILYN CLARK STUDIOS 125.00 AP - 00259556 10/31 /2007 MARK CHRISTOPHER INC 142.03 AP - 00259557 10/31/2007 MARQUETTE COMMERCIAL FINANCE 3,788.98 AP - 00259558 10/31/2007 MARSHALL PLUMBIl~'G 777.00 AP - 00259558 10/31/2007 MARSHALL PLUMBING -83.57 AP - 00259558 10/31/2007 MARSHALL PLUMBING 334.29 AP - 00259558 10/31/2007 MARSHALL PLUMBING -194.25 AP - 00259559 10/31/2007 MARTINEZ UNION SERVICE 150.00 AP - 00259560 10/31/2007 MASTERCRAFT HOMES 101,503.28 AP - 00259561 10/31/2007 MCKEE, LEONARD J 164.59 AP - 00259562 10/31/2007 MERITAGE HOMES OF CALIFORNIA 500.00 AP - 00259563 10/31/2007 MIDDLESEX OFFICE SUPPLY INC 178.49 AP - 00259564 10/31/2007 MIDWEST TAPE 71.98 AP - 00259564 10/31/2007 MID~i'EST TAPE 21.99 AP - 00259565 10/31/2007 MIGLIACCI, THERESA 135.00 AP - 00259566 10/31/2007 MISSION REPROGRAPHICS 754.25 AP - 00259567 10/31/2007 MMASC 80.00 AP - 00259568 10/31/2007 MOONRIDGE ANIMAL PARK WILDLIFE AWARE 200.00 AP - 00259569 10/31/2007 NAFFZIGER, MICHAEL 500.00 AP - 00259570 10/31/2007 NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RENTALS INC 1,384.21 AP - 00259571 10/31/2007 NATURES EARTH PRODUCTS II~'C 1,875.80 AP - 00259572 10/31/2007 NO KILL 100.00 AP-00259573 10/31/2007 NOWAK,JOHN 250.00 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 81.67 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 462.41 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 50.05 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 67.63 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 5.92 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 83.68 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 62.11 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 91.12 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 344.26 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 8.44 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 4 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P450 Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 11.63 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 57.78 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 44.94 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 28.02 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 129.77 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 116.95 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 68.69 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 77.61 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 4238 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT -58.01 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT -25.67 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 96.88 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 508.18 AP - 00289578 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 51.17 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 33.80 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT -11.93 AP - 00259575 10/3 ] /2007 OFFICE DEPOT 32.85 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 3.51 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT -14.35 AP - 00259575 10/3 ] /2007 OFFICE DEPOT 75.07 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 67.83 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 5.88 AP - 00259575 10/3]/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 8.53 AP - 00259575 10/31 /2007 OFFICE DEPOT -8.92 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 8.92 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT -14.09 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 414.02 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 17.77 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 471.17 AP - 00259575 10/31/2007 OFFICE DEPOT -35.36 AP - 00259576 10/31/2007 OFFICE TEAM 276.25 AP - 00259577 10/31/2007 ONESOURCE DISTRIBUTORS INC. 1,352.07 AP - 00259577 ]0/31/2007 ONESOURCE DISTRIBUTORS INC. 104.47 AP - 00259577 10/31/2007 ONESOURCE DISTRIBUTORS INC. 105.28 AP - 00259578 10/31/2007 OPTIMUM INC 13.84 AP - 00259579 10/31/2007 OTT, LAURA 528.00 AP - 00259579 10/31/2007 OTT, LAURA 143.00 AP - 00259579 10/31/2007 OTT, LAURA ~ 252.00 AP - 00259579 10/31/2007 OTT, LAURA 72.00 AP - 00259580 10/31/2007 OTT. SHARON 228.00 AP - 00259580 10/31/2007 OTT, SHARON 132.00 AP - 00259581 ]0/3]/2007 PACIFIC PRODUCTS AND SERVICES 24,307.32 AP - 00259582 ]0/31/2007 PACITTI, JOANNA 1,500.00 AP - 00259583 10/31/2007 PAL CAMPAIGN 42.00 AP - 00259584 10/31/2007 PANDA DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION c 2,277.33 AP - 00259584 10/31/2007 PANDA DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION ( 7,243.39 AP - 00259585 10/31/2007 PARAGON SALES & MARKETING 37.51 AP - 00259586 10/31/2007 PARS 3,500.00 AP - 00259587 10/31/2007 PARTY TIME MACHINES 800.00 AP - 00289888 10/31/2007 PC WORLD 24.95 AP - 00259589 10/31/2007 PHOENIX GROUP INFORMATION SYSTEMS 478.94 AP - 00259590 10/31/2007 PILOT POWER GROUP INC 18,877.24 AP - 00259591 10/31/2007 PINCOTT, CARRIE 20.00 AP - 00259591 10/31/2007 PINCOTT, CARRIE 20.37 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 5 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P451 Agenda Check Resister 10/31/2007 through I l/27/2007 Check No. Check Dale Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259593 10/31/2007 PIVOT GROUP INC 22,080.00 AP - 00259593 10/31/2007 PIVOT GROUP INC -2,208.00 AP - 002S9S94 10/31/2007 POUK AND STEINLE INC. 2,233.29 AP - 00259594 10/31/2007 POUK AND STEINLE INC. 44,929.19 AP - 002S9S95 10/31/2007 PRE-PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC 277.89 AP - 00259596 10/31/2007 PRINCIPAL LIFE 2,072.30 AP - 002S9S98 10/3 ]/2007 R C D C /LUCKY SEVEN PROJECT 16.6] AP - 00259599 10/31/2007 RANDOM HOUSE INC 120.36 AP - 00259599 10/3]/2007 RANDOM HOUSE INC 73.11 AP - 002S9S99 10/3]/2007 RANDOM HOUSE INC 90.35 AP - 00259600 10/31/2007 RELIABLE GRAPHICS 72.00 AP - 00259602 10/31/2007 ROBERT HALF TECHNOLOGY 537.80 AP - 00259603 ]0/31/2007 S AND L AUTO TRANS 65.00 AP - 00259604 10/31/2007 SAGER CONSTRUCTION, G M 1,000.00 AP - 00259607 10/31/2007 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY AUDITOR CONTR( 360.00 AP - 00259607 10/31/2007 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY AUDITOR CONTR( 480.00 AP - 00259607 10/31/2007 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY AUDITOR CONTR( 360.00 AP - 00259608 10/31/2007 SCOTT, DIANA 375.00 AP - 00259609 10/31/2007 SENECHAL, CALVIN 122.50 AP - 00259609 10/31/2007 SENECHAL, CALVIN 9].00 AP - 00259609 10/31/2007 SENECHAL, CALVIN 175.00 AP - 00259609 10/31/2007 SENECHAL, CALVIN 210.00 AP - 00259609 10/31/2007 SENECHAL, CALVIN 60.00 AP - 00259609 10/31/2007 SENECHAL, CALVIN 210.00 AP - 00259609 10/31/2007 SENECHAL, CALVIN 26.00 AP - 00259609 10/31/2007 SENECHAL, CALVIN 47.00 AP - 00259609 10/31/2007 SENECHAL, CALVIN 35.00 AP - 00259609 10/31/2007 SENECHAL, CALVIN 164.50 AP - 00259610 10/31/2007 SHERIFFS COURT SERVICES 250.00 AP - 00259611 10/31/2007 SHOETERIA 200.00 AP - 0025961 I 10/31/2007 SHOETERIA ] 84.23 AP - 00259611 10/31/2007 SHOETERIA 174.53 AP - 00259611 10/31/2007 SHOETERIA 184.23 AP - 00259612 10/31/2007 SIGN SHOP, THE 161.63 AP - 00259615 10/31/2007 SMITH, MICHAEL C 91.47 AP - 00259620 ]0/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.52 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.85 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.36 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.36 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHER,\' CALIFORNIA EDISON 76.55 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.36 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNI4 EDISON 15.36 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.12 AP - 00259620 ]0/31/2007 SOUTHERA' CALIFORNIA EDISON 11.60 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.61 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.43 AP - 00259620 ] 0/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.85 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.36 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.38 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.85 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.28 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.SS AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.85 AP - 00259620 ] 0/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 80.37 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 6 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P452 Aeenda Check Resister 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 97.22 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 71.39 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 20.57 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.52 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.61 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.36 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.12 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.99 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.76 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 80.53 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.01 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 116.99 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 49.14 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 180.31 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 31.73 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 31.73 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.79 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.36 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 52.95 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 122.00 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 106.81 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.00 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 5,244.33 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.65 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.00 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.47 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.68 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.02 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 61.74 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 147.09 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 9.66 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 110.18 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 118.98 AP - 00259620 10/3 ]/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 182.88 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16,785.79 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 102.82 AP - 00259620 10/3]/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.14 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHEIL'V CALIFORNIA ED[SON 60.1 I AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.36 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.00 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISOA' 15.87 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 163.29 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.02 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.02 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.78 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 18.07 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 30.98 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 111.19 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.00 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 114.36 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 35.12 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 82.82 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 100.31 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 7 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Pomait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P453 Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through ]1/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 44.18 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.61 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 109.61 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN.CALIFORNIA EDISON 20.67 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 27.83 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 87.29 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.36 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 62.19 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 90.70 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.17 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.02 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 30.64 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFOINIA EDISON 361.84 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 1,040.08 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 754.55 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 47.83 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 55.60 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 67.48 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 288.61 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.36 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.11 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.44 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.36 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.36 AP - 00259620 10/3]/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.36 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.36 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ]04.15 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 54.26 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 35.59 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 121.03 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 96.60 AP - 00259620 10/3 U2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 87.71 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 278.98 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.36 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.38 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 18.01 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 152.61 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 79.21 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTI-IERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 501.58 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 135.70 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.32 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 200.57 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 120.61 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 115.90 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 8.55 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 5,897.42 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 0.28 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 37.07 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 120.39 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 32.70 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.54 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 80.62 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 96.02 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 8 Current Dale: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_R EG_PORTRAI T_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Pornait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P454 Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amoun[ AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 1,220.53 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 121.35 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.36 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 106.93 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 92.20 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.19 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.36 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.99 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 85.37 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 88.21 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 30.79 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 18.47 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.36 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 132.72 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 501.88 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.85 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.85 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 167.77 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 26.94 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.02 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTFERN CALIFORNIA EDISON S 1.77 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTFERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 534.26 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.36 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.12 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.79 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 68.97 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 110.10 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 100.09 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 26.11 AP - 00259620 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 8.22 AP - 00259621 10/3 ]/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 8,036.67 AP - 00259621 10/3 ]/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 19,706.85 AP - 00259621 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 5,020.88 AP - 00259621 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 31.80 AP - 00259621 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 859.18 AP - 00259621 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 108.83 AP - 00259621 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 46.19 AP - 00259621 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 20,822.68 AP - 00259622 10/31/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2,213.85 AP - 00259623 10/31/2007 SOUTFILAND SPORTS OFFICIALS 840.00 AP - 00259624 10/31/2007 STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT 179.00 AP - 00259625 10/31/2007 STEINY AND COMPAA'l' INC 112,860.40 AP - 00259625 10/31/2007 STEINY AND COMPANY IIQC -11,286.04 AP - 00259626 10/31/2007 STOFA, 70SEPH 13.00 AP - 00259627 10/31/2007 SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC 75.00 AP - 00259627 ]0/31/2007 SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC 75.00 AP - 00259627 10/31/2007 SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC 75.00 AP - 00259627 10/31/2007 SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC 75.00 AP - 00259627 10/31/2007 SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC 75.00 AP-00259628 10/31/2007 SYMPROINC 1,316.25 AP - 00259629 10/31/2007 THOMSON GALE SS.OS AP - 00259630 10/31/2007 TURCH AND ASSOCIATES, DAVID 4,000.00 AP - 00259630 10/31/2007 TURCH AND ASSOCIATES, DAVID 4,000.00 AP - 00259630 10/31/2007 TURCH AND ASSOCIATES, DAVID 4,000.00 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 9 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report: CK_AGENDA_ REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P455 Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259632 10/31/2007 TWINS CLUB 75.00 AP - 00259634 10/31/2007 UNITED WAY 329.82 AP - 00259635 10/31/2007 USA MOBILITY WIRELESS INC 562.85 AP - 00259636 10/31/2007 UVENCE, PAMELA 1,000.00 AP - 00259637 ] 0/31/2007 VASQUEZ, LESLIE 120.00 AP - 00259637 10/31/2007 VASQUEZ, LESLIE 156.00 AP - 00259638 10/31/2007 VEND U COMPANY 81.93 AP - 00259638 10/31/2007 VEND U COMPANY 73.20 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 572.01 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 465.36 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 129.40 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 33.74 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON .89.75 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 35.42 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 196.70 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON - 60.73 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 33.74 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 31.72 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 31.72 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 31.72 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 67.44 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 32.86 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 33.74 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 35.30 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 20.16 AP - 00259640 10/3 ]/2007 VERIZON 31.82 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 33.01 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 21.68 AP-00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 362.53 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 465.36 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 8722 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 89.75 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 89.75 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 98.06 AP-00259640 10/3]/2007 VERIZON 89.50 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 89.50 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON ~ 185.17 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 33.74 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 32.69 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 89.50 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 479.06 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 354.01 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 32.69 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 33.74 AP-00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON ~ 89.75 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 32.69 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 94.66 AP-00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 89.50 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 89.50 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 400.61 AP - 00259640 10/3]/2007 VERIZON 33.74 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 443.32 AP - 00259640 ]0/31/2007 VERIZON 33.74 AP - 00259640 10/31/2007 VERIZON 572.01 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 10 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P456 Asenda Check Resister 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259641 10/31/2007 VERIZON 93.47 AP - 00259642 10/31/2007 VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS 125.00 AP - 00259643 10/31/2007 VIKING ENGINEERING PROJECTS 500.00 AP - 00259644 10/31/2007 VISION SERVICE PLAN CA 10,391.04 AP - 00259645 10/31/2007 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 233.82 AP - 00259645 10/31/2007 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 33.41 AP - 00259645 10/31/2007 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 1.91 AP - 00259645 10/31/2007 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 134.06 AP - 00259646 10/31/2007 WARREN & CO INC, CARL 85.98 AP - 00259646 10/31/2007 WARREN & CO INC, CARL 1,010.79 AP - 00259646 10/31/2007 WARREN & CO INC, CARL 38.38 AP - 00259647 10/31/2007 WEST PAYMENT CENTER 206.19 AP - 00259648 10/31/2007 WESTCOAST MEDIA 772.50 AP - 00259649 10/31/2007 WILLDAN ASSOCIATES 13,964.00 AP - 00259649 10/31/2007 WILLDAN ASSOCIATES 20,063.50 AP - 00259650 10/31/2007 WILSON COMPANY, THE H W 190.18 AP - 00259651 10/31/2007 WILT, MARY 3,300.00 AP - 00259652 10/31/2007 WLC ARCHITECTS 1,530.00 AP - 00259653 10/31/2007 WORD MILL PUBLISHING 700.00 AP - 00259653 10/31/2007 WORD MILL PUBLISHING 700.00 AP - 00259654 10/31/2007 ZERTUCHE, JENNIFER 64.00 AP - 00259655 10/31/2007 ZIRGES, ARLENE 192.00 AP - 00259657 ] 1/7/2007 ARV SOFTBALL 2,277.00 AP - 00259658 ] 1/7/2007 AA EQUIPMENT RENTALS CO EVC 537.54 AP - 00259659 11/7/2007 ABC LOCKSMITHS 16.16 AP - 00259659 11/7/2007 ABC LOCKSMITHS 5.39 AP - 00259659 11/7/2007 ABC LOCKSMITHS 102.36 AP - 00259659 11/7/2007 ABC LOCKSMITHS 6.47 AP - 00259660 11/7/2007 ABLAC 16.39 AP - 00259661 11/7/2007 ADVANTEC CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1,000.00 AP - 00259662 11/7/2007 AEI-CASC ENGINEERING INC. 4,223.75 AP - 00259663 11/7/2007 ALCAL ROOFING & INSULATION 108.16 AP - 00259665 11/7/2007 ALL CITIES TOOLS 134.68 AP - 00259665 11/7/2007 ALL CITIES TOOLS 148.70 AP - 00259666 11/7/2007 ALL WAYS ENTERTAINMENT & KIDS PARTIES 560.00 AP - 00259667 11/7/2007 ALPHAGRAPHICS 69.82 AP - 00259668 11/7/2007 ALTA FIRE EQUIPMENT CO 100.09 AP - 00259669 11/7/2007 ALTA LOMA ANIMAL HOSPITAL 25.00 AP - 00259669 11/7/2007 ALTA LOMA ANIMAL HOSPITAL 25.00 AP - 00259669 11/7/2007 ALTA LOMA ANIMAL HOSPITAL 25.00 AP - 00259669 11/7/2007 ALTA LOMA ANIMAL HOSPITAL 50.00 AP - 00259669 11/7/2007 ALTA LOMA ANIMAL HOSPITAL 50.00 AP - 00259669 11/7/2007 ALTA LOMA ANIMAL HOSPITAL 50.00 AP - 00259669 11/7/2007 ALTA LOMA ANIMAL HOSPITAL 50.00 AP - 00259669 11/7/2007 ALTA LOMA ANIMAL HOSPITAL 50.00 AP - 00259669 11/7/2007 ALTA LOMA ANIMAL HOSPITAL 50.00 AP - 00259669 11/7/2007 ALTA LOMA ANIMAL HOSPITAL 25.00 AP - 00259669 11/7/2007 ALTA LOMA ANIMAL HOSPITAL 25.00 AP - 00259669 11/7/2007 ALTA LOMA ANIMAL HOSPITAL 50.00 AP - 00259670 11/7/2007 AMAZON.COM CREDIT 107.80 AP - 00259671 11/7/2007 AMERICAN KLEANER MFG. 243.70 AP - 00259672 11/7/2007 AMERICAN ROTARY BROOM CO. INC. 169.38 AP - 00259672 11/7/2007 AMERICAN ROTARY BROOM CO. INC. 94.44 AP - 00259673 11/7/2007 ANDERSON, ELSIE 65.00 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 11 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_ REG_PORTRAI T_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Pomait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P457 Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259674 11/7/2007 AQUABIO ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES I 631.28 AP - 00259675 11/7/2007 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 3.35 AP - 00259675 1 ]/7/2007 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 3.35 AP - 00259675 11/7/2007 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 43.35 AP - 00259676 11/7/2007 ARBOR NURSERY PLUS 237.05 AP - 00259677 11/7/2007 ARTESIA SAWDUST PRODUCTS INC. 263.77 AP - 00259678 11/7/2007 ASSI SECURITY 105.00 AP - 00259678 11/7/2007 ASSI SECURITY 1,197.50 AP - 00259678 11/7/2007 ASSI SECURITY 105.00 AP - 00259679 11/7/2007 ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS INC 19,551.00 AP - 00259679 11/7/2007 ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS INC 26,390.00 AP - 00259680 11/7/2007 AT&T LONG DISTANCE 1,337.63 AP - 00259681 11/7/2007 AUFBAU CORPORATION 711.00 AP - 00259681 11/7/2007 AUFBAU CORPORATION 12,264.00 AP - 00259681 11/7/2007 AUFBAU CORPORATION 2,720.00 AP - 00259682 11/7/2007 AUTO SPECIALISTS 90.65 AP - 00259682 11/7/2007 AUTO SPECIALISTS 844.76 AP - 00259682 11/7/2007 AUTO SPECIALISTS 1,646.02 AP - 00259684 11/7/2007 BANC OF AMERICA LEASING 393.54 AP - 00259684 11/7/2007 BANC OF AMERICA LEASING 1,874.85 AP - 00259685 11/7/2007 BARNES AND NOBLE 1,831.75 AP - 00259685 11/7/2007 BARNES AND NOBLE -1,632.41 AP - 00259685 11/7/2007 BARNES AND NOBLE 77.32 AP - 00259685 11/7/2007 BARNES AND NOBLE 223.94 AP - 00259686 1 ]/7/2007 BEARD PROVENCHER AND ASSOC INC 3,480.00 AP - 00259686 11/7/2007 BEARD PROVENCHER AND ASSOC INC 6,790.00 AP - 00259687 11/7/2007 BERNELL HYDRAULICS INC 182.64 AP - 00259687 11/7/2007 BERNELL HYDRAULICS INC 296.98 AP - 00259689 11/7/2007 BIG EVENTS INC 11,945.63 AP - 00259690 11/7/2007 BLIESE, LAURA 36.44 AP - 00259690 11/7/2007 BLIESE, LAURA 36.44 AP - 00259691 11/7/2007 BLUE CROSS 144,960.81 AP - 00259692 11/7/2007 BORBON INC. 301.32 AP - 00259693 11/7/2007 BREWSTER MARBLE CO INC. 56.70 AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 1,753.14 AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 783.82 AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 3,741.64 AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 2,123.44 AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 2,203.70 AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 10,029.26 AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 5,585.02 AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 1,895.17 AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 3,179.79 AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 9,333.44 AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 14,427.06 AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 398.79 AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 2,578.97 AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 597.38 AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 12,239.35 AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 1,236.59 AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 8,340.80 AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 1,801.65 AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 2,072.87 AP - 00259694 t 1/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 7,990.33 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 12 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Pomait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P458 Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through I I/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 26,324.05 AP - 00259694 11/7/2007 BRODART BOOKS 7,380.56 AP - 00259695 11/7/2007 BURR CYCLES INC, JOHN 243.95 AP - 00259696 11/7/2007 CAL PERS LONG TERM CARE 318.57 AP - 00259697 11/7/2007 CALBO 150.00 AP - 00259698 11/7/2007 CALIFORNIA INTEGRATED SOLUTIONS 1,411.20 AP - 00259699 11/7/2007 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 27782 AP - 00259699 11/7/2007 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 78.12 AP - 00259699 11/7/2007 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 83.50 AP - 00259700 11/7/2007 CAMERON WELDING SUPPLY 37.02 AP - 00259701 11/7/2007 CANYON AIR SERVICE INC. 83.98 AP - 00259702 11/7/2007 CAR CARE & TRANSMISSION PRO 38.03 AP - 00259702 11/7/2007 CAR CARE & TRANSMISSION PRO 38.03 AP - 00259702 11/7/2007 CAR CARE & TRANSMISSION PRO 73.76 AP - 00259702 11/7/2007 CAR CARE & TRANSMISSION PRO 529.50 AP - 00259702 11/7/2007 CAR CARE & TRANSMISSION PRO 1,202.69 AP - 00259704 11/7/2007 CARRILLO, TRINA 472.50 AP - 00259705 11/7/2007 CASS CONSTRUCTION 603.75 AP - 00259706 11/7/2007 CDW GOVERNMENT INC. 2,370.52 AP - 00259706 11/7/2007 CDW GOVERNMENT INC. 64.48 AP - 00259707 11/7/2007 CENTRAL DRUGS 122.00 AP - 00259709 11/7/2007 CHAMPION AWARDS AND SPECIALTIES 45.26 AP - 00259710 11/7/2007 CHEERS LIQUOR 24.00 AP - 00259713 ] 1/7/2007 CLABBY, SANDRA 1,000.00 AP - 00259714 11/7/2007 CLARK, DEBORAH 20.41 AP - 00259714 11/7/2007 CLARK, DEBORAH 151.90 AP - 00259715 11/7/2007 CLARKE PLUMBING SPECIALTIES INC. 91 ].80 AP - 00259716 11/7/2007 CLEARWATER GRAPHICS 1,050.56 AP - 00259717 11/7/2007 CLIPPINGS HAIR DESIGNS 40.00 AP - 00259718 11/7/2007 COMBINED MARTIAL SCIENCE INC 2,589.00 AP - 00259720 11/7/2007 COPIES & INK PRINTING INC. 38.75 AP - 00259721 11/7/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 497.84 AP = 00259721 11/7/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 400.05 AP - 0025972 ] 11/7/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 53.34 AP - 00259721 11/7/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 533.40 AP - 00259721 11/7/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 66.68 AP - 00259721 11/7/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 284.48 AP - 00259721 11/7/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 533.40 AP - 00259721 ] 1/7/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 706.76 AP - 00259721 11/7/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 622.30 AP - 00259722 11/7/2007 CRIDLAND, KYLE 2].34 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 219.63 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WA"fER DISTRICT 218.30 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 218.73 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 80.23 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 331.35 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 60.28 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 134.34 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 3,318.43 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 49.64 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 26.83 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 33.48 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 30.82 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 2,590.67 Uscr: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 13 Current Date: 1 ]/28/200 Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Pomait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Resister 10/31/2007 through 1]/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount P459 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 3,760.54 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 3,252.61 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 3,476.45 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 112.15 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 69.34 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 220.06 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 93.53 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 49.64 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 72.00 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 160.21 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 101.26 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 128.29 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 294.54 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 36.14 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 114.81 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 201.26 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,046.89 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 2,861.46 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 120.31 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 114.21 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 216.97 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 377.00 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 2,993.11 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 532.18 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 3,285.71 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 36.80 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 208.38 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 443.32 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 920.79 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 975.50 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 289.22 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 232.03 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 201.01 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 77.90 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 77.89 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 309.32 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 309.31 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 250.65 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 364.60 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 122.54 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 883.30 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 145.15 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 169.52 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 185.30 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 638.58 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,290.71 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 226.53 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 177.07 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 565.43 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 150.47 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 182.44 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 65.60 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,745.57 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 96.19 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 14 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P460 Asenda Check Resister 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 66.93 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 121.46 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 286.56 AP - 00259725 ] 1/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 186.38 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 74.91 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 181.31 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 66.93 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 50.97 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 573.84 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 677.63 AP - 00259725 t 1/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,006.11 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 121.21 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 45.65 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 155.79 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,754.45 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 326.03 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 'CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 198.78 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 412.91 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 136.27 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 119.88 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 120.61 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 5,449.41 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 176.17 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 169.34 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 40.33 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 25.50 AP - 00259725 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 94.61 AP - 00259726 11/7/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 51.35 AP - 00259727 11 /7/2007 D AND K CONCRETE COMPANY 180.00 AP - 00259727 11/7/2007 D AND K CONCRETE COMPANY 690.68 AP - 00259727 11/7/2007 D AND K CONCRETE COMPANY 1,104.44 AP - 00259728 11/7/2007 DAISY WHEEL RIBBON CO INC 1,049.41 AP - 00259729 11/7/2007 DAPPER TIRE CO 1,025.55 AP - 00259729 11/7/2007 DAPPER TIRE CO 3,003.87 AP - 00259730 11/7/2007 DATA QUICK 129.50 AP - 00259731 11/7/2007 DAMS, AZIZA 35.89 AP - 00259731 11/7/2007 DAMS, AZIZA 5.34 AP - 00259732 11/7/2007 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 1,568.00 AP - 00259732 11/7/2007 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 2,062.00 AP - 00259733 11/7/2007 DMJM HARRIS 13,710.69 AP - 00259733 11/7/2007 DMJM HARRIS 42,381.81 AP - 00259734 11/7/2007 DOGS ETC. 378.00 AP - 00259735 11/7/2007 DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATION 179.16 AP - 00259735 11/7/2007 DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATION 155.24 AP - 00259735 11/7/2007 DUNK EDWARDS CORPORATION 70.15 AP - 00259736 11/7/2007 EAST COAST ENTERTAINMENT 20,000.00 AP - 00259737 11/7/2007 EFTYCHIOU, AUDREY 232.50 AP - 00259738 11/7/2007 ELLIS ENTERPRISES 1,500.00 AP - 00259738 11/7/2007 ELLIS ENTERPRISES 1,060.00 AP-00259738 11/7/2007 ELLIS ENTERPRISES 3,470.00 AP - 00259738 1 ]/7/2007 ELLIS ENTERPRISES 375.00 AP - 00259738 1 ]/7/2007 ELLIS ENTERPRISES 75.00 AP - 00259738 1 ]/7/2007 ELLIS ENTERPRISES 125.00 AP - 00259738 11/7/2007 ELLIS ENTERPRISES 160.00 User: VLOPEZ-Veronica Lopez Page: IS Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_ REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Pornait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P461 Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259738 11/7/2007 ELLIS ENTERPRISES 1,585.00 AP - 00259738 11/7/2007 ELLIS ENTERPRISES 295.00 AP - 00259738 11'/7/2007 ELLIS ENTERPRISES 330.00 AP - 00259739 1 ]/7/2007 EM SPEED AND POWER TRAINING 378.00 AP - 00259740 11/7/2007 ENTOURAGE TALENT ASSOC. FOR ROCKAPELI 16,000.00 AP - 00259741 11/7/2007 ESPINO'S COP SHOP INC 333.92 AP - 00259741 11/7/2007 ESPINO'S COP SHOP INC 1,314.53 AP - 00259741 11/7/2007 ESPINO'S COP SHOP INC 173.66 AP - 00259741 11/7/2007 ESPINO'S COP SHOP INC 173.66 AP - 00259742 11/7/2007 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 568.92 AP - 00259742 11/7/2007 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 538.36 AP - 00259742 11/7/2007 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 61.83 AP - 00259743 11/7/2007 EXPRESS BRAKE SUPPLY 30.78 AP - 00259743 11/7/2007 EXPRESS BRAKE SUPPLY 295.74 AP - 00259743 ] 1/7/2007 EXPRESS BRAKE SUPPLY 58.43 AP - 00259744 11/7/2007 FAMILY MORTGAGE & ASSOC. INC. 20.82 AP - 00259745 11/7/2007 FARRUGIA, FRANK 100.00 AP - 00259746 11/7/2007 FESTIVAL ARTIST WORLDWIDE 7,050.00 AP-00259746 11/7/2007 FESTIVAL ARTIST WORLDWIDE 3,000.00 AP - 00259747 11/7/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 558.00 AP - 00259747 11/7/2007 FINESSE PERSOI~'NEL ASSOCIATES 819.00 AP - 00259747 11/7/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 748.80 AP - 00259747 11/7/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 768.00 AP - 00259747 11/7/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 880.00 AP - 00259747 11/7/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 256.00 AP - 00259747 11/7/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 846.30 AP - 00259749 11/7/2007 FIVE STAR GAS AND GEAR 1,958.03 AP - 00259750 11/7/2007 FLUORESCO LIGHTING 64.12 AP - 00259751 11/7/2007 FOOTHILL LAWNMOWER 300.00 AP - 00259751 11/7/2007 FOOTHILL LAWNMOWER 300.00 AP - 00259751 11/7/2007 FOOTHILL LAWNMOWER 300.00 AP - 00259751 11/7/2007 FOOTHILL LAWNMOWER 14720 AP - 00259752 11/7/2007 FORD OF UPLAND INC 50.91 AP - 00259752 11/7/2007 FORD OF UPLAND INC 1,071.93 AP - 00259752 11/7/2007 FORD OF UPLAND INC 1,005.68 AP - 00259752 11/7/2007 FORD OF UPLAND INC 227.44 AP - 00259753 11/7/2007 FOREMOST SILKSCREEN AND EMBROIDERY 2,354.34 AP - 00259754 11/7/2007 FOX CROFT FARMS 1,120.00 AP - 00259755 11/7/2007 FRAZEE PAINT CENTER 85.39 AP - 00259755 11/7/2007 FRAZEE PAINT CENTER 9.54 AP - 00259756 11/7/2007 FUKUSHIMA, JiJDITH 3,349.50 AP - 00259757 11/7/2007 FULLERTON SENIOR TRAVEL 825.00 AP - 00259758 11/7/2007 G AND M BUSIIQESS INTERIORS 1,269.98 AP - 00259758 11/7/2007 G AND M BUSINESS INTERIORS 490.76 AP - 00259758 11/7/2007 G AND M BUSINESS INTERIORS 14,528.81 AP - 00259758 11/7/2007 G AND M BUSINESS INTERIORS 6,268.90 AP - 00259758 11/7/2007 G AND M BUSINESS INTERIORS 2,710.25 AP - 00259758 11/7/2007 G AND M BUSINESS INTERIORS 15,755.14 AP - 00259759 11/7/2007 GALE GROUP,THE 58.54 AP - 00259760 11/7/2007 GARCIA, VIVIAN 35.89 AP - 00259761 11/7/2007 GEOGRAPHICS 3,371.65 AP - 00259761 11/7/2007 GEOGRAPHICS 215.50 AP - 00259761. 11/7/2007 GEOGRAPHICS 855.54 AP - 00259762 11/7/2007 GOLF VENTURES WEST 11.95 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 16 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24;0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Resister 10/31/2007 through 1 U27/2007 P462 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259762 11/7/2007 GOLF VENTURES WEST -88.73 AP - 00259762 11/7/2007 GOLF VENTURES WEST 15.45 AP - 00259762 11/7/2007 GOLF VENTURES WEST 237.25 AP - 00259762 11/7/2007 GOLF VENTURES WEST 206.88 AP - 00259763 11/7/2007 GONSALVES AND SON,]OE A 3,000.00 AP - 00259764 11/7/2007 GRAINGER 17.08 AP - 00259764 11/7/2007 GRAINGER 253.96 AP - 00259764 11/7/2007 GRAINGER 74.80 AP - 00259764 11/7/2007 GRAINGER 47.38 AP - 00259764 11/7/2007 GRAINGER 17.60 AP - 00259765 ] 1/7/2007 GRANICUS INC 1,100.00 AP - 00259766 11/7/2007 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 57.47 AP - 00259766 11/7/2007 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 88.74 AP - 00259767 11/7/2007 GUZMAN, ISABEL 70.06 AP - 00259768 11/7/2007 HADCO AUTO SERVICE 50.00 AP - 00259768 11/7/2007 HADCO AUTO SERVICE 153.10 AP - 00259769 11/7/2007 HARKEY, STEPHANIE 100.00 AP - 00259770 11/7/2007 HATANAKA, MARGARET 8.00 AP - 00259771 ] 1/7/2007 HCS CUTLER STEEL CO 3.77 AP - 00259771 11/7/2007 HCS CUTLER STEEL CO 42.56 AP - 00259772 11/7/2007 HEELER ARCHITECT, JOHN 1,920.00 AP - 00259773 11/7/2007 HERITAGE PARK APARTMENTS ALTA LOMA 74.36 AP - 00259774 11/7/2007 HILLIARD JR, DONALD G. 59.17 AP - 00259774 11/7/2007 HILLIARD JR., DONALD G. 24.50 AP - 00259775 11/7/2007 HILLS PET NUTRITION SALES INC 233.17 AP - 00259777 11/7/2007 HOLDEN ARTS & ASSOCIATES 9,600.00 AP - 00259778 11/7/2007 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 692.04 AP - 00259778 11/7/2007 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 244.60 AP - 00259778 11/7/2007 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 90.00 AP - 00259778 11/7/2007 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 854.46 AP - 00259778 11/7/2007 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 163.78 AP - 00259779 11/7/2007 HOLT'S AUTO ELECTRIC INC 177.79 AP - 00259779 11/7/2007 HOLT'S AUTO ELECTRIC INC 172.40 AP - 00259780 11/7/2007 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 15.02 AP - 00259780 11!7/2007 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 123.08 AP - 00259780 11/7/2007 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 440.88 AP - 00259781 11/7/2007 HOSE MAN INC 87.32 AP - 00259782 11/7/2007 HUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN BERNARDINO VALI 200.00 AP - 00259783 11/7/2007 INLAND EMPIRE BUSINESS PARK 399.48 AP - 00259784 11/7/2007 INLAND EMPIRE TOURS AND TRANSPORTATIC 2,416.00 AP - 00259785 1 ]/7/2007 INLAA'D VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 385.00 AP - 00259785 1 ]/7/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 352.50 AP - 00259785 1 ]/7/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 111.25 AP - 00259785 11/7/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 735.00 AP - 00259785 11/7/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 710.00 AP - 00259785 11/7/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 247.50 AP - 00259785 11/7/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 102.50 AP - 00259785 11/7/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 448.75 AP - 00259785 11/7/2007 INLAND VALLEY DA[LY BULLETIN 735.00 AP - 00259785 11/7/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 902.50 AP - 00259785 11/7/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 470.00 AP - 00259785 11/7/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 385.00 AP - 00259785 11/7/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 135.00 AP - 00259785 11/7/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 286.25 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 17 Current Date: ] 1/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount P463 AP - 00259786 11/7/2007 INSIGHT PUBLIC SECTOR 2,959.97 AP - 00259786 11/7/2007 NSIGHT PUBLIC SECTOR 33.66 AP - 00259786 11/7/2007 INSIGHT PUBLIC SECTOR 33.66 AP - 00259786 11/7/2007 NSIGHT PUBLIC SECTOR 33.66 AP - 00259786 11/7/2007 NSIGHT PUBLIC SECTOR 33.66 AP - 00259786 11/7/2007 NSIGHT PUBLIC SECTOR 33.66 AP - 00259786 11/7/2007 NSIGHT PUBLIC SECTOR 33.66 AP - 00259786 11/7/2007 NSIGHT PUBLIC SECTOR 24.71 AP - 00259786 11/7/2007 INSIGHT PUBLIC SECTOR 8,462.47 AP - 00259786 11/7/2007 INSIGHT PUBLIC SECTOR 109.95 AP - 00259788 11/7/2007 NTERNATIONAL PAVEMENT SOLUTIONS 5,200.00 AP - 00259788 11/7/2007 NTERNATIONAL PAVEMENT SOLUTIONS -16,620.73 AP - 00259788 11/7/2007 NTERNATIONAL PAVEMENT SOLUTIONS 166,207.26 AP - 00259788 11/7/2007 NTERNATIONAL PAVEMENT SOLUTIONS -520.00 AP - 00259789 11/7/2007 NTERSTATE BATTERIES 211.18 AP - 00259789 ] 1/7/2007 NTERSTATE BATTERIES -168.00 AP - 00259790 11/7/2007 JAM FIRE PROTECTION INC 20.25 AP - 00259791 11/7/2007 JOBS AVAILABLE INC 238.68 AP - 00259791 11/7/2007 JOBS AVAILABLE INC 122.40 AP - 00259792 1 ]/7/2007 JONES, ROBERT 2,730.00 AP - 00259793 11/7/2007 KELLY EQUIPMENT 641.25 AP - 00259793 11/7/2007 KELLY EQUIPMENT 484,404.61 AP - 00259794 11/7/2007 KELTON, BOBBY 8.000.00 AP - 00259795 11/7/2007 KONICA MINOLTA BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 936.60 AP - 00259795 11/7/2007 KONICA MINOLTA BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 8,433.65 AP - 00259795 11/7/2007 KONICA MNOLTA BUSNESS SOLUTIONS 2.166.52 AP - 00259795 11/7/2007 KONICA MNOLTA BUSNESS SOLUTIONS 2,921.54 AP - 00259795 11/'7/2007 KONICA MINOLTA BUSNESS SOLUTIONS 1,802.17 AP - 00259796 11/7/2007 KUCERA, JENNY 200.00 AP - 00259797 11/7/2007 L AND L BUILDNG MATERIALS NC. 36.44 AP - 00259797 11/7/2007 L AND L BUILDNG MATERIALS NC. 60.00 AP - 00259798 11/7/2007 LABRIOLA, SUZANNE 50.00 AP - 00259799 11/7/2007 LAIRD CONSTRUCTION CO 225,053:90 AP - 00259799 11/7/2007 LAIRD CONSTRUCTION CO -22,505.39 AP - 00259801 11/7/2007 LASTNG IMAGES LANDSCAPE 1,200.00 AP - 00259801 1 ]/7/2007 LASTING IMAGES LANDSCAPE -120.00 AP - 00259802 ] 1/7/2007 LEE & STIRES 123.43 AP - 00259805 11/7/2007 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 162.00 AP - 00259805 11/7/2007 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 136.50 AP - 00259805 11/7/2007 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 5,935.00 AP - 00259805 11/7/2007 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 305.00 AP - 00259805 t 1/7/2007 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 3,894.00 AP - 00259807 11/7/2007 LNA 16,708.49 AP - 00259808 11/7/2007 LNDLEY FIRE PROTECTION 37.86 AP - 00259809 11/7/2007 LINGLE BROS COFFEE INC 12.Oi AP - 00259810 ] 1/7/2007 LITTLE BEAR PRODUCTIONS 300.00 AP - 00259811 11/7/2007 LOS ANGELES COCA COLA BTL CO 341.36 AP - 00259812 11/7/2007 M D STANLESS SERVICES INC 33.2] AP - 00259813 11/7/2007 M P BUILDERS 32.00 AP - 00259814 11/7/2007 MANELA, ROSARIO 31.56 AP - 00259814 11/7/2007 MANELA, ROSARIO 32.11 AP - 00259815 ] 1/7/2007 MANSOURI, IRAJ 4,800.00 AP - 00259816 11/7/2007 MARK CHRISTOPHER NC 125.78 AP - 00259816 11/7/2007 MARK CHRISTOPHER NC 942.23 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 18 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P464 A>ienda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259816 11/7/2007 MARK CHRISTOPHER INC 769.47 AP - 00259817 11/7/2007 MARSHALL PLUMBING 334.00 AP - 00259817 11/7/2007 MARSHALL PLUMBING 312.49 AP - 00259817 11/7/2007 MARSHALL PLUMBING -78.12 AP - 00259817 11/7/2007 MARSHALL PLUMBING -83.50 AP - 00259818 11/7/2007 MATTHEW BENDER AND CO. INC. 278.42 AP - 00259820 11/7/2007 MCKINLEY ELEVATOR CORP 250.00 AP - 00259821 11/7/2007 MIDWEST TAPE 229.88 AP - 00259821 11/7/2007 MIDWEST TAPE 78.96 AP - 00259822 11/7/2007 MILLER, BETTY 100.00 AP - 00259824 11/7/2007 MOUNTAIN MOTOR SPORTS 123.64 AP - 00259825 11/7/2007 MOUNTAIN VIEW GLASS AND MIRROR INC 109.14 AP - 00259826 11/7/2007 MOUNTAIN VIEW TIRE AND SERVICE INC 268.50 AP - 00259827 11/7/2007 NAPA AUTO PARTS 47.64 AP - 00259827 11/7/2007 NAPA AUTO PARTS 36.14 AP - 00259827 1 ]/7/2007 NAPA AUTO PARTS 51.36 AP - 00259827 11/7/2007 NAPA AUTO PARTS 43.51 AP - 00259827 11/7/2007 NAPA AUTO PARTS 18.78 AP - 00259827 11/7/2007 NAPA AUTO PARTS 85.84 AP - 00259827 11/7/2007 NAPA AUTO PARTS 18.72 AP - 00259827 11/7/2007 NAPA AUTO PARTS -26.71 AP - 00259828 11/7/2007 NATIONAL RECREATION AND PARK ASSOC 510.00 AP - 00259829 11/7/2007 NEW READERS PRESS 37.80 AP - 00259831 11/7/2007 NOBLE COMPANY, R J 158,903.90 AP - 00259831 11/7/2007 NOBLE COMPANY, R J -15,890.39 AP - 00259832 11/7/2007 NOWAK, JOHN 350.00 AP - 00259833 11/7/2007 O C B REPROGRAPHICS INC 508.33 AP - 00259834 11/7/2007 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CENTERS OF CALIFO 68.62 AP - 00259834 11/7/2007 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CENTERS OF CALIFO 261.21 AP - 00259834 11/7/2007 OCCUPATIONAL FIEALTH CENTERS OF CALIFO 68.62 AP - 00259834 11/7/2007 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CENTERS OF CALIFO 73.00 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 21.07 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 86.95 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 20.13 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 95.08 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 50.74 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 50.74 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 19.65 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 39.03 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 132.49 AP - 00259835 1 ]/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 25.17 AI' - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 23.62 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 20.21 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 83.66 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 347.55 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 281.60 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 281.60 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 52.80 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 34.64 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 22.17 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 58.55 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 72.74 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT ] 12.58 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 53.39 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 19 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Pomait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P465 Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 77.15 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT -3.75 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 12.52 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 46.97 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 20.84 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT -46.97 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 73.09 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 585.25 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 59.47 AP - 00259835 11/7/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 23.54 AP - 00259836 11/7/2007 ONTARIO PROSTHETIC SYSTEMS 45.00 AP - 00259837 11/7/2007 OTSUKA, DENNIS 21.00 AP - 00259838 11/7/2007 PAPA 640.00 AP - 00259839 11/7/2007 PACITTI, JOANNA 5,000.00 AP - 00259840 11/7/2007 PAGEANTRY PRODUCTIONS 8,034.76 AP - 00259841 11/7/2007 PARK PLACE PROPERTIES 12.00 AP - 00259842 11/7/2007 PARKWEST CONSTRUCTION CO 10.00 AP - 00259843 11/7/2007 PERVO PAINT CO 58.29 AP - 00259844 11/7/2007 PITASSI ARCHITECTS INC ] 1,650.07 AP - 00259844 11/7/2007 PITASSI ARCHITECTS INC 2,042.64 AP - 00259845 11/7/2007 PORT SUPPLY 1,330.38 AP - 00259846 11/7/2007 PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION INC 74.35 AP - 00259847 11/7/2007 PRE-PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC 34.20 AP - 00259848 11/7/2007 PROMOTIONS TEES & MORE 2,887.02 AP - 00259849 11/7/2007 RADIO SHACK CORP #3683 10.64 AP - 00259850 11/7/2007 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FONTANA FAMILY YM 6,983.10 AP - 00259851 11/7/2007 RANCHO SMOG CENTER 29.00 AP - 00259852 11/7/2007 RANDOM HOUSE INC 253.81 AP - 00259852 11/7/2007 RANDOM HOUSE INC 210.71 AP - 00259853 11/7/2007 RASMUSSEN, MILT 400.00 AP - 00259855 11/7/2007 RBM LOCK AND KEY SERVICE 331.87 AP - 00259856 11/7/2007 RCPFA 7,459.06 AP - 00259857 11/7/2007 RDO EQUIPMENT CO 43.11 AP - 00259858 11/7/2007 RECORDED BOOKS LLC 7.49 AP - 00259859 11/7/2007 RED WING SHOE STORE 137.37 AP - 00259860 11/7/2007 REPUBLIC ITS 712.42 AP - 00259862 ] 1/7/2007 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 330.00 AP - 00259863 1 ]/7/2007 RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY COLLEGE 30.00 AP - 00259864 11/7/2007 RMA GROUP 218.75 AP - 00259864 11/7/2007 RMA GROUP 408.00 AP - 00259865 11/7/2007 ROADWAY ENGINEERING & CONTRACTING IN 67,800.00 AP - 00259865 11/7/2007 ROADWAY ENGINEERING & CONTRACTING IN -6,780.00 AP - 00259866 11/7/2007 ROBERT HALF TECHNOLOGY 1,048.71 AP - 00259866 11/7/2007 ROBERT HALF TECHNOLOGY 672.25 AP - 00259866 11/7/2007 ROBERT HALF TECHNOLOGY 1,075.60 AP - 00259866 11/7/2007 ROBERT HALF TECHNOLOGY 1,021.82 AP - 00259866 11/7/2007 ROBERT HALF TECHNOLOGY 1,048.71 AP - 00259867 11/7/2007 RODRIGUEZ INC, R Y 645.85 AP - 00259868 11/7/2007 ROJER, IVAN M. 100.00 AP - 00259869 1 ]/7/2007 ROQUET PAVING INC 178.20 AP - 00259871 1 V7/2007 RUDY'S SIGN GRAPHICS 134.69 AP - 00259872 11/7/2007 SAFELITE GLASS CORP ] 85.40 AP - 00259872 11/7/2007 SAFELITE GLASS CORP 452.61 AP - 00259872 11/7/2007 SAFELITE GLASS CORP 504.37 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 20 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 P466 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259873 11/7/2007 SAN ANTONIO MATERIALS 131.08 AP - 00259874 11/7/2007 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 156.75 AP - 00259875 11/7/2007 SAN BERNARDINO CTY SHERIFFS DEPT 1,281.12 AP - 00259876 11/7/2007 SAN BERNARDINO CTY SHERIFFS DEPT 216.00 AP - 00259877 ] 1/7/2007 SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS 500.00 AP - 00259878 11/7/2007 SELECT HEATING AND AIR CONDITIONING 591.32 AP - 00259879 11/7/2007 SEMMATERIALS L P 216.00 AP - 00259880 11/7/2007 SHARP SEATING 2,779.25 AP - 00259881 11/7/2007 SHIELDS PH.D., ANDREA 78.40 AP - 00259882 11/7/2007 SHOETERIA 121.21 AP - 00259882 11/7/2007 SHOETERIA 169.68 AP - 00259883 11/7/2007 SHRED IT 42.50 AP - 00259883 11/7/2007 SHRED IT 21.25 AP - 00259883 11/7/2007 SHRED IT 21.25 AP - 00259885 11/7/2007 SIMPLOT PARTNERS 2,717.78 AP - 00259885 ] 1/7/2007 SIMPLOT PARTNERS -350.19 AP - 00259885 11/7/2007 SIMPLOT PARTNERS 317.86 AP - 00259885 11/7/2007 SIMPLOT PARTNERS 1,050.56 AP - 00259885 11/7/2007 SIMPLOT PARTNERS 370.66 AP - 00259886 11/7/2007 SIZZLER FAMILY STEAK HOUSE #567 97.52 AP - 00259888 11/7/2007 SOURCE GRAPHICS 176.37 AP - 00259889 11/7/2007 SOUTH COAST AQMD 315.24 AP - 00259889 11/7/2007 SOUTH COAST AQMD 99.09 AP - 00259890 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALI DJS 300.00 AP - 00259891 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.79 AP - 00259891 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 5,244.33 AP - 00259891 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 27.16 AP - 00259891 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 40.94 AP - 00259891 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 73.48 AP - 00259892 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 19,429.89 AP - 00259892 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14,992.80 AP - 00259892 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ~ 4,212.90 AP - 00259892 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 44.24 AP - 00259892 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2,727.75 AP - 00259892 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2,868.67 AP - 00259892 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12,120.96 AP - 00259892 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 181.47 AP - 00259892 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 181.47 AP - 00259892 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 44.24 AP - 00259892 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2,727.75 AP - 00259892 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2,868.67 AP - 00259892 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 4,212.90 AP - 00259892 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12,120.96 AP - 00259892 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14,992.80 AP - 00259892 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 19,429.89 AP - 00259892 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 67,583.13 AP - 00259892 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 67,583.14 AP - 00259893 11/7/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL ATHLETI~ 350.00 AP - 00259895 11/7/2007 STEINY AND COMPANY INC 1,557.87 AP - 00259895 11/7/2007 STEINY AND COMPANY INC -155.79 AP - 00259896 11/7/2007 STERLING COFFEE SERVICE 284.32 AP - 00259896 I ]/7/2007 STERLING COFFEE SERVICE 232.60 AP - 00259896 11/7/2007 STERLING COFFEE SERVICE 218.48 AP - 00259896 11/7/2007 STERLING COFFEE SERVICE 66.70 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 21 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:GK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P467 Agenda Check Reeister ]0/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259896 11/7/2007 STERLING COFFEE SERVICE 661.08 AP - 00259896 11/7/2007 STERLING COFFEE SERVICE 142.15 AP - 00259896 11/7/2007 STERLING COFFEE SERVICE 47.08 AP - 00259896 11/7/2007 STERLING COFFEE SERVICE 25.00 AP - 00259897 11/7/2007 STOVER SEED COMPANY 2,357.03 AP - 00259899 11/7/2007 SUNRISE FORD 19.] 1 AP - 00259900 11/7/2007 SUNSHINE GROWERS NURSERY INC 177.90 AP - 00259900 11/7/2007 SUNSHINE GROWERS NURSERY INC 60.56 AP - 00259901 11/7/2007 SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC 75.00 AP - 00259901 11/7/2007 SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC 75.00 AP - 00259901 11/7/2007 SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC 75.00 AP - 00259901 11/7/2007 SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC 75.00 AP - 00259902 11/7/2007 TAKASHIMA, TOSHIO 676.50 AP - 00259903 11/7/2007 TARBELL REALTORS 135.86 AP - 00259904 11/7/2007 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCTS 216.56 AP - 00259905 11/7/2007 THERMALAIR INC 16.75 AP - 00259906 11/7/2007 THOMSON GALE 27.44 AP - 00259907 11/7/2007 TJ'S FLOOR COVERING SUPPLIES INC 277.78 AP - 00259908 11/7/2007 TOMARK SPORTS INC 83.47 AP - 00259909 11/7/2007 TRADE UNION INTERNATIONAL 12,657.26 AP - 00259911 11/7/2007 TRANSPACIFIC TIRE & WHEEL INC 430.03 AP - 00259912 11/7/2007 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 2,250.00 AP - 00259912 11/7/2007 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 8,764.08 AP - 00259912 11/7/2007 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 2,669.25 AP - 00259912 11/7/2007 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 45,478.28 AP - 00259913 11/7/2007 TYPECARE 55.00 AP - 00259915 11/7/2007 UNDERGROUND TECHNOLOGY INC 517.72 AP - 00259915 11/7/2007 UNDERGROUND TECHNOLOGY INC 1,038.75 AP - 00259916 11/7/2007 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 1,000.21 AP - 00259916 11/7/2007 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 177.77 AP - 002599]6 11/7/2007 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 32.15 AP - 00259916 11/7/2007 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 88.79 AP - 00259916 11/7/2007 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 881.79 AP - 00259916 11/7/2007 UN[FIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 75.64 AP - 00259916 11/7/2007 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 146.49 AP - 00259916 11/7/2007 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 32.15 AP - 00259916 11/7/2007 UNIF[RST UNIFORM SERVICE 883.65 AP - 00259916 11/7/2007 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 77.42 AP - 00259916 11/7/2007 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 32.15 AP - 00259916 11/7/2007 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE ]46.49 AP - 00259917 11/7/2007 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA TRUSTEE FOR P, 2,550.34 AP - 00259918 11/7/2007 UNITED RENTALS NORTHWEST INC 437.73 AP - 00259919 11/7/2007 UNITED SITE SERVICES OF CA INC 217.78 AP - 00259919 11/7/2007 UNITED SITE SERVICES OF CA INC ] 83.49 AP - 00259920 11/7/2007 UNITED WAY 11.00 AP - 00259921 11/7/2007 UPS 61.39 AP - 00259922 11/7/2007 URBAN RESTORATION GROUP 125.00 AP - 00259923 11/7/2007 VAL ELECTRIC INC 71.50 AP - 00259924 11/7/2007 VCA CENTRAL ANIMAL HOSPITAL 138.88 AP - 00259925 11/7/2007 VENTURI STAFFING PARTNERS 10.02 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 3,624.75 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 88.11 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 205.92 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VER[ZON 19.59 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 22 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Pornait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P468 Agenda Check Resister 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 33.74 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 19.59 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 43.71 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 161.41 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 33.74 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 33.74 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 32.68 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 20.16 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 89.50 AP - 00259922 11/7/2007 VERIZON 19.59 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 19.59 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 89.75 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 32.69 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 49.90 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 33.84 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 19.59 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 19.59 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 32.69 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 19.59 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 19.59 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 19.59 AP - 00259927 11/7/2007 VERIZON 33.74 AP - 00259928 11/7/2007 VICTOR MEDICAL COMPANY 795.92 AP - 00259928 11/7/2007 VICTOR MEDICAL COMPANY 1,602.72 AP - 00259929 11/7/2007 VICTORIA ANIMAL HOSPITAL 200.00 AP - 00259930 11/7/2007 VILLAGE NURSERIES WHOLESALE LLC 900.56 AP - 00259931 11/7/2007 VISTA PAINT 372.60 AP - 00259931 11/7/2007 VISTA PAINT 819.72 AP - 00259932 11/7/2007 VULCAN MATERIALS COMPANY 182.10 AP - 00259932 11/7/2007 VULCAN MATERIALS COMPANY 65.45 AP - 00259933 11/7/2007 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO ] 77.10 AP - 00259933 11/7/2007 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 226.79 AP - 00259933 11/7/2007 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 563.53 AP - 00259933 11/7/2007 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 63.10 AP - 00259934 11/7/2007 WARREN & CO INC, CARL 320.63 AP - 00259935 11/7/2007 WATSON, ED 121.00 AP - 00259936 11/7/2007 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 109.04 AP - 00259938 11/7/2007 WESTERN HIGHWAY PRODUCTS INC 100.89 AP - 00259939 11/7/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 35.00 AP - 00259939 11/7/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 20.00 AP - 00259939 11/7/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 35.00 AP - 00259939 11/7/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 20.00 AP-00259939 11/7/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 20.00 AP - 00259939 11/7/2007 WESTERA' UNIVERSITY 35.00 AP-00259939 1]/7/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 35.00 AP - 00259939 11/7/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 30.00 AP - 00259939 11/7/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 35.00 AP - 00259940 11/7/2007 WESTRUX INTERNATIONAL INC 36.72 AP - 00259940 11/7/2007 WESTRUX INTERNATIONAL INC 204.82 AP - 00259941 11/7/2007 WIENERSCHNITZEL#46I 74.92 AP - 00259942 11/7/2007 WILLDAN ASSOCIATES 34,520.00 AP - 00259943 11/7/2007 WILSON AND BELL 585.37 AP - 00259944 11/7/2007 WINDOR 1NC 5,422.00 AP - 00259945 1 ]/7/2007 WITHERS & SANDGREN LTD 8,254.49 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 23 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_R EG_PORTRAIT _RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P469 At=enda Check Resister 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00259945 11/7/2007 WITHERS & SANDGREN LTD 4,371.75 AP - 00259946 11/7/2007 WSA US GUARDS CO INC 3,665.88 AP - 00259946 11/7/2007 WSA US GUARDS CO INC 6,319.62 AP - 00259946 11/7/2007 WSA US GUARDS CO INC 7,556.40 AP - 00259946 11/7/2007 WSA US GUARDS CO INC 1,851.06 AP - 00259946 11/7/2007 WSA US GUARDS CO INC 9,056.90 AP - 00259946 11/7/2007 WSA US GUARDS CO INC 4,127.00 AP - 00259946 11/7/2007 WSA US GUARDS CO INC 6,166.00 AP - 00259946 11/7/2007 WSA US GUARDS CO INC 1,986.00 AP - 00259946 _ 11/7/2007 WSA US GUARDS CO INC 7,301.00 AP - 00259946 11/7/2007 WSA US GUARDS CO INC 8,700.00 AP - 00259948 11/7/2007 ZEE MEDICAL INC 463.31 AP - 00259949 11/7/2007 ZONES CORPORATE SOLUTIONS 419.46 AP - 00259949 11/7/2007 ZONES CORPORATE SOLUTIONS 1,433.79 AP - 00259949 11/7/2007 ZONES CORPORATE SOLUTIONS 405.70 AP - 00259949 11/7/2007 ZONES CORPORATE SOLUTIONS 405.70 AP - 00259949 11/7/2007 ZONES CORPORATE SOLUTIONS 405.70 AP - 00259949 11/7/2007 ZONES CORPORATE SOLUTIONS 405.70 AP - 00259949 11/7/2007 ZONES CORPORATE SOLUTIONS 405.70 AP - 00259949 11/7/2007 ZONES CORPORATE SOLUTIONS 188.98 AP - 00259949 11/7/2007 ZONES CORPORATE SOLUTIONS 509.00 AP - 00259951 11/7/2007 US POSTMASTER 6,750.00 AP - 00259952 ] 1/8/2007 R C EMPLOYEE ACTIVITIES COMMITTEE 17,000.00 AP - 00259953 11/14/2007 25 DOLLAR ROOTER & PLUMBING CO. INC. 3,155.00 AP - 00259954 11/14/2007 ABBANI, MAHA 52.00 AP - 00259955 11/14/2007 ABLAC 207.48 AP - 00259956 11/14/2007 ABLETRONICS 181.36 AP - 00259956 11/14/2007 ABLETRONICS 21.14 AP - 00259956 11/14/2007 ABLETRONICS 143.04 AP - 00259956 11/14/2007 ABLETRONICS 23.55 AP - 00259956 11/14/2007 ABLETRONICS 8.77 AP - 00259956 11/14/2007 ABLETRONICS 102.75 AP - 00259958 11/14/2007 ADORABLE, RODNEY 500.00 AP - 00259959 11/14/2007 ALLIANCE INVESTMENT PROPERTIES 10,000.00 AP - 00259960 11/14/2007 AMERICAN EXPRESS 62.39 AP - 00259961 11/14/2007 AMTECH ELEVATOR SERVICES 219.58 AP - 00259962 11/14/2007 ASSOCIATED GROUP 2,207.59 AP-00259963 11/14/2007 AT&T 54.91 AP - 00259963 11/14/2007 AT&T 54.91 AP - 00259963 11/14/2007 AT&T 3,348.93 AP - 00259964 11/14/2007 AVANTE INC. 100.00 AP - 00259965 11/14/2007 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 28.75 AP - 00259966 11/14/2007 BANC OF AMERICA LEASING 8,948.44 AP - 00259967 11/14/2007 BANC OF AMERICA LEASING 195.03 AP - 00259967 11/14/2007 BANC OF AMERICA LEASING 390.82 AP - 00259968 11/14/2007 BERKET, MINHAJ 250.00 AP - 00259969 11/14/2007 BOUVARD, MARIA 987.00 AP - 00259970 11/14/2007 BRANSKY, JODI 32.00 AP - 00259971 11/14/2007 BRODART BOOKS 3,081.22. AP - 00259971 11/14/2007 BRODART BOOKS 684.58 AP - 00259971 11/14/2007 BRODART BOOKS 19.44 AP - 00259971 11/14/2007 BRODART BOOKS 17.46 AP - 00259971 11/14/2007 BRODART BOOKS 76.17 AP - 00259971 11/14/2007 BRODART BOOKS 76.17 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 24 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Pornait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA At=enda Check Re>?ister 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount P470 AP - 00259971 11/14/2007 BRODART BOOKS 24.23 AP - 00259971 11/14/2007 BRODART BOOKS 46.57 AP - 00259971 11/14/2007 BRODART BOOKS 148.53 AP - 00259971 11/14/2007 BRODART BOOKS 1,313.15 AP - 00259972 11/14/2007 BROOKE INSURANCE & FINANCIAL SERVICES 7.80 AP - 00259973 11/14/2007 BUCKNAM AND ASSOCIATES 828.00 AP - 00259974 11/14/2007 BURGA, ARTURO 200.00 AP - 00259975 11/14/2007 BYRNE, DAVID 99.00 AP - 00259976 11/14/2007 C I P CONSTRUCTION 500.00 AP - 00259977 11/14/2007 C P CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 1,000.00 AP - 00259978 11/]4/2007 CACEO 65.00 AP-00259978 11/14/2007 CACEO 65.00 AP - 00259979 11/14/2007 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 4,714.00 AP - 00259980 11/14/2007 CALIFORNIA DELTA MECHANICAL 20.00 AP - 00259981 11/14/2007 CALIFORNIA FRANCHISE TAX BOARD 47.58 AP - 00259982 11/14/2007 CALIFORNIA FRANCHISE TAX BOARD 25.00 AP - 00259983 1 ]/14/2007 CALIFORNIA FRANCHISE TAX BOARD 372.03 AP - 00259984 11/14/2007 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 125.00 AP - 00259985 11/14/2007 CAMASTRA, MARY ANN 379.00 AP - 00259986 11/14/2007 CAPCA 500.00 AP - 00259987 11/14/2007 CARLS JR RESTAURANT NO 236 29.32 AP - 00259988 11/14/2007 CARRIAGE ESTATES III LLC 10,000.00 AP - 00259989 11/14/2007 CASK N CLEAVER 34.00 AP - 00259990 11/14/2007 CENTRAL CITIES SIGNS INC 48.49 AP - 00259990 11/14/2007 CENTRAL CITIES SIGNS INC 75.43 AP - 00259990 11/14/2007 CENTRAL CITIES SIGNS INC ~ 282.84 AP - 00259991 11/14/2007 CLEMENT COMMUNICATIONS INC 230.55 AP - 00259992 11/14/2007 COATS, TONYA 250.00 AP - 00259993 11/14/2007 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS ] 1,422.30 AP - 00259994 11/14/2007 CORNELISON, DENISE 20.00 AP - 00259995 11/14/2007 COUNSELING TEAM INTERNATIONAL, THE 4,850.00 AP - 00259996 11/14/2007 CREATIVE MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS INC 250.00 AP - 00259997 11/14/2007 CRIDLAND, KYLE 27.16 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 128.59 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 332.93 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 3,124.53 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,514.15 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,125.79 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 920.97 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,068.60 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 624.40 AP - Op259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 2,341.51 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 31.38 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 48.11 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 226.53 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 231.85 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 198.60 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 154.71 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 766.69 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 404.50 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,617.73 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 706.39 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 66.93 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 136.57 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 25 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Pornait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount P471 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 181.06 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 70.92 AP - 00259999 ] 1/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 125.63 AP - 00259999 ] 1/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 178.83 AP - 00259999 11/]4/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 90.87 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 536.60 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 2,203.09 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 4,490.31 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 152.80 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 317.65 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 90.67 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 472.58 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 45.45 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 149.39 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,585.54 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 197.02 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,274.75 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 935.60 AP-00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGAVALLEYWATERDISTRICT 1,]55.05 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 834.52 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 574.99 AP - 00259999 11/14/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 18.40 AP - 00260000 11/14/2007 DELTA DENTAL 37,965.69 AP - 00260002 11/14/2007 DUNK EDWARDS CORPORATION 208.84 AP - 00260003 11/14/2007 DUNK, ANN MARIE 806.40 AP - 00260004 11/14/2007 EASTERLING, RAY 25.00 AP - 00260005 11/14/2007 EDFUND 65.08 AP - 00260006 11/14/2007 EMPIRE LINE-X 541.63 AP - 00260007 11/14/2007 ENGLE, COLLEEN 60.00 AP - 00260008 11/14/2007 ESGIL CORPORATION 8,753.09 AP - 00260009 11/14/2007 EXPERIAN 50.00 AP - 0026D010 11/14/2007 F & F LLC 258,691.70 AP - 00260011 11/14/2007 F & F LLC 180,152.05 AP - 00260012 11/14/2007 F & F LLC 131,115.08 AP - 00260013 11/14/2007 F & F LLC 22.739.87 AP - 00260014 11/14/2007 FASTENAL COMPANY 14.45 AP - 00260015 11/14/2007 FIEDLER, MARK 15.00 AP - 00260016 11/14/2007 FILARSKY AND WATT S62.S0 AP - 00260017 11/14/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 748.80 AP - 00260017 11/14/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 880.00 AP - 00260017 11/]4/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 768.00 AP - 00260017 11/14/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES '710.40 AP - 00260017 11/14/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 880.00 AP - 00260017 11/14/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 576.00 AP - 00260017 11/14/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 802.90 AP - 00260018 11/14/2007 GARCIA, MARIO 10.00 AP - 00260019 11/14/2007 GENENCON 3,196.64 AP - 00260019 11/14/2007 GENENCON 803.36 AP - 00260020 1 ]/14/2007 GOMEZ, LILIANA 50.42 AP - 00260020 11/14/2007 GOMEZ, LILIANA 34.00 AP - 00260021 1 ]/14/2007 GRAINGER 27.91 AP - 00260022 11/14/2007 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY 250.00 AP - 00260023 11/14/2007 HALL, NICOLE 83.36 AP - 00260024 ] 1/14/2007 HAMPTON, CINDY 200.00 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 26 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P472 Asenda Check Resister 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Dale Vendor Name Amount AP - 00260025 11/14/2007 HARRIS, MARION 32.00 AP - 00260026 11/14/2007 HAY, SHARYN 105.00 AP - 00260027 11/14/2007 HC VINEYARD LLC .116,126.76 AP - 00260028 11/14/2007 HENRI SPECIALTIES CO INC. 25.81 AP - 00260029 11/14/2007 HOBBS, RUSSELL 5.50 AP - 00260030 11/14/2007 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 169.97 AP - 00260030 11/14/2007 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 108.83 AP - 00260030 11/14/2007 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 855.00 AP - 00260031 11/14/2007 HOSE MAN INC 74.08 AP - 00260032 11/14/2007 HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 43.31 AP - 00260032 11/14/2007 HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 140.00 AP - 00260032 11/14/2007 HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 100.76 AP - 00260032 11/14/2007 HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 23.97 AP - 00260034 11/]4/2007 INLAND EMPIRE TOURS AND TRANSPORTATIC 929.50 AP - 00260034 11/14/2007 INLAND EMPIRE TOURS AND TRANSPORTATIC 1,948.00 AP - 00260035 11/14/2007 INLAND FAIR HOUSING AND MEDIATION 15.00 AP - 00260036 11/14/2007 INLAND PRESORT & MAILING SERVICES 66.91 AP - 00260036 11/14/2007 INLAND PRESORT & MAILING SERVICES 90.97 AP - 00260037 11/14/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 1,372.50 AP - 00260037 11/14/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 727.50 AP - 00260037 11/14/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 740.00 AP - 00260037 11/14/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 230.00 AP - 00260037 11/14/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 82.50 AP - 00260037 11/14/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 805.00 AP - 00260037 11/14/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 745.00 AP - 00260037 11/14/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 303.75 AP - 00260037 11/14/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 1,385.00 AP - 00260037 11/14/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 775.00 AP - 00260037 11/14/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 105.00 AP - 00260037 11/14/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 326.25 AP - 00260037 1 ]/14/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 157.50 AP - 00260037 11/14/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 1,472.50 AP - 00260037 11/14/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 757.50 AP - 00260037 11/14/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 822.50 AP - 00260037 11/14/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 163.75 AP - 00260037 11/14/2007 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 120.00 AP - 00260038 11/14/2007 JACOBS, ROCIO 52.00 AP - 00260039 11/14/2007 JONES & ASSOCIATES, DIANNE 363.00 AP - 00260040 11/14/2007 JONES, CORDOLYN 250.00 AP - 00260041 11/14/2007 K K WOODWORKING 64.65 AP - 00260042 11/14/2007 KB HOME 1,000.00 AP - 00260044 11/14/2007 KLUZ, KAROL 250.00 AP - 00260045 11/14/2007 KOA CORPORATION 25,019.00 AP - 00260046 11/14/2007 L S A ASSOCIATES INC 1,785.00 AP - 00260047 11/14/2007 LANCE SOLL AND LUNGHARD 21,050.00 AP - 00260047 11/14/2007 LANCE SOLL AND LUNGHARD 2,200.00 AP - 00260048 11/14/2007 LANGSTON, JIMMY 250.00 AP - 00260049 11/14/2007 LEWIS INVESTMENT COMPANY LLC 66,221.73 AP - 00260051 11/14/2007 LITTLE BEAR PRODUCTIONS 250.00 AP - 00260052 11/14/2007 LOPEZ, LIDIA 445.00 AP - 00260053 11/14/2007 LOPEZ, MARL4 24.00 AP - 00260054 11/14/2007 LOS ANGELES FREIGHTLINER 53.30 AP - 00260054 11/14/2007 LOS ANGELES FREIGHTLINER 82.30 AP - 00260055 11/14/2007 LOS OSOS BAND BOOSTERS 150.00 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 27 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 P473 Check No. Check Dale Vendor Name Amount AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 21.03 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 5.00 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 8.10 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 33.89 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 292.65 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 233.28 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 55.93 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 50.13 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 155.86 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 44.38 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 6.10 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 9.68 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 94.32 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 5.69 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 45.19 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 322.00 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 47.50 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 21.47 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES IN'C. 39.82 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. ~ 263.11 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. -39.82 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 81.97 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 644.35 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 13.98 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 15.80 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 41.58 AP - 00260057 11/]4/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 6.87 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 20.77 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 23.56 AP - 00260057 11/]4/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 2.98 AP - 00260057 11/]4/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 16.58 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 33.92 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 41.1 ] AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 111.37 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 8.59 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 21.49 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 50.00 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 56.40 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 0.45 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 17.22 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 18.04 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 46.05 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 39.16 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 59.90 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 110.69 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 142.23 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 9.97 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 7.18 AP - 00260057 11/14/2007 LOWES COMPANIES INC. 64.43 AP - 00260059 11/14/2007 LUCERO, MANUEL 50.00 AP - 00260060 11/14/2007 M D DIET 50.03 AP - 00260061 11/14/2007 MAIN STREET SIGNS 210.11 AP - 00260061 11/14/2007 MAIN STREET SIGNS 510.20 AP - 00260061 11/14/2007 MAIN STREET SIGNS 969.75 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 28 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 P474 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00260061 11/14/2007 MAN STREET SIGNS 224.12 AP - 00260061 11/14/2007 MAN STREET SIGNS 929.34 AP - 00260063 11/14/2007 MARK CHRISTOPHER NC 110.99 AP - 00260063 ] 1/14/2007 MARK CHRISTOPHER NC 61.42 AP - 00260064 11/14/2007 MATERIAL HANDLNG SUPPLY NC 106.47 AP - 00260065 11/14/2007 MATHIS AND ASSOCIATES 325.00 AP - 00260066 11/14/2007 MC WIL SPORTS SURFACE INC 4,700.00 AP - 00260067 11/14/2007 MCLNTOSH AICP, ANNE BROWNNG 862.50 AP - 00260068 11/14/2007 MICHAEL, L. DENNIS 101.37 AP - 00260069 11/14/2007 MIDDLE RIDGE NC 5,312.50 AP - 00260069 11/14/2007 MIDDLE RIDGE NC 4,406.25 AP - 00260070 11/14/2007 MIDWEST TAPE 485.82 AP - 00260070 11/14/2007 MIDWEST TAPE 243.93 AP - 00260071 11/14/2007 MILLER, TONY 84.00 AP-00260071 11/]4/2007 MILLER, TONY 944.15 AP - 00260072 11/14/2007 MNANO, FRANK 600.00 AP - 00260073 11/14/2007 MITY LITE NC. ],068.12 AP - 00260074 11/14/2007 MONARREZ, MARISELA 111.95 AP - 00260075 11/14/2007 MSA 07 20.00 AP - 00260076 11/14/2007 NATIONAL BUSNESS INSTITUTE 389.00 AP - 00260077 ] 1/14/2007 NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RENTALS NC 114.00 AP - 00260077 11/14/2007 NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RENTALS NC 114.00 AP - 00260077 11/14/2007 NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RENTALS NC 114.00 AP - 00260078 11/14/2007 NESBITT, NICOLE 64.00 AP - 00260079 11/14/2007 NESTOR TRAFFIC SYSTEMS 7,500.00 AP - 00260080 ] 1/14/2007 NEW JERUSALEM CHURCH 250.00 AP - 00260084 11/14/2007 O C B REPROGRAPHICS NC 258.60 AP - 00260085 11/14/2007 OCASSE-PDC 30.00 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 8.43 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 136.47 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 132.18 AP - 00260087 ] 1/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 17.36 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 49.63 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 5.02 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 50.30 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 140.41 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 102.41 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 19.85 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 344.39 AP - 00260087 11/]4/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 122.96 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 26.66 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 21.30 AP - 00260087 11/]4/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 83.86 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 174.54 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 17.51 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 252.45 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 2.64 AP - 00260087 ] 1/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 17.88 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 415.56 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 184.83 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 130.77 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 17.09 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 287.77 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 384.69 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 29 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Pomait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P475 Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 64.09 AP - 00260087 11/]4/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 425.81 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 2,799.78 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 34.79 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 19.65 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT -12.28 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 29.34 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 254.48 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 198.77 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 23.26 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 182.33 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 67.87 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 1,007.48 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 163.37 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 23.96 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 16.11 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 21.51 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 603.68 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 95.68 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 4.79 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 284.63 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 324.62 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 30.98 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 271.17 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT l OS.44 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 66.62 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT -10.47 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 10.47 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 32.26 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 10.38 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 9.78 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 74.07 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 36.72 AP - 00260087 ] 1/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 67.87 AP - 00260087 1 ]/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 5.08 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 35.14 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT -5.08 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 97.72 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 137.65 AP - 00260087 11/14/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 213.15 AP - 00260088 11/14/2007 OFFICE TEAM 276.25 AP - 00260090 11/14/2007 ONESOURCE DISTRIBUTORS INC. 184.88 AP - 00260090 ] 1/14/2007 ONESOURCE DISTRIBUTORS INC. 730.73 AP - 00260090 1 ]/]4/2007 ONESOURCE DISTRIBUTORS INC. 8.89 AP - 00260090 ] 1/14/2007 ONESOURCE DISTRIBUTORS INC. 913.53 AP - 00260090 11/14/2007 ONESOURCE DISTRIBUTORS Ib'C. 36.05 AP - 00260091 11/14/2007 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 3.12 AP - 00260091 11/14/2007 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 4.30 AP - 00260091 11/14/2007 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 10.40 AP - 00260092 1 ]/]4/2007 ORONA, PATRICIA 105.00 AP - 00260092 11/14/2007 ORONA, PATRICIA 70.00 AP - 00260092 11/14/2007 ORONA, PATRICIA 200.00 AP - 00260093 11/14/2007 OTSUKA, DENNIS 85.00 AP - 00260093 11/14/2007 OTSUKA, DENNIS 100.00 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 30 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Pomait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P476 Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00260094 ] 1/14/2007 OWEN ELECTRIC INC 73.05 AP - 00260094 11/14/2007 OWEN ELECTRIC INC 1,982.58 AP - 00260094 11/14/2007 OWEN ELECTRIC INC 72.62 AP - 00260095 11/14/2007 PAL CAMPAIGN 42.00 AP - 00260096 11/14/2007 PARMA 290.00 AP - 00260097 1 ]/14/2007 PARTIES UNLIMITED 965.25 AP - 00260098 11/14/2007 PASMA 75.00 AP - 00260099 11/14/2007 PBS&J INC 18,430.98 AP - 00260100 11/14/2007 PEACOCK SYSTEMS 85.00 AP - 00260100 11/14/2007 PEACOCK SYSTEMS 85.00 AP - 00260100 11/14/2007 PEACOCK SYSTEMS 85.00 AP - 00260100 11/]4/2007 PEACOCK SYSTEMS 85.00 AP - 00260100 11/14/2007 PEACOCK SYSTEMS 170.00 AP - 00260100 11/14/2007 PEACOCK SYSTEMS 170.00 AP-00260]00 11/14/2007 PEACOCK SYSTEMS 62.50 AP - 00260100 11/14/2007 PEACOCK SYSTEMS 170.00 AP - 00260100 11/14/2007 PEACOCK SYSTEMS 310.32 AP - 00260101 11/]4/2007 PEP BOYS 10.31 AP - 00260102 11/14/2007 PERSPECTIVE LANDSCAPING INC 65.00 AP - 00260103 11/14/2007 PETERMAN LUMBER INC 591.60 AP - 00260104 ] 1/14/2007 PIEPHO, RICHARD 105.00 AP - 00260105 11/14/2007 PITNEY BOWES 206.88 AP - 00260106 11/14/2007 PMI 1,876.10 AP - 00260107 11/14/2007 POMA DISTRIBUTING CO 14,210.72 AP - 00260107 11/14/2007 POMA DISTRIBUTING CO 10,720.36 AP - 00260108 11/]4/2007 PRE-PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC 277.89 AP - 00260109 11/14/2007 PREFERRED BUSINESSES OF AMERICA 2,500.00 AP - 00260110 11/14/2007 PRIDE LAUNDRY SYSTEMS INC 96.50 AP - 00260111 11/14/2007 PRINCETON REVIEW, THE 60.00 AP - 00260112 11/14/2007 RANCHO CUCAMONGA CHAMBER OF COMMEI 200.00 AP - 00260113 11/14/2007 RANCHO ETIWANDA 685 LLC 121,210.00 AP - 00260114 11/14/2007 RANCHO PLAZA 5,800.00 AP - 00260115 11/14/2007 RAULS AUTO TRIM INC 18.00 AP - 00260116 11/14/2007 RED WING SHOE STORE 200.00 AP - 00260117 11/14/2007 RELIABLE GRAPHICS 137.38 AP - 002601 ] 8 11/14/2007 RHODES, KAREN 45.00 AP - 00260120 11/14/2007 RICHENBERGER, DONNA 52.00 AP - 00260121 11/14/2007 RIGHT START #48, THE 120.00 AP - 00260122 11/14/2007 RIVERA, GEORGE 22.31 AP - 00260123 11/14/2007 RIVORD, KIM 100.00 AP - 00260124 11/14/2007 ROBLES SR, RAUL P 65.00 AP - 00260124 11/]4/2007 ROBLES SR, RAUL P 147.50 AP - 00260125 11/]4/2007 RODGERS, F 306.00 AP - 00260126 11/14/2007 RODRIGUEZ INC, R Y 240.00 AP - 00260127 11/14/2007 RUBIQ RONDA 105.00 AP - 00260129 11/14/2007 SAFELITE GLASS CORP 185.40 AP - 00260130 11/14/2007 SAMPLES, KRISTY 54.32 AP - 00260130 11/14/2007 SAMPLES, KRISTY 58.20 AP - 00260131 11/14/2007 SAN ANTONIO MATERIALS 121.95 AP - 00260132 11/14/2007 SAN BERNARDINO CTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 47,291.25 AP - 00260133 t 1/14/2007 SAN BERNARDINO CTY SHERIFFS DEPT 2,081,817.75 AP - 00260133 11/14/2007 SAN BERNARDINO CTY SHERIFFS DEPT 27,651.25 AP - 00260133 11/14/2007 SAN BERA'ARDINO CTY SHERIFFS DEPT 205.00 AP - 00260135 11/14/2007 SCHL4VONE, RANDALL 250.00 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 31 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_R EG_PORTRAIT _RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Pomait Layou[ Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P477 Agenda Check Resister 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Dale Vendor Name Amount AP - 00260136 11/14/2007 SCMAF -INLAND VALLEYS 1,650.00 AP - 00260137 11/14/2007 SCOTT, DIANA 375.00 AP - 00260138 11/14/2007 SERRANO, MARIA 22.00 AP - 00260139 11/14/2007 SHERIFFS COURT SERVICES 250.00 AP - 00260140 11/14/2007 SHOUP, CARRIE 48.00 AP - 00260141 11/14/2007 SHUGART, LUCIA 198.00 AP-00260142 11/14/2007 SIEMENS, VIOLA 10.00 AP - 00260143 11/14/2007 SIMPLOT PARTNERS 4,913.40 AP - 00260144 11/14/2007 SIR SPEEDY 10.78 AP - 00260145 11/14/2007 SKIP BLILA SIGNS 125.00 AP - 00260146 11/14/2007 SMITH, TAMMY 41.00 AP - 00260147 11/14/2007 SOLOMON, LASHONDA 624.00 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 21.82 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 18.46 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 30.84 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 596.66 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 308.75 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.90 AP - 00260]53 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.02 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.36 AP - 00260153 11/]4/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.10 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.05 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 19.22 AP - 00260]53 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 391.58 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 11.59 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.61 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 225.43 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 39.53 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 23.13 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.11 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.82 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 48.24 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 535.60 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 808.98 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 37.35 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ED[SON 17.66 AP - 00260153 ~ 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.90 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.81 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.38 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.90 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 83.63 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.05 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ] 6.95 AP - 00260153 ] 1/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTFERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 37.00 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 116.70 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.49 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 68.51 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.22 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.90 AP - 00260153 ] 1/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.90 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 32 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount P478 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 18.15 AP - 002601 S3 ] 1/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.82 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.97 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.08 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.50 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 108.78 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 81.60 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.90 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHEIL'V CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 00260153 l 1/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.49 AP - 002601 S3 ] 1/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON SS.49 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 122.06 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 227.13 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 108.24 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 27.58 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNL4 EDISON 21.29 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.36 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 0.02 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 002601 S3 ] 1/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.81 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 69.29 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 6,102.58 AP - 002601 S3 1 ]/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 93.21 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 1,068.16 AP - 00260153 1 ]/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 58.69 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 23.72 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.82 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 31.90 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON S0.4S AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 72.00 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 31.22 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 59.73 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 129.25 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.82 AP - 002601 S3 t 1/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 41.80 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 43.60 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.22 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.90 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 00260153 11/]4/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 19.27 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 122.53 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON S0.7S AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 581.89 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.65 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 159.01 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 38.48 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 65.78 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 33 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA p47g Agenda Check Resister 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date' Vendor Name Amoun[ AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.52 AP - 002601 S3 ] 1/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.03 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 47.51 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNL4 EDISON 17.19 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNL4 EDISON 17.03 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 117.27 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 88.15 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 152.1 S AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNL4 EDISON 22.82 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNL4 EDISON 17.05 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 91.78 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ]6.02 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 28.15 AP - 00260153 11/]4/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNL4 EDISON ],030.94 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNL4 EDISON 88.81 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.95 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.09 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.50 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNL4 EDISON 15.87 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 66.49 AP - 00260153 11/]4/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 28.13 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 47.77 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 1722 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 8.72 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 74.88 AP - 00260153 ] ]/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 80.OS AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.90 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 97.95 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.82 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ] 6.50 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 22.23 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNL4 EDISON 42.73 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 95.76 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNL4 EDISON 22.54 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNL4 EDISON 16,468.01 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 38.04 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 19.82 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 20.07 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 97.98 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 122.31 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 36.87 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 70.72 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 25.02 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNL4 EDISON 5,196.58 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNL4 EDISON 84.64 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 30.45 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFOILNL4 EDISON 16.38 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.22 AP - 00260153 1 ]/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 79.01 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 93.79 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.90 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 115.03 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 34 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P480 Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.05 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 28.37 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 51.39 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 50.06 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.35 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 91.59 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.90 AP - 00260153 1 ]/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.27 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 83.95 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.02 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 110.84 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 121.45 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.96 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.36 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 67.50 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 104.08 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.82 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.90 AP - 00260153 11/]4/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNL4 EDISON 16.50 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.14 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.81 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.30 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.50 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.49 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 61.02 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 51.25 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 00260153 ] 1/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 76.21 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 23.78 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 9].37 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 27.14 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.81 AP - 002601 S3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.87 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 68.54 AP - 00260li3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 52.74 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHEIN CALIFORNIA EDISON 90.62 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 23.55 AP - 00260li3 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON S9.OS AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.35 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.49 AP - 00260153 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 9,570.55 AP - 00260153 1 !/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 4,659.81 AP - 00260li4 11/14/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL ATHLETIC 25.00 AP - 002601 S5 11/14/2007 SOUTHLAND SPORTS OFFICIALS 840.00 AP - 00260156 11/14/2007 SPAGNOLO, SAM 156.85 AP - 00260157 11/14/2007 SPARKLETTS 19.49 AP-00260158 11/14/2007 SPECTRA COMPANY 4,107.33 AP - 00260158 11/14/2007 SPECTRA COMPANY 2,752.00 AP - 00260159 11/14/2007 SPENCER, MILLICENT 70.00 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 35 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P481 Agenda Check Resister 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00260161 11/14/2007 STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT 179.00 AP - 00260162 11/14/2007 STEINY AND COMPANY INC 10,991.15 AP - 00260162 11/14/2007 STEIIJY AND COMPANY INC ]0,143.95 AP - 00260162 11/14/2007 STEINY AND COMPANY INC 15,425.00 AP - 00260162 11/14/2007 STEINY AND COMPANY INC 8,641.97 AP - 00260162 11/14/2007 STEINY AND COMPANY INC -1,099.11 AP - 00260162 11/14/2007 STEINY AND COMPANY INC -1,542.50 AP - 00260162 11/14/2007 STEINY AND COMPANY INC -1,014.40 AP - 00260162 11/14/2007 STEINY AND COMPANY INC -864.20 AP - 00260163 1 ]/14/2007 STOFA, JOSEPH 13.00 AP - 00260164 11/14/2007 STONE, MINOR 25.00 AP - 00260165 11/14/2007 SUNGARD BI TECH INC 1,125.00 AP - 00260166 11/14/2007 SUNRISE ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY 3,500.00 AP - 00260167 11/14/2007 SWAN POOLS 197.54 AP - 00260168 11/14/2007 TAO D D S INC, GEORGE 10.00 AP - 00260169 ] 1/14/2007 TEBO TILE AND STONE INC 61.79 AP - 00260170 11/14/2007 THOMPSON, PEGGY 65.00 AP - 00260171 11/14/2007 TILE CRAFT 17.29 AP - 00260172 1 ]/14/2007 TULAO, ADRIENNE 500.00 AP -00260173 11/14/2007 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 1,130.19 AP - 00260173 11/14/2007 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 34.30 AP - 00260173 11/14/2007 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 72.57 AP - 00260173 11/14/2007 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 148.64 AP - 00260174 11/14/2007 UNITED WAY 329.82 AP - 00260175 11/14/2007 UPS 40.39 AP - 00260175 11/14/2007 UPS 59.42 AP - 00260176 11/14/2007 VANANTWERP, JAMES 105.00 AP - 00260177 11/14/2007 VEND U COMPANY 86.03 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 67.44 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 1,402.00 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 136.11 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 45.06 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 94.67 AP-00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 33.75 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 33.75 AP-00260]79 11/14/2007 VERIZON 68.44 AP-00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 89.50 AP-00260]79 11/14/2007 VERIZON 33.75 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 89.50 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 89.50 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 89.50 AP - 00260179 1 ]/14/2007 VERIZON 57.00 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 32.70 AP - 00260 ] 79 11/14/2007 VERIZON 111.67 AP - 00260179 11/]4/2007 VERIZON 19.60 AP-00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 32.70 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 33.74 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON ]9.60 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 34.24 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 31.72 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 89.51 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 19.60 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 33.75 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 32.70 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 36 Current Date: 11/28/200 ReportCK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P482 Asenda Check Resister 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 33.88 AP-00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 33.74 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 34.38 AP-00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 359.OS AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 89.51 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 146.70 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 89.50 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 32.69 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 118.13 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 32.70 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 89.75 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 19.60 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 19.60 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 88.91 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 33.74 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 89.50 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 89.51 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 89.50 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 89.51 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 89.51 AP - 00260179 1 ]/14/2007 VERIZON 89.51 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 94.67 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 32.69 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 33.74 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 200.90 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 39.35 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 129.41 AP-00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 35.63 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 33.75 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 89.51 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 89.50 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 89.51 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 176.76 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 19.60 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 19.17 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 21.46 AP - 00260179 ] 1/14/2007 VERIZON 89.51 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 32.69 AP - 00260179 11/14/2007 VERIZON 356.77 AP - 00260180 11/14/2007 VORTEX INDUSTRIES INC 224.95 AP - 00260181 11/14/2007 WAINWRIGHT, JANICE RODGERS 200.00 AP - 00260182 11/14/2007 WALKER, ANDREW 100.00 AP - 00260183 11/14/2007 WALKER, JANENE 100.00 AP - 00260184 11/14/2007 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 10.84 AP - 00260184 ] 1/14/2007 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 177.10 AP - 00260184 11/14/2007 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 226.79 AP - 00260185 11/14/2007 WASHINGTON, JOSEPH 200.00 AP - 00260186 11/14/2007 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 563.53 AP - 00260186 11/14/2007 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY ~ 63.10 AP - 00260186 11/14/2007 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 218.09 AP - 00260187 11/14/2007 WEST END MATERIAL SUPPLY 46.75 AP - 00260187 11/14/2007 WEST END MATERIAL SUPPLY 104.72 AP - 00260188 11/14/2007 WEST PAYMENT CENTER 147.00 AP - 00260189 11/14/2007 WEST, DENNIS 222.50 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 37 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P483 Agenda Check Res=ister 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00260190 11/]4/2007 WILLDAN ASSOCIATES 3,146.06 AP - 00260190 ] 1/14/2007 WILLDAN ASSOCIATES 3,146.06 AP -00260191 11/14/2007 WL ROUTE 66 ASSOCIATES LLC 1,000.00 AP - 00260192 1 ]/14/2007 WONDER BREAD HOSTESS CAKE 83.35 AP - 00260193 11/14/2007 WORD MILL PUBLISHING 700.00 AP - 00260194 ] ]/14/2007 WREN, DON 50.00 AP - 00260195 11/14/2007 YALE CHASE MATERIALS HANDLING INC 207.43 AP - 00260196 11/14/2007 YUCKOS 1,869.00 AP - 00260197 11/14/2007 ZUVIA, MARLENE 88.00 AP - 00260198 11/15/2007 HARPER, JORDAN 1,408.13 AP - 00260200 11/21/2007 25 DOLLAR ROOTER & PLUMBING CO. INC. 990.00 AP - 00260201 11/21/2007 A AND R TIRE SERVICE 2,358.07 AP - 00260202 11/21/2007 A&V SOFTBALL 2,599.00 AP - 00260203 11/21/2007 ABC LOCKSMITHS 33.94 AP - 00260203 11/21/2007 ABC LOCKSMITHS 5.39 AP - 00260204 11/21/2007 ABLAC 16.39 AP - 00260205 11/21/2007 ACCOMODATING IDEAS INC. 296.20 AP - 00260206 11/21/2007 ADDINGTON, MATTHEW 38.00 AP - 00260207 11/21/2007 ADOBE ANIMAL HOSPITAL 250.00 AP - 00260208 11/21/2007 ADT SECURITY SERVICES INC 186.64 AP - 00260209 11/21/2007 ADVANCED UTILITY SYSTEMS CORP. 3,000.00 AP - 00260210 11/21/2007 ALTA FIRE EQUIPMENT CO 17.00 AP - 002602] 1 11/21/2007 AMSTERDAM PRINTING AND LITHO 743.72 AP - 00260211 11/21/2007 AMSTERDAM PRINTING AND LITHO 114.01 AP - 00260212 11/21/2007 APPLIED METERING TECHNOLOGIES INC 7,141.75 AP - 00260213 11/21/2007 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 3.35 AP - 00260213 11/21/2007 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 3.35 AP - 00260214 11/21/2007 ARBOR NURSERY PLUS 500.00 AP - 00260214 11/21/2007 ARBOR NURSERY PLUS 326.44 AP - 00260215 11/21/2007 ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP 117.71 AP - 00260215 11/21/2007 ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP 417.02 AP - 00260216 11/21/2007 ARCHIVE MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC 676.82 AP - 00260217 ] 1/21/2007 ARIAS, LORRAINE 15.00 AP - 00260218 11/21/2007 ASPA 100.00 AP - 00260219 ] 1 /21/2007 AT&T ] 8.29 AP - 00260220 11/21/2007 AUFBAU CORPORATION 4,363.50 AP - 00260220 11/21/2007 AUFBAU CORPORATION 5,628.00 AP - 00260220 11/21/2007 AUFBAU CORPORATION 13,528.00 AP - 00260220 11/21/2007 AUFBAU CORPORATION 1,000.00 AP - 00260221 11/21/2007 AUTO RESTORATORS INC 210.00 AP - 00260221 11/21/2007 AUTO RESTORATORS INC 1,292.55 AP - 00260222 11/21/2007 AVILA, ISSIAH 1,000.00 AP - 00260223 11/21/2007 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 82.06 AP - 00260223 11/21/2007 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 72.67 AP - 00260223 11/21/2007 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 156.88 AP - 00260223 1 ]/21/2007 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 1,139.96 AP - 00260224 11/21/2007 BANC OF AMERICA LEASING 1,453.51 AP - 00260225 ] ]/21/2007 BARNETT, JAMES 15.00 AP - 00260226 1 ]/21/2007 BARTEL ASSOCIATES LLC 775.00 AP - 00260227 11/21/2007 BEARD PROVENCHER AND ASSOC INC 6,597.50 AP - 00260227 11/21/2007 BEARD PROVENCHER AND ASSOC INC 3,597.50 AP - 00260227 11/21/2007 BEARD PROVENCHER AND ASSOC INC 482.50 AP - 00260228 11/21/2007 BETTER ENERGY IDEAS 185.00 AP - 00260229 11/21/2007 BLINDS ETC. 144.39 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page:- 38 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Pornait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount P484 AP - 00260230 11/21/2007 BOHRER DVM, SUSAN 8,033.50 AP - 00260231 11/21/2007 BRODART BOOKS 637.65 AP - 00260231 11/21/2007 BRODART BOOKS 4.26 AP - 00260231 11/21/2007 BRODART BOOKS 19.18 AP - 0026023 t 11/21 /2007 BRODART BOOKS 4.26 AP - 00260231 11/21/2007 BRODART BOOKS 3,057.47 AP - 00260231 11/21/2007 BRODART BOOKS 108.44 AP - 00260231 11/21/2007 BRODART BOOKS 109.68 AP - 00260231 11/21/2007 BRODART BOOKS 16.78 AP - 00260231 11/21/2007 BRODART BOOKS 56.05 AP - 00260231 11/21/2007 BRODART BOOKS 14.01 AP - 00260231 11/21/2007 BRODART BOOKS 892.87 AP - 00260232 11/21/2007 BROWN & BIGELOW 1,259.02 AP - 00260233 11/21/2007 CAMPBELL, JANE 140.00 AP - 00260234 11/21/2007 CAR CARE & TRANSMISSION PRO 499.39 AP - 00260234 11/21/2007 CAR CARE & TRANSMISSION PRO 463.86 AP - 00260234 11/21/2007 CAR CARE & TRANSMISSION PRO 38.03 AP - 00260235 11/21/2007 CBS OUTDOOR 3,215.25 AP - 00260236 11/21/2007 CDW GOVERNMENT INC. 724.26 AP - 00260237 11/21/2007 CENTER THEATRE GROUP 2,557.00 AP - 00260238 11/21/2007 CERTIFIED TOWING 225.00 AP - 00260239 11/21/2007 CHAMBERS, JERRY 658.00 AP - 00260240 11/21/2007 CHARTER MEDIA INC. 991.20 AP - 00260240 11/21/2007 CHARTER MEDIA INC. 644.00 AP - 00260240 11/21/2007 CHARTER MEDIA INC. 579.20 AP - 00260241 11/21/2007 CITRUS COLLEGE 1,350.00 AP - 00260242 11/21/2007 CLABBY, SANDRA 1,000.00 AP - 00260243 11/21/2007 CLARKE PLUMBING SPECIALTIES INC. 311.40 AP - 00260243 11/21/2007 CLARKE PLUMBING SPECIALTIES INC. 4.74 AP - 00260243 11/21/2007 CLARKE PLUMBING SPECIALTIES INC. 46.55 AP - 00260244 11/21/2007 CLEARWATER GRAPHICS 126.07 AP - 00260245 11/21/2007 COACHELLA VALLEY CHAPTER ICC 25.00 AP - 00260246 11/21/2007 COAST RECREATION INC 498.30 AP - 00260246 11/21/2007 COAST RECREATION INC 2,941.87 AP - 00260246 11/21/2007 COAST RECREATION INC 501.70 AP - 00260247 11/21/2007 COPIES & INK PRINTING INC. 72.49 AP - 00260247 11/21/2007 COPIES & INK PRINTING INC. 38.75 AP - 00260248 11/21!2007 CORAL POWER LLC 311,319.36 AP - 00260250 11/21/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 693.42 AP - 00260250 11/21/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 702.31 AP-00260250 11/21/2007 COVENANTSTAFFINGII~'C. 657.86 AP - 00260250 11/21/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 426.72 AP - 00260250 ] 1/21/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 568.96 AP - 00260250 ] 1/21/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 6.67 AP - 00260250 1(/21/2007 COVENANT STAFFIl~'G INC. 533.40 AP - 00260250 1(/21/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 26.67 AP - 00260250 11/21/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 177.80 AP - 00260250 11/21/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 568.96 AP - 00260250 11/21/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 13.34 AP - 00260250 11/21/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 515.62 AP - 00260250 11/21/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 533.40 AP - 00260250 11/21/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 66.68 AP - 00260250 11/2]/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 711.20 AP - 00260250 11/21/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 568.96 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 39 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P485 Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00260250 11/21/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 177.80 AP - 00260250 11/21/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 6.67 AP - 00260250 11/21/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 693.42 AP - 00260250 11/21/2007 COVENANT STAFFING INC. 13.34 AP - 00260251 11/21/2007 CPRS 135.00 AP - 00260251 11/21/2007 CPRS 135.00 AP - 00260252 11/21/2007 CRRA 192.00 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 351.30 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 116.14 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 763.60 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,550.06 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 6]4.64 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 72.25 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 702.42 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 33.68 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 861.12 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 288.26 AP - 00260254 11/2]/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 35.56 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 252.35 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 899.40 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 931.32 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 44.25 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 74.91 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 4,310.13 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 560.54 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,585.97 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,300.02 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,085.89 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,213.57 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 105.30 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 2,341.41 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 162.44 AP = 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 138.50 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 754.29 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 621.29 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 2,023.29 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 571.20 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 274.59 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,080.57 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 401.84 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 698.86 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 128.66 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,260.12 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 25.50 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,56426 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 22.84 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 416.90 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 750.73 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 887.72 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 551.23 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 154.29 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,250.81 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 871.76 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,526.12 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 40 Current Dale: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P486 Aeenda Check Resister 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 266.61 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 281.24 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,381.15 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 923.63 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 35.01 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 901.02 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 754.29 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 610.65 AP - 00260254 11/21/2007 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 508.24 AP-00260254 11/2]/2007 CUCAMONGAVALLEYWATERDISTRICT 685.13 AP - 00260255 11/21/2007 D & D DISPOSAL INC. 400.00 AP - 00260256 11/21/2007 DAMES INC, ALBERT W 11,712.98 AP - 00260257 11/21/2007 DAMS, AZIZA 33.95 AP - 00260257 11/21/2007 DAMS, AZIZA 13.58 AP - 00260258 11/21/2007 DEMCO INC 830.28 AP - 00260259 ] 1/21/2007 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 3,060.16 AP - 00260260 11/21/2007 DIRECTV 29.99 AP - 00260261 11/21/2007 DIZON, CLAUDINE 24.00 AP - 00260263 11/21/2007 DY, VANNAC 216.00 AP - 00260263 11/21/2007 DY, VANNAC 40.00 AP - 00260264 11/21/2007 EIGHTH AVENUE GRAPHICS 224.02 AP - 00260265 11/21/2007 ELLISON-SCHNEIDER & HARRIS L.L.P. 2,103.50 AP - 00260266 11/21/2007 ESPINO'S COP SHOP INC 45.00 AP - 00260266 11/21/2007 ESPINO'S COP SHOP INC 399.32 AP - 00260266 11/21/2007 ESPINO'S COP SHOP INC 148.67 AP - 00260266 11/21/2007 ESPINO'S COP SHOP INC 199.06 AP - 00260266 11/21/2007 ESPINO'S COP SHOP INC 193.67 AP - 00260266 11/21/2007 ESPINO'S COP SHOP INC 67.50 AP - 00260266 11/21/2007 ESPINO'S COP SHOP INC 389.55 AP - 00260267 11/21/2007 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 1.24 AP - 00260268 11/21/2007 EXCLUSIVE EMAGES ~ 29.10 AP - 00260269 11/21/2007 F S MOTOR SPORTS INC 1,725.79 AP - 00260270 11/21/2007 FARMANI, MIGNON 85.00 AP - 00260271 11/21/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 17.78 AP - 00260271 11/21/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 20.62 AP - 0026027] 11/21/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 23.39 AP - 00260271 11/21/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 17.78 AP - 00260271 11/21/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 23.39 AP - 00260271 11/21/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 25.90 AP - 00260271 11/21/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 23.39 AP - 00260271 11/2]/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 22.90 AP - 00260271 11/2]/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORD 23.39 AP - 00260271 11/21/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORD 17.85 AP - 00260271 11/21/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORD 23.30 AP - 00260271 11/21/2007 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 17.78 AP - 00260272 11/21/2007 FELICIANO, ANTHONY 120.00 AP - 00260273 11/21/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 840.00 AP - 00260273 11/21/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 880.00 AP - 00260273 11/21/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 768.00 AP - 00260273 11/21/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 930.00 AP - 00260273 11/21/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 840.00 AP - 00260273 11/21/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 868.00 AP - 00260273 11/21/2007 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 232.50 AP - 00260274 11/21/2007 FLANDERS, KELLEE 500.00 User: VLOPEZ -Veroni ca Lopez Page: 41 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P487 Aeenda Check Reeister 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00260275 11/21/2007 FOOTHILL FAMILY SHELTER 417.00 AP - 00260276 11/21/2007 FORD OF UPLAND INC 78.89 AP - 00260276 11/21/2007 FORD OF UPLAND INC 1,196.99 AP - 00260276 11/2]/2007 FORD OF UPLAND INC 113.14 AP - 00260276 11/21/2007 FORD OF UPLAND INC 22.67 AP - 00260276 11/21/2007 FORD OF UPLAND INC 86.01 AP - 00260276 11/21/2007 FORD OF UPLAND INC 25.21 AP - 00260277 11/21/2007 FOREMOST SILKSCREEN AND EMBROIDERY 171.86 AP - 00260279 11/21/2007 FRANCISCO, GARY 200.00 AP - 00260280 11/21/2007 FUTURE LIGHTING 2,585.00 AP - 00260281 11/21/2007 G AND M BUSINESS INTERIORS 82,603.55 AP - 00260281 11/21/2007 G AND M BUSINESS INTERIORS 46,837.42 AP - 00260282 11/21/2007 GALE GROUP,THE 58.54 AP - 00260283 1 ]/21/2007 GALLS INC 430.98 AP - 00260284 11/21/2007 GIBBYS FENCING MATERIALS 125.00 AP - 00260285 11/21/2007 GONZALES, ELVA 55.00 AP - 00260286 11/21/2007 GONZALEZ, JULIE 500.00 AP - 00260287 11/21/2007 GRAINGER 400.05 AP - 00260288 11/21/2007 GUERRA, GLORIA 10.00 AP - 00260289 11/21/2007 HADCO AUTO SERVICE 277.75 AP - 00260290 11/21/2007 HANSEN, BARBARA 24.25 AP - 00260291 11/21/2007 HARALAMBOS BEVERAGE COMPANY 391.50 AP - 00260292 11/21/2007 HDL SOFTWARE LLC. 3,750.00 AP - 00260292 11/21/2007 HDL SOFTWARE LLC. 4,605.00 AP - 00260293 11/21/2007 HEATH & ASSOCIATES, RICHARD 1,880.00 AP - 00260294 11/21/2007 HEFFLER COMPANY 80.39 AP -'00260295 11/21/2007 HESKA CORPORATION 801.66 AP - 00260297 11/21/2007 HILLS PET NUTRITION SALES INC 21.61 AP - 00260297 11/21/2007 HILLS PET NUTRITION SALES INC 161.63 AP - 00260297 11/21/2007 HILLS PET NUTRITION SALES INC 228.98 AP - 00260297 11/21/2007 HILLS PET NUTRITION SALES INC 46.66 AP - 00260297 11/21/2007 HILLS PET NUTRITION SALES INC 100.12 AP - 00260298 11/21/2007 HILMAN, FLOYD 78.00 AP - 00260299 11/21/2007 HOME DEPOT 57.32 AP - 00260300 11/21/2007 HOUSE OF RUTH 493.23 AP - 00260301 11/21/2007 HUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN BERNARDINO VAL] 200.00 AP - 00260302 11/21/2007 HUYNH, TRANG 330.68 AP - 00260303 11/21/2007 HYDROSCAPE PRODUCTS INC 21.75 AP - 00260304 11/21/2007 IDCSERVCO 514.72 AP - 00260305 11/21/2007 IMPERIAL SPRINKLER SUPPLY INC 258.35 AP - 00260306 11/21/2007 INLAND EMPIRE COMMUINITY NEWSPAPERS 150.00 AP - 00260306 11/21/2007 INLAND EMPIRE COMMUINITY NEWSPAPERS li0.00 AP - 00260307 11/21/2007 INLAND EMPIRE FAMILY 1,030.00 AP - 00260308 11/21/2007 INLAND EMPIRE MAGAZINE 1,095.00 AP - 00260309 11/21/2007 INLAND FAIR HOUSING AND MEDIATION 717.86 AP - 00260309 11/21/2007 INLAND FAIR HOUSING AND MEDIATION 839.95 AP - 00260310 11/21/2007 INLAND PRESORT & MAILING SERVICES 51.53 AP - 00260313 11/21/2007 INTERSTATE CAPITAL CORPORATION 4,200.00 AP - 00260313 1 I /21 /2007 INTERSTATE CAPITAL CORPORATION 400.00 AP - 00260313 11/21/2007 INTERSTATE CAPITAL CORPORATION 400.00 AP - 00260313 11/2]/2007 INTERSTATE CAPITAL CORPORATION 400.00 AP - 00260314 11/21/2007 IRELAND SOUND SYSTEMS 1,397.97 AP - 00260315 11/21/2007 IRON MOUNTAIN 858.36 AP - 00260316 11/21/2007 JAG INDUSTRIES 475.00 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 42 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Pornait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Asenda Check Resister 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount P488 AP - 00260317 11/21/2007 JONES, ROBERT 2,800.00 AP - 00260318 11/21/2007 K K WOODWORKING 64.65 AP - 00260318 11/21/2007 K K WOODWORKING 37.66 AP - 00260319 11/21/2007 KC RAPID INC 107.95 AP - 00260320 11/21/2007 LANE, RIKESHA 250.00 AP - 00260321 11/21/2007 LEARNING CENTER USA INC 25.00 AP - 00260323 11/21/2007 LITTLE BEAR PRODUCTIONS 525.00 AP - 00260323 11/21/2007 LITTLE BEAR PRODUCTIONS 150.00 AP - 00260323 11/21/2007 LITTLE BEAR PRODUCTIONS 125.00 AP - 00260323 11/21/2007 LITTLE BEAR PRODUCTIONS 385.00 AP - 00260323 11/21/2007 LITTLE BEAR PRODUCTIONS 875.00 AP - 00260323 11/21/2007 LITTLE BEAR PRODUCTIONS 250.00 AP - 00260323 11/21/2007 LITTLE BEAR PRODUCTIONS 145.00 AP - 00260325 11/21/2007 LOS ANGELES COUNTY 100.00 AP - 00260326 11/21/2007 MANELA, ROSIE 16.98 AP - 00260327 11/21/2007 MANSOURI, IRAJ 5,640.00 AP - 00260328 11/21/2007 MARIA MERLOS CLEANING SERVIC ES 78.96 AP - 00260329 11/21/2007 MARK CHRISTOPHER INC 1,242.04 AP - 00260329 11/21/2007 MARK CHRISTOPHER INC 369.51 AP - 00260330 11/21/2007 MARTINEZ UNION SERVICE 45.00 AP - 00260331 11/21/2007 MATHIS AND ASSOCIATES 13,807.05 AP - 00260331 11/21/2007 MATHIS AND ASSOCIATES 4,817.50 AP - 00260331 11/21/2007 MATHIS AND ASSOCIATES 892.50 AP - 00260331 11/21/2007 MATHIS AND ASSOCIATES 3,757.50 AP - 00260331 11/21/2007 MATHIS AND ASSOCIATES 812.50 AP - 00260331 11/21/2007 MATHIS AND ASSOCIATES 1,532.50 AP - 00260331 11/21/2007 MATHIS AND ASSOCIATES 2,916.50 AP - 00260331 11/21/2007 MATHIS AND ASSOCIATES 5.290.00 AP - 00260331 11/21/2007 MATHIS AND ASSOCIATES 4,905.00 AP - 00260331 11/21/2007 MATHIS AND ASSOCIATES 2,484.03 AP - 00260332 11/21/2007 MICROSOFT CORP 483.80 AP - 00260333 11/21/2007 MOUNTAIN VIEW EM PHYS MEDICAL GROUP I 547.00 AP - 00260336 1 ]/21/2007 NATURES EARTH PRODUCTS INC 1,875.80 AP - 00260337 11/21/2007 NAVTRAK NC 168.16 AP - 00260338 11/21/2007 NBS 2,000.00 AP - 00260338 11/21/2007 NBS 1,500.00 AP - 00260338 11/21/2007 NBS 1,500.00 AP - 00260338 11/21/2007 NBS 1,500.00 AP - 00260338 11/21/2007 NBS 1,500.00 AP - 00260338 11/21/2007 NBS 2,155.00 AP - 00260339 11/21/2007 NEC UNIFIED SOLUTIONS INC 1.835.00 AP - 00260339 11/21/2007 NEC UNIFIED SOLUTIONS INC 548.93 AP - 00260340 11/21/2007 NINYO R MOORE 677.50 AP - 00260341 11/21/2007 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CENTERS OF CALIFO 60.00 AP - 00260341 11/21/2007 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CENTERS OF CALIFO 68.62 AP - 00260341 11/21/2007 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CENTERS OF CALIFO 140.84 AP - 00260341 11/21/2007 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CENTERS OF CALIFO 201.57 AP - 00260341 11/21/2007 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CENTERS OF CALIFO 25.00 AP - 00260341 11/21/2007 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CENTERS OF CALIFO 201.57 AP - 00260342 11/21/2007 OCLC INC 45.79 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 3.71 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 48.14 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 102.41 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 101.40 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 43 Curren[ Dale: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Pomait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Reeister 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount P489 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 70.99 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 27.59 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 1,433.00 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT -46.98 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT -10.99 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 18.47 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 13.23 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 30.95 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 61.76 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 86.53 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 12.26 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 63.15 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT -38.32 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 98.02 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 79.68 AP - 00260345 ] 1/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 90.45 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT -477.67 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 16.65 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 177.28 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 331.00 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 9.57 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 63.54 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 71.88 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 16].61 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 21.32 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 189.09 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 20.08 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 87.13 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 262.73 AP-00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 69.80 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 9.49 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 37.50 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 29.08 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 80.65 AP - 00260345 11/2]/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 8.29 AP - 00260345 11/21 /2007 OFFICE DEPOT 56.41 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 93.70 AP - 00260345 11/2]/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 58.71 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 207.94 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 77.03 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 27.48 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 14.07 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 71.52 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 14.00 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 8.88 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 555.20 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 80.97 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 177.72 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 260.45 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT ~ 57.32 AP - 00260345 1 ]/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 10.06 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 47.39 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 42.37 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 15.52 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 44 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Pomait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P490 Asenda Check Resister 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT -537.67 AP - 00260345 11/21/2007 OFFICE DEPOT 29.09 AP - 00260346 11/21/2007 OFFICE MAX 1,944.89 AP - 00260346 11/21/2007 OFFICE MAX 388.98 AP - 00260347 11/21/2007 ONESOURCE DISTRIBUTORS INC. 547.32 AP - 00260348 11/21/2007 ORANGE EMPIRE CHAPTER ICC 90.00 AP - 00260349 11/21/2007 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 72.06 AP - 00260349 11/21/2007 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 76.39 AP - 00260349 11/21/2007 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 45.62 AP - 00260349 11/21/2007 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 753 AP - 00260349 11/21/2007 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 64.62 AP - 00260349 11/21/2007 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 184.33 AP - 00260349 11/21/2007 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 220.00 AP - 00260349 11/21/2007 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 61.26 AP - 00260349 11/21/2007 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 82.08 AP - 00260349 11/21/2007 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 11.94 AP - 00260349 11/21/2007 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 29.28 AP - 00260349 11/21/2007 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 35.41 AP - 00260350 11/21/2007 ORKIN PEST CONTROL 68.00 AP - 00260350 11/21/2007 ORKIN PEST CONTROL 500.00 AP - 00260350 11/21/2007 ORKIN PEST CONTROL 1,307.05 AP - 00260350 11/21/2007 ORKIN PEST CONTROL 1,307.05 AP - 00260350 1 ]/21/2007 ORKIN PEST CONTROL 1,060.00 AP - 00260351 11/21/2007 PAIRMAN, DORIS 100.00 AP - 00260352 1 ]/21/2007 PARS 3,500.00 AP - 00260353 11/21/2007 PATEL, PANKAJ 500.00 AP - 00260354 11/21/2007 PEACOCK SYSTEMS 255.00 AP - 00260354 1 ]/21/2007 PEACOCK SYSTEMS 43.10 AP - 00260354 1 ]/21/2007 PEACOCK SYSTEMS 171.32 AP - 00260356 11/21/2007 PHONG, BRYAN 250.00 AP - 00260357 11/21/2007 PILOT POWER GROUP INC 19,115.89 AP - 00260359 ] 1/21/2007 PLAYS FOR YOUNG AUDIENCES 2,036.99 AP - 00260360 11/21/2007 POSTER SOLUTIONS 40.00 AP - 00260360 11/21/2007 POSTER SOLUTIONS 96.94 AP - 00260360 t 1/21/2007 POSTER SOLUTIONS 54.82 AP - 00260361 11/21/2007 POUK AND STEINLE INC. 118,992.72 AP - 00260361 11/21/2007 POUK AND STEINLE INC. 881.98 AP - 00260361 ] 1/21/2007 POUK AND STEINLE INC. -11,899.28 AP - 00260362 11/21/2007 PRE-PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC 34.20 AP - 00260363 11/2]/2007 PROJECT SISTER 747.00 AP - 00260364 11/21/2007 QUINN; PEGGY 72.00 AP - 00260365 11/21/2007 RANCHO CUCAMONGA CHAMBER OF COMMEI 20.00 AP - 00260365 11/21/2007 RANCHO CUCAMONGA CHAMBER OF COMMEI 20.00 AP - 00260365 11/2]/2007 RANCHO CUCAMONGA CHAMBER OF COMMEI 20.00 AP - 00260365 11/21/2007 RANCHO CUCAMONGA CHAMBER OF COMME] 20.00 AP - 00260366 11/21/2007 RANCFIO CUCAMONGA FAMILY YMCA 5,000.00 AP - 00260367 11/21/2007 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FONTANA FAMILY YM 12,297.00 AP - 00260368 11/21/2007 RANDOM HOUSE CHILDRENS BOOKS 55.48 AP - 00260369 11/21/2007 RANDOM HOUSE INC 115.35 AP - 00260369 11/21/2007 RANDOM HOUSE INC 47.25 AP - 00260369 11/21/2007 RANDOM HOUSE INC 86.90 AP - 00260370 11/21/2007 RBM LOCK AND KEY SERVICE 18.32 AP - 00260371 11/21/2007 RCPFA 7,459.06 AP - 00260373 11/21/2007 RICHENBERGER, DONNA 52.00 User: VLOPEZ -Veroni ca Lopez Page: 45 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT _RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P491 Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00260374 11/21/2007 RITZ-MONTOYA, KYM 2S.S0 AP - 00260375 11/21/2007 ROBERT HALF TECHNOLOGY 1,075.60 AP - 00260375 11/21/2007 ROBERT HALF TECHNOLOGY 1,062.16 AP - 00260375 11/21/2007 ROBERT HALF TECHNOLOGY 873.93 AP - 00260376 11/21/2007 SABADO, MARIA 250.00 AP - 00260377 11/21/2007 SAN BERNARDINO CTY ASSESSOR 840.00 AP - 00260377 11/21/2007 SAN BERNARDINO CTY ASSESSOR 840.00 AP - 00260378 11/21/2007 SAN BERNARDINO CTY AUDITOR CONTROLLE 55.00 AP - 00260378 11/21/2007 SAN BERNARDINO CTY AUDITOR CONTROLLE 50.00 AP - 00260379 11/21/2007 SAN BERNARDINO CTY DEPT OF PUBLIC WOR] 36,285.00 AP - 00260380 11/21/2007 SCHEITHAUER, KRISTIN 1,OS0.00 AP - 00260381 11/21/2007 SCHNEIDERWENT, KAREN 19.38 AP-00260382 11/21/2007 SCWMF 110.00 AP-00260382 11/21/2007 SCWMF 110.00 AP - 00260383 11/21/2007 SEFIANE, KIM 8.00 AP - 00260384 11/21/2007 SEGOVIA, JOE 500.00 AP - 00260385 11/21/2007 SELLERS, TIMOTHY 260.00 AP - 00260386 ] ]/21/2007 SIGMANET 1,180.32 AP-00260386 11/21/2007 SIGMANET 1,180.32 AP - 00260386 11/21/2007 SIGMANET 247.83 AP - 00260386 11/21/2007 SIGMANET 247.82 AP - 00260387 11/21/2007 SIMMONS, ARLENE 100.00 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 881.75 AP - 00260390 11/2]/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 10,711.22 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 80.26 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 111.16 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.15 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.67 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.53 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 61.29 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.76 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 70.86 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 98.83 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.01 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 136.38 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.38 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.92 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON lOl.SO AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 74.73 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 64.94 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTIERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 83.99 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.91 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.38 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.85 AP - 00260390 ] 1/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 75.12 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.85 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 51.68 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 98.87 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 75.84 AP - 00260390 ] 1/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 57.89 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 93.89 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 439.72 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.56 AP - 00260390 11/2]/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 55.56 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lope2 Page: 46 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Pornait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA P492 Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through l I/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00260390 11!21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 76.22 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 10.85 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.15 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.62 AP - 00260390 11/2]/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.92 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.59 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 40.16 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 73.67 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.85 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.15 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.28 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.99 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.78 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.61 AP - 00260390 1 ]/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 0.79 AP - 00260390 1 ]/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.53 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.30 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.38 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.38 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 726.52 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 110.15 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 9,347.74 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 4,665.88 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 3,989.62 AP - 00260390 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 32.23 AP - 00260391 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 19,429.89 AP - 00260391 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2,727.75 AP - 00260391 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 181.47 AP - 00260391 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 72,479.57 AP - 00260391 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 44.24 AP - 00260391 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2,868.67 AP - 00260391 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14,992.80 AP - 00260391 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12,120.96 AP - 00260391 11/21/2007 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 4,212.90 AP - 00260392 11/21/2007 SOUTHLAND SPORTS OFFICIALS 368.00 AP - 00260393 11/21/2007 SPARKLETTS 217.78 AP - 00260394 11/21/2007 SPORT SUPPLY GROUP INC 89.45 AP - 00260394 11/21/2007 SPORT SUPPLY GROUP INC 385.90 AP - 00260395 11/21/2007 STERICYCLE INC 238.91 AP - 00260396 11/21/2007 SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC 75.00 AP - 00260397 11/21/2007 TERRA VISTA ANIMAL HOSPITAL 23.00 AP - 00260398 11/21/2007 TORKELSON, MARJORIE 125.00 AP - 00260399 11/21/2007 TURNER, MYISHA CROOM 1,000.00 AP - 00260400 11/21/2007 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA TRUSTEE FOR P, 3,776.31 AP - 00260400 11/21/2007 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA TRUSTEE FOR P, 43,425.78 AP - 00260401 11/21/2007 UNIQUE MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC 638.28 AP - 00260402 11/21/2007 UNITED RENTALS NORTHWEST INC 641.91 AP - 00260403 11/21/2007 UNITED WAY 11.00 AP - 00260404 11/21/2007 US POSTMASTER 8,500.00 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 92.24 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 54.25 AP - 00260406 ] 1/21/2007 VERIZON 81.96 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 65.36 AP-00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 89.48 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 47 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AEenda Check Resister 10/31/2007 through 11/27/2007 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name ~ Amount P493 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 32.68 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 89.51 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 89.48 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 19.58 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 32.70 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 83.60 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 32.70 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 89.48 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 89.51 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 21.14 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 33.04 AP-00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 126.70 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 49.92 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 89.51 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 68.92 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 654.63 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 65.34 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 162.46 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 101.22 AP-00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 130.78 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 37.87 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 43.34 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 43.34 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 21.14 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 149.01 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 35.35 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 89.51 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 21.69 AP-00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 33.75 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 19.60 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 19.60 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 101.16 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 37.85 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 46.67 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 33.75 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 77.66 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 32.70 AP - 00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 38.90 AP-00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 111.63 AP-00260406 11/21/2007 VERIZON 472.51 AP - 00260407 11/21/2007 VEILNON, CITY OF 148,304.00 AP - 00260408 11/21/2007 VICK, LINDA 450.00 AP - 00260409 11/21/2007 VICTOR MEDICAL COMPANY 840.45 AP - 00260409 11/21/2007 VICTOR MEDICAL COMPANY 703.72 AP - 00260410 11/21/2007 VIRGIL. DENISE 500.00 AP - 00260411 11/21/2007 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 270.27 AP - 00260411 11/21/2007 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 46.55 AP - 00260411 11/21/2007 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 144.69 AP - 00260412 11/21/2007 WATSON PAINTING CORPORATION 22,815.00 AP - 00260412 11/21/2007 WATSON PAINTING CORPORATION 8,560.00 AP - 00260412 11/21/2007 WATSON PAINTING CORPORATION 9,810.00 AP - 00260412 11/21/2007 WATSON PAINTING CORPORATION 26,305.20 AP - 00260413 11/21/2007 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 474.10 AP - 00260414 11/21/2007 WELLS FARGO BANK N A 2,000.00 User: VLOPEZ -Veronica Lopez Page: 48 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 10/31/2007 through 1]/27/2007 P494 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00260415 ] 1/21/2007 WEST PAYMENT CENTER 106.68 AP - 00260415 11/2]/2007 WEST PAYMENT CENTER 279.00 AP - 002604]6 11/21/2007 WESTERN MEDICAL SUPPLY INC 1,688.53 AP - 002604]6 11/21/2007 WESTERN MEDICAL SUPPLY INC 128.64 AP - 00260416 11/21/2007 WESTERN MEDICAL SUPPLY INC 1,714.31 AP - 00260417 11/21/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 20.00 AP - 00260417 11/21/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 35.00 AP - 00260417 11/21/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 35.00 AP - 00260417 11/2]/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 30.00 AP - 00260417 11/2]/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 30.00 AP - 00260417 11/21/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 30.00 AP-00260417 ]1/21/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 30.00 AP-00260417 11/21/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 35.00 AP - 00260417 11/21/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 5.00 AP - 00260417 11/2]/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 30.00 AP - 00260417 11/21/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 35.00 AP - 00260417 11/21/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 50.00 AP - 00260417 11/21/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 35.00 AP - 00260417 11/21/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 30.00 AP-002604]7 11/21/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 35.00 AP - 00260417 11/21/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 35.00 AP - 00260417 11/21/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 35.00 AP - 00260417 11/21/2007 WESTERN UNIVERSITY 30.00 AP - 00260417 11/21/2007 R'ESTERN UNIVERSITY 20.00 AP - 00260418 11/21/2007 WESTRUX INTERNATIONAL INC 201.78 AP - 00260419 11/21/2007 WHITE CAP CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY 1,035.33 AP - 00260421 11/21/2007 ZEE MEDICAL INC 652.86 AP - 00260421 11/2]/2007 ZEE MEDICAL INC 500.86 Total for Check ID AP: 8,902,629.17 Total for Entity: 8,902,629.17 User: VLOPEZ-Veronica Lope2 Page: 49 Current Date: 11/28/200 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 14:24:0 P495 STAFF REPORT ~~ y ~ i ~ ~ ` I:iV GISEGRIAC~ L7GV.i RTVlE,AT ~+~.~ ~ RANCxo Date: December 5, 2007 C,UCAMONGA To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer By: Ping Kho, Assistant Engineer ~ lam. Subject: APPROVAL TO AUTHORIZE THE ADVERTISING OF THE "NOTICE INVITING BIDS" FOR THE HIGHLAND AVENUE AND FAIRMONT WAY STREET IMPROVEMENTS FROM SAN BENITO TO KENYON WAY AND HIGHLAND LANDSCAPE NORTH OF HIGHLAND FROM SAN BENITO TO DEER CREEK CHANNEL TO BE FUNDED FROM TRANSPORTATION AND CAPITAL RESERVE FUNDS RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the plans and specifications for the Highland Avenue and Fairmont Way Street Improvements from San Benito to Kenyon Way and Highland Landscape North of Highland from San Benito to Deer Creek Channel and approve the attached resolution authorizing the City Clerk to advertise the "Notice Inviting Bids." The project will be funded from Transportation and Capital Reserve Funds. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS The first phase of the project, which installed gates and barriers to prevent public vehicles from accessing the closed road, has been completed. The second phase of the project will install landscaping along the north frontage of the closed street from San Benito to Deer Creek Channel and improves Highland Avenue and Fairmont Way from San Benito to Kenyon Way. The project has been designed to allow continued use of the area by pedestrians and bicyclists. The project plans and specifications have been completed and approved by the City Engineer. The Engineer's estimate is $670,000.00, including contingency and Construction Administration, which includes advertising, printing, materials testing and survey. Staff has determined that the project is Categorically Exempt per Article 19, Section 15301(c) of the CEQA guidelines. Legal advertising is scheduled for December 11, 2007 and December 18, 2007 with a bid opening at 2:00 p. m. on Tuesday, January 8, 2008, unless extended by addenda. Respectfully submitted, (f ,{, ~:t William J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO/PK:Is Attachments: Vicinity Map and Resolution VICINITY MAP HIGHLAND AVE. STREET AND LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS FROM SAN BENITO AVE. TO FAIRMONT WAY PROJECT LOCATION r Q a i :` Almond Rd~' Hillside Rd' Banyan SP ,Q ~~. _ ~_ .'`-Q~~' ~_ a ~' Z m > W Q.ij m ;, ~ N Gl ~rll '- ~ L i j m Y ~ ~, U ' ]MI on Av , U y W o ` ', i' ~ U _ o ~ ' ' I--~ ~ I 4thSt „ ~ . ~' Q . 4 qt .. > ~... ~ . ... Q c c= -' B w -Q c- . '-•~-- ~ --4- ......10 Freew~ -- .._ y ~ ~ r E m A { Y = ., ~ ~ = Q ~ 2 = - r' ~ t W Q~~~ ^y_. ~Ison Av Route 30 ~Av P497 RESOLUTION NO. D 7- Z 7< A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING .PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR "HIGHLAND AVENUE AND FAIRMONT WAY STREET IMPROVEMENTS FROM SAN BENITO TO KENYON WAY AND HIGHLAND LANDSCAPE NORTH OF HIGHLAND FROM SAN BENITO TO DEER CREEK CHANNEL" IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City of Rancho Cucamonga to construct certain improvements in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has prepared plans and specifications for the construction of certain improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the plans and specifications presented by the City of Rancho Cucamonga be and are hereby approved as the plans and specifications for the "HIGHLAND AVENUE AND FAIRMONT WAY STREET IMPROVEMENTS FROM SAN BENITO TO KENYON WAY AND HIGHLAND LANDSCAPE NORTH OF HIGHLAND FROM SAN BENITO TO DEER CREEK CHANNEL". BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to advertise as required by law for the receipt of sealed bids or proposals for doing the work specified in the aforesaid plans and specifications, which said advertisement shall be substantially in the following words and figures, to wit: "NOTICE INVITING SEALED BIDS OR PROPOSALS" Pursuant to a Resolution of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California, directing this notice, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that said City of Rancho Cucamonga will receive at the Office of the City Clerk in the offices of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, on or before the hour of 2:00 p.m., on Tuesday, January 8, 2008, sealed bids or proposals for the "HIGHLAND AVENUE AND FAIRMONT WAY STREET IMPROVEMENTS FROM SAN BENITO TO KENYON WAY AND HIGHLAND LANDSCAPE NORTH OF HIGHLAND FROM SAN BENITO TO DEER CREEK CHANNEL". Bids will be publicly opened and read in the office of the City Clerk, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. Bids must be made on a form provided for the purpose, addressed to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, marked, "HIGHLAND AVENUE AND FAIRMONT WAY STREET IMPROVEMENTS FROM SAN BENITO TO KENYON WAY AND HIGHLAND LANDSCAPE NORTH OF HIGHLAND FROM SAN BENITO TO DEER CREEK CHANNEL". PREVAILING WAGE: Notice is hereby given that in accordance with the provisions of California Labor Code, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Articles 1 and 2, the Contractor is required to pay not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for work of a similar character in the locality in which the public work is performed, and not less than the general prevailing rate of P498 RESOLUTION NO. December 5, 2007 Page 2 per diem wages for holiday and overtime work. In that regard, the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of the State of California is required to and has determined such general prevailing rates of per diem wages. Copies of such prevailing rates of per diem wages are on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, and are available to any interested party on request. The Contracting Agency also shall cause a copy of such determinations to be posted at the job site. Pursuant to provisions of Labor Code Section 1775, the Contractor shall forfeit, as penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, not more than fifty dollars ($50.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed for each calendar day or portion thereof, if such laborer, workman or mechanic is paid less than the general prevailing rate of wages herein before stipulated for any work done under the attached contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of said Labor Code. Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 of the Labor Code concerning the employment of apprentices by the Contractor or any subcontractor under him. Section 1777.5, as amended, requires the Contractor or subcontractor employing tradesmen in any apprenticable occupation to apply to the joint apprenticeship committee nearest the site of the public work's project and which administers the apprenticeship program in that trade for a certificate of approval. The certificate will also fix the ratio of apprentices to journeymen that will be used in the performance of the contract. The ratio of apprentices to journeymen in such cases shall not be less than one to five except: A. When unemployment in the area of coverage by the joint apprenticeship committee has exceeded an average of 15 percent in the 90 days prior to the request of certificate, or B. When the number of apprentices in training in the area exceeds a ratio of one to five, or C. When the trade can show that it is replacing at least 1/30 of its membership through apprenticeship training on an annual basis statewide or locally, or D. When the Contractor provides evidence that he employs registered apprentices on all of his contracts on an annual average of not less than one apprentice to eightjourneymen. The Contractor is required to make contributions to funds established for the administration of apprenticeship programs if he employs registered apprentices or journeymen in any apprenticable trade on such contracts and if other Contractors on the public works site are making such contributions. The Contractor and subcontractor under him shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices. Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex-officio the Administrator of P499 RESOLUTION NO. December 5, 2007 Page 3 Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. Eight (8) hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work for all workmen employed in the execution of this contract and the Contractor and any subcontractor under him shall comply with and be governed by the laws of the State of California having to do with working hours as set forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code of the State of California as amended. The Contractor shall forfeit, as a penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed in the execution of the contract, by him or any subcontractor under him, upon any of the work herein before mentioned, for each calendar day during which said laborer, workman, or mechanic is required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in violation of said Labor Code. Contractor agrees to pay travel and subsistence pay to each workman needed to execute the work required by this contract as such travel and subsistence payments are defined in the applicable collective bargaining agreement filed in accordance with Labor Code Section 17773.8: The bidder must submit with his proposal, cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bidder's bond, payable to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for an amount equal to at least 10% of the amount of said bid as a guarantee that the bidder will enter into the proposed contract if the same is awarded to him, and in event of failure to enter into such contract said cash, cashiers' check, certified check, or bond shall become the property of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. If the City of Rancho Cucamonga awards the contract to the next lowest bidder, the amount of the lowest bidder's security shall be applied by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to the difference between the low bid and the second lowest bid, and the surplus, if any shall be returned to the lowest bidder. The amount of the bond to be given to secure a faithful performance of the contract for said work shall be 100% of the contract price thereof, and an additional bond in an amount equal to 100% of the contract price for said work shall be given to secure the payment of claims for any materials or supplies furnished for the performance of the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, or any work or labor of any kind done thereon, and the Contractor will also be required to furnish a certificate that he carries compensation insurance covering his employees upon work to be done under contract which may be entered into between him and the said City of Rancho Cucamonga for the construction of said work. No proposal will be considered from a Contractor to whom a proposal form has not been issued by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. On the date and at the time of the submittal of the Bidder's Proposal the Prime Contractor shall possess any and all contractor licenses, in form and class as required by any and all applicable laws with respect to any and all of the work to be performed under this contract; Including but not limited to a Class "A" License (General Engineering Contractor) or a combination of Specialty Class "C" licenses sufficient to cover all the work to be performed by the Prime Contractor in accordance with the provisions of the Contractor's License Law (California P500 RESOLUTION NO. December 5, 2007 Page 4 Business and Professions Code, Section 7000 et. seq.) and rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto. The Contractor, pursuant to the "California Business and Professions Code," Section 7028.15, shall indicate his or her State License Number on the bid, together with the expiration date, and be signed by the Contractor declaring, under penalty of perjury, that the information being provided is true and correct. The work is to be done in accordance with the profiles, plans, and specifications of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on file in the Office of the City Clerk at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730. Copies of the plans and specifications, available at the office of the City Engineer, Engineering Counter, will be furnished upon application to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and payment of $35.00 (THIRTY-FIVE DOLLARS), said $35.00 (THIRTY-FIVE DOLLARS) is non refundable. Upon written request by the bidder, copies of the plans and specifications will be mailed when said request is accompanied by payment stipulated above, together with an additional non-reimbursable payment of $15.00 (FIFTEEN DOLLARS) to cover the cost of mailing charges and overhead. The successful bidder will be required to enter into a contract satisfactory to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. In accordance with the requirements of Section 9-3.2 of the General Provisions, as set forth in the Plans and Specifications regarding the work contracted to be done by thi: Contractor, the Contractor may, upon the Contractor's request and at the Contractor's sole cost and expense, substitute authorized securities in lieu of monies withheld (performance retention). The City of Rancho Cucamonga reserves the right to reject any or all bids. Questions regarding this Notice Inviting Bids for the "HIGHLAND AVENUE AND' FAIRMONT WAY STREET IMPROVEMENTS FROM SAN BENITO TO KENYON WAY AND HIGHLAND LANDSCAPE NORTH OF HIGHLAND FROM SAN BENITO TO DEER CREEK CHANNEL" may be directed to: Curt Billings, Associate Engineer at (909) 477-2740, ext. 4069. By order of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. Dated this S"' day of December, 2007 Publish Dates: December 11, 2007 and December 18, 2007 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, this 5"' day of December, 2007 Donald J. Kurth, M.D., Mayor P501 RESOLUTION NO. December 5, 2007 Page 5 ATTEST: Debra J. Adams, City Clerk I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 5'h day of December, 2007. Executed this 5"'day of December, 2007, at Rancho Cucamonga, California. Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk ADVERTISE ON: December 11, 2007 and December 18, 2007 P502 STAFF REPORT ~`S~'~ 1 I~.\Gl\I?CRIVG DCPa2T\[H\T ~~~ RANCHO Date: December 5, 2007 CUCAMONGA To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer By: Curt S. Billings, Associate Engineer Subject: APPROVAL TO AUTHORIZE THE ADVERTISING OF THE "NOTICE INVITING BIDS" FOR THE LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS OF THE MWD PARKWAY AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BLUEGRASS AVENUE AND WILSON AVENUE TO BE FUNDED FROM TRANSPORTATION AND BEAUTIFICACTION FUNDS RECOMMENDATION Staffs recommends the approval of the plans and specifications for the landscape improvements for the MWD parkway. and approve the attached resolution authorizing the City Clerk to advertise the "Notice Inviting Bids." BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Parkway and utility undergrounding improvements at the southeast corner of Bluegrass Avenue and Wilson Avenue were differed until the extension and construction of Bluegrass Avenue. Now that the street and adjacent residential development improvements have been completed this project will construct the remaining parkway improvements. The Engineer's estimate is $886,000 including a 10% contingency and costs for printing, and materials testing. Staff has determined that the project is Categorically Exempt per Article 19, Section 15301(c) of the CEQA guidelines. Legal advertising is scheduled for December 11 and December 18, 2007, with a bid opening at 2:00 p.m. on Tuesday, January 8, 2008, unless extended by Addenda. Respectfully submitted, _.~. , ~~. i~~: ~ William J. O'Neil City Engineer WJOICSB:Is Attachments: Vicinity Map and Resolution P503 ~uIHILL5IDE ~D uu BANYAN ST OOQo^ Z ~ ~~~ ~ 210 ~~~ a ~i ASE LIN RD U 11 11°~ HURC ST FO THILL 9LV ~ ~ ~~~ rwF~ltfl ICI dLV~U -~-~~~¢~ G Q ~ > = 4 ~~ "~ 10500 C fF CENTE R W _ UTE w =__ v ......a .l........~ .~..~,....a,,.,,,,~ .~.~ II I ill STH ST II ONTARIO CITY LIMIT CITY OF RANCHO CUCA~ION6A DIYISIOM PROJECT PROJECT: MWD Parl~way landscape LOCATION: Bluegrass 8 Wlison EJINIBIT: Illcinigl Map P504 RESOLUTION NO. O 7- Z 73 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR "LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS OF THE MWD PARKWAY AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BLUEGRASS AVENUE AND WILSON AVENUE" IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS WHEREAS, it Is the intention of the City of Rancho Cucamonga to construct certain improvements in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has prepared plans and specifications for the construction of certain improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the plans and specifications presented by the City of Rancho Cucamonga be and are hereby approved as the plans and specifications for the "LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS OF THE MWD PARKWAY AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BLUEGRASS AVENUE AND WILSON AVENUE". BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to advertise as required by law for the receipt of sealed bids or proposals for doing the work specified in the aforesaid plans and specifications, which said advertisement shall be substantially in the following words and figures, to wit: "NOTICE INVITING SEALED BIDS OR PROPOSALS" Pursuant to a Resolution of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California, directing this notice, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that said City of Rancho Cucamonga will receive at the Office of the City Clerk in the offices of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, on or before the hour of 2:00 p.m., on Tuesday, January 8, 2008, sealed bids or proposals for the "LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS OF THE MWD PARKWAY AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BLUEGRASS AVENUE AND W ILSON AVENUE PROJECT ". Bids will be publicly opened and read in the office of the City Clerk, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. Bids must be made on a form provided for the purpose, addressed to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, marked, "LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS OF THE MWD PARKWAY AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BLUEGRASS AVENUE AND WILSON AVENUE". PREVAILING WAGE: Notice is hereby given that in accordance with the provisions of California Labor Code, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Articles 1 and 2, the Contractor is required to pay not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for work of a similar character in the locality in which the public work is performed, and not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for holiday and overtime work. In that regard, the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of the State of California is required to and has determined such general prevailing rates of per diem wages. Copies of such prevailing rates of per diem wages are on file In the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 10500 Civic Center Drive, P505 RESOLUTION NO. December 5, 2007 Page 2 Rancho Cucamonga, California, and are available to any interested party on request. The Contracting Agency also shall cause a copy of such determinations to be posted at the job site. Pursuant to provisions of Labor Code Section 1775, the Contractor shall forfeit, as penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, not more than fifty dollars ($50.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed for each calendar day or portion thereof, if such laborer, workman or mechanic is paid less than the general prevailing rate of wages herein before stipulated for any work done under the attached contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of said Labor Code. Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 of the Labor Code concerning the employment of apprentices by the Contractor or any subcontractor under him. Section 1777.5, as amended, requires the Contractor or subcontractor employing tradesmen in any apprenticable occupation to apply to the joint apprenticeship committee nearest the site of the public work's project and which administers the apprenticeship program in that trade for a certificate of approval. The certificate will also fix the ratio of apprentices to journeymen that will be used in the performance of the contract. The ratio of apprentices to journeymen in such cases shall not be less than one to five except: A. When unemployment in the area of coverage by the joint apprenticeship committee has exceeded an average of 15 percent in the 90 days prior to the request of certificate, or B. When the number of apprentices in training in the area exceeds a ratio of one to five, or C. When the trade can show that it is replacing at least 1/30 of its membership through apprenticeship training on an annual basis statewide or locally, or D. When the Contractor provides evidence that he employs registered apprentices on all of his contracts on an annual average of not less than one apprentice to eight journeymen. The Contractor is required to make contributions to funds established for the administration of apprenticeship programs if he employs registered apprentices or journeymen in any apprenticable trade on such contracts and if other Contractors on the public works site are making such contributions. The Contractor and subcontractor under him shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices. Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex-officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. Eight (8) hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work for all workmen employed in the execution of this contract and the Contractor and any subcontractor under him shall comply with P5O6 RESOLUTION NO. December 5, 2007 Page 3 and be governed by the laws of the State of California having to do with working hours as set forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code of the State of California as amended. The Contractor shall forfeit, as a penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed in the execution of the contract, by him or any subcontractor under him, upon any of the work herein before mentioned, for each calendar day during which said laborer, workman, or mechanic is required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in violation of said Labor Code. Contractor agrees to pay travel and subsistence pay to each workman needed to execute the work required by this contract as such travel and subsistence payments are defined in the applicable cgllective bargaining agreement filed in accordance with Labor Code Section 17773.8. The bidder must submit with his proposal, cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bidder's bond, payable to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for an amount equal to at least 10% of the amount of said bid as a guarantee that the bidder will enter into the proposed contract if the same is awarded to him, and in event of failure to enter into such contract said cash, cashiers' check, certified check, or bond shall become the property of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. If the City of Rancho Cucamonga awards the contract to the next lowest bidder, the amount of the lowest bidder's security shall be applied by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to the difference between the low bid and the second lowest bid, and the surplus, if any shall be returned to the lowest bidder. The amount of the bond to be given to secure a faithful performance of the contract for said work shall be 100% of the contract price thereof, and an additional bond in an amount equal to 100% of the contract price for said work shall be given to secure the payment of claims for any materials or supplies furnished for the performance of the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, or any work or labor of any kind done thereon, and the Contractor will also be required to furnish a certificate that he carries compensation insurance covering his employees upon work to be done under contract which may be entered into between him and the said City of Rancho Cucamonga for the construction of said work. No proposal will be considered from a Contractor to whom a proposal form has not been issued by the City of Rancho Cucamonga: On the date and at the time of the submittal of the Bidder's Proposal the Prime Contractor shall possess any and all contractor licenses, in form and class as required by any and all applicable laws with respect to any and all of the work to be performed under this contract; Including but not limited to a Class "A" License (General Engineering Contractor) or a combination of Specialty Class "C" licenses sufficient to cover all the work to be performed by the Prime Contractor in accordance with the provisions of the Contractor's License Law (California Business and Professions Code, Section 7000 et. seq.) and rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto. The Contractor, pursuant to the "California Business and Professions Code," Section 7028.15, shall indicate his or her State License Number on the bid, together with the expiration date, and P507 RESOLUTION NO. December 5, 2007 Page 4 be signed by the Contractor declaring, under penalty of perjury, that the information being provided is true and correct. The work is to be done in accordance with the profiles, plans, and specifications of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on file in the Office of the City Clerk at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730. Copies of the plans and specifications, available at the office of the City Engineer, Engineering Counter, will be furnished upon application to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and payment of $35.00 (THIRTY-FIVE DOLLARS), said $35.00 (THIRTY-FIVE DOLLARS) is non refundable. Upon written request by the bidder, copies of the plans and specifications will be mailed when said request is accompanied by payment stipulated above, together with an additional non-reimbursable payment of $15.00 (FIFTEEN DOLLARS) to cover the cost of mailing charges and overhead. The successful bidder will be required to enter into a contract satisfactory to the ,City of Rancho Cucamonga. In accordance with the requirements of Section 9-3.2 of the General Provisions, as set forth in the Plans and Specifications regarding the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, the Contractor may, upon the Contractor's request and at the Contractor's sole cost and expense, substitute authorized securities in lieu of monies withheld (performance retention). The City of Rancho Cucamonga reserves the right to reject any or all bids. Questions regarding this Notice Inviting Bids for the "LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS OF THE MWD PARKWAY AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BLUEGRASS AVENUE AND WILSON AVENUE" may be directed to: Curt Billings, Associate Engineer at (909) 477-2740, ext. 4069. By order of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. Dated this 5th day of December, 2007 Publish Dates: December 11, 2007 and December 18, 2007 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, this 5th day of December, 2007 Donald J. Kurth, MD, Mayor ATTEST: Debra J. Adams, City Clerk I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 5th day of December, 2007. P508 RESOLUTION NO. December 5, 2007 Page 5 Executed this 5th day of December, 2007, at Rancho Cucamonga, California. Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk ADVERTISE ON: December 11, 2007 and December 18, 2007 P509 STAFF REPORT - ADbfINISTRt1TIVE SERVICES DEP~1RTritENT RANCHO Date: December 5, 2007 C,UCAMONGA To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: John R. Gillison, Deputy City Manager/Administrative Service By: George S. Rivera, Human Resources Officer ~ ~~'1~ Subject: Approval of Resolution to Request Author zation from CaIPERS to Provide Medicare Eligibility to Non-Eligible Employees Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council approve the resolution requesting authorization from the California Public Employees Retirement System (CaIPERS) to divide the retirement system into two sections in order to provide Medicare eligibility to non-eligible employees. Backuround The City currently has 13 employees who are not eligible for Medicare coverage. The employees include those who were hired by the City prior to April 1, 1986 when Medicare became mandatory for public employees; among whom are many that do not have sufficient credits, equivalent to 40 quarters of contributions, to become eligible. Non-eligible employees who wish to be covered by Medicare may buyback a certain amount of credit to facilitate in reaching the required number of quarters for eligibility. The process requires an approval from CaIPERS to divide all non-eligible members into (a) those who desire coverage under the Federal system and (b) members who do not desire such coverage. The City first became aware that some pre-1986 non-safety employees, who did not otherwise have Medicare coverage, may wish to opt for Medicare coverage when the City conducted a survey of non-Medicare eligible employees in June 2007. In total, the City has 26 pre-1986 employees, of which 13 are expected to opt for coverage. The primary reason provided by most individuals not opting for coverage is because they have Medicare coverage through their spouse. Human Resources has met with pre-1986 employees several times over the last three (3) months to discuss the possibility of opting into Medicare and the procedures required by CaIPERS to implement this option. The recommended date to begin coverage is September 1, 2008. It is anticipated that it would take approximately 10 to 12 months to complete the process. Based upon the number of employees expected to opt for coverage, the fiscal impact to the City is estimated to be $16,627.00 for the City's required matching 1.45% of base salary contribution. Individual employees will also have 1.45% deducted from their wages, similar to all post-1986 employees. P510 APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION TO REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FROM CALPERS TO PROVIDE PAGE 2 MEDIGRE ELIGIBILITY TO NON-ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES DECEMBER S, ?007 To obtain coverage for the non-eligible pre-1986 employees, the City is required to do the following: a. Pass the attached resolution requesting authorization from CaIPERS to divide the retirement system into those pre-1986 employees who desire Medicare coverage and those who do not. b. Submit the adopted resolution to CaIPERS along with the Coverage Questionnaire (Form PERS-SOC-56A). c. Seek approval from CaIPERS of the resolution. d. Upon approval from CaIPERS, distribute notices to employees; allow employees to vote on the "division election", and certify the results of the election. e. Adopt a second resolution and execute an agreement with the State. f. Wait for final approval. In connection with this process, the City will also be required to reimburse the State for costs incurred by the State in administering this process. Due to the small number of affected personnel this cost is expected to be minimal. The attached resolution will achieve the first step in the process of providing Medicare coverage for non-eligible employees. Subsequently, the City will work with and through CaIPERS and Medicare to complete the above mentioned process that ultimately will allow those currently non-eligible employees who wish to elect Medicare coverage to begin voluntarily paying into the system, thereby receiving quarterly credits in a manner similar to employees hired after April 1, 1986. Staff Report-Medicare-12-5-07.doc P511 RESOLUTION NO. 07- ~.7y A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, TO REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FROM THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM ("CaIPERS") TO DIVIDE THE RETIREMENT SYSTEM INTO TWO SECTIONS PURSUANT TO TITLE 2, CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, ARTICLE 3, DIVISION OF RETIREMENT SYSTEM FOR MEDICARE COVERAGE PURPOSES. WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereinafter designated as "Public Agency", desires to establish a "deemed" retirement system pursuant to Section 218(d)(8) of the Federal Social Security Act composed of positions of members of the California Public Employee Retirement System, hereinafter designated "Present Retirement System', desiring "Medicare-Only" coverage, and to include services performed by individuals employed by the Public Agency in positions covered by said "deemed" retirement system, as members of a coverage group established by Section 218(d)(4) of said Act, in the California State Social Security Agreement of March 9, 1951, providing for the coverage of public employees under the insurance system established by said Act as amended; and WHEREAS, State and Federal law and regulations require, as a condition of such coverage, that a division be authorized by the Board of Administration, CaIPERS; and WHEREAS, it is necessary that the Public Agency now designate any services which it desires to exclude from coverage with respect to such coverage group under said insurance system; and WHEREAS, it is necessary for the Public Agency to set forth the modification, if any, of the benefits and contributions under the Present Retirement System that may result from coverage under the said insurance system with respect to such coverage group; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, HEREBY RESOLVES, that the Board of Administration, CaIPERS, be and hereby is requested to authorize the foregoing division; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that upon receipt of authorization from the Board of Administration a division shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of Section 218(d) of the Social Security Act, and applicable State and Federal laws and regulations; that each eligible member of the Present Retirement System at the time of the division shall be furnished a form to permit the member to elect whether or not his services should be excluded from or included under the said California State Social Security Agreement as hereinbefore provided; with such "Medicare-Only" coverage effective as to services performed on and after September 1, 2008; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the following services with respect to said coverage group of the Public Agency shall be excluded from coverage under said agreement: All services excluded from coverage under the agreement by Section 218 of the Social Security Act; and P512 Resolution No. 07- Page 2 of 3 2. No optional exclusions desired by the Public Agency; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that with respect to the said coverage group the benefits and contributions of the Present Retirement System shall not be modified in any way; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the division shall be given to members of the Present System not less than ninety days prior to the date of the division; provided however, that notice shall be given to employees becoming members of the Present Retirement System after the date of such notice up to and including the date of the divisioh on the date on which they attain membership in the system, and that Michelle Yancy, Benefits Technician, is hereby designated and appointed to conduct such division on behalf of the Public Agency in accordance with law, regulations, and this resolution, including the fixing of the date and the giving of proper notice thereof to members of the Present Retirement System and to all such eligible employees; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Public Agency will pay and reimburse the State at such time and in such amounts as may be determined by the State the approximate cost of any and all work and services relating to such division. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this _ day of December 2007. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAINED: Dr. Donald Kurth, M.D., Mayor ATTEST: Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk P513 Resolution No. 07- Page 3 of 3 I, DEBRA J California, do hereby certi adopted by the City Council of said City Council held on t . ADAMS, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, fy that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved and of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a Regular Meeting he _ day of December 2007. Executed this _ day of December 2007, at Rancho Cucamonga, California. Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk P514 STAFF REPORT ~-; Date: December 5, 2007 ^-1 ~ ^~ RANCHO To: Mayor and Members of the City Council G'UCAMONGA Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: Fabian A. Villenas, Principal Management Analyst, City Manager's Office Subject: APPROVAL OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CHAFFEY COLLEGE FOUNDATION TO BROADCAST THE "CHAFFEY COLLEGE FOUNDATION TELETHON" ON RCTV-3 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve an agreement with the Chaffey College Foundation to broadcast the Chaffey College Telethon from the Chaffey College Theater, on RCTV-3, the City's PEG channel (Government Access), through assistance provided to the College by Charter Communications. The Telethon will be broadcast on: Friday, January 11, 2008, from 5 p.m. to 11 p.m., Saturday, January 12, 2008, from 4 p.m. to 11 p.m., and Sunday, January 13, 2008, from noon/12 p.m. to 10 p.m., for a total of twenty-three (23) Telethon hours over three days (minor overages may be encountered For a smooth transition in programming). BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Due to the fires and windstorms that occurred in late October, the Chaffey College Telethon, previously scheduled for October 26-28, was postoned until further notice. The Chaffey College foundation has contacted City staff with the new dates for the Telethon to broadcast January 11-13, 2008. The City Council had previously approved this agreement for the October telecast at the September 19, 2007 meeting. This agreement reflects the new Telethon dates and allows both parties to reschedule dates again if necessary. All other provisions remain the same. In the City of Rancho Cucamonga where Charter Communications is the primary cable provider for the PEG channel, the Telethon will be available on RCTV-3 (as well as for customers that receive the same RCTV-3 feed from Time Warner). The Telethon will no longer be available on Time Warner's Channel 10 (previously Adelphia's channel) as that service is no longer provided. In addition, the College will webcast the Telethon again this yeaz. All arrangements with the providers Charter and Time Warner aze secured by the Foundation as a part of the cable provider's community television efforts. As part of their community television efforts, Charter Communications will provide Chaffey College with a temporary connection to Charter's system via fiber optic cable, which will allow for the airing of the Telethon on RCTV-3. The fiber optic cable is located in the Chaffey College Theater, and it is from this location that the Telethon will be taped. A temporary transmitter/receiver will be hooked up for the purpose of the Telethon only. Charter will manually switch the feed from RCTV-3 programming to the Telethon feed between the airings of the Telethon. Charter will test the signal before the Telethon, for signal quality prior to broadcast for approximately 30 minutes on Thursday, January ] 0, 2008. The City will provide no technical services. The City's RCTV-3 operating guidelines maintain that entities and groups eligible to submit messages or programming to be aired on RCTV-3 include local government, local public educational institutions, and public agencies, as well as agencies whose events are co-sponsored by the City. P515 APPROVAL OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CHAFFEY COLLEGE FOUNDATION TO BROADCAST THE "CHAFFEY COLLEGE FOUNDATION TELETHON" ON RCTV-3 PAGE2 RCTV-3 programming may not include content considered obscene; promoting illegal activities; activities that attempt to defraud the viewer or attempt to obtain money by fraudulent pretenses, representations or promises; commercial advertising; or messages promoting, endorsing or opposing a political candidate, initiative or election issue. The attached agreement (MOU) includes these provisions. The Chaffey College Foundation and its community partners present the Telethon for developing funds that will be directed to student scholazships and will allocate funds received from the Telethon towazd scholarships. The previous Telethons have raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for student scholazships. The Chaffey College Foundation's goal is to continue to expand the scholarship fund for more students in need. scholazships will again be awarded on the Telethon this yeaz to demonstrate to the community how their donation towazd last yeaz's Telethon is directly benefiting students. The sponsors from previous year's Chaffey College Telethons have agreed to support this year's Telethon. According to the Foundation, sponsors' donations will show on the screen and "crawl" throughout the Telethon. The importance of the financial resources for college will be the emphasis. The sponsors will speak about the importance of education to their success. These segments will be 30 to 60 seconds and may be aired more than once. Both live and taped business and personal testimonials will be aired. They will focus on the benefits of Chaffey College's valuable Associate Degrees, certification in academic and vocational fields, two-year general education, and major course fields for transfer to a four-year college or university program, as well as continuing education and life enrichment programs. According to the Foundation, as in prior years, the Telethon programming will be comprised of community-oriented entertainment. They will present entertainment acts/groups from the local area. All of these entertainment acts have been pre-screened by the Foundation for appropriateness of content and topics to ensure the language and nature of the entertainment is within keeping of general audience viewing. All live entertainers will be receiving instructions from the Foundation/College on acceptable behavior before a viewing audience. The program will be hosted and no commercial elements will be allowed. Again, in accordance with City, and related guidelines, statements of a political or commercial nature will not be allowed. CONCLUSION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Chaffey College Foundation to broadcast the community based Chaffey College Telethon from the Chaffey College Theater on RCTV-3. Respectfully submitted, ~'h----~ v Fabian A. Villenas Principal Management Analyst RCTV-3 and Cable Franchise Admin. Attachment(s) -Memorandum of Understanding P516 APPROVAL OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CHAFFEY COLLEGE FOUNDATION TO BROADCAST THE "CHAFFEY COLLEGE FOUNDATION TELETHON" ON RCTV-3 PAGB 3 ~UJ`~-~,1~,----- P517 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CHAFFEY COLLEGE FOUNDATION AND THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga ("CITY") operates a Public, Education and/or Government access channel (the City's PEG channel) ("RCTV-3"), via its local cable franchise agreement with Charter Communications; and WHEREAS, RCTV-3 airs a governmental and information Bulletin Board that displays text messages the majority of the time, which is normally supplemented with key government and community related programming aired during prime-time viewing; and WHEREAS, it is part of the CITY'S public service mission to offer relevant informational and educational television programming to the public in the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and WHEREAS, the Chaffey College Foundation Telethon is being produced by Chaffey College Foundation ("FOUNDATION") and its Community Partners, for the sole purpose of developing funds that will be directed to student scholazships, and the Foundation Boazd will allocate all funds received from the Telethon; and WHEREAS, the CITY'S RCTV-3 operating guidelines provide that entities and groups eligible to submit messages or programming to be aired on RCTV-3 include: local government, local public educational institutions, and public agencies, as well as agencies whose events are co- sponsored by the CITY; based thereon, the Chaffey College Foundation Telethon is appropriate for airing on RCTV-3; and WHEREAS, the CITY and the FOUNDATION desire to enter into this Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") whereby the FOUNDATION will direct and coordinate the production and transmission of programming appropriate for taped and live cablecast on RCTV-3 during specified time slots scheduled for January 11-13 or such other date as may be agreed upon by the parties' representatives should unforeseen circumstances prevent the event from being conducted on the scheduled date, as set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, the FOUNDATION and the CITY agree as follows: 1. The CITY shall make available to the FOUNDATION designated and agreed-to time slots for the Chaffey College Telethon programming, produced for general viewership and coordinated by the FOUNDATION. The designated and agreed-to time slots aze as follows: The Telethon will be broadcast on: Friday, January 11, 2008, from 5 p.m. to 11 p.m.; Saturday, January 12, 2008, from 4 p.m. to 11 p.m.; Sunday, January 13, 2008, from noon/12 p.m. to 10 p.m. for a total of twenty-three (23) Telethon 1 P518 hours over three days (minor overages may be encountered for a smooth transition in programming). 2. The FOUNDATION shall be solely responsible for the programming aired during the agreed-to time slots. Anew MOU addressing programming for the FOUNDATION'S Telethon to be conducted in the future will need to be entered into. 3. The FOUNDATION shall abide by and conform to eligibility and content guidelines for RCTV-3 programming. Pursuant to those content guidelines, prohibited programming includes, but is not limited to, content considered obscene; content that promotes illegal activities, activities that attempt to defraud the viewer or attempt to obtain money by fraudulent pretenses, representations or promises; commercial advertising; or messages promoting, endorsing or opposing a political candidate, initiative or election issue; and content which predominately conveys a religious or political message. 4. The CITY shall not be responsible in the event any of the scheduled airings do not occur due to any technical reason, including failure of Charter's system or Chaffey's equipment, or due to any other circumstances beyond CITY'S reasonable control. 5. The FOUNDATION shall be responsible for ensuring that Charter Communications and Adelphia resume normal RCTV-3 programming and feed during hours when the Telethon is not being broadcasted. The FOUNDATION expressly understands and agrees that at no time may RCTV-3 be dazk, i.e., without programming, during non-Telethon hours. 6. The FOUNDATION shall be responsible for damages caused by the acts or omissions of its officers, employees, volunteers or agents that occur in relation to its exercise of rights or required performance under this Agreement. Likewise, the CITY shall be responsible for damages caused by the acts or omissions of its officers, employees, or agents that occur in relation to its exercise of rights or required performance under this Agreement. The intent of this paragraph is that each party shall be responsible for any damages caused by its own negligence, arising out of or occurring in connection with this MOU. 7. The FOUNDATION agrees that consideration for the Chaffey Telethon's live broadcast on RCTV-3 will be reconsidered on a yearly basis. 8. This Agreement sets forth the entire understanding between the CITY and the FOUNDATION with respect to the subject matter herein. No representation or promise, whether express or implied, written or oral, that is not contained herein shall be binding or of any force or effect between the parties. By signing below, the FOUNDATION and CITY indicate their willingness to be bound by this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and all provisions herein. CHAFFEY COLLEGE FOUNDATION: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA: By: By: Title: Title: 2 P520 STAFF REPORT COb'1b4UNITY $ER~'ICES DEPdRTD4ENT Date: To: From: By: Subject: December 5, 2007 Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager RANCHO ~UCAMONGA Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director Ryan Samples, Community Services Supervisori~-_ ;`,~ APPROVAL OF A REQUEST FROM THE AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY FOR THE WAIVER OF CENTRAL PARK ROOM RENTAL FEES FOR ONCE PER MONTH COMMITTEE MEETINGS THROUGH APRIL 7, 2008 FOR THE RELAY FOR LIFE EVENT RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve a request from the American Cancer Society to waive room rental fees for monthly committee meetings that will be held at Central Park beginning November 19, 2007 and continuing through April 7; 2007 for the American Cancer Society Relay for Life event. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: The City has received a request to waive fees from the American Cancer Society for a series of monthly community meetings at Central Park beginning November 2007 and continuing through April 2008 for the annual Relay for Life event. The meetings are scheduled for the purpose of planning and organizing the annual Relay for Life event that will be held at Los Osos High School in April 2008. It is anticipated that the meetings will be conducted in Game Point or Clay Creek at the James L. Brulte Senior Center at Central Park on the first Monday of each month from 5:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., beginning November 19, 2007 (3rd Monday) and continuing through April 7, 2008. A total of six meetings will be conducted at Central Park. This recommendation includes the November 19 and December 3 meeting dates although they have already occurred. FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact to the City for the waiver of fees is approximately $270.00. Ily, Kevin T~AcArdle Community Services Director Attachment P521 City Council Members Community Service Department To Whom ,It May Concern: a This letter~is to request that the American Cancer Society be able to use the facilities located at the Central Park Senior Center or The Central Park Community Center. We greatly appreciate your support for our community Relay For Life for the past couple of years and would like to request the same usage for. our Relay 2008. We are also again requesting a waiver of fees due to the non- profit status of the organization. We have been actively involved within the community of Rancho Cucamonga with our efforts to raise awareness about cancer issues, services and fundraising for many years now. In fact our Relay For Life in this community has been extremely successful. At our community Relay this past May of 2007, we had more than 1500 participants and close to 100 survivors in attendance at Los Osos High School. We raised over $115,000.00, which will be leverage and used rieht here in this community. We would like the facility use for the First Monday of each month through March, and then in April we will need to host several meetings in preparation for our Relay. We are attaching a meeting schedule, so that you can review all of the dates that we are requesting. We would need to accommodate between 20 and 60 community members. The closer we get to our April 12th, 2008 Relay For Life, the more community members we anticipate having. There are several things we would like for you to keep in mind when reviewing this application. First and fore most, the reason that the American Cancer Society is rated in the top ten for non- profits, is because we try to get everything donated from within the community. This is also why we are the;top funder of cancer research for anon-profit. Second, this is almost completely volunteer-community ran. This event actually haooens IN and directly bene5ts OUR community. Third, everyone knows of someone who has suffered, is suffering or has lost the battle to cancer. Together this community can say yes, I support you, your loved one, family or friend! Are we a community that takes up the fight? Will you support the efforts of the American Cancer Society and OUR COMMUNITY? I have enclosed some facts about the American Cancer Society, the Relay For Life, a Proposed Meeting Schedule (depending upon availability) and the Central Park Facility Reservation Request Form. Please feel free to call me with questions concerning the Rancho Cucamonga Relay For Life. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Deborah K. Quinn Rancho Cucamonga Relay For Life Event Chair dkquinn47@yahoo.com deborah.k.quinn@kp.org Aaron Davis Relay For Life, Manager Border Sierra Region 1240 Palmyrita Ave, Unit A Riverside, Ca 92507 951.300.1231 P522 ~.~ ', ' 'E•~, ~ l:' ~,~ ~. :~,`: R A NBC H O C U C A M O N G A CITY C O U N C I L Staff Report DATE: December 5, 2007 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Linda D. Daniels, Redevelopment Director BY: Jan Reynolds, Redevelopment Analyst II SUBJECT: REVIEW AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF A SUBLEASE BETWEEN J. FILIPPI VINTAGE COMPANY, INC. AND SAFFRON CATERING & EVENT SERVICES, INC., FOR SPACE WITHIN REGINA WINERY AS BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE TERMS OF THE GROUND LEASE BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND J. FILIPPI VINTAGE COMPANY. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council review the Sublease between J. Filippi Vintage Company, Inc. and Saffron Catering & Event Services, Inc., and acknowledge the Sublease's consistency with the terms of the existing Regina Winery Ground Lease between the City and J. Filippi Vintage Company, Inc. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: J. Filippi Vintage Company, Inc. proposes a sublease with Saffron Catering & Event Services, Inc. for catering and banquet services for a term of five (5) years. The sublease space includes the kitchen area, kitchen work area, and kitchen office spaces which encompasses approximately 900 square feet in the kitchen area of the winery tasting room building. The tenant of the sublease will also have access to common areas including the banquet room and rest rooms. Saffron proposes installation of a dishwasher and food preparation area, but does not propose installation of ovens or cooking facilities. The sublease states that the tenant will prepare and cook food items at a remote site and transport them to the Regina facility. Staff and the City Attorney have reviewed the Sublease and have determined that it is consistent with the uses and requirements specified in the City's Ground Lease and permitted under the existing Conditional Use Permit for the Winery, which includes the P523 locations in which alcoholic beverages can be served. In addition, the Sublease identifies the tenant is responsible for any permits for construction as well as for operations through the County Health Department. Any events conducted outdoors or involving live entertainment will remain subject to a Special Events Permit processed through the Planning Department. Respectfully submitted, ~, ~ ~~~ Lin a D. Daniels Redevelopment Director Attachment: Sublease P524 SUBLEASE THIS SUBLEASE, executed at Rancho Cucamonga, California, on the day of 20_ between the J. Filippi Vintage Co. Inc., a California Corporation (JFW), hereinafter referred to as "Lessor' and Saffron Catering & Event Services, Inc., a California Corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Lessee". IT IS AGREED between the Parties hereto as follows: 1. Kitchen Work Space and Office Area: The Lessor hereby leases to Lessee, and Lessee leases from Lessor, on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, those certain premises which include. the kitchen area, kitchen work area, and kitchen office space, which encompasses an approximate amount of 900 square feet in the kitchen area of the winery tasting room building, and access to common areas to include the banquet room, bottling /cellar area, restrooms and other common areas, situated in Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California and located at 12467 Baseline Rd., Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739. (see attachment exhibit A page 9). 2. Term: The Term of the Sublease shall be for one Five (5) year term commencing on November 1, 2007 and expiring on October 31, 2012. The Lessee shall begin paying his actual rent on November 1, 2007 and it shall be due thereafter on the first day of each month. 3. The rental for the demised premises shall be Seven Hundred Fifty Dollars ($750 per month) starting on November 1, 2007. Lessee agrees to pay Lessor, without deduction or offset, at such places at may be designated from time to time from Lessor. 4. Security Deposit: Not applicable 5. The Lessee acknowledges that late payment to the Lessor will cause the Lessor to incur costs not contemplated in this Sublease, the exact amount of such costs being difficult and impractical to determine. Such costs include, without limitations, processing and P525 accounting charges. Therefore, if one or more installment is not received by the Lessor by five o'clock (5:00 pm) on the tenth (10"') business day of the month, the Lessee shall pay to the Lessor an additional sum of ten percent (10%) of the overdue amount as a late charge, which late charge is agreed to represent a fair and reasonable estimate of cost that the Lessor will incur by reason of the late payment. Expectancy of any late charge shall not constitute a waiver of the default with respect to the overdue amount, and shall not prevent the Lessor from exercising any other rights and remedies available to the Lessor pursuant to Law. (Lessee's Initials) The premises are leased to the Lessee for the purpose of the operation of a catering and event services business. Performance: 6. Lessee shall, at its sole cost and expense, comply with any and all requirements, pertaining to said premises, of any insurance organization or company, necessary for the maintenance of reasonable fire and public liability insurance, covering said building and appurtenances which tenant occupies or uses. 7. Services Provided to JFW by lessee: Marketing: Lessee should incorporate the JFW venue into the overall marketing plan and would include the following: • Lessee would include the JFW in their new brochure/website which will feature JFW as an exclusive venue. • Prepare custom winery menus allowing JFW winery clients to have unique catering options with ordering made easy for their special event(s). • Marketing of JFW to various groups/clients/organizations/companies structured to be benefit both parties. Saffron's currently staffs a full marketing department which is equipped to expand its marketing activities to include the JFW venue. • Lessee would co- sponsor events reducing the cost of these events for both parties (ex: Wedding Shows/Business Exhibits - we could get one booth and split the cost - essentially we would be considered the same company) • Lessee will be providing food prepared off site, and only use warming ovens on site with serving activity. • Lessee acknowledges that any event that is outdoors, and/or includes live entertainment is not permitted by the CUP and requires additional permits/approvals by the City. P526 Lessee acknowledges that any use of any portion of the entire premises, which does not have approved occupancy, is prohibited and not accessible until compliance with building codes has been granted. Event Coordination/Customer Service: Lessee Lessee handle inquires for the JFW venue with a Web based project manager system which would entail handling the booking of events and payments to JFW for facility rentals; the designation of one venue Manager that will be responsible for the JFW clients. Lessee will process facility rental fees on behalf of JFW once a month and shall pay JFW for all collected facility rental fees within 15 days of the last day of said month. At the option of JFW, JFW shall be able to rent out its facilities and collect fees without the utilization of lessee's services as stated within this sublease /agreement. Space Occupied • Lessee will have the ability to book space in the bottling /cellar area, outside park area and banquet room for private parties adhering to the approved occupancy. Lessee acknowledges and will comply with the uses and conditions of approved CUP 94-25, including where alcoholic beverages can be served.. • Lessee will co-habit the current "kitchen space" -with the JFW winery staff. This space would be used to expedite events and store miscellaneous equipment. • Lessee will have a private space "dishwasher space" where it could leave small wear, silverware, linen etc. • Lesee will have an office for personnel. Event Set up and Clean up: It is the lessee's sole responsibility to set up and tear down of the events. 8. Lessee shall not use the premises, or permit anything to be done in or about the premises, which will in any way conflict with any law, statute, ordinance or governmental rule or regulation now in force or which may hereafter be enacted or promulgated. Lessee shall keep their "A" rating given by the Environmental Health Department. Lessee shall, at its sole cost and expense, promptly comply with all laws, statutes, ordinances or governmental rules, regulations or requirements now in force or which may hereafter be in force and with the requirements of any board of fire underwriters or other similar bodies now or hereafter constituted relating to or affecting the condition, use or occupancy of the premises, excluding structural changes not related to or affected by Lessee's improvements or acts. The judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction or the admission of Lessee in any action against Lessee, whether Lessor be a party thereto or not, that Lessee has violated any law, statute, ordinance or governmental rule, regulation ore requirement, shall be conclusive of the fact as between the Lessor and Lessee. P527 8.1 Lessee shall refrain from restricting the rental, sale or lease of the premises, the fixtures or the improvements' on the basis of sex, age, handicap, marital status, race, color, religion, creed, ancestry or national origin of any person. All deeds, leases, or contracts entered into by Lessee in connection therewith shall contain or be subject to substantially the same nondiscrimination or segregation clauses. 9. Lessee shall not commit, or suffer to be committed, any waste upon the said premises, or any nuisance, or other act of thing which may disturb the quite enjoyment of any other Tenant in the building in which the demise premises may be located. 10. Lessee shall not make or suffer to be committed, any alterations of the said premises, or any part thereof, without the written consent of Lessor first had and obtained, and any additions to, or alterations, the said premises, except moveable furniture shall become at once a part of the realty and belong to Lessor. Lessee shall keep the demise premises and the property in which the demise premises are situated free from any liens arising out of any work performed, material furnished or obligations incurred by Lessee. 10.1 Lessee shall submit plans and obtain permits as needed for all proposed improvements. Any Improvements must take into consideration the preservation of those fixtures and equipment that are of historic value and identified in the Chattel Report that is an attachment to the Ground Lease. 10.2 Lessee shall obtain or already have all approvals as needed from health department, and have a final inspection of all interior improvements, prior to beginning operations as stated in this sublease. 11. Lessor shall keep and maintain in good order the exterior of the premises including exterior walls, roof and structural parts, two restrooms on the ground floor and parking lot. Lessee shall keep and maintain in good order the interior of the premises demised and shall be responsible for repair at his sole cost, of any damage caused by him, or by his customers, and Lessee, further, at his sole cost, shall make and maintain all improvements and alterations to the interior of the premises, including painting, subject to the prior written approval of Lessor. 12. Lessee, as a material part of the consideration to be rendered to Lessor, hereby waives all claims against Lessor (unless Lessor is negligent) for damages to goods, wears and merchandise, in, upon or about said premises and for injuries to Lessee, his agents, or third persons in or about said premises from any cause arising at any time, and Lessee will hold Lessor exempt and harmless from any damage or injury to any person, arising from the use of the premises by Lessee, or from the failure of Lessee to keep the premises in good condition and repair, as herein provided. 13. When premises is under the supervision/use of Lessee, lessee is solely responsible for any and all liabilities which could occur but, not limited to damaged art, damage to the building or any facility. P528 Lessee will provide public liability insurance covering the area leased by Lessee, with limits of liability for personal injury of not less than Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00) for each person; One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) for each occurrence, and for property damage of Five Hundred Thousand ($500,000.00) for each accident, and Lessee will deliver to Lessor a memorandum certificate of such insurance policy, evidencing such coverage within thirty (30) days of the inception of this Lease. Said policy shall name Joseph Filippi Winery Inc. and the City of Rancho Cucamonga as an additional insured, and shall contain an endorsement to the effect that said policy will not be canceled by the insurer without first giving notice to Lessor thirty (30) days advance notice in writing of such cancellation thereof, and Lessee agrees that if Lessee does not keep such insurance in full force and effect, the Lessor may take out the necessary insurance and pay the premium and repayment thereof shall be deemed to part of the payment as such on the next day upon which rent becomes due. 14. Lessee shall not conduct or permit to be conducted any sale by auction on said premises. Lessee shall not place or permit to be placed any projecting sign, marquee, or awning on the front of said premises without the written consent of Lessor; Lessee, upon request of Lessor, shall immediately remove any sign or decoration which Lessee has placed or permitted to be placed in, on or about in the front of the premises and which, in the opinion of the Lessor, is objectionable or offensive, and if Lessee fails to do so, Lessor may enter upon said premises, and Lessee shall not place or permit to be placed upon said sidewall, rear wall, or roof, any sign, advertisement or notice without the written consent of Lessor. 15. If the demised premises be damaged or destroyed during the term of this Sublease by fire, flood or by the elements, the Lessor shall within sixty (60) days repair the same and the Lessee shall be entitled to abatement of the rent for such period of time as the premises shall be untenable, unless such damage or destruction is caused by the Lessee, in which case the lessee shall be responsible for the cost of repairs. In the event the premises may be damaged or destroyed to an extent that some part of the said premises shall not be . tenable, except if such damage or destruction is cause by the Lessee, the Lessee shall be entitled to a proportionate reduction of the rent for such untenable portion during the time repairs are being made by Lessor within the sixty (60) day period. If, however, the demised premises shall be so damaged as to cause Lessor to decide not to repair or rebuild the same, the term of this Sublease shall terminate as of the date of such damages or destruction, and liability for future rent shall cease as of such time. 16. This Sublease and all rights of Lessee hereunder shall be subordinate to the lien of any trust deed or any other encumbrance, which may now or hereafter affect the demised premises or upon the real .property of which the demised property is a part. Lessee hereby agrees to and shall, upon demand, execute, acknowledge, and deliver to the Lessor without expense to Lessor any and all documents that may be necessary and proper to subordinate this Sublease to the lien of any such trust deed or other encumbrance. P529 17. Either (A) the appointment of a receiver to take possession of all or substantially all of the assets of Lessee, or (B) a general assignment by Lessee for the benefit of creditors, or (C) any action taken or suffered by Lessee under insolvency or bankruptcy act shall constitute a breach of this Sublease by Lessee. 18. (A) Time is of the essence hereof. If default be made on the part of either party in any of the covenants contained herein, except for the payment of rent, and it shall not be rectified by the defaulting party within fifteen (15) days after receipt of notice from the other party, then the term hereby granted shall, at the option of said party not in default forthwith cease and terminate. (B) This Sublease is made upon the express condition that if default be made in the payment of rent above reserved or any part thereof, or if Lessee fails or neglects to perform, meet or observe any of the Lessee's obligations hereunder or if Lessee shall abandon or vacate said premises, the Lessor, or the legal representative of Lessor, at any time thereafter, without notice or demand, may lawfully declare said term ended, and re-enter said premises, or any part thereof, either with our without process of law, and expel, remove and put out the Lessee or any person or persons occupying said premises, and may remove all personal property there from, using such force as may be necessary to repossess and enjoy said premises as before this demise, without prejudice to any remedies which might otherwise be used for arrears of rent or preceding breach of covenants or conditions, and without liability to any person for damages sustained by reasons of such removal. (C) The subsequent acceptance of rent hereunder by the Lessor shall not be deemed a waiver of any preceding breach of any obligations hereunder by the Lessee other than the failure to pay the particular rental so accepted; and the waiver of any breach of covenant or condition by the Lessor herein shall not constitute a waiver or any other breach regardless of knowledge thereof. 19. In the event of litigation arising from default in performance of any of the provisions of this Sublease by either the Lessor or the Lessee, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to receive from the other party reasonable attorneys fees and costs of action incurred in connection with such litigation. In the event that either the Lessor or the Lessee shall, by reason of acts and omission or commission in violation of the terms of this Sublease, or by any other reason arising out if the Lessee-Lessor relationship, be made a party to such litigation commenced by a person other than the parties hereto, then such party performing the said act or suffering the same omission shall pay all costs, expenses, and reasonable attorneys fees incurred by the other party which arises from, or are necessarily incidental to such litigation. P530 20. If any part of the premises shall be taken or condemned for a public or quasi- public use, and a part thereof remains which is susceptible of occupation hereunder, this Sublease shall, as to the part so taken, terminate as of the date title shall vest in the condemnor, and the rent payable hereunder shall be adjusted so that the Lessee shall be required to pay for the remainder of the term only such portion of such rent as the value of the part remaining after condemnation bears to the value of the entire premises at the date of condemnation; but in the event Lessor shall have the option to terminate this Sublease as of this date when title to the part so condemned vests in the condemnor If all the demised premises, or such part thereof be taken or condemned so that there does not remain a portion susceptible for occupation hereunder, the Sublease shall thereupon terminate. If a part or all of the demised premises be taken or condemned, all compensation awarded upon such condemnation or taking shall go to the Lessor and the Lessee shall have the right to stake his claim thereto, by reason of the condemnation of all, or a part of the demised premises. 21. As a material inducement to lease, Lessor hereby represents and warrants as follows: (A) Ownership of Property and Equipment Lessee will own and provide any kitchen or service equipment for use on the premises. (B) Ownership of Premises: Prior Claims Lessor has good and valid title to the leased premises referred to herein and there is no prior existing Sublease, option or other possible claim for tenancy in or on the premises which in any way would interfere with Lessee's quite enjoyment of the subleased premises. 22. Lessee shall not sublease or assign this sublease without the written consent of lessor. 23. In the event that any or all of the shares of stock of Lessee are sold or transferred, or if any of.the assets of Lessee are sold or transferred, other than the ordinary course of business, Lessor shall have the right to terminate this agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, LESSOR and LESSEE have executed this Sublease on day of , 2007. P532 ,, ~y ~sx p of ~ g~ . .^ '~~ ~ ~~ '~ 3 p i S I. i i i i ~f I`.. . f~:) !~ 9 I I I 1 Ial~~ fi. {r~ { ~v h~1 \~ .}" ~` `~ _~ .. ~ ~k~n•irm`ti 7c ai e. STAFF REPORT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Date: December 5, 2007 To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer By: Walter C. Stickney, Associate Engineer P534 \ ti RANCHO C,,UCAMONGA Subject: APPROVAL OF THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY`S FINANCE DIRECTOR TO FILE AND SIGN A CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND, ARTICLE 3 FUNDS THAT THE SAN BERNARDINO ASSOCIATED GOVERNMENTS HAD SET ASIDE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE CITY'S PACIFIC ELECTRIC INLAND EMPIRE TRAIL, PHASE 3 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the attached resolution authorizing the City's Finance Director to file and sign a claim for Local Transportation Fund (LTF) Article 3 funds that the San Bernardino Associated Governments had set aside for the construction of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, Phase 3.. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS On February 1, 2005, the City submitted an application to the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) for LTF Article 3 funds to help defray the costs for constructing the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, Phase 3. The project limits extend from Archibald Avenue to Haven Avenue. Later, the City was informed that SANBAG during its March 16, 2005 meeting had approved the City's application and authorized $954,900.00 be set aside for the construction of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, Phase 3. Now that construction of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, Phase 3 Project is complete, the City seeks to file a claim with SANBAG for reimbursement of the LTF Article 3 funds. The City will be seeking reimbursement of the entire $954,900.00. One of the SANBAG requirements for reimbursement is the submittal of a certified copy of a City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga resolution authorizing the City's Finance Director to file and sign a claim for reimbursement. Respectfully sub%'mitted,~ p Wil am J. O'Neil City Engineer WJONVS:Is Attachments: Vicinity Map and Resolution P535 RESOLUTION NO. O7'~ 7S. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY'S FINANCE DIRECTOR TO FILE AND SIGN A CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND, ARTICLE 3 FUNDS THAT THE SAN BERNARDINO ASSOCIATED GOVERNMENTS HAD SET ASIDE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC INLAND EMPIRE TRAIL, PHASE 3 WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga is eligible to receive Local Transportation Fund (LFT) Article 3 funds, administered through the San Bernardino Associated Government (SANBAG), as reimbursement for the costs of constructing the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, Phase 3 Project and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga authorizes the City's Finance Director .to file a claim for reimbursement of LFT Article 3 funds for the construction of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, Phase 3 and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Finance Director is hereby authorized to sign the above mentioned claim. By order of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. Dated this 5'h day of December, 2007 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, this 5'h day of December, 2007. Donald J. Kurth, M.D., Mayor ATTEST: Debra J. Adams, City Clerk I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, CITY CLERK of the certify that the foregoing Resolution was Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, held on the 5'" day of December, 2007 City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City California, at a regular meeting of said City Council Executed this 5~h day of December, 2007, at Rancho Cucamonga, California. Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk P536 CITY OF R4NCH0 CUC_AMONG:~ VICIlYITY NLAP PACIFIC ELECTRIC INLAND EMPIRE TRAIL, PHASE 3 J ARCHIBALD AVE. TO HAVEN AVE. Staff Report DATE: December O5, 2007 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Michael TenEyck, Utility Operations Manager SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ADOPTING A SOLAR REBATE PROGRAM FOR THE MUNICIPAL UTILITY AREA PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA SOLAR 1NITIATNE AS REQUIItED BY SENATE BILL 1 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopt a resolution for a solar rebate program for the municipal utility area pursuant to the California Solar Initiative as required by Senate Bill 1. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga established a municipal utility on August 31, 2001. On August 21, 2006, Senate Bill 1 (SB1) was signed into law establishing a statewide goal of installing 3000 MW of solar generating capacity within 10 years. The law required that on or before January 1, 2008, all publicly owned electric utilities shall offer a monetary incentive for the installation of solar energy systems of at least two dollars and eighty cents ($2.80) per installed watt, or for electricity produced by the solar energy system, measured in kilowatt-hours, as determined by the publicly owned utility. The incentive per installed watt has shall decline by 7 percent (7%), each year thereafter effective each January 1, 2009. The expenditure level for all publicly owned utilities shall be seven hundred eighty-four million dollars ($784,000,000), spread over ten years. The expenditure level for each publicly owned utility shall be capped at the utilities percentage of statewide load served by all local publicly owned electric utilities for the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility this amounts to 0.159% or one million two hundred and fifry thousand dollars ($1,250,000) spread over the next ten years. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA IMPLEMENTING A SOLAR REBATE PROGRAM FOR THE MUNICIPAL UTILITY AREA PURSUANT TO SENATE BILL 1 DECEMBERS, 2007 PAGE2 The resolution authorizes the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility to begin implementing the program effective January 1, 2008, and will be administered by in-house staff in accordance the guidelines established by the California Energy Commission and will be budgeted and paid for out of Municipal Utility Public Benefit funds. Respectfully Submitted, Will am J. O'Neil City Engineer P538 WJO:MT P539 RESOLUTION NO. 0 ~- ~ 7~J A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ADOPTING A SOLAR REBATE PROGRAM PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF SENATE BILL 1. A. Recitals. WHEREAS, on August 21, 2006, Senate Bill 1 (SB1) was signed into law establishing a statewide goal of installing 3000 MW of solar generating capacity within 10 years. WHEREAS, on or before January 1, 2008, all publicly owned electric utilities shall offer a monetary incentive for the installation of solaz energy systems of at least two dollars and eighty cents ($2.80) per installed watt, or for electricity produced by the solar energy system, measured in kilowatt-hours, as determined by the publicly owned utility. WHEREAS, the incentive per installed watt has shall decline by 7 percent (7%), each year thereafter effective each January 1, 2009. WHEREAS, the expenditure level for all publicly owned utilities shall be seven hundred eighty-four million dollars ($784,OOQ000), spread over ten years. The expenditure level for each publicly owned utility shall be capped at the utilities percentage of statewide load served by all local publicly owned electric utilities. WHEREAS, All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby find and resolve as follows: Section 1. The facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A of this Resolution, are true and correct. Section 2. The rebates, rates, fees and charges assessed under Solar Rebate Program shall be as set forth on Attachment 1 hereto and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. P540 Attachment I Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility -Solar Rebate Program Incentive Type: Utility Rebates Renewable Technology: Photovoltaic Applicable Sectors: All RCMU grid connected customers Incentive Amount: $2.80 per watt AC. Decreasing 7% per year starting 01-01-2009 Year $ Watt $ Kwh 2008 $ 2.80 $0.10 2009 $ 2.60 $0.09 2010 $ 2.42 $0.09 2011 $ 2.25 $0.08 2012 $ 2.09 $0.08 2013 $ 1.95 $0.07 2014 $ 1.81 $0.07 2015 $ 1.68 $0.06 2016 $ 1.57 $0.06 2017 $ 1.46 $0.05 Maximum Incentive: $25,000.00 Eligible Size: No size restrictions Equipment Requirements: Must use CEC-certified PV modules and inverters; Must have minimum 10-year warranty per CEC requirement. Meters must meet CEC accuracy and warranty requirements. Installation Requirements: PV system must be grid-connected; Installer must be licensed contractor Ownership of Renewable Energy Credit: Utility retains ownership STAFF REPORT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Date: December 5, 2007 To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. ONeil, City Engineer By: Tasha Hunter, Engineering Tech. P541 RANCHO CUCAMONGA Subject: APPROVAL OF RELEASE OF REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FOR PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP 7891, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD EAST OF HERMOSA AVENUE (PREVIOUSLY TURNER) RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution releasing the real property improvement contract and lien ageement for Pazcel 2 of Pazcel Map 7891 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the Resolution approving same and cause same Resolution to record. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: A real property improvement contract and lien ageement for Parcel Map 7891 was approved by City Council on July 6, 1983, and recorded as document 83-192112. The ageement was for construction of missing off-site street improvements including one-half median island adjacent to the property along Foothill Boulevazd. The missing off-site street improvements have been constructed thus eliminating the need for the real property improvement contract and lien ageement. Respectfully submitted, ~~~~~ ~ William J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:TCH Attachment(s) P542 is N VICINITY MAP W E S City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering. Division Title: ~~~.ce~ /~~ ~ ~8 9/ Exhibit: P543 RESOLUTION NO. D 7-Z 7~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RELEASING OF REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FOR PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP 7891, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD EAST OF HERMOSA AVENUE (PREVIOUSLY TURNER) WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, adopted Resolution No. 83-107 accepting a real property improvement contract and alien agreement for Parcel Map 7891; and WHEREAS, the improvements required under the lien agreement have been constructed and said real property improvement contract and lien agreement is no longer required. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby release said real property improvement contract and lien agreement from Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 7891, and the Mayor is authorized to sign this resolution and the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to cause Release of Lien to be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of the County of San Bernardino, State of California STAFF REPORT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DATE: December 5, 2007 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Joseph Stofa Jr., Associate Engineer P544 RANCHO cUCAMONGA SUBJECT: VACATION OF EXCESS DRAINAGE EASEMENT (V-212) -ALEX MA - A REQUEST TO VACATE A 5 TO 10 FEET WIDE BY 500 FOOT LONG EXCESS DRAINAGE EASEMENT ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF ALTA LOMA CHANNEL LOCATED BETWEEN HELLMAN AVENUE AND BERYL STREET (6928 HELLMAN AVENUE) - APN: 0202-041-62. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution ordering the vacation of excess drainage easement along the Alta Loma Channel between Hellman Avenue and Beryl Street. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: - The subject property, 6928 Hellman Avenue, is located on the southwest corner of Mignonette Street and Hellman Avenue and contains an easement along the westerly property boundary for drainage of public waters. The easement for drainage purposes in the natural state was originally obtained by the County of San Bernardino, .prior. to.. incorporation by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. In 1984, the drainage area was improved with a concrete channel thus reducing the area required for maintenance. The proposed reduction of drainage easement has been reviewed by staff and found acceptable. In addition, it will reduce the maintenance liability. On November 14, 2007, the Planning Commission found that said vacations conform to the General Plan and recommended that the vacation occur. Respectfully submitte^d,~ ~~~~-l~t WillYam J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:JES/rlc Attachments: Exhibit A -Vicinity Map Exhibit B -Vacation Exhibit P545 ~i~ s~~ _. i t HIS NL: I~ ~~ ~~ l ~ ~~' VICINITY MAP City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Division N W E S Title: G 9 ~ 8 NFLL/y i4/~/ Exhibit: B-1 EXHIBIT g LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR CITY PARCEL VACATION IN CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT PORTION OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF LOT 3, BLOCK 12 CUCAMONGA HOMESTEAD ASSOCIATION LANDS, IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 6 PAGE 46 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. SAID PORTION LYING WESTERLY OF A LINE DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED JUNE 6, 1984 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 84-132673, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:' °' COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF PARCEL N0. 2 OF PARCEL MAP N0. 3189 IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FILED IN PARCEL MAP BOOK NO. 30, PAGE 92; THENCE SOUTH 89'44'04" WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL N0. 2, 146.12 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING ON ANON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHEAST, HAVING A RADIUS OF 465.00 FEET, TO WHICH POINT A RADIAL BEARS SOUTH 69'52'29" WEST; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY 235.55 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 29'01'26" TO THE BEGINNING POINT OF A NON-TANGENT LINE, TO WHICH POINT A RADIAL BEARS SOUTH 40'51'03" WEST; THENCE SOUTH 47'28'00" EAST 60.74 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 49'54'50" EAST 225.14 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE WEST LINE OF HELLMAN AVENUE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID WEST LINE SOUTH 00'30'25" EAST 6.59 FEET TO A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT 5.00 FEET; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE NORTH 49'54'50" WEST 225.76 FEET TO A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 475.00 FEET; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 4°06'50", AN ARC LENGTH OF 34.11 .FEET TO A REVERSE CURVE CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 475.00 FEET; THENCE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 34°20'15", AN ARC LENGTH OF 284.67 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL .NO. 2; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE NORTH 89'44'04" EAST 10.62 TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGfNNING. CONTAINS APPP,OXIMATE 4,017 SO. FT. . _` '~~ '~ AFFECT PARCEL OF APN 0202-041-61 ~~Lfi'e. _, , li `* ,,r 9 ~~/~ B-2 c SE COR. OF PARCEL 2 P. M. N0. 3169, P. M. B, 30-96. THE POINT DF BEGINNING X 12" SEWER - THE TRUE POINT - 10.62' OF BEGINNING ~ \ 589'44'04"W \ 146.12' ~~~ \\ \ i ~A ~~569_62'29"W ~~` \\ u~ m (RADr- i` \ ~s ~` ~ 'o O. '\ \ EXHIBIT B RECORD DATA PER DEED REC. JUNE 6. 1984 AS INST. N0. 84-132673 MIGNONETTE STREET S89_44'04"W O M 356.74' I W ~~~ 5 [~ ~ \ 0- ~` \ ~ !. `` \ \~ \\ ~ ,~o~, \~ ., ^;~ ~ '> / ~ ~ry ~ ~ ',s 's°' ~~ ~/ p/P >/`Q' tic R, ~ /T SQL. EX, t2" SEWE O R26•~,% 028' R'9iy ~ ~ T ~ ,~c q~ ~ / / ` `~ ~ c, APN: 0202-041-61 ctigti ~ :~ ~ . ~~< „' cjGU LAND SC/ ~~ II~~ Yi.i, :9 ~~ :a ~~ ,vc o~" / e .~Fl SCALE: 1"=60' EX. 12" 346.12' ~ 200.00' I I I I m it m I M I 33' I II I I I . I 6928 N. HELLMAN STREET i I RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA I APN: 0202-041-62 I w I SOe 0' LEGEND PROPOSED AREA TO BE VACATED BY THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CONTAINS APPOXIM ATE 4,077 S0. FT. - - - LOT LINE TO BE REMOVED ~~• NEW LOT LINE CURVE TABLE CURVE RADIUS LENGTH ANGLE C1 475.00' 34.11' 4'06'50" I z I I > I Q z I I ~ I n ~ I Z ~I Q I ,m I ~ I = I w I I I 3 II ,~ ~ ~ I ~. ~ I \ ~a ,n° I \ ~, z I I N j, \o~ ~ I '0„1 a , a I ~'~~ ~', ~ "7,22 33' I \ ~~ I jT I EX. 12" SEWER) ~~ J' 1 m I °r~ ~ ~ h~ \~~ I ~~ I II MONTE VISTA AVENUE 7 B-3 P548 RESOLUTION NO. O7-~~O A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ORDERING THE VACATION (V-212) OF A PORTION OF ALTA LOMA CHANNEL LOCATED BETWEEN HELLMAN AVENUE AND BERYL STREET (6928 HELLMAN AVENUE). WHEREAS, by Chapter 4, Article 1, Section 8334, of the Streets and Highway Code, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga is authorized to vacate that portion of the storm drain easement hereinafter more particularly described; and WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission on November 14, 2007, by minute action finds and determines that .the vacation of the subject storm drain easement herein contemplated conforms to the City's General Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council found all the evidence submitted that portions of Alta Loma Channel Easement are unnecessary for present or prospective drainage purposes because the channel has been fully improved and the additional easement is not required. NOW, THEREFORE,_.BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: SECTION 1: That the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby makes its order vacating excess Alta Loma Channel Easement (V-212), on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, which have been further shown on Exhibit "A" and by reference made a part thereof. SECTION 2: That from and after the date the resolution is recorded, said storm drain easement no longer constitutes a public easement. SECTION 3: That the City Clerk shall cause a certified copy of this resolution to be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of San Bernardino County, California. Don Kurth, Mayor ATTEST: Debbie J. Adams, City Clerk STAFF REPORT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DATE: December 5, 2007 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Joe Stofa Jr., Associate Engineer RANCHO C,UCAMONGA SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF MAP AND ORDERING THE ANNEXATION TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 5 FOR PARCEL MAP 16884 LOCATED AT 6433 PUMA PLACE SUBMITTED BY BLU CROIX, LTD ON BEHALF OF VERIZON CALIFORNIA -APN: 0225-271-49. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolutions approving Parcel Map 16884, order the maintenance .annexations and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign said resolution BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Tentative Parcel Map 16884, located at 6433 Puma Place was approved by the Planning Commission on October 25, 2006, by Resolution No. 06-97 for the development of 4 parcels. BIu Croix, Ltd on behalf of Verizon California, is submitting for approval 4 parcels-which includes 3 parcels for development of single family homes and 1 parcel to be retained by Verizon California for their use at 6433 Puma Place. The off-site public improvements have previously been completed, thus the agreement and security are not required. Respectfully submitted, ~~G~ William J. O'Neil City Engineer P549 WJO:JES/rlc P550 F S =i, U = ~I 4'~;umi r- i~r• 11 ` ~ 441 ~{GA1 " ' i 9 ' 's :~ i d' .G . .. ' 1a_ ~ . }, ~ ~'~ , ' n' ~ ~ N ~ p~ (;b P~ ~ i .f ~ s i6i~' Z i%~ .'~ ' .tl l 9 ~ aovla vwna ~,~o°a;; . ; B 'F N °o ~ / pp~ ~ d •,o o m ~ O P ~/ L ~ h ~? W.IS.9„ g } ~ ~ r, ~ o ~~ ~~ a ; p` 'a ~ ~ / " ~ y I ~ - 91' WD ' ~' i ' .W.ii.9x , t~ _ ~I~~ ~ ~ tl ' ` v N / ~ o ,~ g a u~ e ~ m ., ~ ,. ,~, ,I, s~ t g .~ _ Q a / s= ' W `~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Po o1 a o m ~ .99. ac.r~x z ~ U z 4 C o -1 h 1- - U .q L I C ~ 'A ' N V ^~ `~`j 311N3Atl N3]IIIIIW P551 RESOLUTION NO. O 7 - 279 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 16884 WHEREAS, Parcel Map 16884 submitted by Blu Croix, Ltd on behalf of Verizon California consisting of 4 parcels located at 6433 Puma Place was approved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga for the division of 4 parcels on October 25, 2006, and is in compliance with the State Subdivision Map Act and Local Ordinance No. 28 adopted pursuant to that Act; and WHEREAS, all of the requirements established as prerequisite to approval of the final map by the City Council of said City have now been met with Blu Croix, Ltd on behalf of Verizon California, as developer; and WHEREAS, said Developer submits for approval said Parcel Map 16884 offering for dedication, for street, highway and related purposes, the streets delineated thereon and the easements dedicated thereon for storm drain, sidewalk, street tree and landscape purposes. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HEREBY RESOLVES, that said developer be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Maintenance Agreements on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest; and that the offers for dedication, easements and the final map delineating the same for said Parcel Map No. 16884 is hereby approved and the City Engineer is authorized to present same to the County Recorder to be fled for record. Mayor ATTEST: Debbie J. Adams, City Clerk P552 RESOLUTION NO. O7- ,2 D A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 5 FOR PARCEL MAP 16884 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 Actof 1972", being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, (THE "72 Act"), said special maintenance district known and designated as Landscape Maintenance District No. 6, Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 5 (referred to collectively as the "Maintenance Districts"); and WHEREAS, the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 2 of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972" authorize the annexation of.additional territory to the Maintenance Districts; and WHEREAS, such provisions also provide that the requirement for the preparation resolutions, an assessment engineer's report, notices of public hearing and the right of majority protest may be waived in writing with the written consent of all of the owners of property within the territory to be annexed; and WHEREAS, notwithstanding that such provisions of the 1972 Act related to the annexation of territory to the Maintenance District, Article XIIID of the Constitution of the State of California ("Article XIIID") establishes certain procedural requirements for the authorization to levy assessments which apply to the levy of annual assessments for the Maintenance Districts on the territory proposed to be annexed to such districts; and WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference have requested that such property (collectively, the "Temtory') be annexed to the Maintenance Districts in order to provide for the levy of annual assessments to finance the maintenance of certain improvements described in Exhibit B hereto (the "Improvements"); and WHEREAS, all of the owners of the Territory have filed with the City Clerk duly executed forms entitled "Cons.ent And Waiver To Annexation Of Certain Real Property To A Maintenance District And Approval Of The Levy Of Assessments On Such Real Property' (the "Consent and Waiver'); and --- WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have expressly - waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the 1972 Act to the annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts and have expressly consented to the annexation of the - Territory to the Maintenance Districts; and WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the 1972 Act and/or Article XI IID applicable to the authorization to the levy the proposed annual assessment against the Territory set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and have declared support for, consent to and approval of the authorization of levy such proposed annual assessment set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto; and P553 RESOLUTION NO. PARCEL MAP 16884 December 05, 2007 Page 2 WHEREAS, at this, time the City Council desires to order the annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts and to authorize the levy of annual assessments against the Territory in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit C hereto. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: ' ` SECTION 1: That the above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2: The City Council hereby finds and determines that: a. The annual assessments proposed to be levied on each parcel in the Territory do not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on each such parcel from the Improvements. b. The proportional special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory from the Improvements has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the cost of the maintenance of the Improvement. c. Only special benefits will be assessed on the Territory by the levy of the proposed annual assessments. SECTION 3: This legislative body hereby orders the annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts, approves the financing of the maintenance of the Improvements from the proceeds of annual assessments to be levied against the Territory and approves and orders the levy of annual assessments against the Territory in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit B. SECTION 4: All future proceedings of the Maintenance Districts, including the levy of all assessments, shall be applicable to the Territory. P554 Exhibit A Consent And Waiver To Annexation Of Certain Real Property To Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 And Approval Of The Levy Of Assessments On Such Real Property Identification of the Owner and Description of the Property To Be Annexed The Owner of the Property is: The Blu Croix, LTD on behalf of Verizon California The legal description of the Property is PARCEL 1: LOT 25, OF TRACT NO. 15866, IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATES OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 282 OF MAPS, PAGE(S) 25 THROUGH 29, INCLUSIVE, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. EXCEPTING THEREFROM Y. OF ALL MINERALS, OIL AND GAS RIGHTS AND RIGHTS TO UNDERGROUND STORAGE SPACE, AS RESERVED IN THE DEED FROM JOHN M. PON, ET UX, RECORDED NOVEMBER 29, 1951, IN BOOK 2859, PAGE 597, OFFICIAL RECORDS. ALSO EXCEPTING THE REMAINING '/<'S OF ALL GAS, OIL, MINERALS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES LYING 500 FEET BELOW THE SURFACE OF THE LAND, BUT WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO USE THE SURFACE OF THE LAND TO REMOVE, DRILL OR PROSPECT FOR SAME, AS RESERVED IN DEED RECORDED JANUARY 9; 1984, INSTRUMENT NO. 84-003706, OFFICIAL RECORDS. ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO: 0225-271-49 The legal description of the Property is: The Land referred to herein is situate in the State of California, County of San Bernardino, City of Rancho Cucamonga, described as follows: A-1 P555 Exhibit B To Description of the District Improvements Fiscal Year 2007/2008 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.6 (COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL): Landscape Maintenance District No. 6 (LMD #6) represents landscape sites throughout the Caryn Planned Community. These sites are associated with areas within that district and as such any benefit derived from the landscape installation can be directly attributed to those parcels within that district. Because of this, assessments required for this district are charged to those parcels within that district. STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (ARTERIAL STREETS): Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 (SLD #1) is used to fund the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located on arterial streets throughout the City. The facilities within this district, being located on arterial streets, have been determined to benefitthe Cityas a whole on an equal basis and as such those costs associated with the maintenance and/or installation of the facilities is assigned to the City-wide district. The sites maintained by the district consist of street lights on arterial streets and traffic signals on arterial streets within the rights-of-way or designated easements of streets dedicated to the City. STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 5 (COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL): Street Light Maintenance District No. 5 (SLD #5) is used to fund the maintenance and/orinstallation of streetlights and traffic signals located within the Caryn Planned Community. Generally, this area encompasses the area of the City east of Milliken Avenue, south of Banyan Street, north of Highland Avenue and west of Rochester Avenue. It has been determined that the facilities in this district benefit the properties within this area of the City. This sites maintained by the district consist of street lights on local streets and traffic signals (or a portion thereof) on local streets within the Caryn Planned Community. B-1 PM16884 P556 Exhibit B To Description of the District Improvements Fiscal Year 2007/2008 Proposed additions to Work Program (Fiscal Year 2007/2008) For Project: PARCEL MAP 16884 Number of Lamps Street Lights 5800E 9500E 16,000E 22,000E 27,500E SLD # 1 - - - - - SLD#5 - - - - - #6 Community Trail DGSF `Existing items installed with original project Annexation Date: July 20, 2005 Turf Non-Turf Trees SF SF EA B - 2 PM 16884 P557 Exhibit C Proposed Annual Assessment Fiscal Year 2007/2008 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0.6(COMMERCIAUINDUSTRIAL): The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $246.97 for the fiscal year 2007/08. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for Landscape Maintenance District No. 6 (Caryn Planned Community): # of _ # of Rate Per Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment Land Use Type Units Units Factor Units Unit Revenue Single parcel 1274 1.0 1274 $246.97 $314,639.78 Family The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (PM 16884) is: 4 SFR x 1 A.U. Factor x $246.97 Rate Per A.U. _ $987.88 Annual Assessment STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (ARTERIAL STREETS): The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $17.77 for the fiscal year 2007/08. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 (Arterial Streets): # of # of Rate Per Physical Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment Land Use Unit Type Units Units Factor Units Unit Revenue Single Parcel 22,901 1.00 22,901 $17.77 $406,950.77 Family Multi-Family Unit 10,449 1.00. 10,449 $17.77 $185,678.73 Commercial Acre 2,834.56 2.00 5,669.12 $17.77 $100,740.26 TOTAL $693,369.76 The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (PM 16884) is: 4 SFR x 1 A.U. Factor x $17.77 Rate Per A.U. _ $71.08 Annual Assessment C - 2 PM 16884 P558 Exhibit C Proposed Annual Assessment Fiscal Year 2007/2008 STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 5 (COMMERCIAL)INDUSTRIAL): The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $34.60 for the fiscal year 2007/08. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No. 5 (Caryn Planned Community): # of # of Rate Per Physical Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment Land Use Unit Type Units . Units Factor Units Unit Revenue Single parcel 1273 1.00 1274 $34.60 $44,080.40 Family The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (PM 16884) is: 4 SFR x 1 A.U. Factor x $34.60 Rate Per A.U. _ $138.40 Annual Assessment C - 2 PM 16884 P559 CERTIFICATE OF SUFFICIENCY CONSENT AND WAIVER TO ANNEXATION FOR PARCEL MAP 16884 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6, STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 5 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA WILLIAM J. O"NEIL, the undersigned, hereby certifies as follows: That I am the CITY ENGINEER of the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA. That on the 5th day of December, 2007, I reviewed a Consent and Waiver to Annexation pertaining to the annexation of certain property to the Maintenance District, a copyofwhich is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. That I caused said Consent and Waiver to Annexation to be examined and my examination revealed that said Consent and Waiver to Annexation has been signed by the owners of all of the property within the territory proposed to be annexed to the Maintenance District. That said Consent and Waiverto Annexation meets the requirements of Section 22608.1 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. EXECUTED this 5th day of December 2007, at Rancho Cucamonga, California. CITY ENGI R CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STATE OF CALIFORNIA P560 N G I N E E R I N' G D E P A R T M E N T STAFF REPORT DATE: December 5, 2007 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Willie Valbuena, Assistant Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF MAP AND MONUMENTATION CASH DEPOSIT FOR PARCEL MAP 17866, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF ROCHESTER AVENUE, SOUTH OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, SUBMITTED BY ROCHESTER PARK GROUP, LLC. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the. City Council adopt the attached resolution approving Parcel Map 17866 and accepting the monumentation cash deposit and authorizing the City Clerk to cause said map to record. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Tentative Parcel Map 17866, located on the east side of Rochester Avenue, south of Foothill Boulevard, in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7), was approved by the Planning Commission on December 13, 2006. This project is for the development of 14 single-story professional office buildings on 7.24 acres of land. The site has been annexed into the City's Landscape Maintenance District and Street Light Maintenance Districts on June 6, 2007 under DRC2006-00127. The Developer, Rochester Park Group LLC, is submitting monumentation cash deposit to guarantee the setting of the monuments in the following amount: Monumentation Cash Deposit $2,450.00 Copies of the security are available in the City Clerk's Office. Respectfully submitted, Willi m J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:WV/rlc P561 BASELINE ROAD w z w Q w w ~ ~ Q' Z W ~ Q ~ Q S ~\ U SITE. ~ FOOTHILL BOULEVARD ~~ z w ~~ a ~' ~P Q ~ ~ ~_ r`' 4RROW ROUT N CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ITEM: /°A/PCELy~4P /7866 TITLE: V/C/ /TY f~jgP ENGINEERING DIVISION P562 RESOLUTION NO. D 7'- Z S A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP 17866 AND ACCEPTING MONUMENTATION CASH DEPOSIT. WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map 17866, submitted by Rochester Park Group LLC and consisting of a subdivision of 7.24 acres of land into 14 single-story professional office buildings, located on the east side of Rochester Avenue, south of Foothill Boulevard, in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7), was approved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on December 13, 2006; and WHEREAS, Parcel Map No. 17866, is the final map of the division of land approved as shown on the Tentative Parcel Map; and WHEREAS, all the requirements including the monumentation cash deposit established as prerequisite to approval of the final map by the City Council of said City have now been met by Rochester Park Group, LLC, as developer; and NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, HEREBY RESOLVES that said Parcel Map No. 17866, be and the same is hereby approved and the City Engineer is authorized to present the same to the County Recorder to be filed for record. P563 STAFF REPORT DATE: December 5, 2007 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM:. William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Willie Valbuena, Assistant Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF MAP AND MONUMENTATION CASH DEPOSIT FOR PARCEL MAP 18579, LOCATED ON THE W EST SIDE OF HAVEN AVENUE, NORTH OF 6TH STREET, SUBMITTED BY HAVENPOINTE, LLC. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving Parcel Map 18579 and accepting the monumentation cash deposit and authorizing the City Clerk to cause said map to record. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Tentative Parcel Map 18579, located on the west side of Haven Avenue, north of 6th Street, in the Industrial Park, Subarea 6, of the Haven Overlay, was approved'by the Planning Commission on August 8, 2007. This project is for the development of a building office of 19 units for condominium purposes on 2.0 acres of land. The site has been annexed into the City's Landscape Maintenance District and Street Lighting Maintenance Districts on September 20, 2006, under CUP 99-53. The Developer, Havenpointe, LLC, is submitting monumentation cash deposit to guarantee the setting of the monuments in the following amount: Monumentation Cash Deposit $2,450.00 Copies of the security are available in the City Clerk's Office. Respec ully submitted, Willi J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:WV/rlc P564 l; 1 7Y Jr 6TH STREET PROJECT LOCATION 4TH STREET 10 w z w w > Z U w ~ > ~ Q 2 N CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENGINEERING DIVISION ITEM: f'A/PCEL ~ ' P ~~79 TITLE: ~//C//~[/Ty ~j~ P565 RESOLUTION NO. O7~- Z p,Z A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP 18579 AND ACCEPTING MONUMENTATION CASH DEPOSIT. WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map 18579, submitted by Havenpointe, LLC, and consisting of a subdivision of 2.0 acres of land into 19 units for condominium purposes building, located on the west side of Haven Avenue, north of 6th Street, in the Industrial Park District; Subarea 6, in the Haven Overlay, was approved by the Planning Commission ofthe City of Rancho Cucamonga on August 8, 2007; and WHEREAS, Parcel Map No. 18579, is the final map of the division of land approved as shown on the Tentative Parcel Map; and W HEREAS, all the requirements including the monumentation cash deposit established as prerequisite to approval of the final map by the City Council of said City have now been met by Havenpointe, LLC, as the developer; and NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, HEREBY RESOLVES that said Parcel Map No. 18579, be and the same is hereby approved and the City Engineer is authorized to present the same to the County Recorder to be filed for record. _: 4``~ i„ ,:y": T H E C I T Y O F . .. .... . RANG 11 O C U C d M O N G A StaffR~ort DATE: December 5, 2007 7'O: _ Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: John R. Gillison, Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services BY: Ingrid Y. Bruce, GIS/Special Districts Manager SUBJECT': APPROVAL OF GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (GIST SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT NO.2007M4585 BETWEEN THE CTI'Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND ENVIItONMENTAL SYSTEM RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC. (ESRT) IN THE AMOUNT OF $28,942.23 TO BE FUNDED FROM ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT GIS DMSION 1001207-5300 IN THE AMOUNT OF $24,792.23 AND SPECIAL DLSTRICTS ADMINLSTRATION FUND 1100202-5300 IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,150.00. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City Council approve [he Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Software Maintenance Agreement No. 2007M4585 between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) in the amount of $28,942.23 to be funded from Administrative Services Department GIS Division 1001207-5300 in the amount of $24,792.23 and Special Districts Administration Fund 1100202-5300 in the amount of $4,150.00. BACKGROUND: In 1985, City Council approved the purchase of very specialized sofrware for managing geographic data spatially. The early introduction of this software in the organization has propelled the City into being one of the leaders in the field of GIS technology [hat has successfully implemented and currently maintains GIS as an enterprise solution. Each year, the sofrware maintenance must be renewed with ESRI for a period of 12 months. Staff also recommends approving the renewal of [he ongoing maintenance effective October 2007 through October 2008. The software maintenance may be renewed annually up to a maximum of 5 years. Respectfully submitted, ' .-~ ~~ I ~_ C/ o R. Gillison Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services P566 Attachment: Software Maintenance Agreement P567 SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT +.' f; ESRI, 380 New York St., Redlands, CA 92373-8100 USA • TEL 909-793-2853 • FAX 909-793-5953 ' Software Maintenance Agreement Na. 2007M4585 This Software Maintenance Agreement ("Agreement") is between the licensee printed below ("Licensee") and Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc ("ESRI"). DEFINITIONS "Software" means the actual copy atoll or any portion of the final commercial release(s) of ESRI proprietary geographic information system software technology, computer software code, components, dynamic link libraries, and programs delivered on any media, whether provided in source, object, or executable code format(s), inclusive of backups, updates, or upgrades supplied under this Agreement. ARTICLE 1-TERM AND FEE The initial term of this Agreement shall begin on receipt of order (renewal date) and shall cominue far twelve (12) consecutive months at the fee(s) noted in the ESRI Quotazion. Thereafter, Licensee may condnue the service for annual maintenance and update at the then current fee. Should Licensee decide to extend this Agreement, Licensee shall issue a purchaze oMer in advance of the renewal date at the quoted price. Payment is due annually in advance. Licensee agrees to pay ESRI invoices within thirty (30) days of receipt. ARTICLE 2~OFTWARE MAllVTENA,NCE AND UPDATE SERVICE ESRI will supporUmaintain the Software for a period of twelve (12) months. Software support and maintenance will apply only to unmodified Software and to commercially released updated versions of Ne Software. Software updates are provided only for standard hardware plat(ortns and operating systems supported by ESRI az described in the Sothtgre documentation. Licensee is responsible for making or arr..nging for updates to interfaces for nonstandard devices or custom applications. ESRI support and maintenance will he provided in compliance with the ESRI U.S. Software Maintenance Program on the ESRI Web site at http://www.esdcoM software/maintenance/about/overview.html. ESRI supports users with the installation and maintenance of ESRI Software, arsistance in salving problems arising from the use of the Software, hardware interfacing of peripheral devices, and logging of enhancement requests end bugs suhmitted by the user. Licensee may contact Technical Support at ESRI Technical Support Center Internet Request Support Fax: 909-792-0960 Telephone: 909-793-3774 Hours: 6:00 a.m. [0 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time (Monday through Friday, except ESRI holidays) ARTICLE 3-TERMINATION This Agreement may be terminated by either party giving the other party thirty (30) days notice of intent to terminate prior to the end of the term identified in Article 1. ARTICLE 4-LIMITATION OF LIABILITY AN'D REMEDIES ESRI will use commercially reasonable efforts to provide corections orwork-around solutions for any erors reported and determined to be in the Software or the documentadon a[ no cos[ to Licensee for the term of this Agreement. EXCEPT FOR THE ABOVE EXPRESS LIMITED WARRANTY, ESRI DISCLAIMS ALL OTI IER WARRANTIES OF ANY KMD, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OP MERCHANTABB.ITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE,NONMTERFEAENCE, SYSTEM INTEGRATION, AND NON[NFRINGEMENT. ESRI DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE SOFTWARE OR DOCUMENTATION WILL MEET LICENSEE'S NEEDS, OR THAT LICENSEE'S OPERATION OF THE SAME Wll.L BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR FREE, OR THAT ALL NONCONFORMITIES CAN OR WILL BE CORRECTED. HOWEVER CAUSED, ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, AND WHETHER OR NOT ESRI HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBII.ITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. THESE LIMTTATIONS SHALL APPLY NOTWITHSTANDING ANY FAII-URE OF ESSENTIAL PURPOSE OF ANY LIMITED REMEDY. ARTICLE LICENSE Maintenance and support is provided subject to the terms and conditions of the then- current General License Terms and Conditions and Exhibit 1, the terms of which will be indicated on ESRI's Web site or enclosed in the deliverable's packaging, depending on the method of delivery. Licensee may only use the type and number of copies of the SoftwaF Data, Web Services, and Documentation far which the appropriate license fees have been paid to ESRI and in accordance with the General License Terms and Conditions, Exhibit 1, and the licensed configumtlon on file with ESRI Ctsstomer Service. Licensee may not assign the rights granted hereunder, or any of them, without the prior written consent of ESRI. ARTICLE 6-APPLICABLE LAWS The laws of the State of Califome and rates and reguladons issued pursuant thereto shall be applied in the interpretation, execution, and enforcement of this Agreement. ARTICLE 7-ENTIRE AGREEMEN"P This Agreement constitutes the sole and entire agreement of the parties az to the subject matter set forth herein and supersedes any previous agreements, understandings, and artangemenu between the parties relating ro such subject matter. Any modification(s) or amendment(s) to this Agreement must be in writing and signed by an authorised representative of each party. The parties have agreed to these terms and have executed this Agreement on the date last signed below. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused [his Agreement to be executed and effective as of the last date written below. CFFY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA (Licensee) By: Authorised $ignamre Printed Name: Title: Dale: EN ONMENTAL SYST SEARCH MST~,INC%y%/C, ( ) I// V7lj~J`~/ Authodud Signature Printed Name: LAURA DA GERMOND Title: 4 y~,~ 7 Date: O " GU~/ Licensee Conmet Information Contact: Installation Address: City, State, ZIP: Telephone: Fax: E-mail: If ESRI fails to fulfill i5 obligations under this Agreement, Licensee's sole and ezclusive remedy k the right to rermina[e this Agreement immediately for the affected Software. IN NO EVENT SHALL ESRI BE LL4BLE TO LICENSEE FOR COSTS OF PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOST PROFITS; LOST SALES OR BUSINESS EXPENDITURES; INVESTMENTS; OR COMMITMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH ANY BUSINESS, LOSS OF ANY GOODWILL, OR FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO THIS AGREEMENT OR USE OF THE SOFTWARE OR DOCUMENTATION, ESRI Quotazion No. Master License Agreement 2000MLA4586 G-60/JC 4/9/07 STAFF REPORT I~NGINEEIiING DEP.~IRTMENT Date: December 5, 2007 To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer By: Jerry A. Dyer, Senior Civil Engineer Romeo M. David, Assistant Engineer P568 RANCHO CUCAMONGA Subject: APPROVAL OF THE CONTRACT (AGREEMENT #07-900) FROM THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SECOND DISTRICT, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, TO FUND THE COST OF INSTALLING SIDEWALKS AROUND STORK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, IN THE AMOUNT OF $250,000.00 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the attached contract (agreement #07-900) from the County of San Bernardino to fund this project, for the proposed construction of sidewalks around Stork Elementary School. BACKGROUNDIANALYSIS Residents living in this area have expressed an interest in having a separated pathway for their children to walk on; to and from Stork Elementary School (located at 5646 Jasper Street, Rancho Cucamonga). Currently, there are few sidewalks within close proximity to the school. The installation of these sidewalks will enable students to walk to and from school without having to face the dangers associated with busy traffic. Proceeding with this project serves the public purpose by helping to promote the safety of children in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Respectfully submitted, ~~~~~ William J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:JAD/RMD:Is Attachments: Vicinity Map Construction Agreement #07-900 H 5458 W W ~ 5472 a sass HILLSIDE ROAD 5576 4 0 L. 5536 N ~ ~ 0 5556 n ~ ~ ~ ~ ORCHARD STREET W W W d. (n Q 7 M N M r N u7 ~ N ifl W W ~ ~ ~ O ~O ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ W Q7 m 'ro I \u ro m~°m I m 1400 L.F. I 5627 N 40 .F. .y1 56 5649 STORK ELEM. 1215 L.F. i F- 5622 W W 'r a ~ ~ 5654 ~ ~ BEECHWOOD DRIVE 8674 Q m~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PROPOSED SIDEWALK FOR FLOYD M. STORK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL N NTS STAFF REPORT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Date: December 5, 2007 To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer By: Walter C. Stickney, Associate Engineer P570 1 RANCHO CUCAMONGA Subject: APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT (DISTRICT AGREEMENT NO. 8-1354) AND APPROVAL OF THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN SAID AGREEMENT RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Project (District Agreement No. 8-1354) for a new interchange at approval of the attached resolution authorizing the Mayor agreement. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Development Cooperative Agreement Interstate 15 (I-15)/Arrow Route and to sign all four (4) originals of said The Foothill Boulevard exit along I-15 has become increasingly congested. One of the reasons is that commercial vehicles/trucks bound for the City's industrial area must exit I-15 at Foothill Boulevard then backtrack on local streets to the industrial area. This, combined with vehicles exiting at. Foothill Boulevard for their own reasons, has caused backups to form on I-15. The situation will only worsen as time progresses. To help alleviate congestion along .I-15, the City desires a new interchange at the intersection of I-15 and Arrow Route. This interchange will allow commercial vehicles/trucks direct access to the City's industrial area thereby reducing traffic onto Foothill Boulevard and neighboring streets. However, I-15 is part of the State Highway System (SHS). One of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) requirements before improvements can be done within the SHS is that the City Council approve the Project Development Cooperative Agreement (District Agreement No. 8-1354) for the new interchange and approve the attached resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign the Project Development Cooperative Agreement. The Project Development Cooperative Agreement identifies the State's and the City's obligations for the preparation of a Project Report and Environmental Documents for a new interchange at I-15 and Arrow Route. Similarly, Caltrans requires a certified, notarized copy of the Resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign the Project Development Cooperative Agreement be returned with the signed agreements. P571 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Re: Cooperative Agreement -Interchange at I-15/Arrow Route December 5, 2007 Page 2 Caltrans has requested that the effective date (near top of page 1) be left blank because they want the effective date for the agreement to be the date their District Director signs all four originals of the agreement. After the agreement has been fully executed, one original will be returned to the City. Respectfully submitted, ~~~. Willi m J. O'Neil City Engineer WJOM/CS:Is Attachments: Vicinity Map and Resolution P572 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA VICINITY MAP =1r _ s'~--y ~~ NEW INTERCHANGE AT I-15/ARROW ROUTE ('`TTV hi, A A T~T!-+L7n r~TTn A l l~~rrr P573 RESOLUTION NO. D T Z ~ 3 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT (DISTRICT AGREEMENT NO. 8-1354) FOR THE NEW INTERCHANGE AT I-15/ARROW. ROUTE AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN SAID AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga desires a new interchange on Interstate 15 (I-15)/Arrow Route and WHEREAS, a Project Development Cooperative Agreement (District Agreement No. 8- 1354) must be executed with the California Department of Transportation for such improvements to the State Highway System (SHS) and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga approves the Project Deyelopment Cooperative Agreement (District Agreement No. 8-1354) BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign the above mentioned agreement. By order of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California Dated this 5'h day of December, 2007 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, this 5`" day of December, 2007. Donald J. Kurth, M. D. Mayor ATTEST: Debra J. Adams, City Clerk I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 5`h day of December, 2007 Executed this 5`h day of December, 2007, at Rancho Cucamonga, California. Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk N G I N E E R I N G D E P A R T M E N T STAFF REPORT DATE: December 5, 2007 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer ' BY: Willie Valbuena, Assistant Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT (DRA-37) FOR CONSTRUCTION OF 9TH STREET STORM DRAIN AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH DEVELOPMENT OF PARCEL MAP 16141, SUBMITTED BY HC VINEYARD, LLC. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the Reimbursement Agreement for construction of 9th Street storm drain and related improvements in connection with the development of Parcel Map 16141 and authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign said agreement and to cause same to record. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS As a Condition of Approval of Parcel Map 16141, HC Vineyard LLC, the Developer, was required to construct the 9th Street storm drain and related improvements between Lanyard Court and the Cucamonga Creek Channel. The said required public improvements have been completed by the Developer and accepted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Whenever a developer is required, as a condition of approval of a development permit, to construct a public facility that is determined by the City to have supplemental size, length or capacity overwhat is needed for the impacts of that development, and when such construction is necessary to ensure efficient and timely construction of the facilities network, a reimbursement agreement with the developer shall be offered. The Developer has submitted an itemized accounting of the construction costs of the required public storm drain and related improvements to 9th Street between Lanyard Courtand Cucamonga Creek Channel. Upon review of the City Staff, the total cost of said improvements is $ 842,719.63 to be reimbursed from different adjacent developers and property owners upon development of their respective properties. Copies of the agreement signed by the Developer are available in the City Clerk's office. Res ectfully submitted, ~ p• ~~~~ William J. O Neil City Engineer W:1 O: W V/rlc r „ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENGINEERING DIVISION P575 A ITEM: /~ e~Y M~ e6~~1~ -- TITLE: P576 RESOLUTION NO.O7~,z p y A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT (DRA-37) FOR CONSTRUCTION OF 9TH STREET STORM DRAIN AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has for its consideration a Reimbursement Agreement (DRA-37) submitted by HC Vineyard, LLC, as developerof Parcel Map 16141 for construction of the 9th Street storm drain and related improvements between Lanyard Court and the Cucamonga Creek Channel; and WHEREAS, the Developer, at Developer's expense, has completed the required storm drain and related improvements; and NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, HEREBY RESOLVES, that said Reimbursement Agreement be and the same is hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Reimbursement Agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the City Clerk to attest hereto and cause said agreement to record. STAFF REPORT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Date: December 5, 2007 To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer By: Trina Valdez, Public Services Technician II P577 RANCHO ~UCAMONGA Subject: ACCEPT IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASE THE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND AND FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR 5938 ETIWANDA AVENUE, LOCATED NORTH OF BANYAN STREET, SUBMITTED BY PACIFIC CREST COMMUNITIES, INC. RECOMMENDATION: The required improvements for 5938 Etiwanda Avenue have been completed in an acceptable manner, and it is recommended that the City Council accept said improvements, authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and authorize the City Clerk to release the Faithful Performance Bond. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: As a condition of approval of completion of 5938 Etiwanda Avenue, located north of Banyan Street, the applicant was required to complete street .improvements. The improvements have been completed and it is recommended that the City Council release the existing Faithful Performance Bond and file a Notice of Completion. Developer: Pacific Crest Communities, Inc.: 414 Inland Empire Blvd., Ste. 345, Ontario, CA 91764 Release: Faithful Performance Bond SU501245 $ 12,700.00 (Bond No.) Respectfully submitted, ~~~~. William J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:TLV Attachment(s) P578 ~ w ~ e , m Q ~ cT W Q Y U3 j w Q i S/ TE Q ~ ~ o U W Z Q ~ m W NTERSTATE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 10 WILSON AVE. BANYAN ST. N ITEM: ~•~•ET/W.4//DA A IP TITLE: V/~!/IV/TY MA/p ENGWEERING DiViS10N P579 RESOLUTION NO. O 7'Z ~S A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR 5938 ETIWANDA AVENUE AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF,A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for 5938 Etiwanda Avenue have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice ~of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work is complete. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby resolves, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. P580 STAFF REPORT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ~~`'J~ 1~1~'AJN-Cr' H^OJ Date: December 5, 2007 Cjl)CAMONGA To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. ONeil, City Engineer By: Trina Valdez, Public Services Tech. II Subject: ACCEPT IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASE THE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND, ACCEPT A MAINTENANCE BOND AND FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR PARCEL MAP 16009 LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER AND- SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SIXTH STREET AND CHARLES SMITH AVENUE, SUBMITTED BY CHASE BACK BAY,LLC RECOMMENDATION: The required improvements for Parcel Map 16009 have been completed in an acceptable manner, and it is recommended that the City Council accept said improvements, authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and authorize the City Clerk to release the Faithful Performance Bond and accept a Maintenance Bond. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: As a condition of approval of completion of Pazcel Map 16009, located on the southeast comer and southwest comer of Sixth Street and Chazles Smith Avenue, the applicant was required to complete improvements. The improvements have been completed and it is recommended that the City Council release the existing Faithful Performance Bond and accept the Maintenance Bond. Developer: PO Box 3724, Tustin, CA 92781-3724 Release: Faithful Performance Bond # 2167969 $173,100.00 _ (Bond No.) - Accept: Maintenance Bond # 2167969A $17,310.00 (Bond No.) Respectfully submitted, ~~~~~ William J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:TLV Attachment(s) P581 Vicinity Map NOT TO SCALE City of Rancho Cucamonga " ENGINEERING DIVISION Item: Improvement Agreement for Parcel Map 16009 Title: VICINITY MAP EXHIBIT: 1 P582 RESOLUTION NO. 07-,2Slp A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR PARCEL MAP 16009 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for Parcel Map 16009 have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work is complete. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby resolves, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. P583 STAFF REPORT t. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT RANCHO Date: December 5, 2007 CjUCAMONGA To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. ONeil, City Engineer By: Trina Valdez, Public Services Tech. II Subject: ACCEPT IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASE THE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND, ACCEPT A MAINTENANCE BOND AND FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR PARCEL MAP 16139 LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF SIXTH STREET BETWEEN ROCHESTER AVENUE AND CHARLES SMITH AVENUE , SUBMITTED BY CHA5E EL MONTE, LLC RECOMMENDATION: The required improvements for Parcel Map 16139 have been completed in an acceptable manner, and it is recommended that the City Council accept said improvements, authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and authorize the City Clerk to release the Faithful Performance Bond and accept a Maintenance Bond. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS As a condition of approval of completion of Parcel Map 16139, located on the north side of Sixth Street between Rochester Avenue and Charles Smith Avenue, the applicant was required to complete improvements: The improvements have been completed and it is recommended that the City Council release the existing Faithful Performance Bond and accept the Maintenance Bond. Developer: Chase El Monte, LLC, 800 W. Sixth St., 5`h Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90017 Release: Faithful Performance Bond Accept: Maintenance Bond # 2167970 (Bond No.) # 2167970A (Bond No.) $275,500.00 $27,550.00 Respectfully submitted, William J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:TLV Attachment(s) P584 8rx STREET ~v 4 A`~ N.T.S. oG~s,~Ci ~ ~~.~^1 [y L 0 L^i d W S ~- .~w U 6rx STREET - -- __~~_~rm_~~n~~. ~e~g9-•C-I3E~~P~4AATGt~-.._._._.._.~_.._..._.. _.. VICIlVITY MAP PARCEL MAP 16139 P585 RESOLUTION NO. 07' ~ S 7 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR PARCEL MAP 16139 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for Parcel Map 16139 have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work is complete. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby resolves, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is .authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. P586 STAFF REPORT - ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT RANCHO Date: December 5, 2007 ciJCAMONGA To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. ONeil, City Engineer By: Trina Valdez, Public Services Tech. II Subject: ACCEPT IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASE THE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND, ACCEPT A MAINTENANCE BOND AND FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR PARCEL MAP 17609 LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF CHURCH STREET AND VICTORIA GARDENS LANE ,SUBMITTED BY BASS PRO SHOPS RECOMMENDATION: The required improvements for Pazcel Map 17609 have been completed in an acceptable manner, and it is recommended that the City Council accept said improvements, authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and authorize the City Clerk to release the Faithful Performance Bond and accept a Maintenance Bond. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: As a condition of approval of completion of Pazcel Map 17609, located on the southeast corner of Church Street and Victoria Gardens Lane, the applicant was required to complete improvements. The improvements have been completed and it i5 recommended that the City Council release the existing Faithful Performance Bond and accept the Maintenance Bond. Developer: Bass Pro Shops, 2500 E. Kearney, Springfield, MO 65898 Release: Faithful Performance Bond # 104720573 (Bond No.) Accept: Maintenance Bond # 105013538 (Bond No.) Respectfully submitted, ~~~~~ William J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:TLV $55,100.00 $5,510.00 Attachment(s) 1 ~ ch `--' ------ --- ~ 1 ~. ~ f ~ ~ ~~ 3 ~~~ I - ~ i I i i vacatrr Lnrro ~ ~, vrHK]LLr rryln]eCvy~~P•Al/R~[pCG~EnpLI~1~ .LV.W Av31LJ Csfi06$ i rvcn. ]Vr w.ms I r]In m,s.n p ~.~ A~~ q ~ IV] 1 . ~ I ' ~~~ --~ Im r ' i ruca a ~ rvcu IW w]Hp ..O Ir,H / o 1 j ---------~ s I14 m.~Hl I . 1 I r ~ ~ I ~ ~ I / ` / / ; rNmp _~ ~ / ~ % r i ~ i 0 z 0 50 100 200 1 INC. PROPOSED PARCEL/ RICH7 - Of - WAT ---- rRACi aouNOAm l~~GFL~MIRI UMT[N LIA!]UTY[ MrAf AXY Il vc4 U.C,ACAL1IRRwA NMIi[a WNMT~C MrAIlT, AS TTNAMlp CO44pN GV CVeYicmo[v4onRIR r]LNOr[lrNtt•T.lUrII14 lOf MGVJJ,G141! ' rR~PI]I ~uml 4 PR~Afl® 6Y; N ~SUBTPM T; 609 (1~TENTSTIV~E PARCEL MAP No.17~ 509 CfTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA~~®F g®BERNARDI~O ~~~~~ r~~ N STATE OF CALIK~ ~1JIA t\~6616~E%MBO$~PMCCLOtdvq 10/JI; 5 ~- ~ I 1 1 ~'~ r 0`"'I V ~~ae P588 RESOLUTION NO. ~ 7- Z ~ S A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR PARCEL MAP 17609 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for Parcel Map 17609 have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work is complete. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby resolves, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. STAFF REPORT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Date: December 5, 2007 To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. ONeil, City Engineer By: Trina Valdez, Public Services Tech. II P589 RANCHO CUCAMONGA Subject: RELEASE OF MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BOND FOR PARCEL MAP 16815, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MISSION PARK DRIVE BETWEEN RICHMOND PLACE AND BUFFALO AVENUE, SUBMITTED BY RANCHO MILLS, LLC RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council authorize the City Clerk to release the Maintenance Guarantee Bond, for Parcel Map 16815, located on the north side of Mission Pazk Drive between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue, submitted by Rancho Mills, LLC BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS The required one-year maintenance period has ended and the street improvements remain free from defects in materials and workmanship. DEVELOPER Rancho Mills, LLC 147 E. Olive Avenue Monrovia, CA 91016 Release: Maintenance Guarantee Bond #66111884-M $3,690.00 /Resp~e/,cy^tlf~ully submittQedp, William J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:TLV Attachment P590 VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE N N.YS. City of Rancho Cucamonga ENGINEERING DIVISION IteR1: Parcel Maa No. 16815 Title: VICINITY MAP EXHIBIT: 1 STAFF REPORT ENGINEERING DEP,~RTMENT Date: December 5, 2007 To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer By: Joseph Stofa Jr., Associate Engineer P591 RANCHO CUCAMONGA Subject: ACCEPT PUBLIC STREET EASEMENTS FOR A PORTION OF TRACT 16324 LOCATED NORTH OF WILSON AVENUE AND WEST OF WARDMAN BULLOCK ROAD, SUBMITTED BY GRANITE HOMES. RECOMMENDATION: The public street easements for Wardman Bullock Road from the southerly tract boundary to and including the intersection of Colonbero Road; Colonbero Road from the easterly tract boundary to and including the intersection of Woodley Ridge Drive; Woodley Ridge Drive from Colonbero Road to and including the intersection of Golden Ridge Place; and Golden Ridge Place from Woodley Ridge Drive to the tract northerly boundary have been substantially completed in an acceptable manner and are necessary to serve neighboring properties to the north, are recommended for approval by the City Council to accept said public street easements. The Notice of Completion, Release of the Faithful Performance Bond and Labor and Material Bond shall be retained and processed at a later date. ' BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: As a condition of approval of Tract 16324, located north of Wilson Avenue and west of Wardman Bullock Road, the applicant was required to complete improvements. The improvements on Wardman Bullock Road, Colonbero, Woodley Ridge Drive and Golden Ridge Place have been substantially completed in an acceptable manner and are necessary to serve neighboring properties to the north. It is recommended that the City Council accept the public street easements for a portion of said tract and retain the present Faithful Performance and Labor and Material Security until a later date to be determined. Respectfully submitted, Willia J. O'Neil City ngineer WJO:JES/rlc Attachment(s) ~' ~~ SITE LOCATION -- - Q ~ BANYAN 0 ~O 0~' GO~p~ PO ZY Q U ~ O Q m ~ Q. RANCHO ~; CUCAMONGA Q ,r`% HIGHLAND AVE. FONTANA N CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ITEM: ~ T /6 TITLE: ~/IC/N/TYMAP P592 ENGWEERING DIVISION P593 i, ~ I~ih ~I Ij1 III \ i 111111 __ -- _ -- --- - -- --------- -----. I. ~,~ I I ' - - i ~--j --s- _ _- _ _ - - - - - --------rt ------'- I __ ,'i ~._, I \ I I I _" ~ ; I i \ I it i 81$7 I I 1'i ne u' to re w O hS' ~~t ~ I. I - \. _. I: ~ ~~ ,~ ~ ° ;~, _ . ' ~: 'te ~~ I me . P ` \~.iw 9 ~ ! e \ it \ , ~ ~ \ Tom. t ]a ~ v •iI ~ \ /je'~ ~y .] I M ~~ n I n .° i' ~ en ~ ~ /° i I .° °~ Y. ~ i m~ ! / >v I I .° n of ~` ~ .. " L %~ ,E ~ I I ., _ ~ r . 1 °°' e~ uT • .ss iA u.A .. - _ . I ,E se~~S6i m en not •vni nth E]I N 05' N I^ Y_~~_v_y__1_..-Y___1.._-'-~~~I~~~_. _ III ^' /~tJ $L,/G L~AS~/7~IVT TO BE itCC EPTE D .. ~ _ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA rvoR~sE~ COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA _~~~~~ P594 RESOLUTION NO. G7' Z 0 / A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC STREET EASEMENTS FOR A PORTION OF TRACT 16324 WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for Tract 16324 have been substantially completed in an acceptable manner to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, public street easements for Wardman Bullock Road from the southerly tract boundary to and including the intersection of Colonbero Road; Colonbero Road from the easterly tract boundary to and including the intersection of Woodley Ridge Drive; Woodley Ridge Drive from Colonbero Road to and including the intersection of Golden Ridge Place; and Golden Ridge Place from Woodley Ridge Drive to the northerly tract boundary are necessary to serve neighboring properties to the north; and WHEREAS, the Notice of Completion, Release of the Faithful Performance Bond and Labor and Material Bond shall be retained and processed at a later date. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby resolves, that a portion of the public street easement as offered on Tract 16324, Map Book 313, Pages 72-81 is hereby accepted. Said portion being: Wardman Bullock Road from the southerly tract boundary to and including the intersection of Colonbero Road; Colonbero Road from the easterly tract boundary to and including the intersection of Woodley Ridge Drive; Woodley Ridge Drive from Colonbero Road to and including the intersection of Golden Ridge Place; and Golden Ridge Place from Woodley Ridge Drive to the northerly tract boundary STAFF REPORT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Date: December 5, 2007 To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. ONeil, City Engineer By: Trina Valdez, Public Services Tech. II P595 RANCHO cUCAMONGA Subject: APPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION FOR TRACT 46324; LOCATED AT THE NORTHERLY END OF WARDMAN BULLOCK ROAD, SUBMITTED BY RANCHO 2004 LLC RECOMMENDATION It' is recommended that City ,Council adopt the attached resolution accepting the subject agreement extension and security and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign said agreement. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Improvement Agreement and Improvement Security to guazantee the construction of the public improvements for Tract 16324 were approved by the City Council on December 7, 2005, in the following amounts: Street/Stonn Improvements Wazdman Bullock Rd Faithful Performance Bond: $ 2,042,300.00 $ 136,400.00 Labor and Material Bond: $ 1,021,150.00 $ 68,200.00 Monumentation Cash Deposit $ 8,550.00 Due to the current market conditions, construction and sales have slowed and the required improvements have not yet been completed. The developer, Rancho 2004 LLC, is requesting approval of a 12-month extension on said improvement agreement. Copies of the Improvement Agreement Extension are available in the City Clerk's office. Respectively submitted, ~~~' li~''vl Will'un J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:TLV Attachments November 19, 2007 Trina Valdez Public Service Technician II City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Re: Improvement Agreement Extension for Tract 16324 Dear Trina, Due to the currentmarket conditions, construction acid sales have slowed and the required improvements under the agreement have not yet been completed. Granite Homes would like to request a 12 month extension on said agreement. Regards, Alysa Morello Assistant Project Manager Granite Homes 949-456-0429 ~~ G GRANITE HOMES /71'91 C~u'nrrigln Rnnd 1f200 brine. CA 92C/4 949.250.9229 Fnc 949. _'S0.92?I P597 ~O ~o~~P Gp ~0 SITE LOCATION wrLSON j Q BA~NYA~N 31 RANCHO CUCAMONGA Q .r% -_ HIGHLAND AVE. Q FONTANA N CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ITEM: ~ ®~~ ~®~® TITLE: ~®~®~~~s ~,,~r!,~ ENCWEERING DIVISION P598 RESOLUTION N0. ©T z g ~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 16324 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its consideration an Improvement Agreement Extension executed on December 5, 2007, by Rancho 2004 LLC, as developer, for the improvement of public right-of--way adjacent to the real property specifically described therein, and generally located at the northerly end of Wazdman Bullock Road; and WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of said Tract 16324; and WHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement Extension is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient Improvement Security, which is identified in said Improvement Agreement Extension. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 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 City Clerk to attest thereto. STAFF REPORT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Date: December 5, 2007 To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer By: Jerry Dyer, Senior Civil Engineer /%~"r,~,p~ Shelley Hayes, Assistant Engineet P599 RANCHO CUCAMONGA Subject: RELEASE OF FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND NO. 8793405, WHICH WAS HELD ON NOVEMBER 15, 2006 AS A MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,811,643.70, FOR THE HAVEN AVENUE STREET WIDENING AND STORM DRAIN PROJECT, CONTRACT NO. 05-034 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Clerk to release Faithful Performance Bond No. 8793405, which was. held on November 15, 2006 as a Maintenance Guarantee Bond in the amount of $6,811,643.70, for the Haven Avenue Street Widening and Storm Drain Project, Contract No. OS-034. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS The required one-year maintenance period has ended and the improvements remain free from defects in materials and workmanship. Contractor: Riverside Construction Co., Inc. 111 North Main Street, P.O. Box 1146 ` Riverside, CA 92505 Respectfully submitted, ~G2~.~ Wiliam J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:JD/SH:Is Attachments . HAVEN AVENUE STREET WIDENING AND STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS FROM BASE LINE ROAD TO NORTH OF 19TH STREET r ~' . I. ~ u HILL51 E RD I~. ~ ~ BANY i~ ~~t-1~^ AV ~~^^ 1971 I^ F I TRILL ~..~ 40~E SITE i 24TH ST SUMMR A r --~r~~ L BNSF '~' .. J.L .: 4TH 5T I. . CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA VICINITY ~~ MAP -.., ~~ ~, STAFF REPORT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Date: December 5, 2007 To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer By: Jerry Dyer, Senior Civil Engineer Q~~ Shelley Hayes, Assistant Engine ~/-- RANCHO CUCAMONGA Subject: RELEASE OF FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND NO. 08814042, WHICH WAS HELD ON NOVEMBER 15, 2006 AS A MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $73,780.00, FOR THE SOLAR SPEED DETECTION SIGN PROJECT, CONTRACT NO. 06-068 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Clerk to release Faithful Performance Bond No. 08814042, which was held on November 15, 2006 as a Maintenance Guarantee Bond in the amount of $73,780.00, for the Solar Speed Detection Sign Project, Contract No. 06-068. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS The required one-year maintenance period has ended and the improvements remain free from defects in materials and workmanship. Contractor: TDS Engineering 2899 Agoura Rd., #171 Westlake Village, CA 91361 Respectfully submitted, G%Gi~ William J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:JD/SH:Is P601 Attachments P602 \ ~. -' ~'HI- -- - ~ 1 - ApM3FU .. . . UP~~i' K I' '~~ ,I a ><~~'f`{fwstQoMgM`~~~~-,R~' i~~\~. 'T"y'!~ I s: C i g I~ I I `f I 3 j+,IJ .. i ~1 J~~ A ~ 6 I Zt I ~ r ~. ;~ I I ~i ~, AI Imo, ~i j~ -~ t ~~` Z ~ I' J 4• iV .. /~ ~^ `T, Si~..o rJr~l e .~tr~}.Fti~~j~ir.,+~aa~+~~+ir~d~ray~+nn'~iiraH ~Ia ._ „~~ ', ~ sj f ~I.,.-J ~il v991a,i1~ ~,I a 'r, '~\\ a: ~-~" cVn v r ~ "/ ~. 'fir` i. /. w ~ 1 :y ~Tl j'1. Nr~ '\a,,\11 d>jN lydrm~ a v; X73=~'< ~~ I .s~~~'°l.~.l~, l.'_ ~piy~ ~ =-r- te-' 1~~1 \yII 1 y11 N~~ _nL "ar tai s e r '41 '~ 1,; ja hir I"~ar~(~ i 141 L ; 7-fEn!~ Il _~ f ~ ~ e~~al rI LLt~ / ~ 11. ' ~ /rt~iVONtlMlk3 ~r~~r~t~H~ hd ,~ ~"v+~ • ~~ ~J '4K d I Iz I \ tSijril71d`uwE ~" ~ LI' \ t I I a I I/" :1' I -f ~.I.~ i'f ~-1~"~^'~ :-d. I' i I'4 ~ d .ln. 1 ~: I~~a ~^s I. O~ T •v ~ ~: I f rru F la L.-h ~ 2 \ ~ • .~ 4i,~d ( i ! d ~ 11I '<111 ~.~Y:' r $~I ^+~ I rw{'. ~ ~ I'_~ ~I ~ ~ , ~ i`~ , rv- f ~ /' ~1 {I ~1(,`n.~Y51~'ll,'J3A~'~TII jrJd~ll{~ r-~`9C-.:T~~ttt333 ~Ga "` , I i ~'., I/r- rll '.a c~.1 oV*~ ~..1~ r II~,"~r~ ~~, ~ ~~N~rj~, ~I-I~ ~ ~-F ~'°,~ I , I. i ~ ~yl I .: ' `~ !;; 4 I :.. ti.3 ~i i* t~'~TJ ~, ~~ gg ~'~ I:. zl ~?~'Q~''~L_ ~"~, I ' i ~1~~; /` ~f y a IS i~In IJ•I7If1i I~r`I^Iarlrp ~ Viltl.. ~~I 91 .. 1 zl,., IA''y1. i "," ~nvvlwr vtN~l /~ I VI ~. < ~, A~ ~T y-~ I `T ,, Y I ~' ~ ~rl ~=~ ~~ ~_s ~ az ~NNiai IL~`iJg_ ~ J ~ `s+)~i 5.5yin ~ W ~^~I I,~ I' ' `~nT` I~ Y " c r,ly ~ I..y~ ~~-cTa~vu~lixo~t I -1- nMytlyytsal^kH~ ~ ~~. I ^ .. ' i >k~1 ly I 'I N~y~,~~~'i5i ~'~>Jc.r~ .: Jncraav~+a I I 11' ' ~ ~!I~ y.1'Jd 4~ ~„ ~- I~ ~~' ~ ~xrcNAV I~aH~usou 1 ~, I~ 'a.il, 7 k}~i`?~Cy- v ',: /..~ ~7,r~,~,fl°~~~~ ~~ "~i ~~ J'-''c~'~n ~ It: 1 i~Jt L -~ I _ 1eaNOw~n7 .: ~ " =I/ialr. ran~Ii,~ISI~i OJ-- I V*~'* :.1~_i spy ~~~ .I ll~~ ~L -F-~ r I -'~ ~S. ~tiH~anllstiW '/:^ ~~ ~,• ~ MGH MEn~O(`'eL `Id ~ ~r'1, ~`'?p-i-IlR~mC~~'.\\ 61.F~~~'11 V ~-~ 1 1 ' ~ ~~J _ ~ ~., ~ ~i'- ~ }~fi.:•3{"wa ~l''Yllt{aH? _ '.~ _-fC~wwa31 -1 I ~.; ~ ~' .-r ~ ~J3iSIF~y oY - i r lr ~.' I ~ .1 ~ p.C 1 I ;I 1a37aaiy I s .~) ~ y ~A J 1 ~ .1 I r - ~ I ~ ~~I jII.~~ A~ ~Y~'oNC~eHS L ~¢ ~L'~ ~µ` y.., i T { ~ .~y ~.: 1~ r ~ , 7~ 1.. -. 1 ~' vSYt 1 i Cu'o ~~7alq ~ ~ nvaNrvr 3•I~I ~~ ~r ~', ~~~,' Tv I a 41 Wiiry*~ . 1 ~ .I ,- yot" I ~. •~ .. •. or ~/,~ ~1 r- 41 ~i11 A_I ~V ~ 7Ek~1,."'FedQ'^ ~ r~ \~'I I~7 I J': ~~ ~. a ,_ ~'~-~'~ ~I I ~Gr TG .nw-vlwd'oA ~r ~f3~~~~1 -1. it I> nt c~-j~n ne~v$un Inr vz ~~ r v Pig r Qr * I IS"' 'rT" r r~ G~ I"~ -~+~MWc>jrj ~_- [.]T! ~";~pJl ~- ~ -_ I li _ Nt -1 ~, ~I I~,:' n I :/. ~ ~C~l -r ! 9:1,, >.{ \11 il [f„ mIi i. vi j I 'k~ K ? I /' aa~ ., ~'~ ii i . ~ I I _ 1 I~ zI .1 ~ rQ^fAk~'~ ~t1~'. I s~r~li~l ~ zl ~t~r~~~3,1 ~M IZ•~fn~~~4~ ~',~ ~.~ ~ •I 1 / \ ~L~.~ ~ d... I 'I ~7~y liii.' ~ J 1',Ia~l .1'l'Ilt 11/ ^ ~, •."~ If~ ~ e Lf 5" ~ ~I. ~i :~~T' i ~Atl 4'R~~ ~ rr r t ~ ~ $ ~~ tC- + I~ IF~I~I 11 _y ~ '-'y~$I 1 _~ ; I m ~ ~I I 1 ^:; >_ ~r ~' ~., z I ahH~N ~, ow I -.J.. I :5} C. -L~ III II!` I-~w- n>tiy i l'~'}~~~~ tan ^- QI ~S vns i~ N "~ I /o ~I i I ~ pa+Tyi , 7h .~ YsbvrN'n'-tlr~ ~ I ~lil III :.gH I i `.:I rI y/il! , ~. ~1~ y~ ~I 1r ~., j Ilv 1 L~i(omf~OaHL ~ '~( ~.y .;,/-=I~ Sr -'"2 ~.I ~~~ Yr -.-~1 ~i ._}L ...~.:~t ~"J ~ & '' I/E c~~'- on}3tNaV9nYN'3m'Ir_Jl'j SI.. h-° ~w~dpw,relNJv}'i~:lr ~II ~ ~ f' C ~ .: c. / ~ ~ F ~ alwv~r.-~-i 1-'r-r c I 1 G_.rur.r 77j~ it } r' . ~ ~p ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ L ~r ~ ' 7~I '~: -I fig'} s ~ L.~s-.r ~J-:. -. / ~I pK13i1S~llki.~i~Ila1 L ~J rLt ~C' _'~~'_I.~m lei.. INV i!v'Ak I p I.iJ''.:. Ai°nr ^ _a I 1 F Sf I I '4f""~T^~~It #I ~4. ~ rrd _~~~~~--lid. y7 1~°„~,~I ( I~ / , ~ - y ~r~`dnoon9.s[+~ d.mt I:)o o'I~oi~,_r `?F.alea dr ~7-r~ uHan i~~i:arpoe~~ Jspargdr~ j 1:-Jri. I~~~',a,..I~ I~'4''j^-_~,~2~``~ 1 ~.: v I ;- ~a~~:.. 1' I~I.J I ~ lo~{ lr ~1 I~ ~+1 1'~ I ~ L ,i , ~.fwyC~L ~a'f~n~rAfwwe~,T+s~~.~~j~~~L41T.. I ,~ r~`, AY.ovV~ -k~ ~ ,~ ^ 'r I I i1~ ~~ ~I I~~'z`;rl ill I ~ ~ „ '~ ~ ' a°' f~' I"I 4_ y -\ I , ~ _ ~ , ~ j~ -F1a~3iS ~ dd V MN 'l ~, . '_ : ~ 11F 13651°9 P~ I g' I ~y~?'if{ IIc~ ~, rays ' ~i~ r I ci'" ~~. ~ - I ~ : L "~ I 3~i~6Y ~nl ^d{11'S 'i 'h2 ~', jr ~ uMn/»- / '-ir LLJ`I ~ ~ ~itl ~~, ':Il„'I~~~y~ :~y~ _: .. i lard ~r ls~i4~it~tr~i>N~ .. ~/i~I~ir.. ,. STAFF REPORT ENGINEERING DEPARTD~fENT P603 RANCHO Date: December 5, 2007 CUCAMONGA To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer n,,D By: Jerry Dyer, Senior Civil Engineer J>w''1 y Shelley Hayes, Assistant Engineer e~ Subject: RELEASE OF FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND NO. PRF7583032, WHICH WAS HELD ON NOVEMBER 15, 2006 AS A MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $144,850.00, FOR THE HIGHLAND AVENUE TREE SCREEN, EAST OF MILLIKEN TO ROCHESTER, CONTRACT NO. 06-077 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Clerli to release Faithful Performance . Bond No. PRF7583032, which was held on November 15, 2006 as a Maintenance Guarantee Bond in the amount of $144,850.00, for the Highland Avenue Tree Screen, east of Milliken to Rochester, Contract No. 06-077. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS The required one-year maintenance period has ended and the improvements remain free from defects in materials and workmanship. Contractor: JDC, Inc. P.O. Box 3448 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Respectfully submitted, g~~~ William J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:JD/SH:Is Attachments CITY OF R_4NCH0 CUCAMONGA VICINITY M_4P - TREE SCREEN HIGHLAND AVE. FROM WOODRUFF PL. TO ROCHESTER AVE. P605 STAFF REPORT F_NGINEERING DEPARTMENT 1 RANCHO , Date: December 5, 2007 C,UCAMONGA To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer By: Jerry Dyer, Senior Civil Engineer Shelley Hayes, Assistant Enginee ~~ Subject: RELEASE OF FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND NO: 104735648, WHICH WAS HELD ON NOVEMBER 15, 2006 AS A MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $276,947.00, FOR THE BASE LINE ROAD PAVEMENT REHAB, CARNELIAN TO LION, CONTRACT NO. 06-080 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Clerk to release Faithful Performance. Bond No. 104735648, which was held on November 15, 2006 as a Maintenance Guarantee Bond in the amount of $276,947.00, for the Base Line Road Pavement Rehab, Carnelian to Lion, Contract No. 06-080. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS The required one-year maintenance period has ended and the improvements remain free from defects. in materials and workmanship. Contractor: R. J. Noble Company 15505 E. Lincoln Ave Orange, CA 92856 Respectfully submitted, William J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:JD/SH:Is Attachments P606 VICINITY MAP BASE LINE RD. PAVEMENT REHABILITATION FROM CARNELIAN AVE. TO LION ST. PROJECT LOCATION ,t'~ ~> ~~ ~~~.'ti~ O r" ~ t~ 1 Jam: t ~ ~i .. _v-- >>111 Alm ontl ltd ~'' ~. , r R ~ ~i '> HDlsitle Rd ~, r f ~ & ' ~ ~ m: m ~ '' i ~' 4 ." F ,~' , ' .. I ,~ a 1N1.o~uAa, ~ '~ ~ ~ ~~" lsan ,Ay: $allY3f1~~ 5~ , ~' ~~ s I . ~.: w IU ,. ` , .. ~. ` . 1_ ~: ~ r ... +19th-Si , . ~-; .. ' " .. _. .. ..t . ~ ° ~ I ~ ~htand Av ,,. ~t Fodfhi ~. ... "ID1I~ ,.r.. y' ~v ~ ' , , 8tti ~. -+ _ ~~ atnst =-n- STAFF REPORT P607 - ENGINEERING DEP.ARTTIENT RANCxo Date: December 5, 2007 C,UCAMONGA To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer By: Jerry Dyer, Senior Civil Engineer `~ Shelley Hayes, Assistant Engine G,Y~ Subject: ACCEPT THE HERITAGE PARK AND WINDROWS PARK BASEBALL FIELD RENOVATION IMPROVEMENTS, CONTRACT NO. 07-092 AS COMPLETE, RELEASE THE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND, ACCE PT A GUARANTEE BOND, RELEASE THE LABOR AND MATERIAL BOND AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY ENGINEER TO FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION AND APPROVE THE FINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $107,798.95 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council accept the Heritage Park and Windrows Park Baseball Field Renovation Improvements, Contract No. 07-092, as complete, authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion, release the Faithful Performance Bond, accept a Guarantee Bond, authorize the release of the Labor and Materials Bond in the amount of $53,048.30 six months after the recordation of said notice if no claims have been received and authorize the release of the retention in the amount of $10,778.90, 35 days after acceptance. Also, approve the final contract amount of $107,798.95. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS The subject project has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The Heritage Park and Windrows Park Baseball Field Renovation Improvements scope of work consisted of renovation of two baseball fields at Heritage Park and two baseball fields at Windrows Park. Pertinent information of the project is as follows: Budgeted Amount: $105,000.00 ~ Account Numbers: 11203035650/1562120-0, 11203035650/1600120-0 ~ Engineer's Estimate: - $73,213.50 > City Council's Approval to Advertise: May 3, 2007 Publish dates for local paper: May 9 and May 15, 2007 Bid Opening: June 5, 2007 Contract Award Date: June 20, 2007 Low Bidder: Lasting Images Landscape, Inc. P608 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Re: Accept Heritage Park & Windrows Park Baseball Field Renovation Improvements December 5, 2007 Page 2 ~ Contract Amount: - 10% Contingency:. ~ Final Contract Amount: - Difference in Contract Amount: $53,048.30 $5,304.83 $107,798.95 $54,750.65 (103.21%) The net increase in the total cost of the project is a result of six (6) contract change orders. The notable change significant to the increase of the contract was contract change orders number 2 and 3 which provided for the contractor to perform additional excavation, grading, export of material and new brick dust to achieve the necessary grades for the renovated ball fields. Respectfully submitted, Willlliam J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:JD/SH:Is Attachment P609 RESOLUTION NO. D7- z-/ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE HERITAGE PARK AND WINDROWS PARK BASEBALL FIELD RENOVATION IMPROVEMENTS, CONTRACT NO: 07-092 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the Heritage Park and Windrows Park Baseball Field Renovation Improvements, Contract No. 07-092, has been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and complete. WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby resolves, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. PROJECT LOCATION CITY OF RANCIiO CUCAMONGA HERITAGE PARE AND IIINDROIB PARR BASEBALL FIELD RENOVATIONS VICINITY MAP STAFF REPORT ENGINEERING DEP,~1RTn~tENT Date: December 5, 2007 To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer By: Curt Billings, Associate Erigineer~~ Shelley Hayes, Assistant Engineer P611 RANCHO C,UCAMONGA Subject: ACCEPT THE HERITAGE PARK EMERGENCY SEWER RETROFIT IMPROVEMENTS, CONTRACT NO. 07-138 AS COMPLETE, RETAIN THE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND AS A GUARANTEE BOND, RELEASE THE LABOR AND MATERIAL BOND AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY ENGINEER TO FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION AND APPROVE THE FINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $117,129.84 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council accept the Heritage Park Emergency Sewer Retrofit Improvements, Contract No. 07-138, as complete, authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion, retain the Faithful Performance Bond as a Guarantee Bond, authorize the release of the Labor and Materials Bond in the amount of $113,120.00 six months after the recordation of said notice if no claims have been received and authorize the release of the retention in the amount of $11,712.98, 35 days after acceptance. Also, approve the final contract amount of $117,129.84. BACKGROUNDIANALYSIS The subject project has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The Heritage Park Emergency Sewer Retrofit Improvements scope of work consisted of constructing sewer line through the park and connect to existing sewer in Beryl Street. Pertinent information of the project is as follows: Budgeted Amount: ~ Account Numbers: Engineer's Estimate: - City Council's Approval Urgency Resolution: ~ Publish dates for local paper: Contract Award Date: 9 Low Bidder: Contract Amount: $145,000.00 10250015650/1651 . $145,000.00 July 18, 2007 July 6, 2007 August 1, 2007 Albert W. Davies, Inc. $113,200.00 P612 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Re: Accept Heritage Park Emergency Sewer Retrofit Improvements December 5, 2007 Page 2 10% Contingency: $11,312.00 ~ Final Contract Amount: $117,129.84 ~ Difference in Contract Amount: $3,929.84 (3.47)% The net increase in the total cost of the project is a result of one (1) contract change orders. The notable changes that were significant to the increase of the contract provided for the contractor to reconfigure drainage along new concrete slab. Res tfully submitted, ~c Wiliam J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:CB/SH:Is Attachment 13 PROJECT AREA 1l~AP _-___:-- W a„ ~ ~ HILLSIDEI,iRD~ ~ ~ ajl • .. i ^ ail HERITAGE P. Z ~j Y~ Q 'Z O P s.. Q~ . ~'' a _ __-.::~~-:.---' i .;' HILLSIDE_RD,_; ----i~~-~ ' ~' ~ , 11 ii _. _._. __ ~ i' ~ a [ _. =ar __ ._ _c.. - .:._.__ ~I _ 1' ~' . .; '~ l ~~ ~;~ , _.__-_-. -.~~._:~i _ - i ___ - . .. ._...c_r.:-. . i.la - ii _... c.--~ > it LEMON AVE.Q,I ~. I, '`HIGHLAND AVE MONTE t~ ri 1. ii~ i ~~ UPLAND ~ ~~'! l ~~ Y' _ _ ~~ -~-- ----- ~ _ _ _ _ _ t `f ~ °'r C. ~~ a I ajl r i ! ii ~ 5 a SOR I ~ >„ Q. _- _ I'~ CHURCH ST ,; _. _ ,~ C QI~ I __ I' Q p . q Ji j~, K. O. >'i, ~. SAN HERNARDIND RD _. ,,-_, <_ S u HILL ~O _ _... ~ ~. .._ _ ~ . . i ' 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ .. ~ n <' Q i -_.. _J.. _ J _____ W m _ ~ _ -. W~ l _ .~ .. ~.. ai Y; ' ;i m;! 9th ST. - _ ._ ._:' :~. .- . ll I W, > o W ~' >• c bl~i <i ~ 6i~ .. p' Q J J' W ¢. m Q. f ., Z' S U 2 Q 6th 51 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HERPfAGE PARK EMERGENCY SE~PER RETROFIT ~~ N -~;' x.rs. P614 RESOLUTION NO. D 7'Z 9Z A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE HERITAGE PARK EMERGENCY SEWER RETROFIT IMPROVEMENTS, CONTRACT NO. 07-138 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the Heritage Park Emergency Sewer Retrofit Improvements, Contract No. 07-138, has been completed to the satisfactiori of the City Engineer; and complete. WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work ""NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby resolves, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. P615 STAFF REPORT ENGINEERING DEPARTbIENT Date: December 5, 2007 RANCHO CUCAMONGA To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer By: Karen McGuire-Emery, Senior Park Planner Subject: APPROVAL TO AWARD A CONTRACT TO MEGA LIGHTING, INC. (DBA MEGA WAY ENTERPRISES), IN THE AMOUNT OF $546,943.50 (PLUS A 10% CONTINGENCY), FROM PARK DEVELOPMENT ACCOUNT NO. 1120305- 5650/1605120-0 IN THE AMOUNT OF $601,637.85 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CENTRAL PARK PLAYGROUND PROJECT. RECOMMENDATION Accept the bid received and award and authorize the execution of a contract in the amount of $546,943.50 and authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency, in the amount of $54,694.35, to Mega Lighting, Inc. (D,BA Mega Way Enterprises), for the construction of the Central Park Playground Project, to be funded from Park Development Account No. 1120305-5650/1605120-0 in the amount of $601,637.85. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS On Tuesday, November 13, 2007, 16 bids were received and opened for the Central Park Playground Project (see attached summary). The lowest bid received was from Mega Way Enterprises and after review, was found to be accurate and responsive. Thus, staff recommends award of the contract to Mega Way Enterprises, in the amount of $546,943.50. The new playground will be located adjacent to the Community Center and will incorporate the current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines, as well as the current Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) standards. The design will include provisions for play equipment for ages 1 to 5 and ages 5 to 12, as well as access walkways, security lighting and the necessary landscape and irrigation modifications. Respectfully submitted, ~G~ William J. O'Neil City Engineer Attachments CENTRAL PARK PLAYGROUND PROJECT • BID SUMMARY 13-Nov-07 p ~ Eng: Estimate Mega Way IAC Engineering Sierra Landscape Descrl lion 4uan[i Unit ~ Unit Price Price Unit Price Price Unit Price Price Unit Price Price i. 2. Mobiiiuli0n Surveying 8 ConslmGion staking 1 LS $ 44,000.00 E 44,000.00 $' 21,000.00 $ 21,000.00 $ 19,W2.14 $ 19,09214 $ 30,000.00 $ 311,000.00 3, Temporary construction lence 1 LS 9,200.00 E 9,200.00 3,500,00 3,500.00 9,839.74 9,839.74 5,300.00 5,300.00 4. Clear and gmb 1 LS 7,500.00 $ 7,SOO.W 2.500.00 2.500.00 1,967.95 1 967.95 2,500.00 2,500.00 5. Erosion Control 1 LS 33,000.00 $ 33,000.00 25,000.00 25.000.00 9,178.06 9,178.06 4,800.00 4,800.00 6. EadhworWGrading-CulB Fill 1 LS 8,000.00 E 8,000.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 1,499.70 1,499.]0 11,500.00 11,5110.00 7 Constrtx:t mnrret¢ mow wtb 1 LS 66,000.00 $ 66,000.00 9,50000 9,500.00 12.919.35 12,919.35 19,500.00 10,500.00 . 325 LF 23.00 $ 7,475.00 13.00 4,225.00 1419 4,611.]5 1250 4,06250 e. ConSWG metl. Broom petlesVtan paving/sidewaGdMisc flatwnrk 4,000 SF 1150 E 46 000.00 ~ 6 25 25 000 00 5 56 240 22 9. Construct masorvy seat wall wiN plaster finish 115 LF 172.50 $ , 19 837.50 . 95 00 , . 10 925 00 . 159 90 , .00 12.00 48,000.00 10. Constmd 3' 0' hl. masonry tents pilaster with plaster finish 2 FA 4 025 00 $ , 050 8 00 . 800 00 . . 1 . 18,388.50 300.00 34,500.00 1 i. Consinlct 4' B' hL masonry fence piaster with poster finish 7 EA , . 5 175 00 S . , 36 225 00 . 1 400 ,800.00 983.98 1,96L96 1,580.00 3,160.00 12. Construe fi'g'ht. masonry f¢nce pilaster with plasRrfiNsh 4 F , . . . , .00 9,800.00 1.352.96 ~ 9,470.72 7,800.00 12,600.00 J1 10,350.00 $ N,400.00 1,500.00 8,000.00 4,819.87 19,679.48 ~ 7,800.00 31 200 00 13. Construe playground concrete edge at play area 215 LF 138.00 $ 29,670.00. 78.40 16,856.00 32.72 ~ 7,1134.80 41.00 , . 8 875 00 14. Fabdrate 8 install Nbuar steel tents ' 300 LF 172.50 $ 51,750.00 117.00 35,100.00 63.55 19,065.00 110 00 , . 33 0011 00 ConsbuG 4 PVC SDR -35mm storm drain, bedtlirg per Deiail3, , . , . 15. Sheet G2 ' 200 LF 13.80 $ 2,760.00 65.00 13,000.00 27.00 5.400.00 ].pp 1 400 00 Consbud B PVC SDR-35 stone tlrain, bedding per Detail 2, Sheet , . 16. C-2 350 LF 23.00 $ 8,050.00 80.00 28,1100.00 21.00 7 3,50.00 00 11 3 850 00 17. Pmvitle and install atrium drain per Detail 2. Sheet G2 22 FJt 264.50 $ 5,819.00 325.00 7,150.00 768.70 , 16,867.40 . 11500 , . 2 530 00 18. Core existing bazin arp conneU as mqulred per Sheet G2 / EA 575.00 $ 57500 T00.00 700.00 541.19 541.19 500 00 , . 500 00 19. Construct subdrain per Delail4. Sheet G2 130 LF -'34.50 § 4,485.00 24.00 3,120.00 31.78 4,131.40 . 6.00 . 780 00 20. Connect subtlrain to stone drain ~ 2 EA 1,150.00 $ 2,300.00 400.00 BOO.OQ 226.0 452.40 50.00 . 100.00 21. ConstmG atdi basin and grate per Detail 1, Sheet G2 2 EA 1,725.00 $ 3,450.00 1,800.00 3,600.00 1,460.95 2,921.90 1,000.00 2 000.00 22. InslaA quick coupNllg valve per City Sid 536 - 2 Flt 350.00 $ 700.00 300.00 ~ 600.00 30249 619.98 710 00 , 220 00 Consimct t'domeslic meterwlth 2'servlce Ane par CCWD Std. . . 23. Dwg. No. 113 and 111 " 1 LS 3,500.00 $ 3,500.00 3,000.00 3,00000 2,367.65 2,387.65 4,800.00 4,800.00 24. Construct 3/4 wC water fine 48 LF 21 00 $ 1,008.00 15.00 720,00 4.92 236.16 7 80 374 40 25. Conshud 1' wC water line 200 LF 22.00 $ 4,400.00 15.00 3,000.00 5.53 1.106.011 . 8 00 . 1 600 00 28. Pravitlelnsta0 stettriWl conduit, tlisbibu0on8 widng 1 LS 11,000.00 $ 11.W0.00 .14,000.00 14,000.00 15,866.58 15,066.58 . 9 000.00 , . 9 000 00 27. Provitlefinsta9 walkwaylighis 9 FA 4,025.00 $ 36,225.00 3,700.00 33,300.00 5,411.86 48,706.74 , 4 460.011 , . 40 14000 28. Providernsla0 soil prepara0on, rock picking & fine grading i LS 40,756:00 $ 40,756.00 6,000.00 6,000.00 6,100.64 6,100.64 , 4,000.00 , 4,W0.00 29. Pmvidelnslall irtigailon system (insta8etl for wmpleie coverage) 1 ~ LS 20,378.00 $ 20,378.00 29,000 00 29,000.00 1],281.05 17,281.05 31 250.00 31 250 00 30. Provide soils(erti(ity end agricultural suitability tesBrg i LS 1,150.00 $ 1,150.00 300.00 300.00 614.98 614.98 , 250 00 , 00 250 31. Provitlrln51aA 35'OOx tree 23 FA 1,035.00 $ 23,805.00 550.00 ~ 12,650.00 1,100.82 25 318.116 . 550 00 . 12 85000 32. Provlde/InstaN shrubs, Sgalbn 286 Flt 28.75 $ 8,222.50 19.00 5,434.00 22,53 , 6 443 SB . 13 00 , 3 71800 33. Provldellnsta0 shrubs, 2-gallon 143 Eh, 25.30 $ 3,61].90 25.00 3,575.00 20.30 , . 2 974.34 . 1525 , 2 1875 34. Providelinstall shrubs, t-gallon 479 FA 7150 $ 5,508.50 ~~ 6.50 3,113.50 8.68 , 4 157 72 5 50 , 2 634 50 35. PmvidPlnslall 3' nlukh 40 CY 40.25 $ 1,610.00 35.00 1,400.00 49.00 , . 1 960 00 . 45 00 , . 1 800 00 36. Provide/Instali turt sod 14,000 SF 0.69 $ 9,660.00 0.90 12.600.00 1.17 , . 16 380 00 . 0 75 , . 10 500 00 37. Provide fi0-day maintenance 1 LS 3,056.00 $ 3,056.00 2,000.00 2.000.00 1,475.86 , . 1 475 96 . 1 600 00 , . 1 600 00 38. Provld¢/install metal bench 4 FA 1,725.00 $ 6900.00 1,775.00 7,100 DO 7,985.06 , . 7,940.24 , . 900 1 00 , . 7 600 W 39. Provitlelinslall concrete Iresh receptacle 2 _ EA 1,03500 $ 2.0]0.00 85000 1.700.00 737.98 1075 96 , . 880 00 , . 1 ]60 00 40. Provide/install drinking tounlain 1 EA S,i75.00 $ 5,175.00 4,500.00 4,500.00 3,693.76 . 3,693.76 . 5,500.00 , . 5,500.00 41. Providennstall import sand far minimum 12' depth Sand in play areas 125 CV 63.25 E 7,906.25 75 OD 9 375 00 51 78 6 472 50 42. Provide/Install play equipment 1 LS 115,000.00 $ 1 15,000.00 75,W0.00 , . 75,000.00 . 98,627.38 , . 99,627.38 95.00 88,000.00 11,875.00 86,000.00 43. Provide/Install resilient svrtadng complete, InGUding concete base 5,000 SF 29.90 8 1 49,500.00 18 00 90 000 00 24 15 120 750 00 TOTALS , . . , . 20.00 100,000.110 $ 896,694.65 $ 546,943.50 $ 586124.52 $ 809,550.15 ~~ # _ Landmark Site Conengr Corporation Cora Construction' Grand Pacific oescrl lion quanti Unit Unit Price Price Unit Price Price Unit Price Price Unit Price Price 1. 2. Mobilisation Surveying 8 Conslmdlon staking 1 LS $ 27,950.00 S 27,950.00 ~; E 30957:00 $ 30,957.00 E 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 3. Temporary conSWCpon lerce i LS 11,175.00 11,175.00 5,600.00 5,600.00 8,866.00 8,866.00 4. . Clear and gmb 1 LS 2,510.00 2,510.00 3,530.00 3,530.00 9,450.00 9,450.00 5 Erosion ConUOI 1 LS 1],930.00 1],930.00 15,175.00 15,175.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 . 6. ~ EarprvrorWGratllry-CUtBFlp 1 LS 7,530.00 7,530.00 5,650.00 5,650.00 5.000.00 ~ 5,000.00 ] ConsUUd concrete mow curb 1 LS 12,265.00 12,265.00 61,175.00 61,17500 12,]50.00 12,750.00 . 325 LF 11.72 3,009.00 17.75 3,810.75 15.00 4,875.00 e. ConsWCt med. Broom patlesidan pavirg/sidewaOdMisc. flalwork 4,000 SF 99 15 3 960 00 7 00 28 000 00 9. COOSlmct masonry seat waQ wiN plaster finish 115 LF . , . 150.60 17 34200 . . . 153 00 17 00 595 4.90 19,600.00 5 70. Comsimct 3' 0' ht masonry lence pilaster with plaster Finish 2 EA , 1 738 00 3 476 00 . , . 0,00 28,750.00 2 ' ' , . . . 940.00 1,880.00 3,500.00 7,000.00 11. ConsUUCt 4 B ht masonry fence pilaster with plasterflnlsh ' 7 FA 2,295.00 18,065.00 1,295.00 .9,065.00 ~ 3,700.00 25 900 00 12. Cons[mcl6 9"hl. masonry lance pilaster with plaster finish 4 FA 4,795.00 19,180.00 4,705.00 78,820.00 , . 3,900.00 15 600 00 13. ConsWd pWygrountl mnaele edge al pYayarea 275 LF Sg.00 72,470.00 70.00 15,050.00 , . 25.00 5 375 00 14 Fabricate 8lnslall lobular steol lance ' 308 LF 200.40 62,520.00 113.00 33,900.00 , . 120.45 36,135.00 Constmct 4 PVC SDR -35n1m stomr tlmin, bedding par Detail3, 15. Sheet G2 200 LF 17.00 3,400.00 ]0.50 14,100.00 25.00 5,000.00 Construcl8' PVC SDR-35 storm drain, betltlhg per Detail 2, Sheet tfi. ~ C-2 350 LF 18.50 6,475.00 76.50 26,775.00 35.00 12 250.00 17. Provide and insta0 atrium drain per Delail2, Sheet G2 22 FA 280.00 6,160.00 - 295.00 6,490.00 , 500.00 11.000.00 18. Core ezlsting basin and canned as requimtl per Sheet G2 1 EA 905.00 905.00 1.412.00 1,412.00 500.00 500.00 19. Constmd subdrein per Delall4. Sheet G2 130 LF 26.40 3,692.00 82.00 10,660.00 35.00 4,550.00 20. Connect subdrain to storm drain 2 FA 235.00 470.00 SB8.00 1,178.00 1,000.00 2.000.00 21. Construct cater basin and grate per Delall 1, Sheet G2 2 EA S45.OD 1,090.00 2,177.00 4,234.00 2,000.00 4,000.00 22. Instep quirk coupling valve per City Std 536 ' 2 Eft 206.00 472.00 175.00 350,00 750.00 1 500 00 CanstmU 1 domesOc meter wIN 2 servke pne per CCW D Std. , . 23, fing. No. 113 arM 117 ' 1 LS 5,590.00 5,590.00 5,650.00 5,650.00 'Non-responsive bid - 4,600.00 4 600A0 24. Construct 3/4 PVC water ine 48 LF 7.00 336.00 4 70 225.60 Oid not include Addendum , 15.00 720 00 25. Con5WCt 1'PVC water pne 200 LF 7.00 1pa0.00 5.30 1,060.00 items . 20.00 4 000.00 26. ProvitlelrulaA ekttrial wrMuit, dlsVlbNionBwidrlg .1 LS 10,040.00 10,040.00 48,]75.00 48,775.00 , 23,529.00 23,529.00 27. PmvidrJirelaO waAtwdy Aghts 9 EA 5,455.00 49,095.00 4,268.00 38,41200 4,Bfi2.00 43 758 00 28. ProvitlelOStaA soil preparation, rock piGing 8 flr10 grading i LS 6,900.00 6 900.00 7 058 82 7 058 82 , . 5 , , . , . 0,000.00 50,000.00 29. Provid~nsta0 irrigation syslun (lmslalletl for complete ceverage) 1 LS 38,700.00 38,700.00 36 705 118 36 705 86 2 30. Provide soils fedTty and agricultural suifablpty testing 1 LS 060 00 , . , . 2,000.00 22.000.00 31 ProvidelnstaA 35' boz tree . 460.00 295.00 295.00 7,000.00 t 000.00 . 32. Providelinsfap shubs 5-galbn 23 EA ]56.00 1],434.00 706.00 16,238.00 _ 838.00 19,228 00 33. , ProvidelnstaA Shrubs 2-galbn 286 4 FJ~ ~ 22.00 8,292.00 21.20 6,063.20 2212 6,326.32 3d. , ProvidaJln5laA shrubs l-galbn 1 3 FJl 27.00 3,861 DO 29.40 4,21M2U 1257 1)97.51 35 , ProvidelnstaA 3' mulch 479 EA 10.00 4,790.00 8.00 3,632.00 10.40 4,981.60 . 36 ProvidelnstaA tud sod 40 CV 55.]0 2,228.00. 47.06 1,882.40 151.25 6,050.00 . 14,000 SF 0.90 12,600.00 0.76 70,640.00 1 05 14 700 00 37. Provide 60-day maintenance 1 LS 2,565.00 2,565.00 2,400.00 2.400.00 . , . 2 750 00 2 750 00 38. Provida/InstaA metal bench 4 EA 1,180.00 4,720.00 7.450.00 5,800.00 , . , . 1 500 00 6 000 00 39. Provldelnstall conuele gash receptacle 2 EA 504.00 1,008A0 1,000.00 2,000.00 , . , . 1 785.00 3 5]0 00 40. ProvideltnstaA tldnking lountain 1 FA 3,975.00 3,9]5.00 5,e00A0 5,800.00 , , . 3,810.00 3,810.00 41. ProvitlelnslaA imppd santl for minimum 12' depth sand In pky areas 125 CY 60.80 7 600 00 41 20 5 150 00 42. ProvidelnstaA play equipment 1 LS , . 85,270.00 95,210 UO . , . 73,912.00 73,912.00 160.00 20,000.00 88,200.00 88,200.00 43.. Provlde/InStaA resiAenl sarlaGng complete, Irlcbtling conueta base 5,000 ~ SF 23.39 116 950 00 16 76 83 800 00 TOTALS , . . , . 19.50 97,500.00 E 634,608.88 f 675,316:85 5'656,625.00 E 879,621.43 V # - Descri lion BIg Ben Vitlo Samarzich, Inc. ~ Tiffany Group PIMA Corporation ~uanti Unll. Unit Price Price Unl[ Price Price Unit Price Price Unit Price Pricp 1. 2. MObilizalion Surveyiny 8 Construction sUkirg 1 LS $ 33.500.00 $ 33,500.00 $ 37,000 Op E 37,000.00 $ 34,000.00 $ 34,000.00 $ 35,000.00 $ 35,000.00 3. Temporary construction fence 1 LS 11,500.00 71,500.00 7,500.00 7,500.00 9,000.00 9,000.00 12,000.00 12,000.00 A. CleareMgvb ~ 1 LS 2,100.00 2,100.00 6,000.00 6.000.00 2.500.00 2.500.00 2.000.00 2,000.00 5 Erosion Conir0l 1 LS 33,000.00 33,000.00 15;000.00 15,000.00 30,00000 30,000.00 26,000.00 26,000.00 . S EadhvrorWGrading-CulB Fitl 1 LS 4,000.00 x,000.00 3,000.00 3,000.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 S,OpO.I>0 S,OOD.DD 7. Construct mrxxele mow carp 1 LS 9,000.00 9,000.00 50,000.00 50,000.00 15,000.00 15,000.00 39,000.00 39,000.00 325 LF 10 50 3,412.50 17.00 5,525.00 12.00 3,900.00 1200 3,900.00 8. ConsWq med. Broom petlesMan paving/sidewalWMisc. 8a[work 4,000 SF 8.40 33,600.00 7 50 30 000 00 11 00 44 000 00 9.. Construct masonry seat wa0 with plaster finish 115 LF 190.00 21,850.00 . , . 130 00 14 950 00 . , . 301 00 34 615 00 5.00 20,000.00 215 00 ip_ Constuct 3' 0' hl. masonry fence pilaster with plaster finish 2 EA 1 180 00 2 36 . , . . , . . 24,725.00 11. r.mlSti UCt d'ft'ht.masonry fence pilaster wiN plaster Bnish ] FA , . , 0.00 1,500 00 3,000.00 1,935.00 3,670.00 2,500.00 5,000.00 12. Constuct 6' 9' hL masonry fence pilaster wiUi plaster finish 4 E 1,280.00 8,960.00 2.200.00 15,400.00 2,130.00 14,910.00 4,000.00 28,000.00 13. Conslvci playground concrete edge ai plaY ama 215 A 4,BBO.OV 19,52000 2,800.00 11,200.00 6,500.00 26,000.00 6,700.00 26,800.00 14. Fabricate 8 InstaO tubular steel fence LF 47.00 10,10500 - 85.00 18,275.00 55.00 11,825.00 50.00 10.750.00 Construct 4' PVC SDR -35mm storm drain, bedding per Detail3, 300 LF 116.00 34,800.00 115.00 34,500.00 124.00 37,200.00 150.00 45,000.00 15. Sheet G2 ' 200 LF 15.00 3,000.00 40.00 8,000.00 24.00 4 800.00 20 00 4 000 00 Conslrucl0 PVC SDR-35 storm drain, bedtlirg per Detail 2, Sheet , . , . i6. G2 ~ 350 LF 30.00 10,500.00 5500 19,250.00 35.00 12,250.00 3000. 10 500 00 17. Provide and Irss1aA alduni drain per Detail 2, Shoal G2 22 FA 238.00 5;236.00 650.00 14,300.00 500.00 11.000.00 , . 100.00 2,200.00 18. Core exisli~ basin arM conned as required per Sheei G2 1 EA 500,00 500.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 ~ 500.00 500.00 1,000.00 1 000.00 19. ConsWd subdrain per Detail4, Sheei G2 130 LF 16.00 2,080.00 30.00 3,900.00 35.00 4,550.00 , 50.00 6,500.110 20. Conned subdrain to storm drain 2 FA 150.00 300.00 1,000.00 2,000.00 75000 1,SOO.OV 500.00 1 UOO Op 21. Consivd etch basin antl grate per Detail 1, Sheaf G2 2 EA 7,150.00 2,300.00 2500.00 5,000.00 2,125.00 4,250,00 . 750.00 1 SOO.W 22. Install quick coupling valve per City Std 536 ^ 2 FA 1,200.00 2,400.00 500.00 1,000.00 150,00 300 00 , 200 00 400 00 Conswcl 1 tlomeslic meter with 2 servke fine per CCWD Std. . . . 23. Dw'9. No. 113 arq 111 ' 1 LS 17,000.00 17,000.00 - 15,000.00 15,000.00 1,750.00 7,750.00 3 500 00 3 500 00 24. Conslvd 3!4 PVC water Gne ' 48 ~ LF 7.pD 336.00 ~ 2000 960.00 9,00 432.00 , . . . 50 00 2 <00 00 25. COnStNCt 1 PVC wafer Gne 200 LF 7.00 1.400.00 25.00 5,000.00 1200 2,400,00 . . ffi00 4 000 00 26. Providelnsla0 elecidgl conduit, disidbulion 8 widrg 1 LS 9,300.00 9,300.00 22,000.00 22,000.00 39,589.00 39,589.110 , . 15 800 00 15 00 800 27. Provide/InsiaA waACVrdY Aghls ~ 9 FA 4,400.00 39,600.00 4,800,00 43,200.00 3,808.00 34 27200 , . , . 4 500 00 40 500 00 28. Pmvid~nsiall soil preparagon, tack picking 8 fine grading 1 LS 2,000.00 2000.00 5 000 00 5 000 00 , 8 400 00 8 40 , . , . , . , . , . , 0.00 20,000.00 20,000.00 29. Pmvide7lnstaG Irrigation system (installed for complete cove2ge) 1 LS 29,000.00 29,000.00 37 000.00 37 000 00 26 400 00 26 400 00 6B DDD rH1 30. Pmvitle soils fertility antl agdw8ural suitability testing 1 LS 350 00 350 0 , , . , . . . , . 68,000.00 31. ProvMe/InstaA 35' bos bee . . 0 SOO.UO SOO.OD 7,200.00 1,200.00 7,000 W 1,000.00 32. Pmvide(nsiall shrubs 5yallon 23 EA 900.00 20,700.00 700 00 16,100.00 900.00 20,700.00 650.00 14,950.00 33. , PrOVide/Install chubs 2-gallon 286 EA 26.00 7,436.00 20.00 5,720.00 28.00 8,008.00 20.00 5,720.00 34. . Providelnstn0 shrubs 1-gallon 143 EA 30.00 4,290.00 21.00 3,003.00 24,00 3,A32.00 15.00 2,145.00 35 , Pmvide]inslall3' mulch 479 FA 10.00 4,790.00 6.00 2.874.00 16.00 8,622.00 10.00 4,790.00 . 36 Pvvitle(nstall tur(sod 40 CV 100.00 0,000.00 50.00 2,000.00 84.00 3,360.00 50.00 2000.00 . 37. Pmvide 60-day malnterar¢e 14,000 SF 1.80 25,200.00 0.80 11,200.00 1.80 25,200.00 0.80 11,200.00 38. Pvvid84nslaA metal bench 1 LS 4,200.00 4,200.00 2,500.00 2,500.00 3,000.00 3,000.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 39. Pmvldernsial concrete bash recepiade 4 FA 2,200.00 8,800.00 1,600.00 6,000,00 1,500.00 6,000.00 1,800.00 7,200.00 40. Pnrvidelnstal tlnnking fountain 2 EA 950.00 1,800.00 1,300.00 2,600.00 803.00 1,606.00 750.00 1.500.00 1 FA 2,B5U.00~ 2,850.00 5,500.00 5,500.00 2,500.00 2,500.00 6,000.00 6,000.00 41. Provide]inslall Impon sand for minimum 12' depth 53rq In play alas 125 CY 158.00 19,750.00 100.00 12,500.00 80.00 10.000.00 180 00 22 500 00 42. Provide/in9tall play equipment 1 LS 109,074.50 109,0]4.50 100,000.00 100,000.00 85.000.00 05,000.00 . , . 85,000.00 85,000.00 43. PrgvltleMSlall resirinnl sudacing complete, InGWing concrete baze 5,000 SF 26.00 130,000.00 25 00 125 000 00 26 00 130 000 00 T OTALS . , . . , . 21.00 105,000.00 E 696,000.00 - $ 729.857.00 $ 732,611.00 $ 734,480.00 1 ~ Broughton Construction 4-Con Engineering JDC Inc. Palomar Descri lion Quanti Unit Unit Price Price ~ Unit Price Price Unit Price Price Unil Price Price 1. 2. MoblA7agon Surveying 8 Construction slakin 1 LS S 36,900.00 $ 36,40000 E 40,000-W $ 40,000.00 E 40,000.00 5 90,000.00 5 40.600.00 S 40.600.00 3. g Temporary construction fence i LS 8,333.00 8,333.00 6,000 W 6,000.00 11 000.00 11,000.00 9,860.00 9,860.00 4. Clear arxl grab 1 LS 7,800.00 7,800.00 4,000.00 4,000.00 8000.00 8,000.00 3,306.00 3.306.00 5. Em$lon Coniml 1 ~ LS 5,200.00 5,200.00 22,000.00 22,000.00 60,000.00 60,000.00 66,805.08 66,88508 6. Earthwvrk/Gredin0-CW8Fi0 1 LS 6.500.00 6,500.00 6,000.00 6,000.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 - - 15,660.00 15,880.00 7. Consbuct conuele mow curb 1 LS 78,000.00 78,00000 35,000.00 35,000.00 50,000.00 50,000.00 40.605.95 48,805.95 325 LF 13.00 4,225.00 13.00 4,225.00 10.00 3,250.00 29.00 9,425.00 8. GOnslNCt med. Broom pedestrian paving/sitlewalk/Misn flalwork q 000 SF 9. Construct masonry seal waA wllh Plaster finish , 8.50 26,000.00 1000 40,000.00 7.25 29,000.00 2320 92.800.00 10. Construct 3' 0' hL masonry lerxx pilaster with plaster finish 115 2 LF FA 169.00 19,935.00 270.00 31050.00 165.00 18,975.00 150.80 17,34200 11. ConstrwY 4' 8' ht masonry lerrce pllaster with plaster finish 7 1,040.00 2.080.00 3 000 00 6,000.00 1,200.00 2;400.00 828.00 1,858 00 ' ' FA 1,430.00 10.010.00 5,000 00 35,000,00 1,900.00 9,800.00 ° 1 276.00 8 932 00 12. COnsImG 6 9 ht. masonry fence plaster with pFdster finish 4 EA 5,200.00 20,800.00 8 800 00 35 200 00 5 000 00 20 0011 00 , . . 4 640 00 8 5 13. Construe playground wnaete edge al play area 215 LF 71 5 , . , . , . , . , . 1 , 60.00 . 0 15,372.50 60-00 12,90000 150.00 32,250.00 40.60 8 729 00 14. Fabdra[e BlnstaA tubular steel fence 300 LF 194.67 58,401.00 110.00 33,000.00 135.00 40 500 00 . . 111 56 33 468 00 Construe 4' PVC SDR ~,5mm storm tlmin, beddirg per Detail3. , . . , . 15. Slmei G2 200 LF 40.30 8,060.00 2000 4,000.00 35.00 7,000.00 35 38 7 076 00 Construct 8' PVC SDR-35 storm tlrein, bedding per Detail 2, Sheet . , . i6. G2 350 LF ~ 4290 15,015.00 35.00 12,250.00 40.00 14,000.00 47.07 16 474 50 17. Provide and InStaA alnum drain per Detail2, Sheet G2 22 EA 286.00 6,292.00 150.00 3,300.00 175.00 3,050.00 . . 116.00 2 552 00 18. Core exis8rxj basin and connect as required per Sheet G2 1 EA 1,085.50 1,085.50 1,500.00 1soD.uD 400.00 400.00 . . 1,160.00 1,160.00 19. Construe Subdmin per Deail4, Sheet G2 130 LF Sd.60 7,098.00 35.00 4,550.00 30.00 3,900.00 44.63 5 801 90 2U. ConneG subdrain to storm drain 2 FA 312.00 624.00 200.00 400.00 1,000.00 2,000.00 , 290.00 580.00 21. Consevct catch basin an0 grate per Detail 1, Sheet G2 2 EA 3,172.00 6,344.00 1,000.00 2,000.00 650.00 1,300.00 580.00 1,160.00 22. Install quick coupling valve per City Sld 536 ' 2 EA 318.50 fi37.00 350.00 700.00 300.00 600.00 580.00 1,160.00 Construct 1 tlpmeslic meter v4th 2'servlce Gne per CCWD Sid. 23. I7wg. No. 113 and 111 ' 1 LS 17,485.00 17,48500 15,000.00 15,000.00 15,0011.00 15.000.00 - 860.00 9 9 860 00 24. Construe 3r4 WCwater Ana 48 LF 28.60 1,37280 2.00 96.00 6.00 288.00 , , 4 84 222 72 25. Construe i' PVC water line 200 LF 28.60 5,720.00 5 00 1,000.00 6.00 1 200.00 . . - 15 22 3 094 00 28. ProvidelnsaR ekGdr I mMUit dishibufion 8 wiring t LS 12,266.80 12,266.80 22,000.00 22,000.00 , 25,000.00 25,000.00 . , . 20 561 00 20 561 00 27. Provid~nstall waAwray lights 9 FA 5,239.00 47,151.00 6,000.00 54,000.00 12,500.00 112 500.00 , . , . 5 185 20 46 666 80 28.. ProvidPlnStaA soil preparation. rock picking & fine grading 1 LS 7 800.00 7 800 00 10 000 00 10 000 00 . 7 500 , . , . , , . , . , . , .00 7,500.00 6,960.00 6,960.00 29. PmvltlelnsaA iniga9on system (in5tapetl for wmplete coverage) 1 LS 40 56 00 30. Pmvido soiLS (erOAty and agricvtturel suilabiFty tes8rg 1 , 0. 40,560.00 50,00000 50,000.00 45,000.00 95,000.00 36,19200 38,192.00 31. ProvidolnsaA 35' box tree LS 325.00 325.00 350.00 350,00 750.00 750.00 290.00 290.00 23 EA 780.00 17,940.00 800.00 18,d0o.00 575.00 13 225 00 fi96 00 16 008 00 32. PmvidefinsaA Shrubs, SgaAOn 286 FA 23.40 8,692.40 2500 7,150.00 , . 2060 5 720.00 . . . 20 88 5 97168 33. ProvidPfnStaA Shrubs, 2gaAon 143 FA 32.50 4,647.50 4000 5.720.00 , 23.00 3,289.00 , , 29 00 4 147 00 34. PmvidelnSaA Shrubs, 1gaAOn 479 FA 9.66 4,627.1d 10.00 4,790.00 . 10.00 4 790 00 . , . 7 09 3 779 31 35. ProvidelnsaA 3'mukh 40 CY 52.00 2,080.00 60.00 2,400.00 , . 50.00 2,000.00 . . . 46 40 1 8511 00 36. PmvidernsaA turf sod 14,000 SF 0.8`v 11,900.00 160 14,000.00 0,75 10 500 00 . , . 0 75 10 500 00 37. Provide 60-day maintenance 1 LS 2,600.00 2.600.00 3,500.00 3,500.00. , . 4,000.00 4 000 00 . , . 320 00 2 2 320 00 38. Previdelnslall metal benGr 4 EA 1,950.00 7,800.00 1,100.00 4,400.00 , . 1,500.00 6 000 00 . , . . 1 180 00 4 640 00 39. PmvidellnSaA mnaele trash receptacle 2 FA 78000 1,560.00 1,00000 2000.00 , . 1,100.00 2 200 00 , . , . 160 1 00 2 320 00 40. Provide/insaA drinking fountain 1 EA 7,540.00 7,540.00 5,500.00 5,500.00 , . 7,500.00 7,500.00 . . , . 4,060.00 4,060.00 41. ProvidPlnstaA impon santl (or minimum 12' depth sand in play areas 125 CY 58.24 ],280.00 230 00 28750 00 120 00 15 000 00 92. Pmvidelnslall pay equipment 1 L$ 99 519 00 99 519 . . . , . 90.48 11,310.00 , . , .00 105,000.00 105,000.00 105,000.00 105,000.00 81,20000 81,200.00 43. Pravidernsall resillenl sudadng com Iele, including corrvele base 5,000 SF 2577 128 850 00 27 00 135 000 00 25 25 126 250 TOTALS , . . , . ~ . , .00 80.60 203,000.00 $ 779,4T8.60 $ 828,131.00 5 8]5,937.00 $ 888901.94 rp STAFF REPORT ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT Date: December 5, 2007 To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: John Gillison, Deputy City Manager/Administrative Servic~~ By: Manuel E. Pilonieta, Information Services Manager ~ RANCHO C,,UCAMONGA Subject: APPROVAL TO AWARD THE PURCHASE OF VMWARE SOFTWARE AND MAINTENANCE TO COMPUTEK IN THE AMOUNT OF $88,022 TO BE FUNDED AS FOLLOWS: $67,286 (ACCOUNT NUMBER 1714001-5152) AND $20,736 (ACCOUNT NUMBER 1714001-5300) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the award to purchase VMware software and maintenance to Computek in the amount of $88,022 to be funded as follows: $67,286 (account number 1714001-5152) and $20,736 (account number 1714001-5300). BACKGROUND As part of the City's computer management strategy, the Information Services Division has standardized on the use of VMware software. This software allows central computer resources to be used more efficiently since additional services can often be added to existing computer hardware instead of dedicating a single computer server per software application. Use of this software facilitates change management by allowing replication of computer services into backup environments. VMware also improves systems availability by sharing resources in redundant clusters where computers servers can take over services for a server experiencing performance limitations or a hardware failure. Additionally, this software greatly reduces the time to provision new computer services, which can often be added within a few hours to an existing physical server without the need to purchase and configure additional hardware. The Information Services Division provided specifications to Purchasing for review. After assessment, Purchasing determined that a reorder was the most efficient method of procurement. Pricing was confirmed with Computek, a previously awarded vendor, and is being honored for this contract. Purchasing therefore recommends the re-order with Computek based on RFB#06/07-011 awarded on February 20, 2007. Respectfully submi (~ 1 ohn Gillison Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services P620 P621 Staff Report DATE: December 5, 2007 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Jon Gillespie, Traffic Engineer . SUBJECT: APPROVAL TO AMEND CONTRACT WITH DMJM+HARRIS, INC. (CO #04- 188) IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000 FROM TRANSPORTATION FUND ACCOUNT NO. 11243035650/1361124-0 TO PROVIDE PALEONTOLOGICAL REPORT, NOISE ABATEMENT DESIGN REPORT, AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS, NEPA DELEGATION, AND LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS FOR PAVEMENT FOR THE BASE LINE ROAD AT I-15 FREEWAY INTERCHANGE PROJECT RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the proposed contract amendment with DMJM+Harris, Inc. (CO #04-188) in the amount of $100,000 from Transportation Fund Account No. 11243035650/1361124-0 to provide Paleontological Report, Noise Abatement Design Report, Air Quality Analysis, NEPA delegation, and Life Cycle Cost Analysis for Pavement for the Base Line Road at I-15 Freeway Interchange Project. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: On November 14, 2004, the City Council awarded contract CO #04-188 to DMJM+Harris in the amount of $565,275 for professional services to provide Project Report and Environmental Document for the improvement of the Base Line Road at I-15 Freeway Interchange. DMJM+Harris has provided all of the technical reports and services identified in the RFP and in their proposal for this project. However, Caltrans has recently requested seven (7) additional technical reports. These additional technical reports are as follows: Paleontological Identification Report, Paleontological Evaluation Report, Paleontological Mitigation Plan, NEPA Delegation, Noise Abatement Design Report, Slope Approval Letter and Exhibits, and Life Cycle Cost Analysis of pavement. These seven (7) reports were not required in the original scope of work, and were not required by Caltrans at the time the project was initiated. However, due to recent changes in environmental regulations, these reports are now required. December 5, 2007 P622 SUBJECT: APPROVAL TO AMEND CONTRACT WITH DMJM+HARRIS, INC. (CO #04- 188) IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000 FROM TRANSPORTATION FUND ACCOUNT NO. 11243035650/1361124-0 TO PROVIDE PALEONTOLOGICAL REPORT, NOISE ABATEMENT DESIGN REPORT, AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS, NEPA DELEGATION, AND LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS FOR PAVEMENT FOR THE BASE LINE ROAD AT I-15 FREEWAY INTERCHANGE PROJECT Page 2 DMJM+Harris has requested $98,480 to provide these additional services. This contract amendment is necessary since the amount of the change order is larger than the City Council approved contingency in the amount of $57,388. Also, in the approved 2007/2008 budget, staff requested Transportation Funds (Fund 124) in the amount of $100,000 in anticipation of possible change orders to complete this project. Therefore, an appropriation of funds is not required. ,Staff recommends that the City Council approve this contract amendment in the amount of $100,000. Res ecffully sub~m~,itt(pe~dQ, iam J. Neil City Engineer C: Vicinity Map CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA FISCAL YEAR 2007/08 BUDGET CAPITAL PROJECTS DETAIL P624 Funding Source: TRANSPORTATION (124) - --- - ---__ __..._..__.- __....-_.. ____ Object: 5650 2005/06 Fiscal Year 2006/07 Fiscal Year 2007106 Project/ Adopted Adopted Estimated Department Manager Prooram Description Budoet Budge[ Actual ~ Request Rcmd. 1022 Local Street Rehab (Various) 376,270 0 6,000 0 0 1026 Developer Reimbursements 1,000,000 1,200,000 1,200,000. 2,700,000 2,700,000 ~ 1042 Signal: Church @ Terra Vista P 0 0 0 264,000 264,000 ~ 1076 Etiwanda (6th to Arrow) 505;000 505,000 0 505,000 505,000 1081 6th St @ RR Spur W/Lucas Ranch 2,000 0 39,000 0 D 1189 Foothill Blvd Grove-Vineyazd 5,000 50,000 316,900 5,000 5,000 1251 Illuminated Signal Name Signs 20,000 20,000. 40,660 20,000 20,000' 1275 Rochester St Imprv N/Rte 30 0 0 1,310 0 0 1283 Street Imp @ Baseline & I-I S 2,000 0 15,390 0 0 1285 Signal @Etiwanda & Victoria 2,000 0 0 0 0 1355 Haven Ave Grade Separation 0 5,000 S,OOD 2,000,000 2,000,000 1361 Baseline & I-15 Interchange 200,000- 320,000 634,620 100,000 ]00,000 ---I-364-V/ilson-Pky-Improv.Cam-Beryl_._ --.SO,OOD_.__ ___._100,00D_. -.-_5.,000 LQ0,0.00 100,000_'__.__ 1371 Arch Baseline to 19th Rehab 0 2,000 3,700 0 0 1398 Bluegrass S/O Vista Verde-Wlsn 0 435,000 60,000 450,000 450,000- 1405 6th RxR Spur Xing W/O Etiwanda 696,000 0 0 0 0 ' 1406 Haven W/S Baseline-Fury Wdn Sd 2,000 2,000 896,230 0 0 1415 Signal: Milliken @ Los Osos 2,000 0 0 0 0 1419 Hermosa Flashing Beacon 0 0 7,000 0 0 1442 In&aswcture Improvements 0 2,000 10,000 0 0 1443 Construct Interconnect Project 5,000 0 52,920 0 0 1466 EtwndaBanyan-NEC Curb Return 2,000 0 1,720 0 ( ; 1467 Milliken 4tlr to 6th-W'dmS.Rehab 234,000 2,000 75,580 0 0 ]473 Signal: 6th @ Buffalo 200,000 2.000 346,070 0 0 1474 Signal: Carnelian @ Wilson 200,000 2,000 243,140 0 D 1475 Foothill @ Hellman Left Tum 50,000 2,000 146,720 0 0 1476 Re-stripe Church-Arch to Haven 25,000 25,000 25,000 1,000 1,000 1477 Re-stripe Atrow I-15 to Etwnda 2,000 0 0 0 0 ' 1491 Traffic Controller Along 19th 220,000 42,000 0 0 0 1492 Traffic Controller Along Fthfl 400,000 83.000 60,000 600,000 600,000' 1509 Signal: Archibald @ Banyan 200,000 2,000 252,320 0 0 1510 Signal: Archibald @ Victoria 200,000 200,000 203,330 1,000 1,000 ' 151 I I-15 Ramp Imprvmnts @ Baseline .100,000 750,000 310,000 750,000 , 750,000 • 1512 Signal: Bsln @Hellman-Modify 25,000 50,000 52,450 1,000 1,000 1513 I-15 Ramp Imprvmnts @ Foothill 200,000 1,800,000 1,400,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 ' 1514 Highland Ave Haven-Milliken 50,000 2,000 300,000 600,000 600,000 1515 Wilson EIR Wardman 200,000 10,000 175,000 10,000 10,000 ' 1521 Bus PadsBays @ Major Arterial 5,000 10,000 0 10,000 10,000 1568 Baker @ Metrolink WidenB;.Rehab 0 250,000 250,000 2,000 2,000 - 1569 Wilson-Mlkn-Day Crk Chnl EIR 0 200,000 222,960 5,000 5,000 1570 Church Street-Kenlock to Ctr 0 650,000 0 0 0 1571 Foothill @ I-15 NB Offramp 0 2,000 0 0 0 1572 Milliken @Kenyon-Modify TS 0 10,000 10,000 0 0 1573 Hermosa @ 8th St-Modify TS 0 12,000 31,000 1,000 1.000 ~ 1574 Foothill @Aspen-Modify TS 0 10,000 10,000 0 0 1575 Base Line @ Alta Cuesta-Modify 0 80,000 10,000 0 1576 Traffic Signal: Church @ Elm 0 180,000 210,000 1,000 1,000 SF-55 STAFF REPORT ENGINF_ERING DEP_-~RTT4ENT Date: December 5, 2007 To: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager From: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer By: Walter C. Stickney, Associate Engineer P625 ~~ ~ ~. RANCHO C,UCAMONGA Subject: APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION COMMITTING TO A STATE BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNT GRANT MATCH FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF PHASE IVB OF THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL, "RAILS TO TRAILS", FROM VINEYARD AVENUE TO AMETHYST AVENUE RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve of the attached resolution committing the City to fund a local match equal to 10% of the total construction costs. BACKGROUNDIANALYSIS Phase IVb of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail (PEIET), Vineyard Avenue to Amethyst Avenue, is the only remaining portion of the PEIET that is unfunded. The City recently submitted an application for 2008/2009 State Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) funds to help pay for construction of Phase IVb of the PEIET. After reviewing the City's application, state personnel notified the City that State BTA application requirements changed this year. One of the new requirements is a resolution adopted by the local agency's council or local governing board committing the local agency to fund the minimum required 10 percent local match. This resolution fulfills that requirement. Without this resolution, the City's recently submitted 2008/2009 BTA grant application will not be considered. Respectfully submitted, Will' m J. O'Neil City Engineer WJONVCS:Is Attachments: Vicinity Map and Resolution P626 CITY OF RANCHO CUC_4MONGA. - - _ _ --,~ a,4; ~ . y - .~' d'f ....„ n. ~ ~ ~ ? F vm .vc I .~ ~K UPLAND ~'~ w fa ~ _~ ~~ a ~ ~ , A ~ ~ H ~~ ~ ~ ...: . ~ i .'~ B / rl_ SDOD r . „ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ FONTANA PROJECT • LIMITS i a>.~~ I dNTARId CITY OF RANCHO CUC_4MONGA ,_-,.. VICINITY MAAP ,~ -„ ~: '-~_ PACIFIC ELECTRIC INLAND EMPIRE TRAIL PHASE IVB -VINEYARD AVE. TO AMETHYST AVE. P627 RESOLUTION NO. D 7- ~ ~I,3 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A LOCAL MATCH TO A POTENTIAL STATE OF CALIFORNIA BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNT FUND GRANT -FOR PHASE IVB OF THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC TRAIL, "RAILS TO TRAILS", FROM VINEYARD AVENUE TO AMETHYST AVENUE WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has submitted a Bicycle Transportation Account grant application to 'the State of California for the funding of construction costs associated with the improvement of Phase IVb of the Pacific Electric Trail. "Rails to Trails", from Vineyard Avenue to Amethyst (Project); and WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has estimated a total constructioh cost of said improvements to be $2,500,000; and WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has identified in the grant application submittal to the State a local match by the City of Rancho Cucamonga equal to 10% of the total construction costs, or $250,000; and WHEREAS, said 10% reflects a not to exceed match for a Bicycle Transportation Account grant equal to $2,250,000, resulting in a total funding for said project equal to $2,500,000; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, hereby resolves to commit the City to a Bicycle Transportation Account grant match of 10% of the construction cost of said project, up to a not to exceed amount of $250,000. The City Council does reserve the right to exceed, on its authority, said `not to exceed amount', should a grant amount greater than $2,250,000 be awarded to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. P628 ORDINANCE NO. 783 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT DRC2005-00523; A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT MAP FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL TO LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL TO BRING THE SITE INTO CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN FOR 2.17 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE AND SOUTH OF 19r" STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0202-131-27, 61 AND 62 A. RECITALS. 1. Creative, Design Associates filed an application for Development District Amendment No. DRC2005-00523, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On October 10`h, 2007, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application DRC2005-00523 and issued Resolution No. 07-58, recommending the City Council approve the above listed application. 3. On , 2007, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on this application and concluded said hearing on that date. 4. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. B. ORDINANCE. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: This City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct. SECTION 2: Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this City Council during the above-referenced public hearing on , including written and oral staff reports, togetherwith public testimony, this City Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 2.17 acres of vacant land that slopes from north to south. Said property is currently designated as Medium Residential; and P629 b. The properties to the north and west of the subject site are developed with a.mobile home park, the properties to the south are developed with single-family homes, and the property to the east is developed with apartments; and c. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development within the district in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and d. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element; and e. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment, nor the surrounding properties; and f. That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; and g. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment, nor the surrounding properties; and h. That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. SECTION 3: Base upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, the Development District Amendment is hereby amended to change the Development District Map in words and figures as shown in the attached Exhibits A and B. SECTION 4: Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein bythis reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, here would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. P630 b. The City Council has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The City Council further finds that the Mitigated negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. c. The City Council has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The City Council therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for pubic review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. SECTION 5: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this Ordinance is, for any reason, deemed or held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competentjurisdiction, or preempted by legislative enactment, such decision or legislation shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, orwords thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more section, subsections, clauses, phrases, orwords might subsequently be declared invalid or unconstitutional or preempted by subsequent legislation. SECTION 6: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published within 15 days after its passage at least once in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California.