The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1980/05/21 - Agenda PacketRegular Meeting May 21, 1980 AGENDA ITEMS: -- NOTE: All items submitted for the City Council agenda must be in writing. The deadline for sub- mitting items is 5.00 p.m. on Thursday prior to the first and third Wednesday of each month. The City Clerk's office receives all such items. 1. CALL TO ORDER. A. Pledge to Flag. B. Roll Call: Frost , Mikels_, Palombo_ Bridge_, and SchTsser_ C. Aonroval of Minutes of Mav 7. 1980. 2. ANNOUNCEMENTS. a. May 29, 1980 at 7:30 p.m. in the auditorium of Sierra Vista School, 253 East 14th Street, Upland (between Euclid and Campus Avenues) -- public forum to discuss the pros and cons of all the Propositions, and in particular Proposition 9, on the June 3rd ballot. 3. COMMISSION REPORTS. A. Advisory Commission. 8, Historical Commission. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR. 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. a. Approval of Warrants - Register No. 80 -5 -21 for $407,600.68. 3 b. Request removal of a Pager from the fixed asset Inventory. Value: $259.29. City Council Agenda -2- May 21, 1980 c. Set date of June 4, 1980 for public hearing to consider an appeal on Director Review No. 80 -06 - Arnold Anderson. The development of an industrial site located on the north side of Sixth Street, approximately 600' west of Turner. 4 d. Release of T.O.P. Bonds for Terrax Corporation _ Release of bonds in the amount of $2,000 for sales office on lot 21 and subdivision sign on lot 21 in the amount of $500. Tract 9590. 5 e. Approval of Improvement Agreement for Director Review _ No. 79 -64. Recommendation: It is recommended that Council adopt the Resolution approving the improvement agreement and direct the Mayor and City Clerk to sign on behalf of the City. 14 RESOLUTION NO. 80 -45 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVE- MENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR DIRECTOR REVIEW N0. 79 -64. 15 f. Transfer funds from County Maintenance Account to Con- tract Sweeping Accnnnt. In order to continue with the present miminal level of sweeping service for the remainder of the fiscal year, it is recommended that the City Council authorize the transfer of funds from the County Maintenance Account to the Contract Sweeping Account. The amount of $5,000 is recommended to be transferred to the Contract Sweeping Account. 16 9. Approval of Maintenance Agreement for Traffic Signals at Etiwanda Avenue and Fourth Street. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Council approve the Traffic Signal Maintenance Agreement and authorize its execution by the City. - h. Release of Bonds: Tract 9321. Located north of 19th Street and west of Sapphire Street. Owner: Crowell /Leventhal, Inc. Labor & Material Bond (road) $ 77,000 Labor & Material Bond (sewer) 38,000 Labor & Material Bond (water) 27,000 City Council Agenda -3- May 21, 1980 Tract 9322. Located north of Highland Avenue and west of Jasper Street. Owner: Lewis Homes of California. Labor & Material Bond (road) $ 74,000 Labor & Material Bond (sewer) 21,500 Labor & Material Bond (water) 26,500 Tract 9337. Located on east side of Turner Avenue be- tween Foothill Blvd, and Arrow Route. Owner: Butler Development. Faithful Performance Bond (water) $ 50,000 Faithful Performance Bond (sewer) 36,000 Labor & Material Bond (water) 25,000 Labor & Material Bond (sewer) 18,000 Labor & Material Bond (road) 85,000 Tract 9348. Located on east side of Turner Avenue at Palo Alto Street. Owner: Kent Land Co. Labor & Material Bond (road) $ 52,000 Labor & Material Bond (sewer) 23,000 Labor & Material Bond (water) 22,000 Tract 9350. Located on west side of Sapphire Street be- tween Banyon Street and 19th Street. Owner: Yellow Brick Road, Ltd. Labor & Material Bond (road) $ 33,000 Labor & Material Bond (water) 10,000 Tract 9352. Located on southwest corner of 19th Street and Hermosa Avenue. Owner: Inco Homes. Labor & Material Bond (road) $ 50,000 Labor & Material Bond (sewer) 18,500 Labor & Material Bond (water) 26,500 Tract 9352 -1. Located on southeast corner of 19th Street and Ramona Avenue. Owner: Inco Homes, Inc. Labor & Material Bond (road) $ 50,000 Labor & Material Bond (sewer) 12,000 Labor & Material Bond (water) 19,500 Tract 9355. Located on southeast corner of Beryl Street and -M-0d Street. Owner: R.L. Sievers & Son, Inc. Labor & Material Bond (road) $ 53,000 Labor & Material Bond (water) 19,500 City Council Agenda -4- Tract 9358. Located on east side of Turquoise Avenue at Appaloosa Court and Galloway. Owner: Crowell /Leventhal, Inc. Labor & Material Bond (road) $40,000 Labor & Material Bond (water) 25,500 Tract 9366. Located on northwest corner of 19th Street and Haven Avenue. Owner: Valle Verde Ltd. Labor & Material Bond (water) $ 7,000 Labor & Material Bond (sewer) 5,500 Tract 9370. Located at northeast corner of 19th Street and Haven Avenue. Owner: Vale Verde Ltd. Labor & Material Bond (road) $ 28,000 Labor & Material Bond (sewer) 5,500 Labor & Material Bond (water) 10,000 Tract 9396. Located on north side of Church Street be- tween and Haven Avenue. Owner: Thompson Associates. Faithful Performance Bond (road) $ 74,000 Labor & Material Bond (road) 37,000 Labor & Material Bond (sewer) 9,500 Labor & Material Bond (water) 7,000 Tract 9480. Located on the south side of Base Line and west of Avenue. Owner: Kaufman /Broad, Inc. Faithful Performance Bond (sewer) $ 61,000 Faithful Performance Bond (water) 42,000 Tract 9582 -1. Located northerly of Wilson Avenue and East of Haven Avenue. Owner: Deer Creek Co. Faithful Performance Bond (storm drain) $100,000 Labor & Material Bond (storm drain) 50,000 Faithful Performance Bond (street trees) 5,330 Tract 9585. Located at northwest corner of Base Line and Haven Avenues. Owner: Thompson Associates. Faithful Performance Bond (road) $130,000 Labor & Material Bond (road) 65,000 Labor & Material Bond (sewer) 12,500 Labor & Material Bond (water) 14,500 May 21, 1980 City Council Agenda -5- May 21, 1980 Tract 9591. Accept Roads and Release Bonds. Located on southeast corner of Hillside Road and Archibald Avenue. Owner: Apple Company. Faithful Performance Bond (road) $ 66,000 Labor & Material Bond (water) 6,500 Tract 9591. Located south of Hillside Road and east of Archibald Avenue. Owner: Michael J and Helena M. Leon. Faithful Performance Bond (road) $ 66,000 Faithful Performance Bond (landscape) 20,476 Tract 9305: Release of bond and acceptance of substitution bond. Located at Hermosa and Victoria Avenues. Release of existing bond... Labor & Material Bond $ 76,000 Accept substitution bond... Labor & Material Bond $ 30,000 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS. A. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE HISTORICAL ORDINANCE NO. 70. Report by Bill Holley ORDINANCE NO. 70 -D (SECOND READING) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SUB- SECTIONS (c) AND (d) OF SECTION 10 OF ORDINANCE NO. 70, CREATING AN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION TO ACT IN ADVISORY CAPACITY TO THE CITY COUNCIL IN THE IDENTIFICATION AND PRE- SERVATION OF HISTORICAL OBJECTS, EVENTS, STRUCTURES AND SITES, AND TO IDENTIFY PERSONS OF HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE TO THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. B. APPEAL OF ZONE CHANGE NO. 80 -02 - WATT INDUSTRIES. A change of zone from R -3 to C -2 for property located on the east side of Haven Avenue between Lemon and Highland. ORDINANCE NO. 101 (SECOND READING) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING THE WESTERLY 557' OF ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 201- 271-53 FROM R -3 TO C -1 LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF HAVEN AVENUE BETWEEN LEMON AND HIGHLAND AVENUES. 25 25 26 29 City Council Agenda -6- May 21, 1980 C. ZONE CHANGE NO. 80 -03 - THOMAS COLEMAN. A request for a 31 change of zone from R -3 to M -1 for . acres of land located on the north side of Ninth Street, approximately 1,000 feet west of Vineyard Avenue - Assessor's Parcel No. 207- 262 -28. 34 ORDINANCE NO. 102 (SECOND READING) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 207- 262 -28 FROM R -3 TO M -1 LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF NINTH STREET APPROXIMATELY 1,000 FEET WEST OF VINEYARD AVENUE. 35 D. ZONE CHANGE NO. 80 -05 - JUDITH AND THOMAS STEPHENSON. change of zone from R-1-1 to R -1- 20,000 for property located on the northwest corner of Klusman and Whirlaway. 37 ORDINANCE NO. 103 (SECOND READING) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 1061 - 511 -6 AND 7 FROM R -1 -1 TO R- 1- 20,000 LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF KLUSMAN AND WHIRLAWAY. 39 E. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO EMERGENCY ORGANIZATION AND FUNCTIONS. The purposes of this ordinance are to provide for the preparation and carrying out of plans for the pro- tection of persons and property within the City of Rancho Cucamonga in the event of an emergency; the direction of the emergency organization; and the coordination of the emergency functions of the city with all other public agencies, corporations, organizations, and effected pri- vate persons. 39 ORDINANCE NO. 104 (SECOND READING) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RELATING TO EMERGENCY ORGANIZATION AND FUNCTIONS. City Council Agenda -7- May 21, 1980 F. PARK DEDICATION ORDINANCE. An ordinance designed 43 to provide park land dedication or fees to provide park improvements to the residents of new subdivisions. The present fee required for each new single family dwelling in a subdivision is $300; mobile homes are $180 per unit. The new fee is based upon the current fair market value of land in Rancho Cucamonga. ORDINANCE N0. 105 (FIRST READING) _ 47 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS FOR DEDICATION OF LAND, PAYMENT OF FEES, OR BOTH, FOR PARK AND RECREATIONAL LAND IN SUBDIVISIONS. G. REVISION TO ORDINANCE N0. 8 WHICH ESTABLISHES A PARK 51 AND RECREATION TAX FOR NEW RESIOENTI AL DEVELOPMENT. The proposed amendment to Ordinance No. 8 would be to residential development not covered under subdivision regulations in Ordinance No. 105. 52 ORDINANCE NO. 8 -8 (FIRST READING) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING RECREATION TAX FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND PROVIDING FOR THE ADMINISTRATION, AMOUNTS AND CREDITS THEREOF. 56 H. ADOPTION OF INTERIM RECREATION ELEMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN. The proposed Interim Recreation Element meets the California State General Plan guidelines and the requirements of Government Code 66477. It is recommended that the City Council adopt a Resolution amending the General Plan to include the Recreation Element and find that there will be no significant adverse environmental impact. RESOLUTION NO. 80 -47 62 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE ADOPTION OF THE GENERAL PLAN. City Council Agenda -8- May 21, 1980 I. APPEAL OF SITE APPROVAL NO. 80 -01 - HONE AND ASSOCIATES. Proposed shopping center to be located on the southwest corner of Lemon and Haven Avenues. 63 104 RESOLUTION NO. 80 -48 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF SITE APPROVAL NO. 80 -01 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER TO BE LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LEMON AND HAVEN AVENUES. 105 J. ZONE CHANGE NO. 80 -04 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - ACACIA CONSTRUCTION. A change of zone from A -1 to R -3 for property located on the southwest corner of Baker and Foothill Boulevard. Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the zone change and issue a Negative Declaration. 116 ORDINANCE NO. 106 (FIRST READING) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 207- 191 -31 AND 26 LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND BAKER 117 K. ZONE CHANGE NO. 80 -06 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - DELL MC DANIEL, INC. A change of zone from A -1 to R -1 for property located on the northeast corner of Ramona and Church. Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the zone change and issue a Negative Declaration. ORDINANCE NO. 107 (FIRST READING) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 1077 - 301 -37 FROM A -1 TO R -1 LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF RAMONA AND CHURCH. L. AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING THE CHERBAK HOUSE AS AN HISTORIC POINT OF INTEREST. Located at 9983 Hillside Road. On May 13 the Historic Preservation Commission held a public hearing to establish whether or not the Cherbak house should be recommended for an historic designation. After the hearing, the Commission unanimously decided that the Cherbak house did meet the criteria established in Ordinance No. 70 -B for a Point of Historic Interest. 128 129 City Council Agenda -9- May 21, 1980 ORDINANCE NO. 108 (FIRST READING) 132 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOGNIZING THE CHERBAK FAMILY HOME, LOCATED AT 9983 HILLSIDE ROAD, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AS A SIGNIFICANT HISTORIC POINT OF INTEREST OF THE CITY AND THEREFORE DESIGNATING IT AS A CITY POINT OF HISTORIC INTEREST. 6. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS. A. CARNELIAN PARKWAY PROGRAM. Staff report by Jack Lam. 133 At the May 14 Planning Commission meeting, the Carnelian Parkway Program was reviewed. The Commission selected a concept and design from those presented, and felt the priority of construction should begin from Foothill northerly with special attention paid to the intersection of 19th Street to re- enforce that commercial node. B. ARTICLE 8 TRANSPORTATION CLAIM. Staff report by Jim Robinson 150 Transportation Development Act funds generated from one quarter of one percent of the sales tax on gas can be utilized for streets or road purposes in Rancho Cucamonga as long as transit needs of the Community are reasonably met. For Fiscal Year 1980 -81, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will receive $676,489 in TDA funds. Of this amount $173,608 will be utilized to provide a continu- ation of the existing fixed route service, one dial -a- ride sedan for the elderly and handicapped and the city's share of the cost to operate two lift equipped vans for the handicapped in the West End. The remaining funds in the amount of $502,881 can be utlized for street and road purposes in the City. Recommendation: (1) That the City Council authorize the City Manager to sign the Article 8 claim. (2) That the City Council adopt by minute action authorizing the following distribution of TDA funds for Fiscal Year 1980 -81, A. Omnitrans $173,608.00 B. City of Rancho Cucamonga 502,881.00 6 6,4 9.00 City Council Agenda -10- May 21, 1980 C. RECOMMENDATION TO DELETE BROKER OF RECORD FOR CITY _ 152 HEALTH INSURANCE. Staff report by Lauren Wasserman. It is recommended that the City Council delete the Broker of Record for the City's health insurance policy beginning July 1, 1980. The purpose of this recommendation is to enable the staff to obtain the fullest range of proposals regarding new health insurance coverage for employees. As the City Council is aware, Blue Cross, the current carrier, has increased rates by approximately 30 percent. We, therefore, think it is appropriate for the City to explore the alternative policies which may be available to us. A number of insurance brokers have indicated a reluctance to submit proposals as long as the City has a broker of record. 7. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS. A RESOLUTION AMENDING CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODES. 153 RESOLUTION N0. 80 -49 156 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ITS CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODES TO INCORPORATE BY REFERENCE THE FAIR POLITICAL COMMISSION'S STANDARD MODEL CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE. 8. ADJOURNMENT. CITY OF TIBURON 80 MAIN STREET • TIBURON CALIFORNIA 90930 0 OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER Robert L. Kleinert May 19, 1980 City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Baseline P.O. Box 793 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 SUBJECT: Agins V. City of Tiburon Dear Councilmembers, The Town of Tiburon would like to thank you again for your financial assistance in regard to our litigation of the above case in the U.S. Supreme Court. In accordance with your request to be kept informed regarding the status of this litigation, we asked Clem Shute, who appeared before the Supreme Court as special counsel for the Town together with our Town Attorney, Bob Conn, to summarize his reaction of the oral argument. We hope you will find his enclosed comments informative and of interest. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at your convenience. Very truly yo rs, Robert L. Kleiner Town Manager /shs Enclosure RECEIVED MAY 2 i Mayor Philip Bass CITY OF. TIBURON and Members of the.Town Council City of Tiburon 1534 Fifth Avenue San Rafael, California 94901 Re: April 15, 1980 Oral Argument in Agins v. City of Tiburon United States Supreme Court No. 19 -602 Gentlemen and Ladies: The oral argument, as directed by members of the Court, focused almost exclusively on the facts of the case. Neither Mr. Kanner, on behalf of the property owners, nor myself, on behalf of the City, were able to develop our respective legal theories in any detail. Members of the Court, by their questioning, consistently brought the subject back to the particular facts, especially the Agins' failure to apply for a permit. I think this worked to the City's advantage. ' Perhaps a brief summary of the respective strategies of the parties will aid in understanding the.significance of the Court's questions. The property owners directed most of their attention in their main brief to attacking the City's zoning ordinances, arguing that a trial should 6e held and money damages awarded should the trial court agree that their property rights had been violated. It was the strategy of the City to demonstrate the validity of the zoning ordinance and direct the Court's attention to the obvious residential uses allowed. We defended the opinion of the California Supreme Court and strove to convince the United States Supreme Court that no trial was necessary in order to establish the rights of the parties. In the property owners' reply brief, filed Just prior to oral argument, there seemed to be a definite shift in that the property owners de- emphasized their attack on the zoning ordinance, focusing instead on what they argued were the abusive effects of the totality of all the City's activities regarding their property. It was their contention that the City's true intent was to forever prevent any development. SHUTE, MIHALY H WEINBERGER ATTOR.NEY3 AT I W C.CItMIXia,fure,aR. 396 H YE3 STREET. SUg ONE M I.RMIF R CMC CENTER M c 3. mn1 SAN FRANCISCO, f.ALIFORNU 9102 lyy .�. T1TTJ April 29, 1980 RECEIVED MAY 2 i Mayor Philip Bass CITY OF. TIBURON and Members of the.Town Council City of Tiburon 1534 Fifth Avenue San Rafael, California 94901 Re: April 15, 1980 Oral Argument in Agins v. City of Tiburon United States Supreme Court No. 19 -602 Gentlemen and Ladies: The oral argument, as directed by members of the Court, focused almost exclusively on the facts of the case. Neither Mr. Kanner, on behalf of the property owners, nor myself, on behalf of the City, were able to develop our respective legal theories in any detail. Members of the Court, by their questioning, consistently brought the subject back to the particular facts, especially the Agins' failure to apply for a permit. I think this worked to the City's advantage. ' Perhaps a brief summary of the respective strategies of the parties will aid in understanding the.significance of the Court's questions. The property owners directed most of their attention in their main brief to attacking the City's zoning ordinances, arguing that a trial should 6e held and money damages awarded should the trial court agree that their property rights had been violated. It was the strategy of the City to demonstrate the validity of the zoning ordinance and direct the Court's attention to the obvious residential uses allowed. We defended the opinion of the California Supreme Court and strove to convince the United States Supreme Court that no trial was necessary in order to establish the rights of the parties. In the property owners' reply brief, filed Just prior to oral argument, there seemed to be a definite shift in that the property owners de- emphasized their attack on the zoning ordinance, focusing instead on what they argued were the abusive effects of the totality of all the City's activities regarding their property. It was their contention that the City's true intent was to forever prevent any development. Mayor Philip Bass and Members of the Town Council April 29, 1980 Page Two At the oral argument it became apparent from the outset that many members of the Court thought that the failure of the property owners to apply to the City for development approval was important. In this regard it was our, position that the zoning ordinance explicitly provided for a minimum of one home and a maximum of five homes, a reasonable use of the property. We argued that since the Agins failed to apply (and thereby exhaust the available administrative remedies), they could not ask the Court to speculate about the number and marketability of the homes that might be approved. There seemed to be some sympathy for this position as members of the Court asked, again and again; whether the property owners had applied to the City, why they had not applied, whether the City would accept an application, and whether the City would act on such an application in good faith. The Chief Justice, particularly, seemed to think that the property owners should have applied, rather than move instantly to litigating their claims. Counsel for the property.owners conceded, in response to questioning from the Court, that if the property owners could build five homes, they would be satisfied. This seemed to place even more focus on the importance of going through the administrative process. In this connection the Court was apparently not particularly interested in the property owners' argument that the City had abused its eminent domain powers. When the subject came up during the City's argument, Justice Stevens stated in effect that the eminent domain action was over and had nothing to do with the case. The Court also was not interested in the question of the proper judicial remedy where a land use regulation violates property rights. It was our position that the Court did not have to reach this issue if it agreed that the City's ordinances were valid. When I attempted to discuss this point, a certain far off look appeared in the eyes of the members of the Court. This look, well known to appellate lawyers, usually indicates a lack of interest in a particular point. In sum, over ninety percent of the time was devoted to the facts of the case, particularly those dealing with the property owners' failure to find out from the City just how many homes would be allowed. It is dangerous (if not unlucky) to make predictions about the outcome of cases Y Mayor Philip Bass and Members of the Town Council April 29, 1980 Page Three based on oral argument. The Justices are certainly not bound to vote in accordance with the apparent positions they indicated by their questions during argument. Thus. We will not speculate as to how the Court might rule. You may be interested in the numerous Friends of the Court (Amid Curiae) who filed briefs on behalf of both the property owners and the City. From several of the questions, it appeared that even the Court was surprised with the attention the case had drawn. Appearing in support of the City were: The United States (through the United States Solicitor General); The States of California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin (joining in a brief prepared by the State of California); The State of New Jersey; The City of San Jose, supported by approximately one hundred other California cities; The National Institute of Municipal Law Officers; The American Planning Association; The major national environmental groups in a brief coordinated by the Conservation Foundation; The County of Los Angeles; The County of San Diego; The Environmental Law Committee of the New York City Bar Association; The Federation of Hillside and Canyon Associations (in Los Angeles County). Mayor Philip Bass and Members of the Town Council Aori1 29. 1980' Page Four Appearing on behalf of,the property owners were: The National Association of Home Builders; The Pacific Legal Foundation; The National Association of Manufacturers; , San Diego Gas and Electric Company; . Glendale Federal Savings and Loan; Half Moon Bay Properties, Inc.; Several attorneys specializing in representing property owners in inverse condemnation actions (joining in one brief). In conclusion, it is one of the high points of a lawyer's professional life to appear before the United States Supreme Court. I sincerely hope that the results of this case will be such that the City will find this to have been an equally satisfying experience. Very truly ycurs. SHUTE,,,MIHALY 11ry1E BERGER E. CLEMENT SHUTE, JR. ECS:ad cc: Robert I. Conn R867 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA WARR / YEN 0 V E N 0 0 R N A M E 5140 INLAND POWER SWEEPING 4661 GLUECKERT. MRS 8949 UNIV OF CALIF REGENTS 2037 CALIF CONSORTIUM C/O CP I OOK CONF SAVING LOY C R DIST ORS R DIST AGENCY GWSUPPLY AMERA SHO EST NIL POSTCCOP ANE N CRETE SAVING r ELIZABETH DEE OEt. SHIRLEY WARRANT RI WARR DATE F 10 10 2 NET 1 2 4.1 1 30.5 139x1 200 3 903 2 1 R867 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA NARR 0 VEN 0 V E N D 0 R N A M E WARRANT WARR DATE 4, 4, 21 I 5 E NET 470,600.68 • 0 7 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM May 14, 1980 TO: Council FROM: Finance Director SUBJECT: Consent Calendar When a fixed asset is lost or destroyed, Government Codes require that those fixed assets can. only be removed by Coun(Al Action. Therefore, we request the removal of a pager from the fixed asset inventory. Amount of asset is $259.29. Serial number B33AD03018, Unit number is #013, 3 0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: May 13, 1980 TO: Harry Empey, Director of Finance FROM: Gary Richards, Code Enforcement Officer SUBJECT: RELEASE OF T.O.P. BOND FOR TERRAX CORPORATION Work for the following tract has been completed and the bonds are hereby author- ized by the Planning Department for release to Terrax Corporation, 4766 Park Granada, Suite 202, Calabasas Park, California 91302. Tract No. Lot No. Amount Receipt Purpose of Bond No. 9590 21 $2,000 00805 Sales Office / Garage Conversion on Lot 21. Northeast Corner of (70^401) Archibald and Whirlavay. 9590 21 $ 500 00805 Subdivision Sign on Lot 21 - (70 -400) Northeast Corner of Archibald and Whirlaway. Thank you for your assistance; if you have any questions regarding these bond releases, please call. GWR:cd CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • MEMORANDUM DATE: May 15, 1980 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Manager SUBJECT: Improvement Agreement for Director Review 79 -64 The subject Director Review is for the addition of a 5,600 square foot metal storage building onto an existing 5,600 square foot building on the south side of 8th St., west of Rochester Ave. The Engineering Conditions of Approval include the construction of street improvements on Eighth Street, to be completed within nine months of the date of posting of security. The improvements are estimated to cost $6,100.00. • RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council adopt the attached resolution approving the improvement agreement and direct the Mayor and City Clerk to sign on behalf of the City. Respectfully submitted, r x, Lloyd B. Hubbs City Engineer LBH:jaa Attachments 9 S 7 C i• .- 1-1.-1 �L ..a .1. KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That this agreement is made and entered into, to conformance with the provisions of the Municipal Code and Regula- tions of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, State of California, a municipal cor- poration, hereinafter referred to as the City, by and between said City and to as the Developer. WITNESSETH: THAT, WHEREAS, pursuant to said Code, Developer has requested approval by the City of, Di prtnr Review Nn 79 -64 in accordance with the provisions of the report of the Community Development Director thereon, and any amendments thereto; located 11899 8th Street, Rancho Cucamonga and, WHEREAS, the City has established certain requirements to be met by said developer prior to granting the final approval of the development; and WHEREAS, the execution of this agreement and posting of improvement security as hereinafter cited, and approved by the City Attorney, are deemed to be equivalent to prior completion of said requirements for the purpose of securing said approval; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between the City and the Developer as fullows: 1. The developer hereby agrees to construct at developer's expense all improvements described on page 3 hereof within 9 months from the date hereof. 2. The term of this agreement shall be 9 months commencing on the date of execution hereof by the City. This agreement shall be in default on the day following the last day of the term stipulated, unless said term has been extended as hereinafter provided. 3. The Developer may request additional time in which to complete the provi- sions of this agreement, in writing not less than four weeks prior to the default date, and including a statement of circumstances of necessity for additional time. In consideration of such request, the City reserves the right to review the provisions hereof, including construction standards, cost estimate, and sufficiency of the improvement security, and to require adjustments thereto when warranted by substantial changes therein. 4. If the Developer fails or neglects to comply with the provisions of this agreement, the City shall have the right at any time to cause said provi- sions to be completed by any lawful means, and thereupon to recover from said Developer and /or his Surety the full cost and expense incurred in so doing. 5. Encroachment permits shall be obtained by the Developer from the office of the City Engineer prior to start of any work within the public right of way, and the developer shall conduct such work in full compliance with the regulations contained therein. Non - compliance may result in stopping of the work by the City, and assessment of the penalties provided. b. Public right of way improvement work required shall be constructed in conformance with approved improvement plans, Standard Specifications, and Standard Drawings and any special amendments thereto. Construction shall include any transitions and /or other incidental work deemed necessary for drainage or public safety. 7 u J • IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT Page 2 • 7. It"--k done within existiug street:: shall be diligently Pursued to comple- tfun: tha City shall hove the right to romp la to anv nad all work in the rveut of unjustifiOl delay in completion, and to recover all cost and oxponse incurred from the Developer and /or his contractor by any lawful means. 3. Vie Developer shall be responsible for replacement, relocation, or re- nuvnl of any component of any irrigation water system in conflict with the required wort: to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the owner of the water system. 9. Tho Developer shall. be responsible for removal of all loose rock and other debris from the public right of way resulting from work done on the adja- cent property or within said right of way. 10. The D rveloper shall plant and maintain parkway trees as directed by the Community Development Director. 11. The improvement security to be furnished by the Developer to guarantee completion of the terms of this agreement shall be subject to the approval Of the City Attorney. The principal amount of said improvement security shall be not less than the amount shown below: IMPROVEMENT SECURITY SUBMITTED: Faithful Performance Bond • TYPE SURETY /AGENT PRINCIPAL AMOUNT 6,100.00 u Material and Labor Bond 6,100.00 IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents to be duly executed and acknowledged with all formalities required by law on the dates set forth opposite their signatures: BY: /J]•A� DEVELOPER BY: 1 DATE: WITNESS: DATE: S— 13--RB g w � / CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA BY: a municipal corporation MAYOR ATTEST: , CITY CLERK DATE: CITY OF RLNCHO CUCAMONGA 3 CONSTRUCTION AND BOND ESTIMATE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FEE SCHEDULE (Attach to "Inspector's Copy ") DATE: 4/17/80 PERMIT NO. COMPUTED BY Paul Rougeau File Reference Oirector Review 79 -64 City Drawing No.s • `OTE: Does not include current fee for writing permit or pavement replace- ment deposits. ITEM qU&NLITY UNIT UNIT COST AMOUNT GR \DE RIGHT OF WAY S.F. REMOVALS, MISC L.S. A. C. PAVEMENT 50 T S..F. 6M0 3000 - DO A. C. BERM L.F. CURB 6 GUTTER L.F. 6.00 294.00 CROSS GUTTER /SPANDREL S.F. SIDEWALK S.F. DRIVE APPROACHES - xxxgxbm"Ap S.F. 2.10 80?,20 CRUSHED AGGREGATE BASE 243Z S.F• 0.08 195.00 STRFET LIGHTS Y' X 4" REDWOOD HEADER LIF, STREET SIGNS EA. R.C.P. L.F. CATCH BASIN EA. OUTLET STRUCTURE EA. STREET EXC. 32 CY 3.00 96.00 8" CURB 22 F F 0.30 IrAl-40 MARKERS 3 EA 35.00 105.00 I 1 I REYAINTNG WALT, BLOCY.IJALLS L.F. LANUSC,IPE & IRRIGATION L.S. • TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST 5543.00 • 17 INSPECTION FEES ITEM OUANTITY 277.15 II. CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION - 6% of Construction Cost Estimate L.S. L.S. I.. S. 277.15 PAVRMENT CUT OR TRFMCH IV. DESIGN FEES (10% of Total Construction Cost Estimate) . . . PERDLIAENT PAVEMENT REPLACEMENT • TOTAL . $ 6 9 .00 STORE MATERIAL IN RICNT -OF -WAY Faithful Performance Bond - $ 6100 F.A. Material and Labor Bond • $ 6100 Maintenance Bond - $ - I. TOTAL INSPECTION FEES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S 277.15 II. COMPACTION TEST FEES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ III. 107. CONTINGENCIES . . . . . . . S 554.00 IV. DESIGN FEES (10% of Total Construction Cost Estimate) . . . - • TOTAL . $ 6 9 .00 Faithful Performance Bond - $ 6100 Material and Labor Bond • $ 6100 Maintenance Bond - $ - Cash Monumenting Deposit - $ - RCE22E 0 I6 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 28th day of April , 1980 , by and between nan�nh;.n National Bank. Columbiana hereinafter "Lender ", • Waener-Insul Company °°. � , hereinafter Borrower , and THE CITY O PRANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, hereinafter "City ", provides as follows: W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, Lender is a financial institution subject to regulation by the state or federal government within the meaning of California Government Code Section 66499(a)(3); and, WHEREAS, from the proceeds of a loan from Lender to Borrower, Lender has on deposit, for the account of Borrower, the sun of $ 12,200.00 ' one-half (1/2) of which shall constitute and be referred to as "the performance fund" and the other one -half (1/2) of which shall constitute and be referred to as the "payment fund "; and, WHEREAS, Borrower has entered into an Agreement, herein- after "the Agreement ", with the City whereby Borrower agrees to install and complete certain designated public improvements, which said Agreement, dated and identified as referring to Project -64 , is hereby referred to and made a part hereo ; • NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City giving final approval to the Project known as DR -79-64 and authorizing the recordation of any tract or parcel map pertaining thereto, Lender and Borrower agree: (1) The performance fund is security pledged to the City to insure that Borrower, its heirs, successors, executors and administrators, shall in all things stand to and abide by, and will and truly keep and perform the covenants, conditions and provisions of the Agreement and any alterat- ion thereof made as therein provided, on Borrower's part to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified and in all respects according to its true and lawful meaning, and to insure that Borrower, its heirs, successors, executors and administrators, shall indemnify and save harmless City, its officers, agents and employees as stipulated in the Agreement. (2) Lender shall disburse the performance fund to the City in such amounts as the City demands, promptly upon re- ceipt of written demands signed by the City Engineer of the City, and specifying therein. that Borrower is in default under the Agreement or this Agreement. (3) In the event City commences legal action to re- • cover all or any portion of the performance fund, then the City shall be entitled to recover, in addition to the amount of the performance fund, costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees. security pledged for the payment of all contractors, subr. contractors, laborers, materialmen and other persons em- ployed in the performance of the Agreement and who are referred to in Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code of the State of California for materials furnished Or labor performed of any • kind, or amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Act with respect to such work or labor, and that Lender will pay the same in an amount not exceeding the payment fund, and in case suit is brought will pay, in addition to the payment fund, costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees. (5) This Agreement and the payment fund shad inure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies and corpora- tions entitled to file claims under Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this Agreement or against the payment fund. (6) No change, extension of time, alteration or addi- tion to the terms of the Agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in any wise affect this Agreement or Lender and Borrower's obligations hereunder, and they do hereby waive notice cf any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or to the work or to the specifications. This Agreement shall become effective upon acceptance by the City and shall remain in full force and effect until such time as the City shall release the • performance fund and payment fund as hereinafter provided. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Lender and Borrower have executed this Agreement on the day and year first above written. • LENDER: BancOhio National Bank Columbiana County Area ame ater iii---- GCCr- a-- FFFia"'3www� (Title) President BORROWER: Wagner -Insul Company 7. ' BY: me '� (Title) President The City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, hereby accepts • the foregoing Improvement Security Instrument and agreeso, (1) Upon final completion and acceptance of the re- quired work, and the performance of all acts specified in the Agreement, City will release any part of the performance fund not claimed by the City in accordance with the above provisions, not needed as security deemed necessary by the city for any guarantee or warranty period or not needed as security for costs and reasonable expenses and fees of the City, including reasonable attorney's fees. (2) Six (6) months after the completion and acceptance of the required work, City will release the payment fund except such part thereof as equals the total of all claims on which an action has been filed and notice thereof given in writing to the City Council of the City. ATTEST: City Clerk CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation BY: •Mayor ff • RESOLUTION NO. 80 -45 • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 79 -64 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its consideration and Improvement Agreement executed on May 13, 1980, by Wagner -Insul Company, as developer, for the Improvement of public right -of -way adjacent to the real property specifically described therein, and generally located at 11899 8th Street, Rancho Cucamonga, 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 real property as referred to Planning Commission, Director Review No. 79 -64; and WHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient improvement security, which is identified in said Improvement Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Improvement Agreement and said Improvement security be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor • is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest thereto. PASSED, APPROVED, ADOPTED this day of 1980. AYES; NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk L Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor 1� CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • MEMORANDUM DATE: May 15, 1980 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer SUBJECT: Transfer Funds From County Maintenance Account To Contract Sweeping Account In July of 1979, the County sweeper for this area broke down. In September of 1979, it was determined that the sweeper would not be put back into service nor replaced. At that time, the City contracted with private sweeping companies on a trial basis for minimal sweeping of problem areas. This service has been costing approximately $2,500 a month and at this time, the $20,000 budget amount has nearly been expended. Approximately $4,800 is still remaining in the budget for County sweeping. • RECOMMENDATION Therefore, in order to continue with the present miminal level of sweeping service for the remainder of the fiscal year, it is recommended that the City Council authorize the transfer of funds from the County Maintenance Account to the Contract Sweeping Account. The amount of $5,000 is recommended to be transferred to the Contract Sweeping Account. Respectfullysuubmi�tteedd, —Lloyd B. Hubbs LBH: j as r \ U 15 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • MEMORANDUM DATE: May.12, 1980 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer SUBJECT: Maintenance Agreement for Traffic Signals at Etiwanda Avenue and Fourth Street Since incorporation, the signal at the intersection of Etiwanda and Fourth has been maintained entirely at County expense, even though one approach is within City limits. The usual arrange- ment among agencies regarding signal contruction and maintenance is to share such costs on the basis of the number of vehicle approach legs in each jurisdiction. In view of the above, San Bernardino County is submitting for Council approval, the attached agreement providing for a 25% participation in the • power and maintenance of the above referenced signals and safety lighting, amounting to a cost of $45 per month. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Council approve the attached Traffic Signal Maintenance Agreement and authorize its execution by the City. Respectfully submitted, 0 L1 d B. Hubbs LBH: j as Attachments 9 EN '4COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO • CONTRACT TRANSMITTAL Contractor: City of Rancho Cucamc Contractor's Representative: Address: County Deprtmem CONTRACT NUMBER Transportation County Department Contract Refeessrun e O Renwable O Temmnn Gary A. Ruhhnan Ph.Ext. 1255 Dm: Budget Urut No. SuRObpct N.. FuW No. Job N0. Amount of Camract 580 021 B Check One: ❑ ExoeWitun O Revenue If contract has more then one pryment or nd,pt. complete the fogfl im q. SS.A. = or Federal Number of paymems: Employe to i` Eslimned amount of each: S Nature of Contract: (Briefly describe the general terms of the contract) • Phone: Traffic Signal Maintenance agreement with the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The agreement provides for the City or County to pay for its portion of maintenance costs. this transmittal to all contracts not prepared on the "Standard Contract" form.) Mproved as to legal form Reviewed as to budget expenditure le r- County Counsel County Admlmsuanve Office P., f m i_ 02•Ie294-107 I 7 MASTER ACREEMEta FOR MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND INTERSECTION LIGHTING THIS MASTER AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of • , by and between the City of Rancho Cucamonga a municipal corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as "CITY ", and the COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, a body politic and corporate of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY ". W I T N E S S E T H WHEREAS, certain approved traffic signals and highway lighting facilities have been installed and are maintained at designated intersections of City streets and County roads; and WHEREAS, CITY and COUNTY desire, and will mutually benefit therefrom, to set forth herein the particular maintenance functions to be performed by each and, to specify the distribution of costs of maintenance and operation between CITY and COUNTY; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 1. This Agreement applies to those intersections and facilities named or listed in Exhibits "A" and "B ", attached hereto and made a part hereof. Upon approval of both parties hereto as evidenced by resolutions of the County Board of Supervisors and the City Council, signal installation and /or inter- section lighting facilities designated for maintenance purposes may be deleted from or added to this Agreement by submittal of a revised Exhibit "A" and "B" which shall, upon said approval become a part of this Agreement and shall supersede and cancel all previous exhibits. 2. The party to perform the maintenance work or provide the required service shall be as indicated in Exhibit "A" and "B ", except that utility- owned intersection lighting will be maintained by the utility owning the same. -1- IV • • 3. A flat monthly rate applicable to all intersections involved shall • be established for signal maintenance and power costs as set forth in Exhibit "A ". A flat monthly rate, per lamp unit, shall likewise be established for maintenance and power costs of intersection lighting as set forth in Exhibit "B ". The flat monthly rates so established shall be reviewed and reconsidered as of June 30th of each year and, if necessary, shall be revised and adjusted by an appropriate revision to Exhibits as set forth hereinbefore. 4. The basis of sharing operation and maintenance costs of traffic sig- nals shall be in the same ratio that the number of intersecting City streets bears to the County roads. Flashers or other electrically operated traffic control or warning devices are also included under this provision. 5. Where highway lighting has been specifically approved at an inter- section, the maintenance and power costs thereon shall be shared between CITY and COUNTY in the ratio that the number of light units serve CITY or COUNTY • traffic. 6. Routine maintenance work to be performed under this agreement will include patrolling, furnishing of electric energy and furnishing necessary repairs and /or replacements as required to insure a satisfactory service. Installation of additional facilities is not a maintenance function under this agreement. 7. Extraordinary expense, such as for repair or replacement of extensive damage, shall be assessed directly against the particular installation involved and shall be the sole expense of the owner thereof. Invoices for such costs shall be itemized as to materials, including service and expense, salaries and wages, and equipment rental. 0 -z I? 8. Invoices for routine maintenance, as defined above, shall be submitted quarterly for work performed or service furnished. Invoices • shall utilize the flat rate basis as set forth hereinbefore for each signal intersection and light unit with segregation shown between traffic signal costs and intersection lighting costs. 9. This Agreement shall become effective this let day of March, 1980 and shall remain in full force and effect until terminated upon thirty days written notice by either party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their respective official therunto duly authorized. Approved as to form this -5„ I/ SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY day of '71 /x,,. •ice / /T 5-0 By Chairman, Board of Supervisors • ALAN K. MARKS �� By IC rsC.. _ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONCA Deputy ATTEST ANDREA DISHAROON, County Clerk and ex officio Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By Deputy -3- • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA E%HIBIT A • SCHEDULE I TRAFFIC SIGNALS • • County Maintained February, 1980 Multi -Phase Per month per intersection Volume Density $140.00 Maintenance and Power Monthly Amount Location City% Billed to City 1. Etivanda Ave @ San Bernardino 25% $35.00 1. Avenue (Fourth Street) Total per month $35.00 aI CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA EXHIBIT B SCHEDULE I INTERSECTION LIGHTING County Maintained February, 1980 Rate: $10.00 per unit per month (Maintenance A Poorer) No. Location Units City% Montly Amount Billed to City 1 Etivanda Ave. @ San 4 25 $10.00 Bernardino Ave. (Fourth St) Total Per Month $10.00 W • 11 • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA EXHIBIT A SCHEDULE II TRAFFIC SIGNALS City Maintained February, 1980 Multi Phased PER Month Per intersection Volume Density - Maintenance 6 Power No. Location City% Monthly Amount -- Billed to County No locations partly in County 9 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA EXHIBIT B SCHEDULE II INTERSECTION LIGHTING City Maintained February, 1980 Rate: - per unit; per month (Maintenance S Power) No. Location Units County S Monthly Amount Billed to County No locations partly in County a • • r] Ut1G.cr l�! ORDINANCE No. 70 D l • AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SUBSECTIONS (c) AND (D) OF SECTION 10 OF ORDINANCE No. 70, CREATING AN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION TO ACT IN ADVISORY CAPACITY TO THE CITY COUNCIL IN THE IDENTIFICATION AND PRESERVATION OF HISTORICAL OBJECTS, EVENTS, STRUCTURES AND SITES AND TO IDENTIFY PERSONS OF HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE TO THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1: Subsection (c) of Section 10 of Ordinance No. 70, of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, is hereby amended to read: (c) The application shall be referred to the Historic Preservation Commission, The Historic Preservation Commission shall hold a public hearing. The Historic Preservation Commission shall recommend approval, modified approval or disapproval of the application. SECTION Z: Subsection (d) of Section 10 of Ordinance No. 70 of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, is hereby amended to read: (d) In the event the Historic Preservation Commission recommends approval or modified approval of an application, • the application and the report and recommendations of the Historic Preservation Commission shall be forwarded to the City Council which shall hold a public hearing on the application, following which the City Council may approve, modify and approve, or deny the proposed designation, Approval or modification and approval, of the designation shall be upon adoption of an ordinance. In the event the Historic Preservation Commission recommends disapproval of an application, no further action need be taken thereon unless a notice of appeal is filed with the City Clerk within 10 days following the action of the Historic Preservation Commission. SECTION 3: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall attest to the same, and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage, as least once in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulation, published in the City 07-Ot—o, Califfornia, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of , 1980. AYES: NOES: • ABSENT: ATTEST: as Mayor CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT • DATE: May 7, 1980 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development BY: Barry Hogan, Senior Planner SUBJECT: AN APPEAL OF MMATTW MMl UATTnx Awn 7nve w nmurw rnur=llnD 1n WRruRATCU - Request for a change in zone from R -3 to C -1 for 15.85 acres of land located on the east side of Haven Avenue between Highland and Lemon Avenues. ABSTRACT: Watt Commercial Properties, Inc., requested a zone change from R -3 to C -1 for the land described above from the Planning Commission on February 25, 1980. The Planning Commission denied the applicants request because they felt that the proposed development was premature and that there is no justification for the construction of the center at this time. The applicant's intention is to develop a neighborhood commercial shopping center at this location over a period of the next four years. Since the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant has prepared additional data for consideration by the City Coun- cil. Attached to the Staff Report, please find copies of the three -phase development •plan and perspectives of the proposed development. These plans are only conceptual and would require specific site plan and design review if zoning is granted. The ap- plicant's intent would be to open Phase I, including a drug store, market and a shop building in April of 1982. Phase II, proposed to be opened in March of 1983, would include additional shop buildings and free - standing buildings. Both of the plans and the total development plan indicate a dotted line along the Highland Avenue frontage. This line indicates the extent of the Freeway right-of -way which may or may not be required. For this reason the applicant is proposing the development to begin from Lemon Avenue developing southerly towards the Freeway right -of -way. At the Planning Commission meeting there was concern expressed over the potential views the residences on the north side of Lemon would have looking southerly into the devel- opment. Attached to your packet of information is a drawing showing what the developer proposes to construct in order to protect or screen the view of the center from the residences. Also included is a section drawing. The developers are proposing 50 feet of landscaping from the property line and depressing the building approximately 20 feet In order to mitigate the visual impacts. This is similar to the proposal approved by the Planning Commission on the Gemco site south of San Bernardino Road on Foothill. Additionally, questions arose as to the feasibility of a market in the area at this time. The applicant has prepared a market and fiscal impact study done by Economic Research and Associates which is submitted in your packet for your information. In addition, the applicant hired the firm of Linscott, Law, Greenspan, Inc., Engineers, to du a traffic report to determine whether or not the development would impact the area or change the level of service provided on the streets. Further, the applicant has contracted with PBR, same firm that did the EIR for the Dann Southwest property, to prepare an initial study for the development. It also is included in your packet for your review and consideration. M0 May 7, 1980 Page 2 Exhibit "B" indicated the general planning for the area and the property, in addition • to the existing zoning. The property presently is water planned for mixed use and contains an asterick indicating it is an alternate commercial site which allows the applicant to request the zone change from R -3 to C -1. As the Council may recall, when a General Plan amendment was granted to the property owner for this property the mixed use designation was shown all the way to Lemon Avenue. At that time CC&Rs were recorded to restrict vehicular access to Lemon Avenue from any commercial development that may be proposed for this site. The purpose was to insure land use comparability between the residential and commercial uses. Part I of the Initial Study is attached for your review in addition to the information submitted by the applicant regarding traffic, drainage, and market ability. If the Council finds that there is no significant adverse impact that would be created on the environment as a result of the zone change then a Negative Declaration should be issued for the project. RECOMMENDATION: If after review of the information presented herein, and by the applicant, the Council concurs with the actions of the Planning Commission then a motion should be made to deny the appeal upholding the Planning Commissions' decision. If the City Council, after review of the information presented herein, and by the applicant, feels that the zone change is appropriate and will not cause significant adverse impacts on the environment, then a motion should be made to adopt the attached ordinance approving Zone Change No. 80 -02 and the issuance of a Negative Declaration. Respectfully submit ed, _ Jack Lam, Director of Community Development JL :cd Attachments: Location Map General Plan and Zoning Map Applicant's Exhibits P. • ►^1 U • • L oCATION MAP EXHIBIT `e �-q • htu� ai ORDINANCE NO. 101 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING THE WESTERLY 557' OF ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 201- 271 -53 FROM R -3 TO C -1 LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF HAVEN AVENUE BETWEEN LEMON AND HIGHLAND AVENUES The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: The City Council hereby finds and determines the following: A. That the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, following a public hearing held in the time and manner prescribed by law, on the rezoning of the property hereinafterdescribed, and this City Council has held a public hearing in the time and manner prescribed by law as duly heard and considered said recommendation. • B. That this rezoning is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 11 C. This rezoning will have no significant environ- mental impact as provided in the Negative Declaration filed herein. SECTION 2: The following described real property is hereby rezoned in the manner stated, and the zoning map is hereby amended accordingly. R -3 (multiple family residential) to C -1 (neighborhood commercial) Said property is located on the east side of Haven Avenue between Leman and Highland Avenues known as the westerly 557' of Assessor's Parcel Number 201- 271 -53. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its adoption. 5 SECTION 3: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City • Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage at least once in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of , 1980. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor 30 • • • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Staff Report Date: May 7, 1980 To: City Council and City Manager From: Jack Lam Subject: ZONE CHANGE NO. 80 -03 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - THOMAS C OLEMAN - A request for a change of zone from R -3 to M- for property located on the south side of 9th Street approximately 1,000 feet west of Vineyard Avenue - 8738 9th Street - Assessor's Parcel No. 207 - 262 -28 BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission, at its meeting of March 26, 1980, held a public hearing to consider the above - described zone change and recommended approval to the City Council as indicated on the attached Resolution. However, the Commission recommended a change of zone to M -R (restricted manufacturing) rather than the M -1 requested by the applicant. The applicant is requesting a change of zone for approximately 2.4 acres of land located at 8738 9th Street (Exhibit "A "). The subject property is presently zoned R -3 (multiple family residential) and has requested a • change of zone to M -1 (limited industrial). The applicant has requested the change of zone to allow for future development of industrial uses on the property. ANALYSIS: Exhibits "8" and "C" indicate the adjacent land use and zon- ing which is described as follows: LAND USE ZONING North Vacant A -1 South Radio Station, vacant land M -R East Light Industrial M -R West Single Family Residence, and vacant land A -1 Exhibit "D" displays the Interim Land Use Element of the General Plan which designates the subject property as Minimum Impact Industrial. The General Plan Land Use Element contains only two industrial land use classifications; minimum impact and major. The zoning ordinance contains 3 industrial desig- nations; M -R, Restricted Manufacturing, M -1 Limited Manufacturing, and M -2 General Manufacturing. The Minimum Impact designation of the General Plan can be implemented through zoning the land either M -R or M -1 to bring the land in conformance with the General Plan. The applicants' request is for M -1 zoning for the subject property. However, all properties to the east and south, which are presently zoned for industrial purposes, are zoned M -R. It appears as though these areas were zoned M -R because of the close • proximity of residential and other sensitive land uses in the area. The M -R City Council and City Manager May 7, 1980 Page 2 J zone is more restrictive and more compatible with surrounding land uses than M -1 zoning. Therefore, to be consistent with the surrounding zoning and established zoning policies for this area, it is recommended that the subject property be granted a zone change to the more restrictive zone of M -R (Restricted Manufacturing). The Initial Study has been prepared for the environmental assessment of this zone change. Attached is Part I of the Initial Study as provided by the applicant. The environmental checklist was completed by staff with no positive responses to any of the items; thus leading to the finding of no adverse impacts as a result of the project. If after review of the Initial Study, the Council finds the environmental assessment to be ade- quate, then issuance of a Negative Declaration would be in order. CORRESPONDENCE: A notice of public hearing was published in the Daily Report ad section on April 23, 1980. In addition, notices of public hearing were sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. To date, no correspondence has been received either for or against this project. RECOMMENDATION: If, after review of the information presented herein and aconclusion of the public hearing, the City Council concurs • with the above analysis and recommendation of the Planning Commission, the appropriate action would be adoption of the attached Ordinance which approves Zone Change No. 80 -03 from R -3 to M -R. Respectfully submitted, Jack Lam, Director of Community Development JLMV:kds Attachments: Exhibit "A" Location Map Exhibit "B" Land Use Exhibit "C" Existing Zoning Exhibit "D" General Plan Designation Part I Initial Study Resolution No. 80 -10 Ordinance 40 0 0 pane CA ,e Y, 80-03 ;�Xar�w M�v • — No1CTX � 33 u uo X ORDINANCE NO. 102 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 207 - 262 -28 FROM R -3 TO M -R, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 9TH STREET APPROXIMATELY 1,000' WEST OF VINEYARD AVENUE J _4� 't b(Ca( 2 The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: The City Council hereby finds and determines the fo 1�5 owing: A. That the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, following a public hearing held in the time and manner prescribed by law, recommends the rezoning of the property hereinafter described, and this City Council has held a public hearing in the time and manner prescribed by law as duly heard and considered said recommendation. B. That this rezoning is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. C. This rezoning will have no significant environ- mental impact as provided in the Negative Declaration filed herein. SECTION 2: The following described real property is hereby rezoned in the manner stated, and the zoning map is hereby amended accordingly. R -3 (Multi - family Residential) to M -R (Restricted Manufacturing) Said property is located on the south side of 9th Street approximately 1,000' west of Vineyard known as Assessor's Parcel Number 207 - 262 -28. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its adoption. SECTION 3: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk sFa—IT cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage at least once in the Daily Report, a newspaper of general circu- lation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of , 1980. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor ATTEST: i Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk • • • r1 LJ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Staff Report Date: May 7, 1980 To: City Council and City Manager From: Jack Lam Subject: ZONE CHANGE NO. 80 -05 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - JUDITH AND THOMAS STEPHENSON - A change of zone from R-1-1 to R -1- 20,000 or property located on the northwest corner of Klusman and Whirlaway. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission, at its meeting of April 9, 1980, he—Td a public hearing to consider the above - described zone change and recommended approval to the City Council as indicated on the attached resolution. The applicants are requesting a change of zone for approxi- mately 3.3 acres of land located on the northwest corner of Klusman and Whirlaway (Exhibit "A "). The subject property is presently zoned R -1 -1 (Single Family Residential, one acre minimum lot size) and the request is for a change to R- 1- 20,000 (Single Family Residential on minimum one -half acre lot). The applicant had previously proposed to divide the property into four single family one -half acre lots and discovered the zoning • required minimum 1 acre. Thus, a zone change is now being requested that would permit the subdivision of land. ANALYSIS: Exhibits "B" and "C" indicate the adjacent land use and zoning which is described as follows: LAND USE ZONING NORTH Flood Control R -1 -1 SOUTH Single Family Residential R -1 -20 EAST Single Family Residential R -1 -1 and R -1 -20 WEST Single Family Residential R -1 -20 The interim land use element of the General Plan designates the subject property as very low density (1 - 2 units per acre). As can be seen on the existing zoning map the subject property is bounded on the east, west and south by one -half acre zoning. The majority of the homes in the surrounding area are developed on one -half acre lots. Therefore, the zone change request would be compatible with the existing zoning and development in the surrounding area. Further, the zone change is consis- tent with the General Plan designation of very low density. The Initial Study has been prepared for the Environmental Assessment of the zone change. Attached is Part 1 of the Initial Study as provided by the applicant. The Environmental checklist was completed by staff with • no positive responses to any of the items; thus, leading to the finding of no significant impacts on the environment as a result of the project. 35 City Council and City Manager May 7, 1980 Page 2 If after review of the Initial Study, the Council finds the Environmental • assessment to be adequate, the issuance of the Negative Declaration would be in order. CORRESPONDENCE: A notice of public hearing was published in the Daily Report legal ad section on April 23, 1980. In addition, notice of public hearing was sent to all property owners within 300 feet of subject property. To date no correspondence has been received either for or against this project. RECOMMENDATION: If, after review of the information presented herein and after the conclusion of public hearing, the City Council concurs with the above analysis and recommendation of the Planning Commission, the approprirate action would be adoption of the attached Ordinance which approves Zone Change No. 80 -05 from R -1 -1 to R- 1- 20,000. „4. R pectfully submitted, JACK LAM, Director of Community Development JL:MV:kds • Attachments: Exhibit "A ", Location Map Exhibit "8 ", Land Use Map Exhibit "C ", Zoning Map Part I, Initial Study Resolution Ordinance 11 36 l J CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Staff Report Date: May 7, 1980 To: City Council and City Manager From: Jack Lam Subject: ZONE CHANGE NO. 80 -05 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - JUDITH AND THOMAS EPHENSON - A change of zone from R- - to R- - 20,000 or property orated on the northwest corner of Klusman and Whirlaway. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission, at its meeting of April 9, 1980, held a public hearing to consider the above - described zone change and recommended approval to the City Council as indicated on the attached resolution. The applicants are requesting a change of zone for approxi- mately 3.3 acres of land located on the northwest corner of Klusman and Whirl away (Exhibit "A "). The subject property is presently zoned R -1 -1 (Single Family Residential, one acre minimum lot size) and the request is for a change to R -1- 20,000 (Single Family Residential on minimum one -half acre lot). The applicant had previously proposed to divide the property • into four single family one -half acre lots and discovered the zoning required minimum 1 acre. Thus, a zone change is now being requested that would permit the subdivision of land. ANALYSIS: Exhibits "B" and "C" indicate the adjacent land use and zoning Which is described as follows: LAND USE ZONING NORTH Flood Control R -1 -1 SOUTH Single Family Residential R -1 -20 EAST Single Family Residential R -1 -1 and R -1 -20 WEST Single Family Residential R -1 -20 The interim land use element of the General Plan designates the subject property as very low density (1 - 2 units per acre). As can be seen on the existing zoning map the subject property is bounded on the east, west and south by one -half acre zoning. The majority of the homes in the surrounding area are developed on one -half acre lots. Therefore, the zone change request would be compatible with the existing zoning and development in the surrounding area. Further, the zone change is consis- tent with the General Plan designation of very low density. The Initial Study has been prepared for the Environmental Assessment of the zone change. Attached is Part 1 of the Initial Study as provided by the applicant. The Environmental checklist was completed by staff with ,1 no positive responses to any of the items; thus, leading to the finding i of no significant impacts on the environment as a result of the project. 35 City Council and City Manager May 7, 1980 Page 2 If after review of the Initial Study, the Council finds the Environmental • assessment to be adequate, the issuance of the Negative Declaration would be in order. CORRESPONDENCE: A notice of public hearing was published in the Daily Report legal ad section on April 23, 1980. In addition, notice of public hearing was sent to all property owners within 300 feet of subject property. To date no correspondence has been received either for or against this project. RECOMMENDATION: If, after review of the information presented herein and after the conclusion of public hearing, the City Council concurs with the above analysis and recommendation of the Planning Commission, the approprirate action would be adoption of the attached Ordinance which approves Zone Change No. 80 -05 from R -1 -1 to R- 1- 20,000. R rectfully submitted, JACK LAM, Director of Community Development JL: MV: kds • Attachments: Exhibit "A ", Location Map Exhibit "B ", Land Use Map Exhibit "C ", Zoning Map Part I, Initial Study Resolution Ordinance • 36 r] �` xci ✓1¢a� ORDINANCE NO. 103 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 1061 -511 -6 AND 7 FROM R -1 -1 TO R- 1- 20,000 FOR 3.3 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF KLUSMAN AND WHIRLAWAY The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: The City Council hereby finds and determines the following: A. That the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, following a public hearing held in the time and manner prescribed by law, recommends the rezoning of the property herein- after described, and this City Council has held a public hearing in the time and manner pres- cribed by law as duly heard and considered said recommendation. • B. That this rezoning is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 0 C. This rezoning will have no significant environ- mental impact as provided in the Negative Declaration filed herein. SECTION 2: The following described real property is hereby rezo—n the manner stated, and the zoning map is hereby amended accordingly. R -1 -1 (single family residential on minimum one acre lot) to R -1- 20,000 (single family residential on minimum 20,000 sq. ft.lots). Said property is located on the northwest corner of Klusman and Whirlaway known as Assessor's Parcel Number 1061 -511 -6 and 7. This Ordinance shall be in fuli force and effect at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its adoption. 37 SECTION 3: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen • (15) days after its passage at least once in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of , 1980. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor C' WAF ON n U u 11 • • CITY OF RAIV( M CUG1M WA STAFF REPORT May 15, 1980 To: City Council and City Manager From: Bill Holley, Director, Community Services Department Subject: Park Dedication in Subdivisions: The City of Rancho Cucamonga has demonstrated through past actions, a commitment to provide park and recreation services to the residents of our community. The question is, in lightof the current receding grant market and the lack of viability of the general obligation bond, how do we "guarantee" that commitment to continue for future residents and generations? At this time, the best avenue of approach to that guarantee is the Quimby Act. The attached Ordinance is offered as Rancho Cucamonga's application of that Act. The balance of this report will be divided into three segments The Ordinance Ramifications Recommendations The Ordinance This proposed Ordinance is available for City enactment through the enabling provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, State of California. (excerpt attached.) These provisions, commonly referred to as the Quimby Act, are in wide application throughout the state. The attached. Ordinance is based on Ordinance 2126, drafted, reviewed, refined and adopted on behalf of County Service Area No. SO by the .Board of Supervisors in June of 1977. Much of the language in the Ordinance is quoted directly from the Quimby text. The formula featured is designed to reflect current market vaules and is not subject to inflationary loss as would be annually revised "flat fees ". While the initial impression of the formula is that is is one of complication, worked out, it is very simple. Example: Lovely Meadows Subdivision N = 87 lots S = 5 acres per one thousand population set as the City park standard P - 3.2 population per dwelling unit as determined by latest census L = $20,000 per acre fair market value of land D = $40,000 per acre development cost of parkland NSP (L -D) - minimum fee or 87 x 5 x 3.2 x (20,000 +* 40,000) $83,520 1,000 1000 l-3 Staff Report - pg. 2 S/15/80 subj: Park Dedication in Subdivision This figure of $83,520 breaks down to $960 per home. • The question is always asked "how does this compare to other cities?" The answer, depending on the cities selected for the survey, could show it to be too low, exactly average, or too high. The more important aspect of the formula is the recognition that is is tied to "true" performance costs. That is, "How much will it cost to buy park land now and to develop it ". The balance of the Ordinance is fairly clear and will not herein be further elaborated upon. Ramifications Negative: Positive: 1) Developers will not like the Ordinance as they will claim it requires more out front investment. It will. 2) It will be said that it will raise the cost of the house to the buyer. It will. 3) Developers will claim that the City is relying exclusively on new development to pay for and build park system. Not true. (a) The "P" factor relates to the parkland requirement of the particular subdivision and its residents; (b) General funds are also allocated for park and recreation • purposes; (c) Other avenues are also being utilized to develop park and recreation facilities, such as 74 and 76 Bond Act, SB 174, and CDBG Funds. I) In the developing areas of our City, we will be able to meet our "commitment and obligation" to the future residents and generations for open parklands and family play areas. There are other positive factors, but the above is the real issue and must stand alone. • 44 Staff Report - pg. 3 5/15/80 Park Dedication in Subdivisions • Recommendation: Recommend that: 1) Council give first Reading to the proposed Ordinance on May 21, 1980. 2) After Second Reading on June 4, adopt resolutions that: (a) Set standard for park acreage ( "S ") at 5 acres per 1,000 population as recommended in general plan; and (b) Set park acre development cost ( "D ") with a provision for a twice yearly Council review of that figure. (Item 2 of this Recommendation is a separate issue from this Ordinance and is brought up at this point only to fill out the full picture a little more clearly.) If you have any questions prior to the meeting, I will be happy to address them. Thank you. • —�I BH /mw 0 LX l" u 66077. The legislative body of a city or county may, by ordi- Park and recreation nance, require the dedication of land, the payment of fees in lieu dedlcations thereof, or a combination of both, for part. or recreational purposes (Quimby Act) as a condition to the approval of a final map or parcel map, provided that: (a) The ordinance has been in effect for a period of Local ordinance 30 days prior to the filing of the tentative map of the subdivision a parcel map. (b) The ordinance includes definite standards for deter- Standards mining the proportion of a subdivision, to be dedi- cated and the amount of any fee to be paid in lieu thereof. (c) The land, fees, or combination thereof are to be Dedications to serve used only for the purpose of providing park or subdivision recreational facilities to serve the subdivision. (d) The legislative body has adopted a general plan Recreation element containing a recreational element, and the park and recreational facilities are in accordance with definite principles and standards contained therein. (e) The amount and location of land to be dedicated Reasonable relationship or the fees to be paid shall bear a reasonable relationship to the use of the park and recreational facilities by the future inhabitants of the subdivi- Sion. (t3 The city or county shall develop a schedule speci- Reimbursement to fying how and when it will use the land or fees owners or both to develop park a recreational facilities. Any fees collected under the ordinance shall be committed within five years after the payment of such fees or the issuance of building permits on one -half of the lots created by the subdivision, whichever occurs later. If such fees are not committed, they shall be distributed and paid to the then record owners of the subdivision in the ' same proportion that the size of their lotrbears , to the total area of all lots within the subdivision. (g) Only the payment of fees may be required in subdivisions containing xxx +*0300•* parcels or Fees only H less than less. 50 Parma (h) Subdivisions containing less than live sxx parcels Nona- residential and not used for residential purposes shall be ex- empted from the requirements of this section; subtivsslon provided however, that a condition may be placed on the approval of such parcel . map that if a building permit is requested for construction of a residential structure or structures on one or more of the parcels within four years the tee may be required to be paid by the owner of each such parcel as a condition to the issuance of such permit. Land a fees required under this section shall be conveyed or paid directly to the local public agency which provides park and recreational services on a communitywide level and to the area within which the proposed development will be located, if such agency elects to accept the land or fee. The local agency accepting such land or funds shall develop the land or use the funds in the manner provided herein. In the event park and recreational services and facilities are provided'by a public agency other than a city or a county, the amount and location of land to be dedicated or fees to be paid shall be jointly determined by the city or county having jurisdiction and such public agency. The provisions of this section do not apply to industrial subdivisions; nor do they apply to condominium projects or stock Inapplicability cooperatives which consist of the subdivision of airspace In an existing apartment building which is more than five years old when no new dwelling units are added, nor do they apply to parcel maps for a subdivision containing less than five xxx parcels for a shopping center containing more than 300,000 square feet of gross leasable area and no residential development or uses. � 6 C7rY OF RANCHO CLIZANK NGA o STAFF REPORT �� • yyyyVV 4 / C May 16, 1980 4 U U To: City Council and City Manager From: Bill Holley, Director, Community Services Subject: Ordinance 8 -A The purpose of this amendment is to not twice require that a park development fee be paid on the same residence. Ordinance 8 would then be applied only to residential development not covered under subdivision regulations in Ordinance 105, as homes built on lots already subdivided. (This would apply to subdivision approved by County but without issued building permits and individual homes.) The current 'TAX" under Ordinance 8 for a single family dwelling unit is $300. This is a flat rate and has no escalator clause to deal with inflation. It is the City Attorney's opinion that as it is a tax, the dollar amount could not be shifted without risking a question of its constitutionality under Prop 13. • Request First Reading May 21, 1980 Thank you. • • ORDINANCE No. BA AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ORDINANCE No. 8, ESTABLISHING RECREATION TAX FOR NEW RES- IDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND PROVIDING FOR THE ADMINISTRATION, AMOUNTS AND CREDITS THEREOF. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does ordain as follows: Section 1: The provision of Ordinance 8 of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,California,shall not apply to residential dwellings or subdivided land with respect to which the dedication of land, or the payment of fees in lieu thereof, or a combination of both for park and recreation purposes, has been required as a condition of the final map or parcel map. Section 2: The Mayor shall sign this ordinance and the City Clerk shall attest to the same, and the City Clerk shalt cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage, at least once in The Dail Re o�rt, a newspaper of general circulation, published in the ityC of lntario and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of 1980. ATTEST: • City Clerk ha ORDINANCE NO. 8 • AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCMONGA ESTABLISHING A PARR AND RECREATION TAX FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND PROVIDING FOR THE ADMINISTRATION, A'AOL'NTS AND CREDITS THEREOF, REPEALING SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2126, A.D DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA isiii'I�3�3tiilbyYi) dd11C6yA SECTION 1. Intent and Purpose. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby declares a tax on all new residential development within the City for the sole purpose of producing revenue for the acquisition, development and initial equipment of new parks or additional park lands. This is declared pursuant to the taxing power granted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga by the Government Code of the State of California. The purpose of the tax is to assist in financing the planning, • acquisition and development of parks to maintain the level of Dark service as the City's population increases. � 1 lJ SECTION 2. Definitions. a. "City" shall mean the City of Rancho Cucamonga. b. "Residential Developmert" shall include all dwelling units constructed for the first time on onen land or when existing structures are remodeled, added to or otherwise altered to increase the number of dwelling units. C. "Dwelling Unit" shall include each single family dwelling, each unit of an apartment, duplex dwelling group or multiple dwelling structure o:: condominium or planned residential development as a separate hati+.at for one or more persons or each mobile home space designed to c -ntain a mobile home trailer on a semi - permanent or permanent asis. d. "Person" includes every person, firm or cornoration constructing a dwelling unit d!. rectly or through the services of any employee, agent or independent contractor. S SECTION 3. Tax: Imposition and Application. . A tax is hereby imposed in the amounts herein set forth and shall be applicable to every dwelling unit as above defined constructed in the Citv after the effective date of this Ordinance and shall be known as the Parks and Recreation Tax. SECTION 4. Tax: Amount. Every person constructing any dwelling unit within the City of Cucamonga shall pay the Citv the following: For each single family dwelling unit, the sum of $300.00 For each multiple dwelling unit, the sum of $180.00 For each mobile home unit $150.00 SECTION 5. Tax: When Payable. The tax imposed in this chapter shall be due and payable upon issuance by the City of a building permit for the construction of any dwelling unit and shall be refunded only in the event that the building permit issued has expired and no construction has been commenced. SECTION 6. Disposition of Tax Receipts. • There is hereby established a Park Development Fund. All sums collected pursuant to this chapter shall be deposited in said Park Development Fund and shall be used solely for acquisition, development and initial equipment of new parks or the expansion of land or services on existing parks in accordance with the Park, Parkway and Open Space element of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. SECTION 7. Partial Credit. Where private open space for park and recreational purposes is Provided in a proposed subdivision and such space is to be privately owned and maintained by the future residents of the subdivision, partial credit, not to exceed 508, may be given against the requirement if the City Council finds that it is in the public interest to do so and that all the following standards are met: a. That yards, court areas, setbacks, and other open areas reouired to be maintained by the zoning and building ordinances and regulations shall not be included in the computa- tion of such private open space; and b. That the private ownershin and maintenance of • the open space is adequately Provided for by recorded written Agreement, conveyance, or restrictions; and • C. That the use of the private open space is restricted for park and recreational purposes by recorded covenant which runs with the land in favor of the future owners of property and which cannot be defeated or eliminated without the consent of the City; and d. That the proposed private open space is reasonably adaptable for use for park'and recreational purposes, taking into consideration such factors as size, shape, torographv, geology, access, and locations; and e. That facilities Proposed for the open space are in substantial accordance with the provisions of the recreational element of the Master Plan of Parks and Recreation; and f. That the open space for which credit is given is a minimum of three acres and Provides for adeauate development and maintenance of the area fnr recreation purposes. Before credit is given the City Manager or his desiqnated repre- sentative shall make written recommendations to the City Council for their approval. SECTION 8. Periodic Revision. • Inasmuch h on average costs of landandadevelopment,la review hShall be coned ducted periodically to determine whether the tax needs revisions to reflect current costs of such acquisition and development. SECTION 9. Repeal of San Bernardino County Ordinance No. 212 . San Bernardino County Ordinance No. 2126, heretofore adopted as an Ordinance of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as re- quired by Section 35328.5 of the Government Code of the State of California is hereby expressly declared reoealed, and is super - ceded as an ordinance of the City of Rancho Cucamonga by this Ordinance. SECTION 10. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has just been incorporated and has no funds whatsoever to Provide for the planning, acquisition and development of public parks. It is necessary that the City acquire funds for such purposes without delay. This Ordinance is therefore necessary for the protection of the public health, welfare and general safety and shall take effect immediately upon its adoption as an urgency ordinance. 1977. APPROVED and ADOPTED this 2nd day of December , ATTEST: Mayor f t e -c°iho Cucamonga L6City clerk \J n U 9 CITY OF RANCHO CL) AMONC,A STAFF REPORT DATE: May 21, 1980 TO: City Council FROM: Jack I=, Director of C ®unity Development BY: Tim J. Beedle, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF INTERIM RECREATION ELEMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN An Interim Recreation Element has been prepared for City Council consideration. This document has been largely prepared from the County Service Area 50 Recrea- tion Plan. However, it has been modified to update the information and data for Rancho Cucamonga. Essentially all goals, policies, progrems and standards remain the same. This document is being considered as an interim to the General Plan until the adoption of the proposed Environmental Resource Element, now being prepared by Sedway /Cooke consultant firm. The adoption of the Interim Recreation Element will facilitate the consideration for adoption of a park dedication and fee jr- dinance prim to the start of the new Fiscal year in light of the requir .ents of Proposition 4. The Quimby Act (California State Government Code No. 66477) sets forth the requirements for park land dedication as part of subdivision conditions. FL1- filling the conditions of this law requires the adoption of a Recreation Elemc^+ to the General Plan which contains definitive principles and standards for park dedications. The plan may provide in -lieu fee for land dedication. Also, a schedule shall be developed specifying how and when the City will use the land and /or fees received. A feature of the Recreation Element is the Park Dedication Standard. A recom- mendation contained within the plan is the standard of 5 acre/1o00 p lation or fee substitution. This dedication requirement is s er o other enmmunities which use the dedication requirement, such as Fontana, Ymba Linda, Irvine, and Claremont. The environmental assessment has been completed and Part I of this assessment is attached. It is the assessment that the Recreation Element will not create any significant adverse impacts on the environment. Should the City Council agree with the assessment, it would be the recommendation that the project be granted a Negative Declaration in accordance with California Administrative Code 15083. The Planning Commission, on May 14, 1980, unanimously adopted the recommendation to the Planning Commission to approve the interim Recreation Element and to de- termine that a negative declaration be issued on this project (Planning Commis- sion Resolution No. 80 -29). May 21, 1980 -2- • City Council Adoption of Interim Recreation Element to the General Plan RECD M 8NDATION: The proposed Interim Recreation Element meets the California State General Plan guidelines and the requirements of Government Code 66477. It is recem- mended that the City Cmncil adopt a Resolution emending the General Plan to include the Recreation Elment and find that there will be no significant ad- verse environmental impact. Respectf y su 't d, JACK LAM, Director of C ®unity Development JL:TJE:Jk 6'7 • • RESOLUTION NO. 80-29 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THE ADOPTION OF AN INTERIM RECREATION TO THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN TO THE CITY COUNCIL WHEREAS, public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on May 14, 1980 to receive public ce ment on the amendment to the General Plan WHEREAS, comments were heard and considered both pro and con regarding the amendment to the General Plan NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council approval as follows: SECTION I: General Plan Amendment No. 80 -02 It is recommended that the General Plan be amended to include the Interim Recreation Element. SECTION 2: It is recommended that a Negative Declaration be adopted for the General Plan Amendment No. 80 -02 based upon the completion is of the Initial Study and its findings. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14 DAY OF MAY, 1980 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Herman. Hempel, Chairman ATTEST: Secretary of the Planning Commission I, .JACK LAM, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passes, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of May, 1980, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Tolstoy, Dahl, Garcia, Hempel NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Jnnes • t CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $70.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt of this application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part II of the Initial Study. The Development Review Committee will meet and take action no later than ten (10) days before the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard, The Committee will make one of three determinations: 1) The project will have no environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 2) The project will have an environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project. • PROJECT TITLE. Parks 4 Recreation Element APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division P.O. Box 807, Rancho Cucamonga 91730 (714) 989- 1851 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Tim c e Planner P.O. Box 807, Rancho Cucamonga, Cali ornia 91730 (714) 989 -1851 LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) City Wide LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: None Ific D( I -11 (V6 PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Amend General Plan to adopt an Interim Recreational Element ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: 'ti Mil" DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONXiENfAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES), ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS):, Refer to General Plan 1979 E.I.R. on File at the Community Development Department • is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series of cumulative actions, which although individually small, .. • may as a whole have significant environmental impact? No I -11 (V6 • WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO /1'' X 1. Create a substantial change in grpund .; contours? X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? X 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? x 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? X 5: Remove any existing trees? How many? X 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: Interim Recreation Element to su¢eest nark sites. IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaulation can be made by the Development !• Review Committee. i Date 3 -24 -80 signature C Title RESOLUTION NO. 80- 47 • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL, FOR THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE ADOPTION OF THE GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS, on May 14, 1980, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the adoption of the interim recreation element to amend the General Plan; and WHEREAS, comments were heard and considered both pro and con regarding the requested General Plan amendment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended for adoption by the Council the following General Plan amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing on May 21, 1980, to consider comments pro and con regarding the General Plan amendment recommended by the Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the Rancho Cucamonga City Council does hereby amend the General Plan as follows: SECTION 1: General Plan Amendment No. 80 -02 amends the General Plan to inc u e an interim recreational element. • SECTION 2: It is recommended that a Negative Declaration be adopteoe General Plan Amendment No. 80 -02 based upon the comple- tion of an Initial Study and its findings. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 21st day of May, 1980. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk • Lin Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor r�L A Vim •,.. M STAFFvREPORT V 1� DATE: May 21, 1980 i LL TO: City Council and City Manager C n F- U FROM: Sack Lam, Director of Community Development v 1977 BY: Barry K. Hogan, Senior Planner SUBJECT: APPEAi OF SITE APPROVAL NO. 80 -01 - HONE AND ASSOCIATES - Proposed Shopping Center to be Located on the Southwest corner of Lemon and Haven ABSTRACT: This item came before the Planning Commission on February 25, 19809 at which time the Planning Commission unanimously approved the request. The request specifically was for the approval of the development of a neighborhood shopping center on approximately 4.5 acres of land. The project included ap- proximately 34,000 square feet of building area, comprised of 19770 square feet for a service station, 3,825 square feet for a restaurant, 3,000 square feet for a nursery facility and display area, 19,250 square feet for retail and 6,000 square feet for office area. The office space is proposed as a last phase of development in a second story over the retail space. The project site is pre- sently vacant, C -1, and General Planned for a Neighborhood Shopping Center. The land to the north and east we vacant and land to the northwest, west and south are developed with residential uses. Attached please find a copy of the February 25, 1980 Planning Commission report, Part I of the Initial Study for the Environmental Assessment, minutes of the Planning C ®fission meeting, a copy of a letter from the Garden Apartment Homeowner's Association, the Commis- sion Resolution of Approval with conditions, and a petition submitted appealing the Planning Commission decision to approve this project. The basic concerns expressed at the meeting were as follows: 1. Traffic - The residents felt that the addition of a commercial center in the neighborhood would increase the traffic to an un- acceptable level and create hazards and additional noise. 2. The residents at the Garden Apartments felt that the development of the center would block views and invade the privacy of their homes. 3. The residents of the Garden Apartments felt that the fast -food establishment and gas station would increase traffic hazards be- cause of overflow traffic, in addition to attracting loiterers, litter and vandalism. 4. The residents felt that there are other areas more suitable for developments such as 19th and Archibald. 5. The residents felt that the present residential character of the area will be exploited by the introduction of commercial enter- prises at this site. The Planning Commission considered all of the concerns of the area residents, full comments of which are contained in the attached Planning Commission minutes. May 21, 1980 City Council and City Manager Appeal of Site Approval Ho. 80 -01 -2- • The Comission felt that the Conditions of Approval required mould mitigate any potential problems and that some of the issues raised were not problems needing mitgation beyond normal conditions of development. RECOMMERDATIOR: The City Council has three options regarding the appeal. The Council may: 1. Concur with the action of the Planning Commission regarding site approval no 80 -01 by denying the appeal and upholding the Plan- ning Commission's decision; or 2. add additional conditions to the approval to make the project more acceptable; or 3. sp rove the appeal and deny the application request. Resp tfull a itted JACK LAM, Director of Community Development JL:HKH:jk • Attachments: Planning Commission Report, February 25, 1980 Part I- Initial Study for the Environmental Assessment Minutes of Planning C ®ission meeting Letter - Garden Apartment Homeowner's Association Planning Commission Resolution Petition of Appeal to Planning Commission Decision n U �f CITY OF RANCHO CUCAHONGA• • STAFF REPORT Date: February 25, 1980 To: Planning Commission From: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development Subject: NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND SITE APPROVAL NO. 80 -01 - HONE AND ASSOCIATES - A request for the development of a shopping center to be located on the southwest corner of Lemon Avenue and Haven Avenue BACKGROUND: The applicant, is requesting approval for the development of a neighborhood shopping center to be located on approximately 4.5 acres of land located on the southwest corner of Lemon and Haven Avenue (Exhibit "A "). The project will include approximately 34,000 square feet of building area. The development will include a 1,770 square foot service station, a 3,825 square foot restaurant, a 3,000 square foot nursery facility and display area, 19,250 square feet of retail space, and 6,000 square feet of office area (Exhibit "B "). The office is proposed as a second story over the retail • space. The project site is presently zoned C -1, General Planned for a Neigh- borhood Shopping Center, and is presently vacant. Land to the north and east are vacant and land to the northwest, west, and south are developed with resi- dential uses. • ANALYSIS: The project site as shown on the development plan is adequate in size, shape, and access to accommodate the proposed uses. The uses as proposed on fhe development plan are permitted within the zone subject to Planning Com- mission review and approval. The project is proposed to be developed in phases if financing is not available to develop the entire project at one time. Exhibit "C" shows the phasing plan which denotes the nursery, service station, and res- taurant as Phase I, the single store retail space as Phase II, and the addition of the offices over the retail space and the final stage of the nursery as Phase III. Phase I development will provide all street improvements, driveways, and land- scaping adjacent to street frontages. Access to the site is provided by one driveway from Haven Avenue and three driveways from Lemon Avenue. Haven Avenue is designated as a major divided highway and Lemon is designated as a collector Street. The existing median in Haven Avenue will be upgraded to City standards and landscaped. In addition, a signal is required to be provided at the corner of Lemon and Haven Avenues. The project is proposing to install 6' concrete block walls along the entire west and south property lines. Those walls will be 6' measured from the highest point of grade at the location of the wall. In addition, it is recommended that dense �5 ITEM "H" Site Approval No. 80- February 25, 1980 Page 2 landscaping be provided along the west and south property lines. The retail building for the nursery facility is located 115' from the west - property line which abuts a single family residential development. The single story retail building is located 10' from the south property line and the nearest condominium units south of the project are an additional 30' away. The two story portion of the building will be located 50' from the south property line plus 30' from the nearest condominium. If the project is phased as shown on the phasing plan, then it is recommended that the building pads be temporarily turfed and irrigated until such time that they are built upon. In addition, it is recommended that 20% of the trees to be planted on the site be of specimen size especially along Haven Avenue which is designated as a Special Boulevard, that mounding be placed wherever possible, and that hedge work be planted on Haven Avenue in front of the drive -thru facility of the restaurant. Exhibits "D ", "E" and "F" display the exterior building elevations of the retail stores, nursery, and portions of the gas station and restaurant. The design proposes to use flat gray concrete roof tile, stucco columns and sides, and wood trellis' in the nursery area. Colored delineations and a material sample board will be available at the Planning Commission meeting. Prior to the Planning Commission meeting, these are available for review in the Planning Division Office. Exhibits "G" and "H" display the exterior building elevations of the service sta- tion which indicate the use of the same gray flat concrete tile roof, white stucco, a white painted metal eave, and as shown on the southeast side elevation, painted metal panels between restroom doors. The Design Review Committee met to review the service station design and felt that there was a need for the use of • more wood, textures, and colors. The issue of more wood on the service station was discussed with both the owner /developer and the architect. However, revised plans indicate that no wood is proposed and instead the architect is proposing punch out columns or corner projections at the corners of the service station. The effect of projecting the corners is desirable; however, the use of wood for the facia and portions of the side of the building are still desirable based upon the comments made by the Design Review Committee. Therefore, it is recommended that revised elevations be done in accordance with the comments of the Design Review Committee and that such plans be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee prior to the issuance of building permits for this site. Complete building elevations were not proposed for the restaurant at this time simply because a tenant has not been decided upon. Therefore, it is recommended that only conceptual site plan approval be granted for the restaurant pad and that final Director Review be completed prior to issuance of building permits for that building. Part I of the Initial Study is attached for your review. Part II of the Initial Study, the environmental checklist, fins been completed by Staff and a field Investigation conducted. After completion of the Initial Study and field inves- tigation, no significant adverse impacts on the environment were found as a result of this project. Therefore, it is recommended that a Negative Declaration be issued for this project. 11 M, Site Approval No. 80- February 25, 1980 Page 3 • CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised in the Daily Report lew ad section for a public hearing before the Planning Commission for this . date. In addition, notices of this meeting were sent to property owners within 300' of the subject property. In response to the notices sent to the adjacent property owners, correspondence was received from the Garden Apartment Homeowners Association which is located south and adjacent to the project site. As can be seen from the contents of the letter (which is attached for your review), the Homeowner's Association is opposed to several aspects to the development of the site. Staff has tried to deal with the concerns pointed out in this letter by requiring a well designed service sta- tion, prohibiting left hand turns from Haven Avenue into the station by use of a raised median island, requiring a significant building setback for the two story portion of the building, and by locating the drive through window of the restaurant away from the south property line. It is highly suggested that the Commission visit the project site and take note of the location of the existing condominium units and the existing site conditions relative to the present landscaping in the area. RECOMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Site Approval No. 80 -01 and issue a Negative Declaration by adopting the attached Resolution No. 80-07 based upon the findings and conditions listed therein. Respectfully s bmitted, SACK LAM, Director of Community Development `J JL ;MV :nm Attachments: Exhibit "A ". Site Plan Exhibit "B ", Vicinity Map Exhibit "Co, Phasing Plan Exhibits "D" - "F ", Exterior Building Elevations of retail stores, nursery and portions of the gas station 6 restaurant Exhibits "G " "N", Exterior Building Elevations of the service station Part I, Initial Study Letter from Garden Apartments Homeowners Association dated 2 /2/80 Resolution No. 80 -07 0? NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL The Rancho Cucamonga City Council will be holding public hearings at 7:00 p.m. • on May 21, 1980 at the Lion's Park Community Center located at 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 to consider: 5. APPEAL OF .:ITE APPROVAL NO. 80-01 - HONE d ASSOCIATES - Proposed shopping center to be located on the southwest corner of Lemon and Haven. Anyone objecting to or in favor of the above, may appear in person at the above described meeting or may submit their concerns in writing to the Planning Division, City of Rancho Cucamonga. • DATED: May 9. 1980 Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission fEXME51T OA " /AlE A flD,/AL W 00-01 6 / ,Ft - - - ------- r'd, -- -i — LEMON AY.�.� e f f Y• f 7 w� Wibil .i - i - . ®a �' z I —AN . FAREAS PARKING �....... DETAIL SITE PLAN '°° M VICINITY MAP n PROJECT STATISTICS EXHI,Brf B" oil S. iF • 24 Ao, IWA C51 C-KlilSlTuV" MNWY � NWO N _few Lmx %I oil 0 t- a R1,33i Nj mto EASr ELEVATION Nam ELKWMW te)(0191T I r 6 4. kl 0 STREET ELEVATION EOMW.E+ EM. m .wi iae+� urai w STREET ELEVATION MONTMWEEf EIEV` exH�ert „�. 00 n � P 0 7 ,I , 'L . mile 0 FRONT • SIDE ELEVATION SOUTHEAST 0". 'L . • • • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY f. PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review Fee; $70.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt of this application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part II of the Initial Study. The Development Review Committee will meet and take action no later than ten (10) days before the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of three determinations: 1) The project will have no environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 2) The project will have an environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project. PROJECT TITLE: Chaffey Plaza APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: Hone and Associates, 7333 Hellman-Avenue, Rancho Oicaam a. galif 91730 X7141 9fl9 -17F7 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: _ SAME: AC AROVR LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) SAC LEMON /HAVEN ASSESSORS NUMBER 201- 262 -16 _ LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: N/A . I -(7 PROJECT DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: See Attached ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: 4.55 acres (198,442 sq ft.) Buildinq area-34,000 sq ft. DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONME -NfAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES) , ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS): Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? 11 I- 2 78' T, WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO • X 1. Create a substantial change in grqund contours? ' • X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? X 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? X A. Create change^ in the existing zoning or general plan designations? X 5: Remove any existing trees? How many?_ _x 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaulation can be made by the Development Review Committee. r Date J A - a H-72 signature .g Title Jf30)d4 L6..�A t inverse condemnation which means the City would be forced to buy that persons land. lie stated it has been discussed on many occasions that we need approxi- mately 10,000 residents in an area for another shopping center, thereforft, it is also his opinion that a center at this location is premature at this time. In regard to drainage, if water starts coming down Haven without any facility to accept that water, it would also have a serious impact because of the amount of runoff. He feels it is totally premature to develop a center within the next two or three years. A motion was made by Commissioner Dahl and seconded by Commissioner Tolstoy to deny Zone Change No. 80 -02 without prejudice. AYES: DAHL, TOLSTOY, .ZONES, GARCIA, REHPEL NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Recess called at 9:05 p.m. Meeting reconvened at 9:30 p.m. with all Commissioners present. PUBLIC HEARING NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND SITE APPROVAL NO. 80 -01 - HONE AND ASSOCIATES - Pro- • posed shopping center to be located on the southwest corner of Lemon and Haven. Michael Vairin, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Staff recommends approval of Resolution No. 80 -07 subject to the following amendments: Condition 05: A ratio of 20% of the trees to be planted on the site shall be specimen size trees to be 36" box trees. Amend Condition 47 to read: No additional food uses may be permitted within the center unless parking requirements of the zoning ordinance can be met and that such use is specifically reviewed and approved by the Planning Division. Chairman Rempel asked for questions from the Commission of the staff. Commissioner Dahl asked that staff review for the Commission the comments by the Design Review Cummittee. Michael Vairin reported the Design Review Committee reviewed the project and requested redesign of the service station which has been complied with somewhat. Mr. Hogan added that the application will Improve Lemon Avenue if the Commission considers approval of the site approval. There is also a pooling of water in this area during the rainy season. The applicant will be required to install a major drainage structure to handle the water, so that it will not cause pro- blems for downstream properties. Mr. Vairin stated one letter was received from the Garden Apartment Homeowners Association, expressing objection to the proposed development. This letter has • been fn. , added to each Commission member for review and Is on retard In the Planning Division. Ile reported in addition, numerous telephone communications in opposition to the development have been received. Planning Commission Minutes -7- CT February 25, 1980 There being no further questions from the Commission of staff, Chairman Rempel • opened the public hearing. r, Mr. Doug Hone, 7333 Hellman Avenue, stated they have owned this site for approximately 3 years. The original Chaffey plan which was done for this community a number of years ago depicted the commercial designation at this intersection. The back portion of the site is proposed for the Shibata Nursery. They have tried to buffer the site in a village theme. The plan will represent the high development standards of this community. Plans are now before Caltrans that Lemon and Haven will be major streets in the west End of San Bernardino next to Euclid Avenue. Commissioner Jones asked Mr. Hone if they would object to a one story office building if It is found this could cause problems to the apartment complex next to this development. Mr. Hone stated they would be willing to reduce the second story; if their engineer determines that the second story would take from the view of the Garden Apartments. Mr. Sid Silliman, 6316 Haven Avenue, stated he would hope that the Commission would see fit to add some additional conditions to the Resolution if approval of the development is considered. He would specifically like to speak in opposi- tion to the gas station and fast food restaurant, as tie feels these developments would have the most impact on the residents in the area. The combination of the two would have a detrimental effect on traffic then what currently exists in • the area now. It will lead to a significant increase in traffic on Haven and Lemon Avenues. He would like to suggest that a fast food establishment not be approved in this location. We need a high quality sit -down restaurant. The com- bination of a fast food drive -in and gas station will lead significantly to litter and increase of traffic. Consequently, there would also be an increase in van- dalism. Hp asked that the gas station and fast food restaurant not be approved at this location. Children meet in this area to catch the school bus and increased traffic in the area could cause a negative impact. Mr. George Godlin, 6344 Haven Avenue, stated he is in opposition to the proposal from a conceptual and planning standpoint. He would not like to have a gas station as a neighbor to him. He does not see any need for an additional center in the City at this time. The area is also subject to a tremendous amount of flooding. This will cause a host of problems and he can not see building: deeper and deeper into the foothills. He finds Mr. Hone's proposal totally eiiacceptable. The economics of what the center will turn into is largely going to be dictated by the economics of the market place. Those living in the Garden Apartments take a great deal of pride in the development. It is heavily landscaped And they pay a heavy price to keep the landscaping up in a rural setting. He feels this is a complete affront to them and will not compliment their area. Mary Mdlnmee :'tared doe to the Ras crunch, linos will he hacked up for blocks. There is no indiratlnn that the gas crunch is going to be ending soon. If we b;,,o cars har.V'.ed np for M arks LrVing to Per gas in addition to the college troffir, she stated there will he problems of getting out of the tract to get to work. She weld 11,w agree that a fast fond restaurant should not be allowed hat a -.It down Lapp restaurant is needed. She would not object to the development of the uuren• in this location. Her opposition was also to the Res station and fast food restaurant. Planning Connission Minutes c ^�8- February 25, 1980 V I Mr. Roland Smith, stated he is in opposition to the gas station. Most stations are not open when the people need gas at this time anyway. How can anyone with any foresight want to put in a gas station when the supply of gas is uncertain? There will be lines several blocks long when there is gas available. This development will have more than a minimum impact on the area. He would not object to a large nursery and high quality restaurant rather than a gas station at this location. Mr. Greg Justice, 6330 Haven, stated he is in opposition to the two story structure as it will destroy the privacy of 8 or 9 units within the Garden Apartments. Mr. Dave Mulligan, 6620 Mesada, stated the drainage problem in the area is going to be quite extensive. They turn to go into their tract at 19th and Haven. During the last rain, they had 2 to 3 feet of water over onto the road. An extensive review of the drainage problems need to be made prior to any develop- ment. A resident of the area, stated his child is picked up every morning on Cartilla and Lemon at the school bus stop. What is going to happen when there is a line up of cars going to the gas station facility? He asked if the station will be a self - serve or full serve gasoline station. Will it be a station that tires can be changed and minor car repairs will be done? He is also in opposition to the fast food restaurant. Is the gas station going to be a company owned station or leased station? A representative of Mobil 011 Corporation stated they are going to be bringing in over a hundred thousand gallons of gasoline a month to this City, which is desparatel needed. There will be a number of gasoline pumps which will help serve the customers faster. They would like to have a company owned station; however, it is not known at this time whether or not it will be. However, if it is not company owned they would like to have strict controls over the dealer. The station will be both self - serve and full serve. The station wouldbe removed if it is found after a period of time that it is not profitable. Mr. Allen, owning property within the Garden Apartments, stated he would like to go on record in support of Mr. Hone's proposal, providing safeguards for landscaping, buffering, and architectural control are met. Mr. Allen Snapp, Architect for the proposed development, stated the character of this development was quite a concern to them. They took a hard look at the winery character of the area. He reviewed the proposed plans for the Commission. It was felt the nursery location as proposed was the best location for buffering of the apartment complex. Mr. Hone stated if it is found the view of the apartments will be blocked by the second story structtre of the development, they are willing to change their design. Also, if he can attract a dinner house restaurant he is willing to cut down on his pad area in the main part of the center. There bring no further comments from the audience, Chairman Rempel closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes -9- February 25, 1980 9a Commissioner Tolstoy stated it was mentioned earlier that the drainage facility • in Haven at this time was not big enough to take any more water. He asked if this development will be responsible to alleviate this problem. Mr. Rougeau stated the Haven Avenue ditch is a flood control facility. The Flood Control District will be reviewing this matter at the time the application is made by the developer. Commissioner Garcia stated it is his opinion a gas station is needed and that this would be a good location for such a facility. It is also his opinion there is a need for same type of economical fast food service due to the college in the area. It is the management that could create problems, not the service. Commissioner Tolstoy stated Haven Avenue is one of the major north /south streets in the City. If we can't handle the traffic on this street with this development, than we do have a problem. The only problem he can see with traffic is where would the people line up to get to the gas station. He does not feel, however, that traffic in and out of the project is going to be a problem. He stated his only problems with the developments are as follows: The Garden Apartments have a lot of nice visual effects with their landscaping. He would like to see the south side of the project have a specific landscape plan indicating where the trees will be placed and possibly add more trees to that area. It is also his opinion the center should be landscaped to blend in and compliment what is already developed on the Garden Apartment site. He stated an additional condition should be added to the Resolution stating 507 of the parking area shall be shaded by vegetation within 15 years. • Commissioner Dahl stated in regard to this center, there will be such a few shops in it that it is very unlikely that there will be any vacancies and the center should be a viable one. It is his opinion a traffic light as proposed at the inter- section will slow down traffic along Haven Avenue and would be less of a hazard. He would also like to see landscaping increased along the southerly end of the property. An additional condition should be added as f lliows: Phase 3 (second story construction) shall be returned to the Planning Commission prior to issuance of the building permits to determine if such addition would block views of resi- dents to the south. Chairman Hempel stated In regard to the service station, it is his opinion the canopy should be lowered. He has no objection to the station itself; however, if the canopy is lowered, it would be much more effective then the high canopy in this location. He would like to see a bicycle and pedestrian lane coming into this center as this would be a very viable type of client to have in this area. Commissioner Tolstoy stated if we can bring another hundred thousand gallons of gasoline into this City, people would be buying gas in our City and we would get the benefit of the gas tax, We need this tax to help improve our roads. A motion was made by Commissioner Garcia and seconded by Cummissioner Tolstoy to approve Resolution No. 80 -07 subject to the following amendments and addi- tions: I* Plannin; Commission Minutes -10- February 25, 1980 MO Amend the following conditions: " 1. Condition 41: The development plans on file in the Planning Division indicate several buildings and uses. Of those indi- cated, the nursery, the service station and the retail buildings were approved by the Commission. The second story office addi- tion and drive thru restaurant were approved in concept only. Final review and approval by the Planning Commission is required for these two uses. 2. Condition #5: A ratio of 20% of the trees to be planted on the site shall be specimen size trees to be 36% box trees. 3. Condition 07: No additional food uses may be permitted within the center unless parking requirements of the zoning ordinance can be met and that such use is specifically reviewed and approved by the Planning Division. 4. Condition #16: All parking lot landscaped islands shall have a minimum inside dimension of 4' and shall contain a 12" walk adjacent to parking stall enclosed by a 6" raised P.C.C. curb. Add the following conditions: S. Phase 3 (second story construction) shall be returned to the Planning Commission prior to issuance of building permits to determine if such addition would block views of residents to the south. • 6. If the gasoline station ceases operation as a service station after 90 days, the station is to be demolished and removed, and the site is to be landscaped. Underground storage tanks shall also be removed. 7. Fifty percent of the parking area shall he shaded by vegetation within 15 years. AYES: GARCIA, TOLSTOY, DAHL, JONES, REMPEL NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Recess called at 11:00 p.m. Meeting reconvened at 11:10 p.m. with all Commissioners present. Planning Commission Minutes -11- February 25, 1980 • v Cr7Y OF PiNCHO CLICAA7017GA THE GARDEN APARTMENTS c' < "m's'IIyVVL!OPMERTDEPT, HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION PB 0,! t ?' • rN 0111ORATED AM PM 6700 HAVEN AVENUE 71819110111112111213141516 ALTA LOMA, CA. 91701 4 February 2, 1980 Nichael :9drin .lssociate planner, 1'larni ng Comrni=sion Itanrho Cucnnonga, Calif Orniu 91730 Dear Mr. Vairin: At the suggestion of Dan llendrycks, I am writing to express the ubj(ctioas of the Garden .Apartments Hmceexners' A£ForiatiOtl to the nrnnos(d r'hrffry pl,s.n, It the corn("• (f T,rmon and Ilm-(n and its rrgnr+sl CoT' n rooditional use permit ( „79 -0 ^.), "I!o hompownc rs of our Lr ;enty -Tie( oohs regard our complex as of hi,,h [unlit, , ,nd are, Lherr•fnVe, concerned that Doug Ilone's dePelepm(nt will lead to the deterioration of Our neighborhood. Fe are especially opposed to the prospects of R gasoline. station being built ad jarc"t to us, We believe that a gas sl.atinn will be • ultrig;ht.ly and will incl -PR�v traffic hazards with cars r—ntrring Hnvrn, turning l.rf1 from Haven, and long lines forming during; pas 1hortn7!es. We are also r,no,,nod tlurt the pro pored tern -story office building will sil;nirio,ntly bloc{, our viow and invnrlo the n' 7i.v ,1cy Of om• homes, Finally, we are definitely opposed to n fast -food establi<hmrnt rtdjaconi, to our residences. Tltr proposed drive -i.n, like Cllr• gn soli nr station, will undoubtedly increase traffic hnzards herause of overflow trnfric. Furthermore, such an (stabli.shment must rr•rfeinly rill bri.ng loit.rre rs and, thl•ref err,• lill,,r rind vandul7tm in O!u' bo!a,'s, I '.rust 1,11,11 Vou will srviuuel:i roes i,lrr n�dr ohj,rtiona -in _nor err rmr:�nr411inn to ihr• pl.,1m:ing Cnn:rl7a'7rrn. Our r(rnr•rrn 7s Hint no r••r!mr•rc i.:7. drvolopovnl nn tlnvrn ,lvcnnc 1ln-rnt(n the fill(, qualify Of n!:r home rnvirnnmr111 and nrighbnfh nor!, Si(tic rrr ly, I'. :Il rl rl)” [ij 1111nnn 1'1'OF]:1 ^nl RESOLUTION NO. 80 -07 . A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING • COMMISSION APPROVING S1TE APPROVAL NO. 80 -01 f. LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF HAVEN AND LEMON IN THE C-1 ZONE WHEREAS, on December 24, 1979, a formal application was submitted requesting review of the above- described project; and WHEREAS, on February 25, 1980, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing for the above - described project. NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I: That the following findings have been made: That the site is adequate in size and shape. 2. That the site has adequate access. 3. That the proposed use will have no adverse effect on abutting property. 4. That the proposed use is consistent with the General Plan. • 5. That the conditions listed in this report are necessary to protect the public health, safety, comfort, convenience, and general welfare. SECTION 2: That this project will not create significant adverse impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued on February 25, 1980. SECTION 3: That Site Approval No. 80 -01 is approved subject to the following conditions and the attached standard conditions: Applicant shall contact the Planning Division for compliance with the following conditions: Only the site plan oncept of the restaurant is approved. Final site plan review and design review will be required prior to issuance of building permits for this pad. In addition, the restaurant capacity shall not exceed 64 seats. is wo WE 2. Vacant building pads within the shopping center shall be temporarily 'turfed and irrigated until • they are built upon. Such details shall be included in the detailed landscape and i`rigation plans. 3• Six (6) foot block walls, measured from the highest grade at the location of such wall, shall be constructed along the west and south property lines in conjunction with Phase I. 4. Dense landscaping shall be provided along the west and south property lines. 5. A ratio of 20% of the trees to be planted on the site shall be specimen size trees to be 36" box trees. 6. All street landscaping along Lemon and Haven shall be installed in conjunction with Phase 1, In addition, mounding shall be provided where - ever possible and hedges in front of the drive - thru window of the restaurant. j. No additional food uses may be permitted within the center unless parking requirements of the zoning ordinance can be met and that such use • is specifically reviewed and approved by the Planning Division. 8, The service station shall be redesigned to incorporate the use of more woods and color. Such design shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Comm ittee prior to issuance of building permits. 9. The signs shown on the plans are not approved and will require separate sign review and approval by the Planning Division. 10, Site shall be developed in accordance with the approved site plans on file in the Planning Division and the conditions contained herein. 11. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all conditions of approval shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits. 12. Approval of this request shall not waive com- pliance with all sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City Ordinances in effect at time of Building Permit issuance. S( 13. Trash receptacle areas shall be enclosed by a 6 foot high masonry wall with view obstructing gates pursuant to City standards. Location shall be subject to approval by the Planning • Division. 14. All roof appurtenances, including air condi- tioners, shall be architecturally integrated, shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning and Building Divisions. 15• Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all conditions of approval contained herein shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. 16. All parking lot landscaped islands shall have a minimum inside dimension of 4' and shall contain a 12" walk adjacent to parking stall. 17. A detailed lighting plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits. 18, Parking lot trees shall be a minimum 15 gallon size. is 19. All twoway aisle widths shall be a minimum of 24 feet wide. 20, Emergency access shall be provided, maintenance free and clear, a minimum of 24 feet wide at all times during construction in accordance with Foothill Fire District requirements. 21. All parking spaces shall be double striped. 22. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building per- mits. 23. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash, and debris. 24. Any signs proposed for this development shall be designed in conformance with the Comprehensive Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation of such signs. I • 25. A uniform sign program for this development shall be submitted to' the Planning Division for • their review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. r 26. Phase 3 (second story construction) shall be returned to the Planning Commission prior to issuance of building permits to determine if such addition would block views of residents to the south. 27. If the gasoline station seizes operation as a service station after 90 days, the station is to be demolished and removed, and the site is to be landscaped. 28. Fifty percent of the parking area ,hall be shaded by vegetation within 15 years. Applicant shall contact the Building Division for compliance with the following conditions: 29. The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, and all other applicable codes and ordi- nances in effect at the time of approval of • this project. 30. Prior to issuance of building permits for com- bustible construction, evidence shall be submitted to the Foothill District Fire Chief that water supply for fire protection is available. • 31. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for a new commercial or industrial development or addition to an existing development, the appli- cant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but not be limited to: System Development Fee, Drainage Fee, Permit and Plan Checking fees. 32. This approval shall become null and void if building permits are not issued for this project within one year from the date of project approval. 33. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. I 34. The final grading plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning, Engineering and Building Divisions and shall be completed prior to recordation of the final subdivl.sion map or issuance of building permit, whichever comes first. Applicant shall contact the Engineering Division for Compliance with the Following Conditions: 35. Dedications shall be made by final map of all interior street rights -of -way and all necessary easements as shown on the tentative Parcel Map 5803 prior to issuance of building permits for this site. 36. Reciprocal easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels over private roads, drives, or parking areas. 37. Adequate provisions shall be made for the ingress, egress and internal circulation of any trucks which will be used for delivery of goods to the property or in the operation of the proposed business. 38. Construct the following missing improvements including, but limited not to: . Haven: Curb E gutter, A.C. pvmt., sidewalk, drive appr., street lights, A.C. over lay, and median island. Lemon: Curb E gutter, A.C. pvmt., sidewalk, drive appr., street lights, A.L. over lay, wheel chair ramps, and catch basins. 39• Prior to any work being performed in the public right -of -way, an encroachment permit and fees shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office, in addition to any other permits required. 40. Street improvement plans approved by the City Engineer and prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer shall he required, for all street improvements, prior to issuance of an encroach- ment permit. 41. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and • F6 IF/ the City Attorney, guaranteeing completion of the public improvements, prior to recording of the map or the issuance of building permits, • whichever comes first. r. 42. All street improvements shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, prior to occupancy. 43• Pavement striping, marking, traffic and street name signing shall be installed per the require- ments of the City Engineer. 44. Haven Avenue and Lemon Avenue intersection shall be signalized a� the developer's expense. Cost experienced abo _hat of the systems development fee will be reimbursed. 45• The applicant will re responsible for construc- tion of all onsite drainage facilities required by the City Engineer, 46. Intersection drains will be required at the following locations: Southside of Lemon at Haven 47. The proposed project falls within areas indi- cated as subject to flooding under the National Flood Insurance Program and is subject to the provisions of that program and City Ordinance No. 24. 48. A drainage channel and /or flood protection wall will be required to protect the structures by diverting sheet runoff to streets, along Lemon. 49. The following northsouth streets shall be designed as major water carrying streets requir- ing a combination of special curb heights, com- mercial -type drive approaches, rolled street connections, flood protection walls, and /or landscaped earth berms and rolled driveways at property line: Haven Avenue 50. All proposed utilities within the project shall be installed underground including utilities along major arterials less than 12 KV. il. Utility easements shall be provided to the specification of the serving utility companies and the City Engineer. IF/ 52. Developer shall be responsible for the reloca- tion of existing public utilities, as required. 53• Developer shall be responsible for the instal- lation of street lighting in accordance with Southern California Edison Company and City standards. 54, Water and sewer system plans shall be designed and constructed to meet requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Foothill Fire District and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from CCWD will be required prior to recordation. 55. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested ayencies involved. Approval of the final map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. 56. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows: San Bernardino County Flood Control District 57, Final parcel and tract maps shall conform to City standards and procedures. • APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1980, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Herman Rempel Herman Rempel ,0 Ch i (rrmmatttn ATTEST:'�J I v"�J'��:•>'1'�u�� Secretary of the PI anni no Commission I, JACK LAM, 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 February, 1980, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: , COMMISSIONERS: GARCIA, TOLSTOY, DAHL, JONES, REMPEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE • Fo� • We the undersigned property owners lodge a concerned protest to and V .� appeal the decision reached by the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission on 2$ February 1980, This decision, intitled, "NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND SITS APPROVAL N0, 80 -01 - HONE AND ASSOCIATES," which permits • Hone and Associates to design, develop, and construct one -masoline ., station, one fast food restaurant and other speciality shops ion or about the southwest corner of Lemon and Haven Avenues in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, This appeal is initiated and submitted for the following reasons: 1. The community is residential. Introduction of commercial enterprises will alter this environment, 2. Vehicular traffic will be n ^ticeably increased. Portions of Lemon does not include pedestrian walks. Approval of No. 80.- 01 will produce traffic patterns which will endanger pedestrians, particularly children and will lead to a potential increase in traffic related injuries. ':11th lessening availability of fuel, automobile wait?ng lines will be formed during the shortages, and accessebility to the residential homes will be hampered and /er reduced. 4, Introduction of stores and shops could lead to robberies and burglaries, thus increasing the overall crime in the area, which will require additional police protection. 4. 5. There are other areas that are much more suitable for these developments such as in or about 19th Street and Archibald. eu - NOTE - Th6,.e nan es with a neat to it have contributed $ 1.00 ` toward the A 100,00 APPF/L FILING FEE. y •, Vii. I''! � r da10 �%e,�.e Cbx. r.� J /./11 1 -- / - X) .r / - �-Q i ` \r .V ffll� J /7S / J /./11 1 -- / - X) .r / - �-Q i ` \r .V ffll� N"A-Pl", "r7T.A PA I'T! T V, 9) T'CNE AND AS 717 1 1PIP•s cee �v 4ZL,14 t"Ij VLV /i516 LLn "J /4 17 DATE go ,3 - i-Lpo -CPO - / -P } J'- C APPEAL T0: fJpTNVP A7'OC IATEG 0D7 AND crT�,; r, ;F6V1..; u�, 130 _01 c �Aa _.� l cz�F�E��.E �. ��•p� IV)L �•i ./. -t-/ 1 �� Y'• ...,�r;�,�- �.h,,�r' 1, I 3 T DATE J -1 Y6 �G LZ v v job cr J ! 1 /cy�J C 71 z 3-y s� -s� -04) AL NJ* GA' PA iVD A, . `)VAL �) -M HOYF. AND A.1'FOCIAT". NAWF i 4v r 0 Aq C7, ; %1 �i i- /n/ !� T 6a-r1jt ll i.a 1, 6"',C`1L1 �{ 3I 1, /C /!, ri,Ls l r,r L�',�«_• .3 f4o !� T A#;EAL TO: V-1;TIVE !IFCLARATl')N 'IT- A-PP'.)VAL N')• 80-01 HWTE AND AFFOCIATES ArJet I t G IN o 9-- IC I 7 SD i-- y - YL) - Fo r "S'. lr�D Lo 03 9-,(fj Ki i it C5 /< A ",;L o 9-- IC I 7 SD i-- y - YL) - Fo r "S'. lr�D Lo .A.PPtAL "0: NEGATIVE DT ' CLAPATION AND S'IrE APPROVAL NO, 60-01 HONE AND AFFOCIATF—S C- L c r. IJ�l /0372 c Zlt 3 (L- rc -3/?/ .? L, 3/Y/1 IL .APPEAL TO: NF�.ATIVR DrCl A.RATT)l -TTF AP:`:'VAL "'.24F A'M VROCIATFS ( t ( ol IrA 2- m r. -� - (A -�, ••.' We the undersigned p..,perty owners lo-ire a conee,:ned protest to, and appeal the decision reached by thn Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission on 25 February 1980. This decision, entitled, " NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND RITF APPROVAL NO. 80 - 01- P.ONF.. AND ASSOCIATES, which permits Hone and Associates to design, develop, and construct one gasoline, station, one feat food restaurant and other speciftallty shops on or about the southwest corner of Lemon and Haven Avenues in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. This appeal is iniated and submitted for (he , following reasons: 1. The community is residential. Introduction of commercial enterprises will alter this environment. 2. Vehicular traffic will. be noticeably Increased. Portions of Lemon does not include pedestrian walks. Approval of No. 60 -01 will produce traffic patterns which will endanger pedestirans, particularly children, and will lead to a' potential increase in traffic related injuries. 3. With the lessening availability of fuel, automobile waiting lines will be formed during shortages, and aecessability to the residential homes will be hampered and /or reduced. 4. Introduction of stores and shops could lead to robberies and burglaries, thus Increasing the overall crime in the area, which In turn will require additional police protection. 5. There are other areas that are much more suitable for these developments such as in or about 19th Street and Archibald. ww MOVE - Those names with an w next to It have contributed $1.00 . toward the $ 100.00 APPEAL FILING FEE NAME ADDRESS DATE t.J ,�1Gf��•C: �`� /C,. Z7! _ `�,L�l'2i. tt II'i. 621c� )a4a.Lr.ew..L1,.. Cct'�cE,,�,. S -iea n✓ , i"f &w�✓�06, c430 l:;h'Zlk'1v rc)-aan, ? so t'A /]YA'ati cC7lili (f Cr-c:��al� A f/ M HONE AND A8..6IATES. NAME i i .��•,.,.,� fin• /171«• -e t 70,,- .� c• 4 116 / /C.�tr.,•,,,�i' ,�. . \.�. .�" . _ kl AL 1. 6441 bayo i�- •.- c- sc,E.� l�aso K.��a. -• L $7 0 )Irl z, v•2iC nn -I�ccc lB z/E � 2`nc+n .r1vE r. I .V, /lC J/.! loud/ 3 -1-KD 3 - / -Ira 3 I - p0 3 s -PC 3'91-$p. 3 `[-xo. 3 -9-d0 a _,,10 % 9 (r I.�-y -BU 3 =1 -,Ye APPEAL TO: NEGATIVE DECI ATION AND SITE APPROVAL N 80-01 FORE AND ASSOCIATES NOR, -q 77- r S- f. IDA M .l. Jll?IP I - - � !,4 0 ?-F� W,e the undersigned property owners lodge a concerned protest to, and appeal the decision reached by the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission on 25 February 1980, This decision, entitled, "NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND SITE APPROVAL NO. 80 -01 - HONE AND ASSOCIATES, which permits •.. Hone and Associates to design, develop, and construct one gasoline • station, one fast food restaurant and other speciality shops pn or about the southwest corner of Lemon and Haven Avenues in the City of , Rancho Cucamonga. This appeal is initiated and submitted for the following reasons: 1. The community is residential. Introduction of commercial enterprises will alter this environment. 2. Vehicular traffic will be noticeably increased. Portions of Lemon does not include pedestrian walks. Approval of No. 80 -01 will prodstab traffic patterns which will endanger pedestrians, particularly children and will lead to a potential increase in traffic related injuries. 3. With the lessening availibility of fuel, automobile waiting lines will be formed during shortages, and a.ccessability to the residential homes will be hampered and/ or reduced. 4. Introduction of stores and shops could lead to robberies and burglaries, thus increasing the overall crime in the area, which in turn will require additional police protection. 5. There are other areas that are much more suitable for • these developments such as in or about 19th Street and Archibald. ea NOTE - Those names with an • next to it have contributed $1.00 toward the $ 100.00 APPEAL FILING FEE. NAME ADDRESS DATE rte_/' �'. • /± A, �lf/�"" GG it Ct i 1 �ri�9LCL�lc7lill/ G z/��:�Lry irIJS �'LCZM1L`Ct �C((N� �iZ�( 1 j03 �i_ /_qp 2-/ 40 5 - d'v RESOLUTION NO. 80 -48 • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF SITE APPROVAL NO. 80 -01 FOR THE DEVELOP- MENT OF A NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER TO BE LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LEMON AND HAVEN AVENUES. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission duly held a public hearing to review and consider Site Approval No. 80 -01 and approved such development based upon the findings and conditions listed in the Planning Commission Resolution No. 80 -07 and, WHEREAS, an appeal on the decision of the Planning Commission to approve Site Approval No. 80 -01 was received; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has duly held a public hearing to consider that appeal and the concerns involved. SECTION 1: The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby finds the following: 1. That said approval by the Planning Commission for Site Approval No. 80 -01 is consistant with the goals and policies of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan. 2. That the findings and conditions applied within Planning Commission Resolution No. 80 -07 is appropriate and logical • for the development of the subject site. NOW THEREFORE, The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby resolves that the Planning Commission decision was true and accurate and that said appeal is denied and the Planning Commission's decision is upheld. Passed, Approved and Adopted this 21st day of May 1980. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Phillip 0. Schlosser, Mayor ATTEST: Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk ' V q 0 • • Date: May 21, 1980 To: City Council and City Manager From: Jack Ism, Director of Community Development By: Michael Vairin, Associate Planner Subject: ZONE CHANGE NO. 80-04 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - ACACIA CONSTRUCTION - A change of zone form A-11; R-3 for property located on the southwest corner of Baker and Foothill Boulevard. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission, at its meeting of April 9, 1980, held a public hearing to consider the above zone change and recommended approval of the zone change to the City Council as indicated on the attached Planning Commission Resolution (see attached Commission minutes for this project). The applicant is requesting a change of zone for approximately 7.66 acres of land located on the southwest corner of Baker and Foothill Boulevard. (Exhibit "A" The subject property Is presently zoned A -1 (Limited Agricultural) and the applican is requesting the zone change to bring the property into conformance with the General Plan for future development. The majority of the property is still in groves and one dwelling is located at the northeast corner of the site. ANALYSIS: Exhibits "B" and "C" indicate the adjacent land use and zoning which is described as follows: LAND USE ZONING NORTH Foothill Boulevard, railroad C -2 SOUTH Vacant, single family R -3 EAST Vacant R -3 NEST Railroad, Commercial R -1 The interim land use element of the General Plan designates the subject property as medium density residential (5 - 15 units per acre). The proposed change of zone is consistent with the General Plan as R -3 zoning is a multiple family zone designation. Future development of the site as multiple family residential will be restricted to a density of 5 - 15 units per acre in accor- dance with the General Plan designation. The subject property is adequate in size and shape to accommodate those uses permitted in the R -3 zone and such proposed zone is consistent with the existing and future land use in the immediate area. The Initial Study has been prepared for the environmental assessment of the zone change. Attached is Part I of the Initial Study as provided by the applicant. The Environmental checklist was completed by staff with no positive response to any of the items; thus, leading to the finding of no significant adverse impacts on the environment as a result of this project. If after review of the Initial Study, the Council finds the Environmental Assessment to be adequate, an issuance of a Negative Declaration would be in order. 105 City Council and City Monger • May 21, 1980 Page 2 CORRESPONDENCE: A notice of public hearing "a published in the Daily Report legal ad section on May 9, 1980. In addition, notices of public hearing were sent to all property owners within 300' of the sub- ject property. To date, an correspondence has been received either for or against this project. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve Zone Change No. 80-04 and issue a Negative Declaration by adopting the attached ordinance. Respectfu WiL� JACK LAM, Director of Community Development JL:MV:kds Attachments: Exhibit "A" - location Map • Exhibit "B" - Land Use Map Exhibit "C" - Zoning Map Part I - Initial Study Commission Resolution April 9, 1980 Commission Minutes Ordinance • 1d� • D I L,OC. I L® U. 6 Subject Property CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING DIVISM 59 #ii iI I o> �w ii i � o's NORTH �r ?a r.uac. rar¢. Subject vacQnt 59 _ —_ —a_ .a ^ ^1Is V V NORTH CITY Or rrrm: Zvz Clang V 90.04 RANCI -10 CUCAMO\GA TITLE: IA"w %(de PLANNING DIVISION EXHIPM-jEL- SG�LE- TITS. I' I • 9 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING DIVISM R -1 0 W. V V NORTH ITEXI: ZL71E GLIB %1dZ /YO 9—e-.24 TITLE: Z?hm -3'7j,y EXHIMT C SG \LG X75. a CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY • PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $70.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt of this application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part II of the Initial Study. The Development Review Committee will meet and take action no later than ten (10) days before the,public meeting at which time the project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of three determinations: 1) The project will have no environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 2) The project will have an environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project. • PROJECT TITLE: Zone Change APPLICANT'S NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: Acacia Construction, Inc. 270 la up Road Suite 100 Fullerton Ca. 92635 99 -0880 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OF PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROJECT: Dim Stayer - came ae ahnve LOCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: None annli ahle at this time dup to growth management ordinance I -I . rROJECT DESCRIPTION • DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Zone change to bring zoning into conformance with General Plan. ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: Aooroximately 7.66 acres including existing single family home (2,500 sq. ft.) on Parcel 26 DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES), ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR USE (ATTACH NECESSARY SHEETS): IS the project, part of a larger project, one of a series Of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? I- 2 Ill YES NO ,X 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? X 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? X _ , 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? X 5: Remove any existing trees? How many? OUNo fi g_ 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: Cnnfnrm Inning to General Plan. • IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaulation can be made by the Development Review Committee. Date ^ // ,1l Signaturi /�� -✓'^� Title !!!ll�� 6 WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO ,X 1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? X 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? X _ , 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? X 5: Remove any existing trees? How many? OUNo fi g_ 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above: Cnnfnrm Inning to General Plan. • IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaulation can be made by the Development Review Committee. Date ^ // ,1l Signaturi /�� -✓'^� Title !!!ll�� 6 !. C RESOLUTION NO. 80 -16 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING • COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ZONE CHANGE NO. 80 -04 REQUESTING A CHANGE IN THE ZONING FROM A -1 TO R -3 FOR 7.66 ACRES LOCATED ON THE SOUTH- WEST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BLVD. AND BAKER - ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 207 - 191 -31 AND 26 WHEREAS, on the 13th day of March, 1980, an application was filed and accepted on the above described project; and WHEREAS, on the 9th day of April, 1980, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section 65854 of the California Government Code. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the following findings: 1. That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed zone in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; 2. The proposed zone change would not have significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding pro- perties; and • 3. That the proposed zone change is in conformance with the General Plan, SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found that this project will not create a significant adverse impact on the environment and recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration on April 9, 1980. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the Califo m is Government Code, that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval on the 9th day of April, 1980, Zone Change No. 80 -04, 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt Zone Change No. 80 -04, 3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and related material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall he forwarded to the City Council. J13 l" C APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 1980. f. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA I, JACK LAM, 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 Commis- sion held on the 9th day of April, 1980, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Jones, Tolstoy, Dahl, Garcia, Rempel NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 11� • • BY:��.sctrN I /� Herman Rempel, Chaairn h ATTEST Secretary of the Planning Commission I, JACK LAM, 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 Commis- sion held on the 9th day of April, 1980, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Jones, Tolstoy, Dahl, Garcia, Rempel NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 11� • • • PUBLIC HEARING ZONE CHANGE NO. 80 -04 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - ACACIA CONSTRUCTION - A change of zone from A -1 to R -3 or more restrictive zoning for property located on the southwest corner of Baker and Foothill. Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report, and reported that the request is consistent with the General Plan. Chairman Hempel opened the public hearing for all those who would like to speak on the zone change request. There being none, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Jones recommended adoption of the Resolution which was seconded by Commissioner Garcia. The motion was unanimously carried. AYES: JONES, GARCIA, DAHL, TOLSTOY, HEMPEL NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE PUBLIC HEARING • ZONE CHANGE NO. 80 -05 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT JUDITH AND THOMAS STEPHENSON A change of zone from R -1 -1 to R- 1- 20,000 or iro re res •rtc rive zoning for property located on the northwest corner of Klusman and Whirlaway. Michael Vairin, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Hempel asked for questions from the Commission of the staff. Chairman asked what the size Lot 1 was in the Staff Report that was 20,000 square feet. Staff indicated that the parcel map would return to the Planning Commission for consideration and Lot 1's configuration would be reviewed at that tine. Chairman Hempel asked whether the applicant was present. They were not. Chairman Remepl then asked whether or not there were any in the audience wishing to speak in favor of or opposition to the zone change. There being none, the public hearing was closed. Chairman Hempel asked for comments of the Commission. Commissioner Tolstoy asked whatthe size of the lots were on Amethyst. Paul Rougeou replied they were half acre or greater. Commissioner Dahl expressed his desire that the applicant be notified of the Commissions' concern on the site layout with particular consideration to the configuration of Lot dl. Planning Commission Minutes -3- April 9, 1980 K ORDINANCE NO. 106 • AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 207- 191 -31 AND 26 LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND BAKER 0 The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: The City Council hereby finds and determines the following: A. That the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, following a public hearing held in the time and manner prescribed by law, recommends the rezoning of the property herein- after described, and this City Council has held a public hearing in the time and manner pres- scribed by law as duly heard and considered said recommendation. B. That this rezoning is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. C. This rezoning will have no significant environ- mental impact as provided in the Negative Declaration filed herein. SECTION 2: The following described real property is hereby rezoned in the manner stated, and the zoning map is hereby amended accordingly. A -1 (limited agriculture) to R -3 (multiple - family residential). Said property is located on the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Baker, known as Assessor's Parcel No. 207 - 191 -31 and 26. SECTION 3: 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 Daily Report, a newspaper of general circu- lation in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 21st day of May, 1980. AYES: NOES: ABSENT; ATTEST: Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk p Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor CTY OF RAN UM CUGIMONGA Goo c�cn.tlryh ; STAFF REPORT < c > � o Date: May 21, 1980 � n F U To: City Council and City Manager U 1977 From: Sack Lam, Director of Community Development By: Michael Vairin, Associate Planner Subject: ZONE CHANGE N0. 80 -06 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - DELL MCDANIEL. INC. - Change of zone from A -1 to R -1 for property located on the northeast corner of Ramona and Church BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission, at its meeting of April 9, 1980, held a public hearing to consider the above zone change and recommended approval of the zone change to the City Council as indicated on the attached Planning Commission Resolution (see attached Commission minutes for this project). The applicant has requested a change of zone for approximately 10 acres of land located on the northeast corner of Ramona and Church Street (Exhibit "A "). The subject property is presently zoned A -1 (limited agricultural) and the applicant has requested a change of zone to R -1 (single - family residential). The applicant has requested a change of zone for ultimate development of a single - family residential project. The project site presently contains one dwelling and the • remainder of the site is a citrus grove. ANALYSIS: Exhibits "B" and "C" indicate the adjacent land use and zoning which is described as follows: Land Use Zoning North Single Family R -1 South Single Family R -1 East Single Family R -2 West Single Family R -1 The interim land use element of the General Plan designates the property as low- density residential (two to five units per acre) . Surrounding General Plan designations indicate low density residential to the east, west, north and south and medium density residential to the southwest. The project site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the uses that would be permitted within the proposed zone. In addition, the proposed zone is consistent with the General Plan and surrounding existing and proposed land uses, The Initial Study has been prepared for the environmental assessment of this zone change. Attached is Part Iof the Initial Study as provided by the applicant. The environmental checklist was completed by the Staff with no positive responses to any of the items; thus, leading to the finding of no significant adverse impact upon the environment as a result of this project. If, after review of the Initial Study the Council finds the Environmental Assessment to be adequate, then issuance of a Negative Declaration would be in order. City Council and City Manager May 21, 1980 Page 2 A notice of public hearing was published in the Daily Report on May 9, 1980. In addition, notice of said hearing was mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. To date, no correspondence has been received either for or against the project. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve Zone Change No. 80 -06 and issue a Negative Declaration by adopting the attached Ordinance. Respectfully submitted, JACK LAM, Director of Community Development JL:MV:kds Attachments: Exhibit A - Location Map • Exhibit B - Land Use Map Exhibit C - Zoning Map • Part I - Initial Study Commission Resolution April 9, 1980, Commission Minutes Ordinance l J llg • CITY OF RANCI -K) CU(:AMO \GA PLANNING DIVISM 54�kt NORTH ITIiMU%yy��o TITLE% , rKarr Mi1RIT- SG\LE; %'= 400 I1� I--t 0 - - - .. - . Vaunt - - -�- Sivgl� faN•��y I dwfl�;�s NORTH CITY OF ITE\r z7e Ghaj2ae O. RO -Ob RANCHO CUCAMO \GA TITLE lam se7/ A 0 PLANNING DIVISKAN EXIINT:-.B- SCALE: 1 =900 ) � 0 K -1 R -1 A-1 Sgllj t R -2 R_I W CITY Or ITEM: O, go.06, RANCHO CUCAIN/IO \GA TITLE PLANNING UIVISK]N E,XIIII3IT _SCALE 1 w x 1al CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA INITIAL STUDY • PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET - To be completed by applicant Environmental Assessment Review Fee: $70.00 For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is made. upon receipt of this application, the Environmental Analysis staff will prepare Part II of the Initial Study. The Development Review Committee will meet and take action no later than ten (10) days before the public meeting at which time the project is to be heard. The Committee will make one of three determinations: 1) The project will have no environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, 2) The project will have an environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or 3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project. �L 1 ` • PROJECT TITLE: L.J%�� , JL NAMa C FLICANf'S ADDRESS, TELEPHONE: TO BOA/0 7 0r7`T4AIo q/7lo a 9gH -a /!_ J.oCATION OF PROJECT (STREET ADDRESS AND ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.) %�orZhaa.s' -T CorNor of iAlaMoNA RvE Arjet C-NORcA Slrva7i' 'VD !3o X //47 Orw`rgr�n 917L� 9l 984 NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE 0 PERSON TO BE CONTACTED CONCERNING THIS PROTECT: CRY M� I�ANIa -� .--r � v +.- my - v r- v a:: x c r r .w r of Tha, Wcs'r;l(aS F rOF SAi •rte )p j(- ?�(- >1 LIST OTHER PERMITS NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL�AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: 1 - ^( nn I d of NECESSARY FROM LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL�AGENCIES AND THE AGENCY ISSUING SUCH PERMITS: 1 - ^( nn I d of • PROJECT DESCRIPTION • 9 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Co") -'5 rvc 'U rJ 3� S NAI4i �AMI p/.� `T /,•A,M. /�i`/�,U�i."."'^f+rr. ACREAGE OF PROJECT AREA AND SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, IF ANY: /D -RcRa:s Is the project, part of a larger project, one of a series of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact? DESCRIBE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDING INFORMATION Oil TOPOGRAPHY, PLANTS (TREES) , ANIMALS, ANY CULTURAL, HISTORICAL OR SCENIC `ASPECTS, USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND THE DESCRIPTION OF ANY 1-2. WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO �1. Create a substantial change in ground contours? FM 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise or vibration? L-�3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? 4. Create changes in the existing zoning or general plan designations? 5: Remove any existing trees? How many? 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives? ion of any YES answers above: IMPORTANT: If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form on the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaulation can be made by the Develo ment Review Committee. , Date, S\ l 'd I b U Signatur Title 1-3 ))( r - < RESOLUTION NO. 80 -18 ' • A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING i COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ZONE CHANGE NO. 80 -06 REQUESTING A CHANGE IN THE ZONING FROM A -1 TO R -1 FOR 10 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH EAST CORNER OF CHURCH AND RAMONA - ASSESSORS NO. 1077 - 301 -37. WHEREAS, on the 19th day of March, 1980, an application was filed and accepted on the above described project; and WHEREAS, on the 9th day of April, 1980, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section 65854 of the Cali- fornia Government Code. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the following findings: 1. That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed zone in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; 2. The proposed zone change would not have significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding pro- perties; and • 3. That the proposed zone change is in conformance with the General Plan. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found that this project will not create a significant adverse impact on the environment and recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration on April 9, 1980. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the California Government Code, that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga here- by recommends appro al on the 9th day of April, 1980, Zone Change Nu. 80 -06. 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt Zone Change No. 80 -06. 3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and related material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall be forwarded to the City Council. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9th DAY OF APRIL. 1980. • PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA . r, BY: Herman lHempel, 91a an ATTEST: Secretary of the Planning Ccvmiss ion I, JACK LAM, 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 Commis- sion held on the 9th day of April, 1980, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Garcia, Dahl, Jones, Tolstly, Hempel • NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None 0 1�( Jack Lam stated that the Commission could state their 'concern when the environ- mental assessment for. the Parcel Map comes before them for review. • A motion was made by Commissioner Dahl to adopt Resolution No. 80 -07. Cohnis- sioner Garcia seconded. There being no further discussion on the motion, it was unanimously approved. AYES: DAHL, GARCIA, JONES, TOLSTOY, REMPEL NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE x x x x x ZONE CHANGE NO. 80 -06 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - DELL MCDANIEL. INC. - Zone Change from A -1 to R -1 for 10 acres located on the northeast corner of Church and Ramona. Assessor's Parcel No. 1077- 301 -37. Michael Vairin presented the staff report. Chairman Rempel asked for questions of Staff. Commissioner Garcia asked if there was a subdivision proposed. Mr. Vairin explained that this is preliminary to subdivisions which might occur when the Growth Management allows the filings on August 1. Chairman Rempel asked if the applicant wished to add anything to this report. • Applicant did not. Chairman then asked if there was any opposition to the report. Cindy Craig on Teak Way asked what would be built on that property, and asked whether one or two Story buildings could be allowed. She felt that some of the privacy would be lost if two story homes were allowed. Chairman Hempel assured Mrs. Craig that the City would look into the development of the property very closely. Chairman Hempel then asked if there were any others wishing to speak. There being none, Chairman Rempel closed the public hearing. Commissioner Garcia moved for recommendation of approval of the zone change to the City Council, seconded by Dahl. There being no further discussion, the motion was unanimously approved. AYES: GARCIA, DAHL, .ZONES, TOLSTOY, REMPEL NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE x x x x x Commissioner Tolstoy asked for a five minute break. Meeting reconvened at 7:54 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes -4- April 9, 1980 1 �7 ORDINANCE NO, 107 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF • RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 1077- 301 -37 FROM A -1 TO R -1 LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF RAMONA AND CHURCH The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: The City Council hereby finds and determines the following: A. That the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, following a public hearing held in the time and manner prescribed by law, recommends the rezoning of the property herein- after described, and this City Council has held a public hearing in the time and manner pres- cribed by law as duly heard and considered said recommendation. B. That this rezoning is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. C. This rezoning will have no significant environ- mental impact as provided in the Negative Declaration filed herein. • SECTION 2: The following described real property is hereby rezoned in the manner stated, and the zoning map is hereby amended accordingly. A -1 (limited agriculture) to R -1 (Single family residential) Said property is located on the northeast corner of Ramona and Church known as Assessor's Parcel Number 1077- 301 -37. SECTION 3: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage at least once in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 21st day of May, 1980. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor 0 ATTEST: Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk I�V i • 0 QTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONCA STAFF REPORT May 15, 1980 To: City Council and City Manager From: Bill Holley, Director, Community Services (by M. Whitney) Subject: Attached Ordinance - First Reading, Cherbak Family Home At the Historic Preservation Commission meeting of May 13, 1980, a Public Hearing was held to establish whether or not the Cherbak Family Home, located at 9983 Hillside Road, should be recommended for Historic Point of Interest designation. (Please see attached application). After the hearing process, the Commission unamimously decided that the Cherbak Family Home did indeed meet the criteria established in Ordinance No. 70 -B for Point of Historic Interest. Note: Present at the hearing were members of the Cherbak family; Mr. R Mrs. Smith, present owners of the home; and Mr. Stowe the person who now has the home in escrow for purchase. The people listed previously were all in agreeance with the Commission decision. mw ORDINANCE NO. 104 AN ORDINANCF. OF THE CITY COUNCIL 9F THE CITY ' OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, Jf0 EMERGENCY ORGANIZATION AND FUNCTIONS ,/ The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows: Section 1: Purposes The declared purposes of this ordinance are to provide for the preparation and carrying out of plans for the protection of persons and property within this City in the event of an emergency; the direction of the emergency organization; and the coordination of the emergency func- tions of this City with all other public agencies, corporations, organi- zations, and affected private persons. Section 2: Definition • As used in this ordinance, "emergency" shall mean the actual or threatened existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within this City caused by such conditions as air pollution, fire, flood, storm, epidemic, riot, or earthquake, or other conditions, including conditions resulting from war or imminent threat of war, but other than conditions resulting from a labor controversy, which conditions are or are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of this City, requiring the combined forces of other political subdivisions to combat. Section 3: Disaster Council Membership The Rancho Cucamonga Disaster Council is hereby created and shall consist of the following: (a) The Mayor, who shall be Chairman. (b) A Council member, shall be Vice - Chairman. , v�. v (c) The Assistant Director of Emergency Services. (d) Such chiefs of emergency services as are provided for in emergency plan of this City, adopted pursuant to this ordi- nance. (e) Such representatives of civic, business, labor, veterans, professional, or other organizations having an official emergency responsibility, as may be appointed by the Director with the advice and consent of the City Council. Section 4: Disaster Council Powers and Duties it shall be the duty of she Ra..chu C .,_c. Ccaadi - - it is hereby empowered, to develop and recommend for adoption by the City Council, emergency and mutual aid plans and agreements and such ordinances and resolutions and rules and regulations as are accessary to implement such plans and agreements. The Disaster Council shall meet upon call of the Chairman or, in his absence from the City or inability to call such meeting, upon call of the Vice- Chairman. 3t 0 ORDINANCE No. 108 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOGNIZING THE CHERBAK FAMILY HOME, LOCATED AT 9983 HILLSIDE ROAD, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AS A SIGNIFICANT HISTORIC POINT OF INTEREST OF THE CITY AND THEREFORE DESIGNATING IT AS A CITY POINT OF HISTORIC INTEREST. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: The City Council finds and determines that the Cherbak Family Rome,--9983 Hillside Road, Rancho Cucamonga, has met the criteria established by Ordinance No. 70 -B for Historic Preservation, and therefore, and with the recommendation of the Historic Preservation Commission, designates the Cherbak Family Home as a Historic Point of Interest of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. • SECTION 2: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall attest to the same, and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage, at least once in The Daily Rrt, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of On— — tarioepo�alifornia, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. 0 ATTEST: PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of 1980. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor City Clerk • CITY 01 RAN CI K) Cl' M)\IGA STAFF RLYOU DATE: May 15, 1980 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development BY: Barry Hogan, Senior Planner SUBJECT: CARNELIAN PARKWAY PROGRAM So GiCn.ttpl ; /tr � ` v r O O F � 2 U > 1977 ABSTRACT: At the May 14, 1980 Planning Commission meeting, the Carnelian Parkway Program was reviewed. Planning Commission selected Concept "B ", Design Concept "B" with Alternative 1 and 2, and felt the priority of construction should begin from Foothill northerly with special attention paid to the inter- section of 19th Street to re- enforce that commercial node. BACKGROUND: Attached, please find a copy of the Planning Commission Staff Report and the Consultant's Report on Carnelian Street. You will note that the report by the consultant details the procedure used in determining the two design concepts and gives a cost estimate for each. The costs range from $652,000 to $668,000. There is not enough Beautification Funds to do the entire project of 3S miles at one time. Therefore, the consultant has broken the project area down into workable segments. In order for the consultant to proceed to the next phase of the project development the Council must select a design concept for the street and a design concept for the planting of material. Additionally, a priority of the areas to be retrofitted first should also be selected. The consultant for the project will make a brief presentation at the City Council meeting explaining both design concepts and detailing the procedure on how the design concepts were arrived at. Should the Council wish to review the street plans prior to the meeting, they are available at the Planning office. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that City Council select Concept "B" for Carnelian Street and Design Concept "B" Alternatives I and 2 for the planting plan of Carnelian Street. Additionally, the Planning Commission recommends that snecial attention he paid to the intersection of 19th Street and Carnelian to give that node added emphases through landscaping; and the Carnelian Improvement Project begin from Foothill and proceed northerly in that priority. Re::pec fu�ll'y Sub,, fitted, .lack Lam, Director of Community Development JI,:BKH:cd Attachments: Planning Commission Staff Report Consultant's Report 133 CITY (Y RAN 10 CUCAMON&k So cvC&4��c7 SFAFF REPORT' r LL O ' O.. DATE: May 14, 1980 U U >'. TO: Planning Commisison \ 1977 FROM: Jack Lam, Director of Commanfey- DeoelopmettY t BY: Barry K. Mogan, Senior Planner SUBJECT: CARNELIAN PARKWAY PROGRAM ABSTRACT: Recently the Planning Commission reviewed a priority list of suggested parkways to be retrofitted with the landscaping and hardscape. Priority No. 1 was Carnelian parkway from Hillside to Foothill. Staff has requested pro- posals from various consultants regarding the retrofitting and selected Genge Consultants to prepare the plan. The plan has been prepared and presented to the Citizen Advisory Commission on April 24, 1980. Two concepts were proposed to the Advisory Commission. Concept "B" and Alternative 1 were selected. Concept "B" imbodies a single tree as the design element tying Carnelian together as a unit. There were various suggestions as to tree type from Eucalyptus to Liquidambers. Suggestion was made that the trees should canopy the street providing shade and reducing the heat gain of the asphalt surface. There was concern expressed that evergreen canopy trees would obscure the view of the mountains. Deciduous trees • were suggested so that in the winter time, when the best views of the mountains are available, there would be little, if any, leaves on the trees to block views. Regarding tree plantings proposed two types were offered- formal and informal. On the whole the Commission felt that informal planting of trees was a better concept and should be employed where possible. Some areas of Carnelian are narrow :nd may present problems in this regard, The installation of sidewalk or the redesign of existing sidewalk proposed and selected was a meandering walkway allowing planting against the walls to soften the alley effect of the walls. Attached to the report please find a preliminary report prepared by the consultant. It lists, the present image of the street as seen by the consultant, the plan goals and design objectives, and summary of their recommendations. Additionally, there are costs estimates prepared for both concepts "A" and "B" broken down into four segments "A" through "D ". Since there is not enough money in the Beautifi- cation Fund to do the entire street at one time i.t was suggested that the con- sultant break down the street into workable segments and give cost estimates for each of those segments. The Commission felt that the segment closest to Foothill should be the first segment retrofitted and then subsequent segments would proceed northerly from Foothill in that priority. It was their feeling that the Foothill segment would have the greatest "punch" for the dollar. Since we are on a tight time schedule, in order to begin the project as quickly as possible, this item has been double scheduled for the City Council Agenda • of May 21, 1980 and therefore, a recommendation should be forthcoming tonight from the Planning Commission. Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact this office. JL:BH:cd ' �� Item K 0 0 Areetscape �nt 135 0 CARNELIAN STREET CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CONCEPTUAL STREETSCAPE DEVELOPMENT Table of Contents Regional Context Map 1. Existing Conditions /Urban Framework 2. Plan Goals /Design Objectives 3. Summary of Recommendations • 4. Summary /Concept "A" with Cost Estimate 5. Summary /Concept "B" with Cost Estimate )36 0 I r gyp® N 7D !rJ {bMIG�+'s Gnw.�sMT w F ceti�r Nis��e ff f7%eeycWi&— Gg1i72,--c7- 137 0 CARNELIAN STREET CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CONCEPTUAL STREETSCAPE DEVELOPMENT APRIL, 1980 1. EXISTING CONDITIONS /URBAN FP,AMEWORI( -Rancho Street lies within the wester y portion of Rancho Cucamonga, and serves as a primary north /south connector between the communities of Alta Loma and Cucamonga. Current as well as ultimate right -of -way (per San Bernardino County Master Plan of Highways is 881; Carnelian Street is classified as a secondary highway by County Standards. Carnelian Street currently carries auto, bus, pedestrian, and bicycle (no designated bikeways) traffic within this most urbanized residential area of the City. Its primary functions are "inner -city" in nature, with its northern terminus above Hillside Road. Project study area includes Carnelian Street between Hillside Drive • to the north and Foothill Boulevard to the south. Banyan Street, 19th Street and Baseline Road are the major east -west streets crossing Carnelian within the 3% mile study area. The street incline rises consistently from south to north, with a general grade of 2 to 4 percent between Foothill Boulevard to the south and Hillside Road to the north. Two distinct physical conditions within the project area will have a major influence on streetscape concept development. These are: Street Drainage - Heavy rains in this foothill region cause considerable surface flows within the street and parkways. Most of the unlandscaped parkways were severely eroded during the rains of last February. Commanding northerly views from the project area to the San Bernardino National Forest (Mt. Wilson, Mt. Baldy, Cucamonga Peak, Big Bear, San Gorgonio Peak). Much less impressive views southerly from the project area to the valley floor also exist. • 13� PRESENT IMAGE - Due to a lack of "urban consistency" and unifying character, the present image of Carnelian Street is generally poor. Utility poles, road signs, masonry walls, and a wide variety of plant types create visual chaos. Neither the architecture nor landscaping provide a sense of definition or containment within the road. The overall physical character of the streetscape is discontinuous, with a diversity of style, scale, form, color and material. Two commercial nodes exist on Carnelian Street - -one at the intersection of 19th Street and the other at Baseline Road. Both intersections totally lack visual identity and a "sense of place." At present, only one short length of Carnelian Street within the project study area offers any relief in terms of urban form. This area lies directly north of Foothill Boulevard, as Carnelian Street curves to the left toward the center of the City. Included here are: 1) A railroad • bridge crossing over the street, 2) views south - westward into Cucamonga Creek, 3) slope banks of variable depth rising above street grade on the east side of Carnelian Street. A historical winery exists at the northeast corner of Carnelian Street and Foothill Boulevard. This intersection, as with the two previously noted, lack identity and visual identification. n U No urban design framework /design plan currently exists within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Street graphics and signage, pavement, furniture, street tree planting, etc., are at this time disorganized. No formal City "entry gateway" exists. Boundary "edges" are weak and undefined. Within the 3'd mile long study area, only one piece of "urban" type street furniture exists, this being a pedestrian seating enclosure above Baseline Road. (Sedway -Cooke is currently preparing the City's Urban Design Element.) 139 0 PLAN GOALS /DESIGN OBJECTIVES - The goals of the Carnelian Street Streetscape Development Plan are as follows: To promote a more attractive image for Carnelian Street, which will improve the vitality of pedestrian usage and visual appeal. The livability of the residential community will therefore be enhanced. 2. Integrate the two major communities within the City, Alta Loma north of Baseline Road and Cucamonga south of Baseline Road. 3. Develop a consistent, integrated streetscape plan which unifies existing and proposed developments within the expanding urban fabric along Carnelian Street and adjacent western Rancho Cucamonga. 4. In conjunction with the new Urban Design Element, provide a guide framework that will "bind" future urban development within the entire City. The skeletal grid arterial /highway system will therefore integrate commercial, residential, public and recreational land uses. 5. To develop a design program which encourages private, • as well as public, investment and interest in revitalization of the project study area and adjacent environs. • Lq I I " SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS - The following summary contains recommendations for improvement of the entire environment of Carnelian Street, both within the road right -of -way and beyond the right -of -way to the variable limits of the scenic corridor. These recom- mendations vary in the level of specificity. Development policies (design objectives and physical design principles) serve as the basis for the planning and design guidelines proposed by our Plans. Recommended development policies are: 1. Create a unified, consistent landscape theme throughout the project study area which serves to "bind" the two communities of Alta Loma and Cucamonga. Separate identity for these (2) communities could be achieved through landscape/ streetscape treatments on both sides of Baseline Road and /or at the corner of Carnelian Street and Baseline Road. 2. Wherever possible, integrate existing materials, treatments, with those to be proposed. 3. With regard to the flood /erosion potential of . the Foothill region in general and Carnelian street specifically, landscape treatments within parkways must demonstrate the ability to withstand large volumes of water and present no specific maintenance problems. 4. Northerly views from within the project study area to the adjacent mountains must be enhanced by framing and directing of these views. 5. Use of river - washed granite cobbles and larger "boulder" masses is encouraged as 1) A statement of a local regional identity material and 2) a very low maintenance landscape treatment. 6. Concerning commercial nodes, creation of visual identity planting which "announces" entry into commercial districts, but also allows filtered views into these areas. Through use of earth berming, masonry, screen planting, create visual buffers to large parking lots. Plant material should "direct" views to key commercial structures. 1'll 0 7. Develop appropriate visual landscape screening in residential areas to minimize impact of "perimeter walls" at tract edges. 8. Provide pedestrian scale features, emphasizing, intensifying and enhancing pedestrian use of the right -of -way. 9. Provide a recurring emphasis of planting, graphics, paving patterns and other design elements to improve the motorists recognition of intersections, commercial uses, residential areas, and a perception of the street identity. 10. Provide a transitional streetscape treatment for the riparian area adjacent to Carnelian Street (Cucamonga Creek interface west of Carnelian just north of Foothill Boulevard). 11. Creation of distinctive City gateways /entrances which would relate in concept /charater to proposed concepts for Carnelian,Street. 12. Minimize long -term landscape maintenance as much • as possible. 13. Bury all utility wires, present and future. 14. Comply with all policies /principles of Urban Design Element of the General Plan. AF:nss lJ ) fZ 7 SUMMARY - CONCEPT "A" The landscape development program for Concept "A" consists of the following: 1. An "identity edge" treatment within parkways, blending mounded "cobble" areas with mounded landscaping. A single dominant street tree will be chosen from the following list: Liquidambar Canary Island Pine Incense Cedar Arizona Cypress Eucalpptus (taller species, i.e., Sideroxylon) Eucalyptus (smaller species, i.e., Leucoxylon) All these tree species have a tall, vertical char- acter, and would "frame" views to the northerly mountains. 2. An equestrian trail between Banyan and Hillside, with a planned future link to Heritage Park over Demens Channel. 3. A "node planting" of street trees at Carnelian Street intersection with 19th and Baseline. These two intersections are commercial nodes, and the "theme" tree planting would signify "attention" to these corners by contrasting in form and texture with the "theme" trees for the remainder of Carnelian Street. Because of the variety of physical conditions 6, constraints existing at these (2) street intersections (varied sidewalk width, varied parkway width, limited right -of -way) street tree planting will occur both on public and private property. The additional planting area on private property would allow room to create a strong, meaningful "landscape statement ", one which would respond to the poor existing condition and lack of "sense of place." 4. A "riparian" planting adjacent to Cucamonga Creek which would reflect the "creek" environment. Large granite boulders will be used to further reflect the "creek" location. Potential trees are: California White Alder California Sycamore Willow Species ) 4} s The "identity theme" unifying the landscape and • rockscape will be achieved through duplication of "mounded masses," both in rock and plant material. Slope gradients within planted and "cobble" areas will be identical with scaled, mounded shrub forms duplicated in mounded, rockwork. Generous use of large boulder outcroppings within mounds will help to relate the rolling, mounding theme. Potential shrubs which could be used for this purpose are: Abelia Ceanothus (Calif. Lilac) Cistus (Rockrose) Elaeagnus (Silverberry) Escallonia (Pink Escallonia) Raphiolepis (Indian Hawthorne) Xylosma Potential ground covers include: Hedera Helix (Hahnus Ivy) Juniper Fragraria (Wild Strawberry) Rosmarinus (Rosemary) Star Jasmine Baccharis (Coyote Bush) Hypericum (St. Johnswort) Lantana Potential vines include: Boston Ivy Creeping Fig Use of mounded "cobble" areas as "deflectors" for flood water. The basic intent is to deflect water in parkway areas back into the street. Landscape screening, consisting of trees, shrubs, and vines (see sections) which will soften the visual impact of extensive masonry walls at edge of project area and create a more pleasing pedes- trian experience. • • CARNELIAN STREET CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CONCEPTUAL STREETSCAPE DEVELOPMENT Cost Estimate Concept "A" SEGMENT "A" 1. 5,200 L.F. Equestrian Trail @ $10 L.F. $ 52,000 2. Striping /Signage for Trail (Allow) 500 3. Parkway Landscape - 5,000 S.F. @ $2.50 S.F. 12,500 4. Parkway "Cobble" - 5,000 S.F. @ $6.50 S.F. 32,500 Total Segment "A" $ 97,500 SEGMENT "B" 1. Parkway Landscape - 15,000 S.F. @ $2.50 S.F. $ 37,500 2. Parkway "Cobble" - 15,000 S.F. @ $6.50 S.F. 97,500 3. 6,000 S.F. Sidewalk @ $1.30 S.F. 7,800 • Total Segment "B" $ 142,800 SEGMENT "C" 1. Parkway Landscape - 15,000 S.F. @ $2.50 $ 37,500 2. Parkway "Cobble" - 15,000 S.F. @ $6.50 97,500 Total Segment "C" $ 135,000 SEGMENT "D" 1. Parkway Landscape - 36,500 S.F. @ $2.50 S.F. $ 91,250 2. Slope Planting - 20,000 S.F. @ $1.25 S.F. 25,000 3. Parkway "Cobble" - 12,500 S.F. @ $6.50 S.F. 81,250 Total Segment "D" $ 197,500 TOTAL ALL SEGMENTS $ 572,800 (2) Node Planting - Allow $10,000 ea. 20,000 TOTAL ALL CONSTRUCTION $ 592,800 103 CONTINGENCY 59,280 GRAND TOTAL $ 652,080 175 NOTE: 0 1. Prices are in 1980 dollars 2. Landscape and cobble prices reflect excavation, import, etc. 3. Not included: Supplementary engineering costs (curb and gutter, etc.) • • )4� 0 SUMMARY - CONCEPT "B" The landscape development program for "Concept B" consists of the following: 1. An identity edge treatment within parkways, similar in theme to Concept "A ". The basic difference lies in the type of identity tree. Rather than an upright, vertical tree which s would frame views, a canopy tree, offering summer shade and deciduous fall color would be used. The canopy form would help mitigate glare from concrete walks and rockscape, and allow transparent views through trees to distant mountains in fall when trees are bare. Potential trees are: Silver Maple (some insect problems) Chinese Pistache London Plane Tree (Platanus) Goldenrain Tree (Koelreuteria) Jacaranda • 2. As in the previous concept, an equestrian trail from Hillside to Banyan. This trail proposes equestrian fencing on both sides of trail, rather than one side only. 0 3. An attempt to relate the Carnelian Street Redevelopment Program to the major scenic corridor along Euclid Avenue (to the west of the'City). A consistent street tree planting of Liquidambar currently exists along much of Baseline Road from Euclid Avenue eastward toward the City of Rancho Cucamonga boundary. The intent of the design concept is to link the scenic corridor with the City of Rancho Cucamonga by continuing the Liquidambar planting along Baseline and terminating the planting at Carnelian. This concept would set a theme for the other commercial node planting at 19th Street. Concurrent with the Baseline Road planting, an opportunity exists for the City to create a "gateway" statement where Baseline Road crosses the City boundary. (This concept is not a part of Genge Consultants current contract with the City, and is intended as a design guideline.) N7 "Node Planting" of vertical, upright Liquidambar • would contrast effectively with the "identity edge" canopy -type trees proposed for the remainder of Carnelian Street. 5. Landscape and rockscape "theme" achieved through duplication of "mounded masses ", both in rock and shrub material (as in Concept "A "). G. Conceptual shrub, vine and ground covers proposed for Concept "A" apply to Concept "B ". • • l�Q • CARNELIAN STREET CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CONCEPTUAL STREETSCAPE DEVELOPMENT Cost Estimate concept "B" SEGMENT "A" 1. 5,200 L.F. Equestrian Trail @ $15.00 L.F. $ 78,000 2. Striping /Signage for Trail (Allow) 500 3. Parkway Landscape - 5,000 S.F. @ $2.00 10,000 4. Parkway "Cobble" - 5,000 S.F. @ $6.50 32,500 Total Segment "A" $ 121,000 SEGMENT "B" 1. Parkway Landscape - 15,000 S.F. @ $2.00 S.F. $ 30,000 2. Parkway "Cobble" - 15,000 S.F. @ $6.50 S.F. 2. Slope Planting - 97,500 3. 6,000 S.F. - Sidewalk @ $1.30 S.F. 20,000 3. Parkway "Cobble" 7,800 • 4. Sawcut /Remove Concrete 81,250 (Allow) Total 2,500 $ 174,250 Total Segment "B" $ 137,800 SEGMENT "C" (Allow) $ 25,000 1. Parkway Landscape - 15,000 S.F. @ $2.00 S.F. $ 30,000 2. Parkway "Cobble" - 15,000 S.F. @ $6.50 S.F. 97,500 3. Sawcut /Remove Concrete (Allow) TOTAL 2,500 Total Segment "C" $ 130,000 SEGMENT "D" 1. Parkway Landscape - 36,500 S.F. @ $2.00 S.F. $ 73,000 2. Slope Planting - 20,000 S.F. @ $1.00 S.F. 20,000 3. Parkway "Cobble" - 12,500 S.F. @ $6.50 S.F. 81,250 Total Segment "D" $ 174,250 TOTAL ALL SEGMENTS $ 563,050 "Gateway" Landscape (Allow) $ 25,000 (2) Node Planting - Allow 10,000 ea. 20,000 TOTAL ALL CONSTRUCTION $ 608,050 103 CONTINGENCY 60,805 I qlR ND TOTAL $ 668,855 n LI CITY OF RANCM CUGIMONGA STAFF REPORT May 13, 1980 DATE: May 13, 1980 TO: City Manager City Council FROM: Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Article 8 /Transportation Claim Each year the City Council must authorize the City Manager to sign the Article 8 claim with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) in order to receive Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds. Currently TDA funds are generated from one quarter of one percent of the sales tax on gasoline. TDA funds can then be utilized for streets and roads purposes as long as transit needs of the Community are reasonably met. Revenues are then apportioned to each City within San Bernardino County based on their percentage of the total population of the County. • For Fiscal Year 1980 -81, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will receive $676,489.00 in TDA funds. Of this amount $173,608.00 will be claimed directly by Omnitrans. This amount claimed by Omnitrans will provide for the continuation of the existing fixed route service, one dial -a- ride sedan for the elderly and handicapped and the City's share of the cost to operate two lift equipped vans for the handicapped in the West End of San Bernardino County. The only modification to the existing fixed route system would be to increase the frequency of service through Rancho Cucamonga to Chaffey College from sixty minutes to forty minute service. The Cities of Montclair, Upland and Rancho Cucamonga have experienced an overload problem on the Chaffey College route this past year, which has necessitated this modification to the Chaffey College route. The remaining funds in the amount of $502,881.00 can be utilized for street and road purposes in the City. The corresponding amounts and specific street and road projects are included in the proposed budget for 1980 -81. RECOMMENDATION: 1. That the City Council authorize the City Manager to sign the attached Article 8 Claim. 2. That the City Council adopt by minute action authorizing the following distribution of TDA funds for Fiscal Year 1980 -81. A. Omnitrans $173,608.00 B. City of Rancho Cucamonga $502,881.00 TOTAL $676,489.00 JR /vz FISCAL YEAR: DATE: 1980 -81 May 21, 1980 CLAIMANT: City of Rancho Cucamonga PAYMENT RECIPIENT: City of Rancho Cucamonga COUNTY LTF: (Claimant) San Bernardino P.O. Box 807 . PURPOSE: (Check one box only) (Mailing Address) ( ) Article 3, Puc Section 99234 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (City and Zip Cade) (x) Article 8, Puc Section 99400a Local Streets and Roads Harry Empey - Finance Director ( ) Article 8 Puc Section 99400a (Attention -Name and Title) Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (contact person - phone number) DETAIL OF REQUESTED ALLOCATION: Amount Method of ayment 1. Payment from Unallocated Funds 2. Payment from Reserves (Drawdow n of funds reserved in a previous year) 3. Total Allocation Requested 5502,881.00 CONDITION OF APPROVAL: Approval of AUTHORIZING SIGNATURE(CLAIMAN tt11yy�� claim and payment by the County CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR OR FINANCIAL Ad♦tor to this claimant are subject OFFICER) to monies being available, and to the provision that such monies will be used only in accordance with the Signature allocation instructions. Lauren M. Wasserman Print Name and Title LTC 5L ONLY 1. DATE APPROVED 2. SIGNED: 1. CLAIM NO. 2. DATE APPROVED 3. ALLOCATION NUMBER 4. BY: 7 SCAG USE ONLY SCAG -TDA ( 2180) 151 - lJ E � 1• \ lei i if May 14, 1980 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Lauren M. Wasserman_�.v City Manager SUBJECT: Recommendation to Delete Broker of Record for City Health Insurance It is recommended that the City Council delete the Broker of Record for the City's health insurance policy beginning July 1, 1980. The purpose of this recommendation is to enable the staff to obtain the fullest range of proposals regarding new health insurance coverage for employees. As the City Council is aware, Blue Cross, the current carrier, has increased rates by approximately 30 percent. We therefore think it is appropriate for the City to explore the alternative policies which may be available to us. A number of insurance brokers have indicated a reluctance to submit proposals as long as the City has a broker of record. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council delete the Broker of Record for the City's health insurance policy beginning July 1, 1980. LMW /vz CJ 9 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM May 13, 1980 rill 1971 TO: Lauren Wasserman FROM: Harry Empe SUBJECT: Blue Cross Rate Increase Mr. Glasscock of the Prudential Insurance Company called today to inform us that our Blue Cross Premiums will be increasing by approx- imately 30 %. Single rate will be going from $35.16 to $45.81. The rate for the employee and one dependant will be going from $72.01 to $93.83. The family premium will be increased from $99.08 to $129.10. These rates are all on a per month basis. In addition to the premium increase, withdrawal from the foundation may cause a further increase in premium by as much as 10 %. However, in talking with Mr. Glasscock he feels that Blue Cross will hold the current premium rate to the 30% increase without forcing an additional cost on the City if we withdraw from the foundation. I think Lauren, it is interesting to note that the information with regards to the rate increase came from Bob Glasscock of Prudential and not from our broker of record. The problem with the rate increase is further compounded with regards to the City paid medical for dependant coverage. As I indicated in my memo in outlining the cost of certain fringe benefits that the 17,196 dollars that the City would have to absorb in additional cost would be increased also by 30 %. In dollars this would be another 5,200, resulting in an overall increase of 22,396. The result in increase by Blue Cross has pushed our premium closer to that of the HMO Plan. I believe at this point the only seperation is about six dollars per month, per employee. Due to the restrictions on time I feel it is in the best interest of the City that we shop for a new insurance coverage and officially notify those carriers that Sur currently preparing presentations to the City of that fact. Also it may be important that Council authorize the re- cision of Toni Gray as the broker of record so as to lift any inhibitions that the other brokers may have with regards to obtaining information for us if Tom Cray were to remain as broker of record. The determina- tion to do so may be something less than enthusiastic. J M E M O R A N D U M TO: Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk FROM: Robert E. Dougherty, Assistant City Attorney DATE: May 9, 1980 RE: Resolution Amending Conflict of Interest Codes. Enclosed please find the following: (1) Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commis- sion (Title 2, Division 6 of the California Administrative Code); and, (2) A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, Amending Its Conflict of Interest • Codes to Incorporate by Reference the Fair Political Practices Commission's Standard Model Conflict of Interest Code. This model code has been developed by the Fair Political Practices Commission, and it may be adopted by reference by pas- sage of the enclosed Resolution. The designated positions are as stated in your memo to me of April 11, 1980, except that I have deleted the position of City Manager. The City Manager, as well as members of the City Council and members of the Planning Commission, are required to file Statements of Economic Interest under other provisions of the Political Reform Act of 1974 as amended. Please note that we have left a blank within the paren- thesis in Section 3 of the Resolution. Your attention is in- vited to Section 4 of the state regulations entitled "Statements 15�1- of Economic Interests: Place of Filing. ". You should select • one of the three alternatives, and place the letter designation in the blank provided. I am also enclosing a copy of the Fair Political Practices Commission's cover letter of April 11, 1980, together with a ma- terials order form. If the enclosed meets with your approval, please present the same to the City Council. RED:sgg Enclosures )55 • • RESOLUTION NO. 80 -49 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ITS CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODES TO INCORPORATE BY REFERENCE THE • FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION'S STANDARD MODEL CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE. WHEREAS, amendments to the Political Reform Act, Govern- ment Code Sections 81000, et sec., have in the past and foresee - ably will in the future require conforming amendments to be made in Conflict of Interest Codes adopted and promulgated pursuant to its provisions; and, WHEREAS, the Fair Political Practices Commission has adopted a regulation, 2 Cal. Adm. Code Section 18730, which con- tains the terms of a standard model Conflict of Interest Code, which can be incorporated by reference, and which will be amended to conform to amendments in the Political Reform Act after pub- lic notice and hearings conducted by the Fair Political Practices Commission pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, Govern- ment Code Section 11370, et seq.; and, WHEREAS, incorporation by reference of the terms of the aforementioned regulation and amendments to it in Conflict of Interest Codes will save this body time and money by minimizing the actions required of this body to keep the Codes in conformity with the Political Reform Act; • NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: 1. All previously adopted resolutions approving various separate Conflict of Interest Codes are hereby rescinded. 2. The terms of 2 Cal. Adm. Code Section 18730 and any amendments to it duly adopted by the Fair Political Practices Commission along with the attached Appendix in which officials and employees are designated and disclosure categories are set forth, are hereby incorporated by reference and constitute the Conflict of Interest Codes for the following departments and agencies: (a) City Clerk's Department; (b) Community Services Department; (c) Finance Department; and, (d) Community Development Department. 3. Persons holding designated positions shall file state- ments of economic interests pursuant to Section 4(t.) of the Con - flicb of Interest Code. PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 1980, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: • APPENDIX TO RESOLUTION NO. City Clerk Assistant City Manager Finance Director /City Treasurer " Community Services Director Director of Community Development Building Official City Engineer Principal Planner Senior Planner • Associate Planner Senior Engineer Public Works Engineer 9 157 Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission (Title 2, Division 6 of the California Administrative Code) • 18730. Provisions of Conflict of Interest Codes (Gov. Code Sections 87300 - 87302) (a) Incorporation by reference of the terms of this regulation along with the designation of employees and the formulation of disclosure categories in the Appendix referred to below constitute the adoption and promulgation of a Conflict of Interest Code within the meaning of Government Code Section 87300 or the amendment of a Conflict of Interest Code within the meaning of Government Code Section 87307 if the terms of this regulation are substituted for terms of a Conflict of Interest Code already in effect. A code so amended or adopted and promulgated requires the reporting of • reportable items in a manner substantially equivalent to the requirements of Article 2 of Chapter 7 of the Political Reform Act, Government Code Sections 81000, et see. The requirements of a Conflict of Interest Code are in addition to other requirements of the Political Reform Act, such as the general prohibition against conflicts of interest con- tained in Government Code Section 87100, and to other state or local laws pertaining to conflicts of interest. (b) The terms of a Conflict of Interest Code amended or adopted and promulgated pursuant to this regulation are as follows: (1) Section 1. Definitions. The definitions contained in the Political Reform ' Act of 1974, regulations of the Fair Political Practices - 1 - 1)O Commission (2 Cal. Adm. Code Sections 18100 et sue.), and any amendments to the Act or regulations, are incorporated by reference into this Conflict of Interest Code. • (2) Section 2. Designated Employees. The persons holding positions listed in the Appendix are designated employees. It has been determined that these persons make or participate in the making of decisions which may foreseeably have a material effect on financial interests. (3) Section 3. Disclosure Categories. This Code does not establish any disclosure obli- gation for those designated employees who are also specified in Government Code Section 87200 if they are designated in this Code in that same capacity or if the geographical juris- diction of this agency is the same as or is wholly included within the jurisdiction in which those persons must report • their financial interests pursuant to Article 2 of Chapter 7 of the Political Reform Act, Government Code Sections 87200, et sea.!/ Such persons are covered by this Code for dis- qualification purposes only. With respect to all other designated employees, the disclosure categories set forth in 1� Designated employees who are required to file statements of economic interests under any other agency's Conflict of Interest Code, or under Article 2 for a different jurisdiction, may expand their statement of economic in- terests to cover reportable interests in both jurisdictions, and file copies of this expanded statement with both entities in lieu of filing separate and distinct statements, provided that each copy of such expanded statement filed in place of an original is signed and verified by the designated employee as if it were an original. See Government Code Section 81004. - 2 - 1St • � r the Appendix specify which kinds of financial interests are reportable. Such a designated employee shall disclose in his or her statement of economic interests those financial interests he or she has which are of the kind described in the disclosure categories to which he or she is assigned in the Appendix. It has been determined that the financial interests set forth in a designated employee's disclosure categories are the kinds of financial interests which he or she foreseeably can affect materially through the conduct Of his or her of`_ice. (4) Section 4. Statements of Economic Interests: P ace o F1 ina. The code reviewing body shall instruct all desig- nated employees required to file statements of economic interests pursuant to this Conflict of Interest Code to file • in accordance with one of the following procedures:? (A) All designated employees shall file statements of economic interests with the agency. Upon receipt of the statements of economic interests of the head of the agency and members of boards or commissions not under a department of state or local government, the agency shall make and retain a copy of each and forward the originals of these statements to the monde reviewing body, which shall be the ?� See Government Code Section 81010 and 2 Cal. Adm. Code Section 18115 for the duties of filing officers and persons in agencies who make and retain copies of state- ments and forward the originals to the filing officer. 4 - 3 - 166 filing officer with respect to these statements. Such state- ments shall be forwarded to the code reviewing body within five days after the filing deadline or five days after receipt . in the case of statements filed late. (B) All designated employees shall file statements of economic interests with the agency, which shall make and retain a copy and forward the originals to the code reviewing body, which shall be the filing officer. (C) All designated employees shall file statements of economic interests with the code reviewing body. (5) Section 5. Statements of Economic Interests: Time of Filing. (A) Initial Statements. All designated employees employed by the agency on the effective date of this Code, as originally adopted, promulgated and approved by the code reviewing body, shall file statements within thirty days • after the effective date of this Code. Thereafter, each person already in a position when it is designated by an amendment to this Code shall file an initial statement within thirty days after the effective date of the amendment. (B) Assuming Office Statements. (i) All persons assuming designated positions after the effective date of this Code which are civil service or merit system positions shall file' statements within thirty days after assuming the designated positions. _q — 0 1�1 within ten days after assuming office, or if subject to State Senate confirmation, ten days after being nominated or appointed. (C) Annual Statements. All designated employees shall file statements no later than April 1. (D) Leaving Office Statements. All persons who leave designated positions shall file statements within thirty days after leaving office. (6) Section 6. Contents of and Period Covered by Statements of conomic Interests. (A) Contents of Initial Statements. Initial • statements shall disclose any reportable investments, interests in real property and business positions held on the effective date of the Code. (B) Contents of Assuming Office Stateme Assuming office statements shall disclose any reportable investments, interests in real property and business positions held on the date of assuming office or, if subject to State Senate confirmation or appointment, on the date of nomination. (C) Contents of Annual Statements. Annual state- ments shall disclose any reportable investments, interests in real property, income and business positions held or received during the previous calendar year provided, however, that the period covered by an employee's first annual statement - 5 - (ii) All other persons appointed, promoted • or transferred to designated positions after the effective date of the Code shall file statements within ten days after assuming office, or if subject to State Senate confirmation, ten days after being nominated or appointed. (C) Annual Statements. All designated employees shall file statements no later than April 1. (D) Leaving Office Statements. All persons who leave designated positions shall file statements within thirty days after leaving office. (6) Section 6. Contents of and Period Covered by Statements of conomic Interests. (A) Contents of Initial Statements. Initial • statements shall disclose any reportable investments, interests in real property and business positions held on the effective date of the Code. (B) Contents of Assuming Office Stateme Assuming office statements shall disclose any reportable investments, interests in real property and business positions held on the date of assuming office or, if subject to State Senate confirmation or appointment, on the date of nomination. (C) Contents of Annual Statements. Annual state- ments shall disclose any reportable investments, interests in real property, income and business positions held or received during the previous calendar year provided, however, that the period covered by an employee's first annual statement - 5 - shall begin on the effective date of the Code or the date of assuming office whichever is later. (D) Contents of Leaving Office Statements. Leaving office statements shall disclose reportable investments, interests in real property, income and business positions held or received during the period between the closing date of the last statement filed and the date of leaving office. (7) Section 7. Manner of Reporting. Statements of economic interests shall be made on forms prescribed by the Fair Political Practices Commission and supplied by the agency, and shall contain the following information: • (A) Investment and Real Property Disclosure. When an investment or an interest in real property,/ is required to be reported,!/ the statement shall contain the • following: (i) A statement of the nature of the invest- ment or interest; 3/ For the purpose of disclosure only (not dis- qualification), an interest in real property does not include the principal residence of the filer. 4/ Investments and interests in real property which have a fair market value of less than $1,000 are not investments and interests in real property within the meaning of the Political Reform Act. However, investments or interests in real property of an individual include those held by the individual's spouse and dependent children as well as a pro rata share of any investment or interest in real property of any business entity or trust in which the individual, spouse and dependent children own, in the aggregate, a direct, indirect or beneficial interest of 10 percent or greater. • - 6 - )�3 (ii) The name of the business entity in which each investment is held, and a general description • of the business activity in which the business entity is engaged; (iii) The address or other precise location of the real property; (iv) A statement whether the fair market value of the investment or interest in real property exceeds one thousand dollars ($1,000) , exceeds ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or exceeds one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000). (B) Personal Income Disclosure. When personal income is required to be reported,5/ the statement shall contain: • (i) The name and address of each source of income aggregating two hundred fifty dollars ($250) or more in value, or twenty -five dollars ($25) or more in value if the income was a gift, and a general description of the business activity, if any, of each source. 9 =/ A designated employee's income includes his or her community property interest in the income of his or her spouse but does not include salary or reimbursement foc expenses received from a state, local or federal government agency. - 7 - 1 �� (ii) A statement whether the aggregate value of income from each source, or in the case of a • loan, the highest amount owed to each source, was one thousand dollars ($1,000) or less, greater than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or greater than ten thousand dollars ($10,000); (iii) A description of the consideration, if any, for which the income was received; (iv) In the case of a gift, the name, address and business activity of the donor and any in- termediary through which the gift was made; a description of the gift; the amount or value of the gift; and the date on which the gift was received. (v) In the case of a loan, the annual interest rate and the security, if any, given for the loan. (C) Business Entity Income Disclosure. When. income of a business entity, including income of a sole proprietorship, is required to be reported,6 the statement shall contain: (i) The name, address, and a general description of the business activity of the business entity; =Y Income of a business entity is reportable if the direct, indirect or beneficial interest of the filer and the filer's spouse in the business entity aggregates a 10 percent or greater interest. In addition,,the disclosure of persons who are clients or customers of a business entity is required only if the clients or customers are within one of the disclosure categories of the filer. • - 8 - �s (ii) The name of every person from whom the business entity received payments if the filer's • pro rata share of gross receipts from such person was equal to or greater than ten thousand dollars ($10,000). (D) Business Position Disclosure. When business positions are required to be reported, a designated employee shall list the name and address of each business entity in which he or she is a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee, or in which he or she holds any position of manage- ment, a description of the business activity in which the business entity is engaged, and the designated employee's position with the business entity. (E) Acquisition or Disposal During Reporting Period. In the case of an annual or leaving office statement, if an investment or an interest in real property was partially or wholly acquired or disposed of during the period covered by the statement, the statement shall contain the date of acquisition or disposal. (8) Section S. Disqualification. No designated employee shall make, participate in making, or use his or her official positions to influence the making of any governmental decision which will foreseeably have a material financial effect, distinguishable from its effect on the public generally, on: (A) Any business entity in which the designated employee has a direct or indirect investment worth more than one thousand dollars ($l,ui.o); - 9 / [ �k (8) Any real property in which the designated employee has a direct or indirect interest worth more than one thousand dollars ($1,000); • (C) Any source of income, other than loans by a commercial lending institution in the regular course of business on terms available to the public without regard to official status, aggregating two hundred fifty dollars ($250) or more in value provided to, received by or promised to the designated employee within twelve months prior to the time when the decision is made; or (D) Any business entity in which the designated employee is a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee, or holds any position of management. No designated employee shall be prevented from making or participating in the making of any decision to the • extent his or her participation is legally required for the decision to be made. The fact that the vote of a designated employee who is on a voting body is needed to break a tie does not make his or her participation legally required for purposes of this section. (9) Section 9. Manner of Disqualification. When a designated employee determines that he or she should not make a governmental decision because he or she has a financial interest in it, the determination hot to act must be accompanied by disclosure of the financial interest. In the case of a voting body, this determination and disclosure shall be made part of the agency's official record; in the case of a designated employee who is the head of an agency, • - 10 - 1�7 this determination and disclosure shall be made in writing to his or her appointing authority; and in the case of other • designated employees, this determination and disclosure shall be made in writing to the designated employee's supervisor. (10) Section 10. Assistance of the Commission and Counsel. Any designated employee who is unsure of his or her duties under this Code may request assistance from the Fair Political Practices Commission pursuant to Government Code Section 83114 or from the attorney for his or her agency, provided that nothing in this section requires the attorney for the agency to issue any formal or informal opinion- (11) Section 11. Violations. This Code has the force and effect of law. Designated • employees violating any provision of this Code are subject to the administrative, criminal and civil sanctions provided in the Political Reform Act, Government Code Sections 81000 - 91014. In addition, a decision in relation to which a violation of the disqualification provisions of this Code or of Government Code Section 87100 has occurred may be set aside as void pursuant to Government Code Section 91003. IR - 11 - /a- MAIL TO: Fair Political Practices Commission Legal Division P.O. Box 807 Sacramento, California 95804 The Conflict of Interest Codes of the following cities, counties and /or agencies now incorporate by reference the terms of 2 Cal: Adm. Code Section 18730: [ ] When amendments to this regulation are pr000sed by the FPPC, copies should be sent to me instead of to the address used to send this mailing. Name: Address: Phone: [ ] I am a contract attorney representing the following cities, counties and /or agencies: • ( ] Please send me the following materials: [ ] Definitions from the Political Reform Act and FPPC regulations of interest to filing officers and designated employees. These are updated on a yearly basis. [ ] Instructions for Designating Employees and Formulating Disclosure Cateaories. This includes some model dis- closure categories. ( ] Standards for Granting Exemptions from the Requirement to Adopt a Conflict of Interest Code. • NOTE: Please feel free to attach other mailing instructions or to ask for other materials you think might help you. jq F. PARK. AND RECREATIONAL LAND- CREDIT FOR PLANNED COMMUNITIES Where private open space for park and recreational purposes is provided in a planned community and portions of or all such space is to be privately owned and maintained by the future residents of the planned community, credit against the requirement of dedication for park and recreational purposes, as set forth in Section 2(G) shall be determined through the adoption of the planned community text provided, however, that the park standard for said planned community is the same as for any other development and that the Planning Commission finds it is in the public interest to do so, and that the following standards are met: (1) That yards, court areas, setbacks and other open areas required to be maintained by the zoning and building regulations shall not be included in the computation of such private open space; and (2) That the private ownership and maintenance of the open space is adequately provided for by written agreement; and (3) That the use of the private open space is restricted for park and recreational purposes by recorded covenants which run with the land in favor of the future owners of the property within the tract; and (4) That the proposed private open space is reasonably adaptable for use for park and recreational purposes, taking into consideration such factors as size, shape, topography, geology, access and location of the private open space land; and (5) That Facilities proposed for the open space are in substantial accordance with the provisions of the recreational element of the general plan, and are approved by the Planning Commission. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM May 20, 1980 TO: Lauren M. Wasserman City Manager FROM: Jim Robinson qf- Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Retention /Recruitment Statistics For City Employees 0� COCAMpLVG_o r O ' A F a > 1977 1 Per your request, the following is a "thumbnail" sketch of recruitment and retention statistics for all employees recruited by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Currently the City has 48 full -time employees, 4 Police Clerks and 3 vacant positions which include two clerk- typists and one Associate Civil Engineer. Since incorporation the City has had 34 employees leave full -time/ part -time employment. Of these 34 employees, 20 resigned for various reasons, 9 left for promotional opportunities and increase in com- pensation and 5 were terminated for not satisfactorily completing probation. The City has also been very fortunate in attracting employees with potential, which has allowed for some promotion from within the organ- ization, particularly in the areas of Planning and Finance. This fact can be attributed to the number of experienced employees that the City has been able to attract from other municipalities. Because of the small staff, the City has always been in a position whereby it has been necessary to recruit only skilled, seasoned employees that can come on board and take on their responsibilities with minimum supervision or direction. In addition the City has taken every effort to recruit from both the private and public sector. Of the 48 employees currently on board, 14 previously worked in the private sector, 3 worked for other public agencies, 2 worked for County governments and the remaining 29 came from other cities, predominately from the Los Angeles and San Bernardino County area. Because of the inflationary impact on employees' career mobility, the City of Rancho Cucamonga shares a similar problem with other Municipalities Continued..... Re: Retention /Recruitment -2- May 20, 1980 Statistics in being able to attract qualified applicants in several positions. Particularly in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, we have had a difficult time recruiting in the area of Engineering, primarily because of the fluid engineering job market in the private sector. As an example, one of the current vacant engineering positions was budgeted in July, 1979, but is still unfilled. We recently resumed recruitment for this position andhope that the timing is a little better. Traditionally employees have been more willing to make a move in the Spring and Sumner months, so we are hopeful that we can fill this position as soon as possible. I don't know if any conclusions can be drawn from the above information, with the exception that the City has done a significant amount of recruiting in the past two years and has been lucky enough to "weather the storm ", so to speak, without any grievances filed by any current or terminated employee. JR /vz AMERICAN ASSOCIATION U " OF UNIVERSITY WOMEN CALIFORNIA STATE DIVISION April 28, 1980 Rancho Cucamonga City Hall 9320 Baseline Rd. Alta Loma, Calif. 91701 .Attn: Mayor Phil Scholosser City Manager Lauren Wasserman Dear Sirs; As a public service, the American Association of University Women, Ontario- Upland Branch, will be sponsoring a public forum to discuss the pros and cons of the propositions that will be appearing on the June 3rd ballot. Proposition 9 will be the main topic of discussion. Our speakers will be from the Speaker's Bureau of the League of Women Voters. We cordially invite you or your representative to attend on Thursday, May 29, 1980, at 7:30 p.m., in the auditorium of Sierra Vista School, 253 East 14th Street, Upland (between Euclid and Campus Avenues). We know how concerned you are about local reaction to state issues and believe the forum will be of interest to your office. Any questions regarding the forum may be directed to Mrs. Gwyn Frost, 699 -1127, Legislative Chair. Sincerely,` L Pr ide`bt, Ontario - Upland Branch American Association of University Women consideration and inclussion. APPROPRIATENESS OF C).MMERCIAL [DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA: The area residents felt that commercial development is incompatible with residential use. As we have seen :rem the location of other centers in the community, those com- mercial centers that are developed directly adjacent to existing residential sites do cause problacs. However, this proposed Centel is different in three facts: 1. It is separated from residential development by a 60 foot street and a grade separation. From a house on Lemon Avenue there will be over 150 feet to A building, a 50 foot landscaped setback and d 16 foot elevation difference. 2. Any proposed residential development adjacent to the Shopping Center would occur after the Shoppinq Center is built and there - fore,would have to consider the Center as a development constraint. 3. Most importantly, this is a neighborhood Shopping Center proposed to serve the neighborhood area within a radius of approximately oue mile. If neighborhood shopping centers are to serve the residential neighborhoods should they not go within the neighbor- hood? SAFETY: The issue of safety for the area residents was raised as a related issue to the increased activity in traffic in the area. It is true that there will be an increase in traffic and activity in the area, however, this will not result in lower safety for the area residents. Sidewalks are required to be installed and appropriate on -site and off -site engineering design for safety purposes are mandatory. The issues as described above were discussed quite thoroughly by the opposition at the time of the first reading of the appeal. To snake the most effective use of City Council time for the second reading, it would be most appropriate to re,3uest that mlditiunal comments he addressed to ...,y ,; issues -!.at were not discussed dnrinq the first reading. Should you have any questions regarding this item, please do not hesitate to call this office. .1L: RKI I : cd UIEWM - TADW� (n 1290CMULW� URBAN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNERS 135 F MAM vTREET TUST -N CA 92680 — (71 41 838 9130 21 March 1980 Mr. Doug Hone Hone 6 Associates 7333 Helman Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, California RE: Chaffey Plaza Tree Planting Requirements. Dear Doug: I have reviewed the Chaffey Plaza Project per our discussions concerning with the City of Rancho Cucamonga's landscape planting requirements. Based on my research and analysis, I have reached the following conclusions. The shading of 508 of the parking area (Resolution No. 00 -07, Section 3, Condition 28) is not possible on the plan as approved by the Planning Commission. As indicated graphically on Alternative A, the studies showed a maximum of ;259 of the parking will be shaded when the sun is at its highest angle in the sky (.Tune 21, 12 PM). Alternative B showed that with the addition of morer but smaller planting islands for additional trees, we can achieved close to 509 as required in Section 3, Condition 28. 'though this may satisfied Condition 28, this Alterr -•4ve created visibility problems to a much greater degree than Alternative A. This in addition to increase in cost of installation (approximately $7000- 10,000). The street tree requirements of 20' o.c. along Lemon Avenue and 25 -30' along Haven Avenue (based on telephone conversation with Mike Vairin of the Planning Department, March 7th) are too dense and impractical for a commercial /office development. The spacing of the street will created a tall hedge effect and decreased the visibility of the building frontages and signs. A review of street tree requirements of cities in Orange County indicated that 35 -40' is the norm for similiar situations. Due to the orientation of Lemon and Haven Avenues (north and east), a reduction in the number of street trees will not affect the amount of shade in the afternoon. I caution the use of Albizia julibrissin(Silk Tree) as the street tree. Although it is a fast growing and with attractive flowers and foliages, its growth is rather brittle, making it subject to breakage due to high wind. The dropping of its small leaflets, flowers and pods may create a maintenance problem. Like many other fast - growing trees, it's short -lived may preclude it from being used as a long term street - scape element. Mambo ul the Amerc ' E,xmiy nl Lar,dS pe Arcbdecla Mr. Doug Hone 21 March 1980 page 2 I recommended the planting of fewer, but taller ( +35') and broader (35 -40') species (see Alternative C). This will allow for visibility, shade, as well as providing a more compatible scale to the 'large open feeling' of the area. Included is a list on the preliminary tree cost estimate for the three alternatives. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you. Since[ y, 9c rrTo ng, .S.L.A. WT: byt Enclosure PRELIMINARY TREE COST ESTIMATES - CHAFFEY PLAZA, RANCHO CUCAMONGA ALTERNATIVE A: 30 - 36" box @ $475 ea = $14,250 115 - 15 gal @ $ 75 ea = $ 8,625 $22,875 ALTERNATIVE B: 36 - 36" box @ $475 ea = $17,100 144 - 15 gal @ $ 75 ea = $10,800 $27,900 ALTERNATIVE C: 20 - 36" Box @ $475 ea = $9,500 20 - 24" Box @ $150 ea - $3,000 60 - 15 gal @ $ 75 ea = $4,500 $17,000 MASTER AN 0 ?ARKS anc :�EC;?EAT!ON cr O U C� MASTER PLAN OF PARK AND RECREATION An Element of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California May, 1980 PROJECT ORIGIN CITY COUNCIL Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor Authur Bridge, Mayor Pro Tem Jim Frost Mike Polombo John Mikels PLANNING COMMISSION Herman Rempel, Chairman Jorge Garcia, Assistant Chairman Richard Dahl Laura Jones Peter Tolstoy PROJECT MANAGEMENT Lauren Wasserman, City Manager William L. Holley, Director, Community Services Tim J. Beedle, Assoicate Planner a TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Characteristics of Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Climate........... ............................... 2 Economic Base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Accessibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Valuation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Budget. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 OVERALL PERSPECTIVE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 ' CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Roles and Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION POLICY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Acquisition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Fee Simple The Grant Less Than Fee Securing Parkland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 The Subdivider Eminent Domain Zoning TheBond .... ....... .............................15 General Obligation - Revenue Bond (ii) TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) ANALYSIS OF PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Study Boundaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Characteristics of Users . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Inventory of City's Park Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Joint Use of Facilities - City /Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Standards and Deficiencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 GOALS OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 THE MASTER PLAN FOR PARKS AND RECREATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 EVALUATION PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 APPENDIX Definition and Description Mini - Park /Tot Lot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Neighborhood Park /Play Lot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Community Park /Playground . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Large Urban Park /Inter -City Park . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 TABLES No. 1 Immediate Action Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 No. 2 Census Date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 No. 3 Park Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 No. 4 Central School District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 No. 5 Alta Loma School District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 No. 6 Chaffey School District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 No. 7 Cucamonga School District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 (iii) TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) TABLES (continued) No. 8 Etiwanda School District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 No. 9 NRPA Open Space Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 No. 10 City Facility Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 No. 11 NRPA Open Space Standards - Neighborhood Park . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 No. 12 NRPA Open Space Standards - Community Park . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 No. 13 NRPA Oth, Recommended Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 No. 14 Deficiencies . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 No. 15 Budget Histories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 No. 16 Valuations and Tax Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 No. 17 School Districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 No. 18 Public Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 FIGURES No. 1 Vicinity Map - Rancho Cucamonga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 (iv) INTRODUCTION Characteristics of the Communit The community is located at the western portion of San Bernardino County, approximately 35 miles to the east of downtown Los Angeles. It is bounded on the north by the Cucamonga wilderness, on theeast by Fontana, on the south by Fontana and Ontario, and on the west by Upland and Ontario. The modern history of the area starts with the arrival of the missionaries into the area around 1774. One of the first land subdivisions of the area took place around 1839 when Don Tiburcio Tapia became the owner of the 13,000 acre Rancho Cucamonga. By 1861 the area planted with vineyards, citrus, the grapes and citriculture industries that made the area known started. With the extension of the Santa Fe Railroad and the speculative moves of the Cucamonga Fruit Land Company and others, the growth began. The area is now in the middle of a vast and dynamic urbanizing rage, but still retaining some of its rural charm. Once primarily a citrus and grape growing area, now is becoming more and more urbanized. As this transition takes place, many of the natural amenities that once were common place are now disappearing. The abundant open spaces that once existed are now becoming urbanized with the development of new industry or residential neighborhoods. The beating of this unique socio- economic pulse suggests the urgency for a parallel - rhythm in increased public services including parks and recreation. Parks and Recreation, -I- as opposed from other services, will perish if not planned decades into the future. Land, that priceless condition precedent to a park system, must be acquired and set aside before it becomes forever unattainable to commercial and residential development. Climate The area has a "Mediterranean Type climate" - warm summers and mild winters. The average annual rainfall is 15 to 17 inches, with little precipitation during summer months. Economic Base The economy of the area is dependent upon diversified manufacturers which include divisions of major national companies; rubber and latex companies, recreational vehicles, mobile homes, industrial equipment, fabricating wire products, chemical additives, a major fabric manufacturing and steel production, power plant and many others. Accessibilit Access to the area is by automobile, bus and truck and rail. Santa Fe Railroad's main transcontinental line, Southern Pacific and Union Pacific railroads connect through the City. Nearby is the Ontario International Airport. San Bernardino Freeway (Interstate 10) connects with Devore Freeway (Interstate 15), within the area. I -15 runs North - South and permits traffic to bypass San Bernardino and Riverside in and out of Los Angeles Basin. Government The City of Rancho Cucamonga is a General Law City, under the administration of a City Manager. The Organizational Chart, on page 3, illustrates how the City is organized. -2- City Attorney Historic Preservation Commission Community Services [ [ Finance Department DeOartmen City Council I Planning Commission I I Advisory Commission I City Manager I Community Development[ I Sheriff Department I (contract) neering I I Building & Safety I [ Planning vision Division Division CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ORGANIZATIONAL CHART -3- Valuations Growth of utility and private assessed valuations within the City has experienced an acceleration similar to that of San Bernardino County. (see Table 16) Budget The total City budget has varied considerable as reflected by the tax rate applied to the total assessed valuation and the anticipated program of the District. It is anticipated that the total salary and benefit expenses will increase, with the addition of more personnel. Further, fixed operation, supervision and maintenance expenses will rise as more programs are initiated. Increased capital expenditures for land and improvements will be significant also. -4- OVERALL PERSPECTIVE The vitality and health of a people depend in large part on the quality and quantity of significant, meaningful recreational opportunities during the leisure and unconnitted time of the citizens. The truth of this becomes more abundantly clear as technological advances create more and more of this leisure and uncommittee time in our society. And as time progresses, we become more and more acutely aware of the social, mental, psychological, cultural and physical values derived when our children, youth, adults and senior citizens have the time and the opportunities to develop and grow through meaningful recreation. The quality of life and environmental quality are greatly dependent upon the avail- ability of appropriate and adequate park lands, open spaces and recreation facilities in every community. As the rural areas experience urbanization and relentlessly expand as is the case here, those priceless open spaces needed for recreation areas accessible to their prople are swallowed up - often forever. Unless we preserve these spaces while they are still available, we shall have none to preserve. New leisure time is another problem that increased recreational facilities can help solve. Since the average citizen now has approximately 3,000 hours of leisure time per year, every year, he requires a complete recreational environment. Pollution and crowding problems are obviously alleviated by more park lands. One of the most pressing needs and concerns of the day facing the municipality is the pro- vision of adequate financing for park and recreation facilities. The master plan of parks and recreation, in addition of providing a framework for development and management of recreation resources and programs, is intended to serve as a guide for the City of Rancho Cucamonga in meeting recreation needs. Recreation problems and their possible solutions are explored, and the roles and responsibilities of the various institutions are identified. In doing so, it was believed essential that public views, comments and recommendations be obtained, evaluated and incorporated to the fullest e:.tent possible. Accordingly, a balanced and representative sample was obtained of the recreation - oriented interests of the service area. Participants were asked in advance to address their remarks to types of recreation pro- grams, activities and facilities they feel their service area should become involved in and the reasons. The questions were designed to help ensure that the broad spectrum of matters affecting the local recreation posture and needs would be addressed; they were not intended nor did they serve to restrict the range of comments from any individual or organization. Several general themes did emerge. Participants felt it is important to provide a variety of recreation opportunities for citizens of all ages, economic situations and physical conditions. Other areas receiving considerable emphasis included: need for additional funding, environmental education, trails, better recreation use of schools, utility, flood control channel and transportation rights -of -way, stronger zoning and other protective programs for flood plains, need for private developers to provide open space and recreation facilities in their new subdivisions, and negative effects of present tax laws on open space and parks. -6- CITY OF RANCHO CUCA14ONGA Roles and Responsibilities The most controversial issue in recreation is the determination as to who will do what in planning, constructing and managing recreation facilities. Resources which have natural, historic, recreational or cultural values of importanct to the residents of a local area are properly the responsibility of the City. As Planner, are: 1. To develop a plan for park, recreation and open space areas within their area of jurisdiction which is compatible with the existing general plan. As Coordinator, are: 1. To work cooperatively with all community agencies, public and private, to insure that all available park and recreation resources are utilized to their fullest in providing recreational opportunities. 2. To coordinate with federal, state, regional and local agencies in their planning process to insure full integration of recreation and open space proposals with other programs within the City. As Supplier, are: 1. To develop park, recreation and open space resources and to provide recreation programs at the local neighborhood and community level. As such, they are analogous to cities in performing this function and should assume similar roles in carrying out their responsibility within their area of jurisdiction. Formulation, Growth and Organization of County Service Area No. 50 Prior to the incorporation of Rancho Cucamonga, Park and Recreation was administered as part of County Service Area No. 50. County Service Area No. 50 was established for the sole purpose of providing parks, recreation and parkways for the unincorporated area of Alta Loma. Since its inception -7- by the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors in December of 1966 and during the ensuing years the communities of Cucamonga and Etiwanda have been annexed to County Service Area No. 50's (CSA 50) jurisdiction. Today these three communities form the basis for the City of Rancho Cucamonga's scope of responsibilities. Due to this significant increase of responsibility which is evident in the tangible form of an encreased populace and expanded geographic area, and that an equitable amount of recreational facilities, parks, parkways and services are tieing pro- vided within this community: A. Recognizes that the principal role of the City's park and recreation responsibilities is to acquire, develop and maintain sufficient open spaces, green belts, and provide meaningful recreation opportunities which will promote a harmonious, social and ecological environment, thereby enhancing the progressive development of the City. B. Initiate a Planning and Development Study of Park and Recreation Services for the following reasons: 1. To determine the recreational needs of the citizens of the City. 2. To evaluate the physical assets and constraints of the existing and potential sites being considered for parks purposes. 3. To identify and evaluate existing and proposed recreational facilities, services and resources of other agencies public and private within the City's sphere of influence. 4. To present a clear and detailed analysis that will be used as a tool for the establishment of an equitable and realistic method to budget for the acquisition and development. OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION POLICY The City of Rancho Cucamonga is fortunate in yet having open space and the opportunity now to safeguard it for the future. While several methods of keeping land open are suggested, a permanent and active preservation program is necessary to obviate reliance on chance. We recommend the appointment of a citizens' task force to identify high priority areas for preservation based upon ecological, aesthetic or recreational value, or strategic location for preventing development. Such a group would help the service area to more actively focus on the goal of open space preservation than is likely to be done through the regular planning process and by involving the citizenery would help to generate public support. The citizens' group should become experts in methods of preservation, sources of funding, alternatives and financial benefits to donors of land, other organizations interested in land preservation, and should personally attempt to motivate and help land owners to keep their land out of development. The group should help to motivate the citizenery to find funding for acquisition, should advise the service area as to state legislation the County Board of Supervisors should initiate or support to help it implement its open space goals, and might consider forming a local land trust. Elections to authorize the issuance of bonds for the acquisition of open space should be held at the earliest possible time. Studies in other cities have shown that over a period of years buying the property is often less costly to the citizens than is pro- viding services to residential developments. Time will only allow land prices to rise and make public purchase more difficult. METHODS OF PRESERVING OPEN SPACE There are basically three categories for obtaining open space: (1) Acquisition; (2) Ease- ments; (3) Zoning. The first approach is the most effective but (except for gifts of land) the most expensive; the last is the least effective and least costly. We feel that a combination of all three methods and their variants should be used. Applicable portions of California law dealing with open space include California Constitution, Article 26, Sections I and 2; Government Code Sections 5541, 5545.1, 5780 -5791, -9- 6950 -6954, 7000 -7001, 51050 - 51065, 51200 - 51292, 65563 -4, 65850; Revenue and Taxation Code, Sections 421 -31 and 13957, and Statutes 1970, Chapter 6. ACQUISITION Acquiring the fee simple. There are various sources of funds for the purchase of open space which are thoroughly explored here for applicability to' Rancho Cucamonga. THE GRANT: A grant is an addition to a budget by means of an outright gift of money from the federal government, the state government or a private source. It is an infusion and represents a most important aspect of funding sources. Acquisition of Less than hee a) Purchase and Leaseback - This method is suited to an area which is presently being used for agriculture. The service area purchases the land and leases it to the former owner or to another party who then pays the service area a modest rental, yet enough to give the service area a return on its investment. b) Purchase with Life Tenancy Arrangements - Property is purchased with the proviso that the present owners can use the land, subject to normal restrictions, for a stated period or for life; in return the price of the property is reduced. c) Purchase and Saleback - Through this device, service areas can purchase land, sometimes through excess condemnation, and then sell or lease it back to people who will use it or develop it subject to deed restrictions. HUD can give grants to communities to pay interest charges on money borrowed for advance land acquisition. -10- Because lack of capital is a serious problem, there are several approaches that can be used in the purchase of land to reduce the amount of capital needed. (i) Purchase for an annuity - The service area pays a certain amount per year for the remaining lifetime of the seller. (ii) Purchase on the Installment Plan - Arrangements are made to purchase the land at a rate of so many acres per year over an agreed upon period of years. The owner may remain upon the land and continue to use it. His capital gains tax is spread out over a period of years instead of coming due in a single year. Since the service area takes title to the land immediately, he does not have to pay local property taxes. This device enables the service area to freeze the price of the property. _ (iii) Pre - emptive Buying - This technique could be especially useful in the foothills. Strategic parcels can be purchased, making it difficult to obtain access for development of adjacent areas. (iv) Philanthropy - Land in the City is held in large parcels. by a few owners, a fact which in the past has been of benefit to all of the citizens of the area. Now, however, these owners are being hurt by the high taxes on the lard and are being pressured into selling. This is the time to approach them with the idea of donating land to the service area either for open space and park purposes or to an organization which would preserve character of the land. Through a donation of all or part of their land, large tax savings can be realized in several ways: (i) Escape from property taxes (ii) No capital gains tax when given to tax - exempt body -11- (iii) Value at time of giving can be deducted from taxable income up to 30 or 50% Deduction can be spread over a period of years by donating an undivided interest serially. Tax regulations allow the spread of deductions over a five year period so that the property (depending upon its value) might be conveyed all at once or at five year intervals. (iv) Careful selection of the recipient for the land will allow deed restrictions which give the donor control over future use of the land. SECURING PARKLAND 1. The Subdivider: One solution for obtaining parkland in growing areas such as the case here is the mandatory dedication of parklands (or fees in lieu of land) from developers. There are benefits derived from the mandatory dedication. approach. Timing is one. An adequate amount of parkland can be provided in a desirable location by the time resi- dents are scheduled to occupy the development. Because City planners are in contact with the developer during the planning stage, the best park location can often be determined and secured_ It is also possible that some free or inexpensive develop- ment of parkland can be obtained, for example, when the developer has earth - moving equipment at his site, limited additional grading could, perhaps, be accomplished on the parkland. It has been determined legally that monies obtained through cash in lieu of land can be used only for parks and recreation purposes directly benefiting the community from which the money was derived. - -12- The mandatory dedication approach is not a panacea. The individual property owner will, in fact, pay a higher price for his house, because these additional recreational lands are in the package. The real benefit to this approach is that it allows the municipality to stay abreast of the demands for new parkland, particularly in the local park category, and the timing is such that lands can be secured in time to be available when the new residents move in. 2. Eminent Domain: Eminent Domain is the power of the sovereign to take property For public use without the owner's consent. The latter, however, is entitled to compensation. Althcugh lodged in the sovereign, the legislature may delegate it to municipal corporations, boards, commissions or school districts organized and existing under the authority of the state to serve the public. Lands may be acquired by eminent domain for public parks and recreational facilities such as golf courses, playgrounds, swimming pools, to name a few. These uses are considered public because there is a direct relationship between them and the health and welfare of the community's inhabitants. An ordinance, enacted pursuant to state enabling legislation or grant of power, should tell the developer what is expected of him by the local government in dedicating open space land, or fees in lieu of land. The following items are among those that could be considered in drafting an ordinance requiring park land dedication by developers: 1. The amount of space or money to be dedicated. This could be stated as a function of the density of the new development. 2. The location of the space to be purchased with fees. Is it near or within the proposed subdivision? 13- 3. Provision for giving "credit" for private open space retained by a homeowners' association or the developer within the subdivision. 4. When fees may be required, when land should be dedicated, and when a mixture of both would be used. 5. Relationship between subdivision map approval and the county adopted General Plan. 6. Dedication of open space should be required on the filing of a Tract Hap or on the granting of a building permit, so that builders of apartment buildings and single - family dwellings or subdivisions sold by metes and bounds are included, as well as subdivisions sold according to a recorded map. 7. Procedure for granting a variance or exception. 8. Improvement and maintenance of open space dedicated to service area: a) If dedicated to City , a guarantee of prompt improvement or return, or a time limit when the county will start development; b) If retained by a homeowner's association, a device for improvement and maintenance, such as a special assessment district to guarantee its open character permanently. 9. Establishment of a fund wherein the fees received are to be deposited. Eminent domain is generally used when a property owner refuses to sell or his asking price is far in excess of market value. Mostly, acquisitions are the product of negotiation. 3. Zoning: In weighing the value of zoning techniques, it must first be recognized that, -14- constitutionally, no zoning ordinance may validly deny an owrer all reasonable use of his land. However, planned unit development and density or cluster zoning have been utilized with great success. Such zones are in the nature of encouragement rather than restriction and as such are far more practical and acceptable in areas of rapid development. So subdivision zoning regulations have provided significant open space benefits. Most communities have zoning regulations that require adequate open spaces in every subdivision for traffic, recreation, light and air, by dedication or otherwise, and the payment of monetary Fees in cases where dedication is impractical. Subdivision zoning regulations also frequently provide for the protection of natural streams and waterways, the avoidance of population congestion, the control of flood plains and unsafe areas and the preservation of outstanding natural or cultural features. THE SOHO General Obligation Bonds The most common type of fund raising is through the General Obligation Bond program. Basically, public agencies which use this major financing method must undergo five steps: 1. A complete survey should be taken regarding community needs. Further, the recreational needs must be surveyed in the context of all the community needs and resources. 2. A complete plan must be developed. For this plan to have efficacy, as many citizens as possible must become involved in its formulation. 3. The recreational plan must be followed by a financial plan providing fund support in the form of gen=_ral obligation bonds. 4. The duration of the bond must be set. It usually ranges from twenty to thiry years, depending on the laws of the state of California and the projection of the future growth of the area involved. -15- 5. The citizens must be revolved and organized sufficiently so that the passage of the issue will be insured. Revenue Bonds Park revenue bonds are a series of bonds issued for money to be repaid in a specific length of time by revenue generated in facilities which pay for operations. These bonds mature the principal and interest obligations. Basically, they provide recreation facilities which would not have been possible otherwise, and open many doors to help gain support for overall recreation programs and services. Since no potential bond purchaser is willing to take bonds on face value or because some economic study indicates in theory that the bonds will be matured, pragmatic guarantees must be offered. It must be shown completely that all the cost of operation will be covered, and that the principal and interest will be paid. To assure the sale of the bonds and the ultimate success of the facility in question, three major documents are required: An economic study, a Bond Counsel Statement, and a Resolution defining covenants. The Economic Study: It should define at least the following: 1. The purpose 2. The governing body and the legislation under which the facility will be operated 3. The administration 4. The facilities proposed 5. Comparable examples as to use and income -16- 6. Similar facilities either under existing jurisdiction or under other jurisdiction similar in population, average income, and participation 7. The approximate yearly income 8. The breakdown of development costs The Bond Counsel Statement: This statement is prepared by a recognized law firm which deals almost exclusively in bonds and trusts. The firm's responsibility is to evaluate the total proposal on its merits. From this evaluation, a project creditability statement is issued. The Bond Counsel Statement follows the adoption of the Bond Resolution which legally binds the agency to the covenants. -17- ANALYSIS OF PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES An adequate, comprehensive system of loci park and recreation facilities operated and managed either in full or in part by the City of Rancho Cucamonga must be made available to all the residents. For this reason, the analysis presented here will focus on the existing service area'_ public parks and recreation system with references to facilities operated by other public or quasi - public bodies such as Alta Loma, Central, Chaffey, Cucamonga, and Etiwanda Schcol Districts and non - profit agencies. STUDY BOUNDARIES The city of Rancho Cucamorga boundaries are as shown in figural, page 61. The analysis section will inclu,le a summary of uses, characteristics, an inventory of the existing facilities by type, a description of standards for various facilities and activities, and finally, an indication of deficiencies in the system, if any. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE USERS OF DISTRICT PROVIDED LEISURE SERVICE FACILITIES The principal source for demographic and income data is the U.S. Census. For this reason, the analysis of the characteristics of the population served by the service area's recreational facilities and programs is based on the census data. (see table 2) Experience has shown that the most prolific users of the service area's facilities are the young and the elderly. AN INVENTORY OF CITY'S PARK FACILITIES. Table T indicates the principal parks within the City. The table and map categorize the City's parklands. -18- JOINT USE OF FACILITIES - CITY /SCHOOL DISTRICTS Over the past years, first as C.S.A. 50 and now as the Community Services Department of The City of Rancho Cucamonga, efforts have been made towards the development of a comprehensive recreation program with the Alta Loma, Central, Chaffey, Cucamonga and Etiwanda School Districts. This program would be of benefit to the residents of Rancho Cucamonga because the school districts have a wealth of recreational facilities available to the public as shown on tables 4 through 8. STANDARDS AND DEFICIENCIES The national standards which offer the most assistance were recommended by the National Recreation and Park Association, NRPA, a national organization engaged in continuing research to determine park and recreational needs and to recommend subsequent courses of action. Of the alternatives recommended by NRPA, their standards relating facilities to land area and areas of park land to people continue to receive the widest circulation and the greatest usage. The NRPA standards for Neighborhood Parks, Service Area Parks, other recommended facilities are shown by Tables 9 through 13. Table 14 shows the selected outdoor deficiencies. -19- GOALS, OBJECTIVES ALD POLICIES The overall goal for parks and Recreation along with objectives one through ten are those recently developed by the City. This Section, along with the analysis pre- viously developed, serves as a basis for preparation of the various plan elements. The policies listed here under each objective area are intended not as direct actions, but positive statement of intent, i.e., specific means of attaining the goal. P.^- .� ?OSEC GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Overall Goal To create and preserve a diversified system of open spaces and recreation programs that meet the leisure needs of all residents now and in future, and which enhances the environmental quality of the City. Objective One To orovide a olanned system of parks and beer. spaces that will provide community scale and orderly development. Policies A. Develop and improve the overall quality, variety and quantity of healthful, interesting and constructive recreation opportunities, both passive and active, for all citizens. B. Be sufficiently responsive to recreation needs of special interest groups such as the physically handicapped, youth, off -road vehicle users, equestrian groups and senior citizens. C. Within the legislative authority of the City, to require subdividers to dedicate land, or an equal amount of value in fees in lieu of land, for parks which will serve their subdivided areas. _ -20- D. Maintain continuing evaluation, of park and recreation policies and programs in ord_r to determine their effectiveness in serving the residents of the city. E. Encourage private outdoor recrea tion enterprises to establish adequate facilities and to assure that public and private outdoor recreation facilities are co:patible rather than competitive. F. Ken entrance fees at parks and swimming pools to the minimum to accomunodate .he needs of low inco,;:e groups. G. Evaluate all county owned vacant lands for open space usage prior to disposition by sale, lease or other development rights. ii . Maintain a system of public information and education on all aspects of recreation and open space planning. Obj=_ctive Two To provide facilities and open spaces that hive relief and afford a sense of natural beauty and openness as an integral part of the Area's surroundings. Policies A. Provide more central and nearby indoor recreation facilities; broaden use of school installations; fcilo.i innovative procedures such as using vacant lots for neighborhood recreation needs; using the entire cc:anunity as a classroom for youth; providing special assistance for ethnic groups; acquiring needed close -in lands; redeveloping existing parks to meet changing lifestyles. B. Develop open space lin %aces - trails, parkways, scenic roads, utility easements, charnels and flood control, railroad right -of -ways, and other linear oppor- tunities for hiking, biking and equestrian trails. - -21- C. Provide for more public multiple -use areas; require multiple -use planning; explore multiple -use possibilities of large private land holdings; design multiple -use into areas to help reduce acquisition, development, maintenance and operation costs incident to purchase and use of single purpose areas. 0. Encrease use of federal surplus property such as administered by Bureau of Land Management under "Land for Recreation or Public Purposes ", for recreation purposes wherever it is economically feasible to do so. E 6rploy design concepts for parka and recreation facilities which minimize the harmful effects of noise, air pollution, vehicular traffic and other negative aspects of urban life. 01a.jective Three To orotectrand conserve features. A. :arerully control development, even that required for active recreation in areas subject to flood, geologic or fire hazards. -22- E. Limit commercial activities witnin parks to those operations and services essential or highly desirable to park uses but at the same tire, cp:;;patible with natural features. F. Limit the use of off -road vehicles to areas where the soil, landforms and natural vegetation will not be harmed. Objective Four 19 --pr icn and provide linkages among open ,oar ^_s inte;ra �ed with the ej ty's natural resources. Policies A. 4lhere applicable, encourage the provision of a balance of high and lo..i intensity recreation areas which are subordinate to and compatible with natural resources. "Objective Five To deve'ap a Pal ir.ies A. Develop programs for all age groups; elderly, older adult, younger adult, teenagers, children B. Develop programs tnat create positive interaction between various age groups -23- C. provide for optimal and meaningful citizen (user) participation in the development of programs. D. Y.ithin the individual facilities, develop multi -use features and programs which will create sufficient diversity to serve effectively a population with varied characteristics and interests. E. identify and preserve historic land ;!arks, especially those deemed important to the cultural heritage of the various ethnic groups within the City. F. 5iaintain an intensive progran of public information to create an awareness among all citizens of the opportunities available for public recreation in the city. Qnj'.ct ve Six To orcvide a diversity of .facilities and programs that jai 11 build character, open new areas or interest, and introduce nen skills for inoividual develoo!eent. policies A. Sr.phasize programs that place a premium on individual resronsibility, leader- ship and achievement in addition to a traditional "team" oriented activities. B. Determining needs, and ways of meeting them should be an overriding planning requi re:=_nt. Avoid deficiencies here and thus the difficulty in defining goals and outlining ob;ectives. Rapid changes in recreation preferences Take provision of necessary facilities difficult. (Example: tennis and competitive swimming among low income youth). C. Assure that no individual will be deprived of the right to participate in a recreational activity of his /her choice due to limited athletic ability or game experience. -24- Objective Seven To develop through recreation activities a citizenery that is healthy and creative. Policies A. By suitable recreation programs, try to evolve better approaches to con- trolling vandalism, juvenile delinquency and dangerous public carelessness. B. Coordinate recreation activities with health services planning especially in the area of recreation therapy. C. Promote thorough physical examinations for all participants in active contact or strenuous activity sports, such as football, baseball, swimming and tennis. Objective Eight To provide eaual opportunity for all residents to participate in and enjoy recreation programs and park and open space amenities. Policies A. Maintain balanced system of facilities and programs that assure equality of opportunity for participation in recreation activities by all of the City's residents. -25- B. Assure a uniform system of park maintenance in order to avoid the impression of a double standard in terms of recreational and leisure services. Objective Nine To prc vide a system of leisure services and open spaces that enhance the ecanomy and attract uevelopment to be balanced wit, environmental concerns. Policies A. By jointly -working with the Community Development, coordinate residential development with provision of adequate open space. B. Allow private enterprise to operate concessions in the parks to provide necessary services, that at the same time not harming the natural environment. Dhjectiv2 Ten To Dromote inter - governmental and inter- agency coordination in planning and developing open spaces, facilities and recreation. programs. Policies A. Promote inter - governmental coordination on the County, State and Special District level in the long range, short range and immediate action planning process for open space development within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. -26- B. Encourage continuous area -wide planning of recreational facilities and programs. C. Expand the joint use provisions now available between the' Citv and the various school districts. D. Where applicable, encourage the exchange of land between the County and other governmental agencies when such exchanges promote the development of park and recreation facilities. E. Pursue the acquisition of surplus Federal and State land to meet present and future recreational needs. F. Coordinate the immediate action and short range program for parks and recreation facilities with those of other County agencies in order to: 1. Maximize benefits /minimize costs. 2. Direct development to areas where satisfactory infrastructure (water, sanitation, etc.) already exist or can be provided at minimal cost. 3. Maximize attraction of matching State and Federal Grants where applicable. -27- THE i'ASTE.R PLAN POR PAPKS AND RECREATIV This section will consist of (1) a broad 20 year concept, (2) a specific five year plan, and (3) a specific one year or immed is to action plan. Centrzl to the develeps!ent of all elements is the ideal that any plan must be flexible and lend itself to adjustments, depending on unforeseen changes in user preferences, financing programs, economic potential of the service area and shift in population patterns. PKDICTABLE CHVNSES - 1980 - 2000_ While during any 20 year period, there is always the unexpected such as war, abrupt social change, etc., one of the primary responsibilities of the urban planner is to identify changes which are likely to occur within a given time period. Such future trands as Population, income, amount of leisure time available, and leisure preferences, are somewhat identifiable based upon available information. 1. emulation Growth Total population in, the City is expected to increase from the present 02,000 to about 120,000 by the year 2000, according to the present growth trends. Future long range planning for leisure services must consider granting priority to the areas of future residential development. During the same time, adequate support to presently developed areas should be provided. 2. Income Income, both nationally and locally has risen steadily over the years even considering inflation. This trend is projected to continue for the foreseeable future according to most economists. A most significant feature of this increase is the spendable income segment and the portion available for leisure expenditures. The major impact of this increase will be in commercially provided recreation; however, as quality of private recreation rises, higher standards of acceptable public recreation could follow. 28 The impact of rising income upon leisure will require additional future study and evaluation in order to update response to user needs during various phases of the twenty -three year long range planning period. 3. Leisure Time Also expected to increase over the years is the amount of leisure available to all members of society. Trends in hours devoted to work point toward shorter days and shorter workweeks. There is general agreement that time devoted to work is dccroasing but little agreement on the extent of future decrease. The four day week is imminent, according to Some sources, although others believe it to be years lorry. While the exact amount of new leisure is unclear at present, it will require continued consideration. One need only review the effect of the federal administrative decision which multiplied the number of three -day weekends to see that relatively minor changes can have major impacts. Reduction of work -life (i.e., early retirements) is of growing importance in planning for leisure activity. Drastic increases in leisure can be disconcerting for people untrained in the use of free time. With growing numbers retiring at earlier ages, full service leisure programming is now receiving, and will continue to require, careful detailed study by many recreation agencies. This means that in the future an expanded older adult group must be considered in recreation planning. Future changes in the amount and schedule of leisure available to students can have pronounced effect on the role of park and recreation agencies. Experiments now underway in year round schooling can reduce the areas available for recreation and force major changes in programming. Continued attention to potential modification in school schedules will be necessary to insure continued success in leisure activity programming for students. q, Leisure Preferences Trends which have been developing over the past ten years can shed some light on this subject. Changing leisure preferences will probably be most affected -29- by (a) the trend toward physical fitness for all aqe groups, (b) the energy crisis, and (c) the woman's movement. Physical fitness for all age groups has become an increasingly popular trend which will undoubtedly continue in the future. People in the 20 -60 age group are taking up jogging, bicycling, hiking, horseback riding, tennis and water sports, being participants rather than simply spectators. Future planning should emphasize the use of non - automobile linkages between parks and special recreation facilities such as bicycle, hiking, and equestrian trails. Womens demands for participation in contact sports such as football ana baseball are likely to be tempered by the reality of severe injury, partici- pation in tennis, swinming and to a lesser, degree, basketball, flag football and track is likely to increase. FACTGRS INFLUENCIZ FUTURE PARK DEVELOP?IENT Figure g shads some of the major factors influencing the kinds of choices that will have to be made about locating future parks. The areas along the foothills should be considered as prime opportunities for open spaces to be enhanced and developed for picnicing, hiking, equestrian or nature areas. -30- The areas outlined on Park Location Map - City of Rancho Cucamonga (not included) shows a brief listing of existing and proposed features to be considered in future park development. FOOXOATIOYS OF THE PLAY In light of the previously stated analysis, goals - objectives - policies, and the possible impact of future trends, the plan elements are based on the following principles designed to correct the problems shown by Figure 9. 1. Provide a comprehensive system of leisure facilities. 2. Eliminate present deficiencies in terms of areas served and necessary facilities. 3. Plan recreational facilities for areas of future residential growth. By planning in advance, it is possible to coordinate residential development with the provision of adequate recreational and leisure time facilities. 4. Provide linkages between facilities and residential ca- munities. Due to lack of available open land, it will not be possible to develop all necessary facilities in all communities. However, the creation of linkages in the form of bicycle paths and routes for other non - automotive forms of transportation will do much to enable all residents to achieve full usage of the City's parks and recreation systems. THE YEAR 2000 COPICEPT The Year 2000 Concept, a long range plan element envisions a comprehensive system neighborhood and community parks oriented mainly to active high intensity group sports and regional areas emphasizing lower intensity activities such as hiking bicycling, picnicing, horseback riding, etc. Elements of the system are connected to each other and centers of residential communities by bicycle routes and hiking - equestiran trails. -31- Central to the aevelopment of this element is the expansion of joint use agree.,�ents between the City and the various school districts. '•laximum utilizaticn of such agree•n^_rts could provide complete coverage of recreational facilities for all residents. Similar joint use agreements with the County Flood Control District, County, State and Federal Government and private agencies would also speed implementation of the plan. FIVE `!EAR PLAN The suggested five year plan embodies a basic program for the orderly, staged development of physical facilities and programs. Generally, the process includes the following elements for both the development of new facilities and the expansion of existing ones. A) Site Selection and Acquisition Once the need for a facility and program within a given area has been determined, sit° selection and subseecent acquisition would be the first step taken. Some considerations would be the relationship between the site and service area in terms of relative size, development possibilities, accessibility, cost and availability. B) Design Instead of a makeshift process of adding facilities and equipment on a year by year basis in response to community demands, departmental initiative, etc., an overall design plan would be prepared immediately upon acquisition. The design with built - in departmental and community concerns would fulfill program requirements and relate to the overall. The City objectives as stated ( objectives one through ten), in the previous section. The design would be developed either by departmental staff or by licensed engineer and /or architect under contract to the City. C) Construction Consturction would be accomplished using_ established procedures of the city of Rancho Cucamonga, Construction would naturally follow the design Concepts with allowances for necessary on -site change orders. -32- 0) Furnishing and Equipping This would be the final development element. At this point, close coordination with programming would be required. I,4b1EDI.ATE ACTION PLAN The immediate Action Plan shoo-in by Tables 18 and 19 have a one year implemantat:on timetable. -33- EVALUATION PLAN This report, after detailed analysis of the needs for recreation, standards and deficiencies, and available p- rn;ran :s and facilities, has proposed a five year implementation plan. As narrated in the section on "Goals, Objectives and Policies ", the nature and preferences with regard to park and recreation services are in an increasing pace of change. Withcut a mechanism for keeping abreast of these changes, the plan's overall concept and implementation proposals can easily become out of date or at ::ors t, irralev,.ct. Wi:iout a system for constant monitor- ing of both the conditions teat affect - - -he plan ar,d the implementation of the plan itself, the plan will becoo;e just another idealized document which gradually icses its value as a reference for resource allocation. Therefore, this section presents an evaluation plan and procedures for adjusting the plan and its objectives to maet ever - changing citizen demands and priorities for expenditures. Any evaluation plan or system, in order to be effective, should contain the follo.ving basic elements: 1. A means for stating and updating basic goals and objectives. 2. An analytical framewor< for posing basic questions about the relevanre of these goals and objectives in light of existing conditions. 3. Techniques for measuring and recording observations relative to the achievement of basis, objectives. 4. A formal means of reporting and feedback for decision making or the relevance of observed or measured characteristics in relation to stated objectives. This evaluation plan is a modest attempt to fulfill these basic evaluation require- ments so that the plan, its basic premises, analysis of needs and deficiencies, and implementation measures may be reviewed on a short term basis consistent with the annual budgeting cycle. -34- It is recom:rendod that there be a yearly review of basic elements of the plan as well as the park and recreation service system in the Citv. Fnrthnrmore it is recommended that the entire plan receive a formal update every five years. With respect to the subjects to be evaluated, the following major areas of concern are recommended for evaluation: 1. Annual and five year review of major objectives. 2. Background characteristics including: a. Peculation distribution and growth o. Income patterns c. Changing leisure prefererces d. Changing leisure Lime availability e. Special user groups including elderly and youth population groups 3. Availability of par;:s by classification including: a. Mini park /tot lot b. Neighborhood c. Co..^ou n ty d. Special facilities 4. Review of facilities available per park and park classification. S. Review of recreation programs including the following elements: a. User group profile b. Areas served c. Program capacity d. Program staff e. Program scheduling -35- 6. Revie:i or project development including: a. Site selection b. Design c. Construction d. Equipment and staffing -36- SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Findings 1. In terms of total acreage, The City does not meet the minimum federal government standard of 5 acres per 1,000 residents. When residents of the City of Rancho Cucamonga are considered, the minimum standard is not met as there are only 60 acres of park land for an approximate population of 52,000. 2. When the School Districts' facilities are considered, deficiencies are significantly reduced. 3. Parks are not well located to serve areas of greatest need. 4. Further expansion of the City's recreation programming effort would appear to be in order. 5. Future population growth indicates that by the year 200, residents within the present City limits will number about 120,000 (controlled growth) compared to 52,000 in 1980. This means that an additional amount of approximately 600 acres of park land has to be acquired and developed between now and the year 2000. 6. Future recreation planning must take into account increased income, increased leisure time, especially due to additional numbers of senior citizens and more active participation by the adults (20 -60 year group), increased recreation demands for women and changing preferences among sport activities for low income and minority groups. Recommendations I. The overall goal for Parks and Recreation along with objectives should be developed by the City using the broad guidelines enunciated under "GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES ". This will serve as a basis for the preparation of the various plan elements in the future. Also, this will help determine the specific location and priority of parks. -37- 2. A vigorous land acquisition and construction program during the next five years including continued development of Vineyard, Alta Loma, Lions, Heritage and other parks for which sites have been acquired, but yet to be fully developed, should be pursued. 3. The key to both the long range and short range plans is development of a system of linkages connecting the Regional and City parks with residential neighborhoods in the form of bicycle routes, equestrian trails and hiking trails. These linkages should, whenever possible, be grade separated at busy intersections and at least a portion can be developed along flood control right -of -ways. Such linkages will provide access for all residents to the major public recreation facilities in the City. 4. Maximization of all joint use agreements between the City and the School Districts. 5. Put into effect a parkland and fee ordinance regarding dedications of land and /or payment of fees for parks as part of subdivision conditions with a minimum dedication standard of 5 acres of parkland per 1000 population increase. go APPENDIX -39- Mini- park /Tot Lot Neighborhood Park /Play Lot Community Park /Playground Large Urban /Inter -city Park Ball Fields and Special Facilities The following will include a brief description of the functions of the above mentioned cate- gories and a brief qualitative description of the parks under each one. Mini Park /Tat Lot Size: 1 or 2 city lots Service area: 600 ft. radius or 1 block Location: Within a high density urban living, shopping, or working area The Mini Park serves an important function as a "patch of green" in the urban landscape. The park functions well in high- density neighborhoods where typical private yards do not exist. Improved as a tot lot, the park can offer a play experience for young children conveniently located to encourage mother's supervision. In a predominantly senior citizen neighborhood the park acts as a gathering place for socializing and should provide passive game activities. The Mini Park, when oriented to work or shopping activities provides a welcome "oasis" for lunch, or a moment's rest and reflection in our fast - paced, mechanized society. Because of the limited area in a Mini Park they can easily become single - purpose oriented. A thorough understanding of the true needs and character of the immediate service area is necessary in order that the proper site may be chosen and effectively developed to satisfy those needs. -40- Neighborhood Park /P1av Lot Area per 1,000 population: 2.5 acres Size: 1 to 5 acres Service area: 1/4 to 1/2 mile radius or as limited by physical barriers Location: Preferably adjacent to elementary schools or near the center of a definable neighborhood which is not bisected by major arteries. The Neighborhood Park is the chief outdoor play center for the children of residential neighborhoods but also provides limited recreation for young people and adults. The park would be utilized for unsupervised sports, softball, with play equipment, tot lot, multiple -use paved areas, turf areas and planting. Some passive areas are desirable with a minimum of auto parking. A playground program should be encouraged, including story telling, craft and dramatics. Community Park /Playground Area per 1,000 population: 2.5 acres Size: 10 to 25 acres Service area: 1 mile radius Location: Preferably adjacent to a junior high or high school, near the center of several neighbor- hoods and on at least a secondary thoroughfare. In addition to many of the features of the neighborhood park, the Community Park provides diversified activities and facilities primarily for young people and adults. It serves as an outdoor recreation center for community recreation activities and events including deve- loped athletic fields, swimming pool, picnic areas, tennis courts and a community center building. Water activities such as fishing may be planned if the topography warrants it. Summer recreation programs operated through the community center should include crafts, home- making, dances, movies, and team sports for all age groups. Off- street parking required and some passive area desirable. -41- Large Urban /Inter -city Park Area per 1,000 population: Size: Service area: Location: 5 acres 25 to 100 acres 3 to 5 -m4le radius or 15 minutes driving time with good auto access Where appropriate sites can be obtained incor- porating natural features, at or near intersection of major or secondary thoroughfares and within an urbanized or on the periphery. The Large Urban Park has some of the characteristics of both community parks and regional parts. Aile over -all develooment is less natural than the regional park, there are many similarities such as picnic areas, campsites, hiking- riding trails and archery which should encompass approximately one -half of the park site. The more urban recreation activities may include athletic fields and sports centers, zoo, aquarium, amusement center, golf course and lake for boating and fishing. Many of these can be revenue producing and operated by concessionaires. Being adjacent to a high school or college would be an asset; joining all the recreation opportunities into one total program. Extensive off - street parking is required with interior roadways and shelters. The inter -city parks are intended to relieve "user pressure" from regional parks by providing a day -use area for those activities usually engaged in on weekends at regional parks, and an overflow facility during peak -user holiday periods. -42- TABLE 1 RANCHO CUCAMONGA IMMEDIATE ACTION PLAN 1980 -81 1. Land Acquisition . . . . . $1,500,000 Neighborhood and Community Park Sites 2. Improvements a. Vineyard Park .. $ 50,000 Automated Irrigation System and Upgrading of Parking Lot Landscaping b. Alta Loma Park. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .b 125,000 Construction of Four Tennis Courts c. Lion's Park . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2,000 Plant Additional Trees (50) d. Heritage Park . . . . . . . . . . . . 65,000 Complete design through working drawings stage -43- TABLE 2 SPECIAL CENSUS DATA FOR RANCHO CUCAMONGA STUDY AREA YEAR Population Single Multi - Total Dwelling Average Ethnic Breakdown Percent Family Family Units Pop. Rate Change . White Black Mex /Amer Amer /Ind Other Pop. D.U. 1975 26,262 7,680 455 8,135 3.41 21,597 158 3,398 160 949 56.07 115,89 1979 49,540 15,5281 1,4252 16,9533 3.2 41,183 840 5,224 55 1,560 89 108 1. Includes 14,233 conventional single family dwelling units and 1,295 nubile homes as per the 1979 State Department of Finance Special Census, April, 1979. 2. Includes 188 duplex units, 33 triplex, 246 fourplex, and 958 apartments in complexes of 5 or more units as per the 1979 Special Census. -44- TABLE 3 RANCHO CUCAMONGA PARK LAND PARK CATEGORY PARK NAME ACERAGE Play Lot /Mini Park Neighborhood Parks Lion's Park 2.5 acres Vineyard Park 7.5 acres Community Parks Alta Loma Park 10.0 acres Additional Facilities Heritage Park 40.0 acres Cucamonga Neighborhood Center 1.0 acres Total Acreage 61.0 acres Regional Parks Cucamonga /Guasti Park Special Use Facilities Red Hill Country Club (Private) La Mancha Golf Driving Range (public) Ontario Motor Speedway Ontario International Airport and Upland Cable Airport -45- TABLE 4 FEATURES AVAILABLE CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT -46- v I O 1 I o O d L L I J 1 v o d a SCHOOL E 1 W ^ O I I Valle le Vista Elementary I I 1 School 3 I I X X I 3 2 1 2 1 1 X X Central Elementary I I 1 r3 I I I I i I i School 3 I X I X 1 2 1' 2 1 1 I X I I X l 1 Cucamonga Junior 1 I High 5 1 I X X i 5 i 4 4 3 4 X I X -46- TABLE 5 FEATURES A4AILMLE ALTA LOG1A SCHOOL DISTRICT Stork Elementary School -47- 4 1 SCHOOL d •" c W O m I U u I¢ O d 01 I L I~ I u0 I Y C Y rJ a I O I N U Y I a I Y I C I I E Y I C I 3 E ev 1 C O Alta Loma Elementary I I School 10 I x X 2 4 4 X x Carnelian Elementary i l 1 School 10 X I X 4 a 14 1 x I x i , Jasper Elementary j I School X I x I 4 4 4 I x x l Alta Loma Junior I High gh School 30 I x X 3 4 4 I 1 X X Stork Elementary School -47- 4 1 m a m N FM m m r w r 0 a w ? n s � r N O S 0 0 o. I Rest Rooms (Sets) Picnic Tables (1) Cooking Facilities Areas (B.B.Q.'s) Playground Equipment; x Indoor Facilities —I Baseball /Softball (Inc. Little League) o Basketball Handball Volleyball o Football /Soccer m Tennis Courts Horseshoe Pits Wading Pools Swimming Pools x Parking AReas Gyin x Grass Area Running Track Shower B Locker m a m N FM m m TABLE 7 FEATURES A'JAILAGLE CUCAAOTIGA SCHOOL DISTRICT _4,g_. '- —f--i— I ) J L IV SCd00L 1] l N� 9U aY I I O L O O n d OJ ! J V I C N I C 19 T' I U O IO O N �-• eO O� O C1 O! L • • Cucamonga Elementary 9 Y I I � --«II I � _L� ! f i I Scnooi 2 X X 2 3 1 �� R I I K! I j Los Amigos Junior High I I+ i Scnool 1 X I X 1 4, i j i I I g I X I I i Under Construction X X l I 6 2 1 l 4 j 1 X I j X _4,g_. TABLE 8 FEATURES AVAILABLE ETIW.ANDA SCHOOL DISTRICT -50- I I N N 7 i j u I f u •— a 1_ c a al m I o SCHOOL _! I I C Ol Q G� O I O1 �� d' O C O � J L •D 1] Y •- O .O T A I I v ^ I � O+ 'E I I= L i I Y I Y N I • T O I CJ U �L I Y I ^! J -r- ' E Y I VI I C T I I U' N U O 01 I N I V N C N C O O lti C L p Gl r O 9 ll- 3 I L= r rJ A r l L j O O L d'Id IU4dlrlmv I I m xli x3'H I d IU'�U Id'iH nda I Scco ntermediate n Sc hcol 15 j 8 X I X 4 3 2 2 1 2 Summit Avenue I ' Elementary School 3 112 X X 4 2' I I X I X East Avenue School 3 2 X X I I j I X X -50- Regional parks Special Areas & Facilities SERVICE AREA Sub - neighborhood Sub - neighborhood 1/4-7/2 mile 1/2 -3 miles Within 112 hr. driving time 20.0 250 + acres Serves entire popu- Within 7 hr. lation in smaller driving time communities; should be distributed through- out larger metro areas * Includes parkways, beaches, plazas, historical sites, flood Mains, dc:antc:m malls, and small parks, tree lawns, etc. No standard is applicable. *"lot applicable By Percentage of Area The National Recreation and Park Association recommends that a minimum of 25, of new towns, planned unit developments, and large subdivisions be devoted to park and recreation lands and open space. Source: National Recreation and Park Open Soace Standards - National Recreation and Park Association Washington, D. C., 1911 -51- TABLE 9 NATIONAL RECREATION AND PARK OPEN SPACE STANDARDS BY CLASSIFICATION AND POPULATION RATIO ACRES/ SIZE CLASSIFICATION 1000 PEOPLE RANGE POPULATION SERVED Piaylots * 2,500 sq. ft. 500 -2,500 to 1 acre Vest pocket parks 2,500 sq. ft. 500 -2,500 to 1 acre Neighborhood parks 2.5 Min. 5 acres 2,000 - 10,000 up to 20 acres District parks 2.5 20 -100 acres 10,000 - 50,000 Large urban parks 5.0 100 + acres One for eac..50,000 Regional parks Special Areas & Facilities SERVICE AREA Sub - neighborhood Sub - neighborhood 1/4-7/2 mile 1/2 -3 miles Within 112 hr. driving time 20.0 250 + acres Serves entire popu- Within 7 hr. lation in smaller driving time communities; should be distributed through- out larger metro areas * Includes parkways, beaches, plazas, historical sites, flood Mains, dc:antc:m malls, and small parks, tree lawns, etc. No standard is applicable. *"lot applicable By Percentage of Area The National Recreation and Park Association recommends that a minimum of 25, of new towns, planned unit developments, and large subdivisions be devoted to park and recreation lands and open space. Source: National Recreation and Park Open Soace Standards - National Recreation and Park Association Washington, D. C., 1911 -51- -- -TABLE 10 STANDARDS AND COSTS FOR SPECIAL RECREATIONAL FACILITIES CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA The following standards are recommended for individual recreation facilities: FACILITY (outdoor) STANDARD COMMENT COST Baseball Diamonds - 1 per 12,000 Regulation 90' Park Development Softball Diamonds (and /or youth 1 per 3,000 Cost diamonds) Tennis Courts 1 per 4,000 (Best in battery of 4) $30,000 @ series of 4 courts Basketball Courts 1 per 2,000 $120,000 (Asphalt costs) Swimming Pools - 50 meter 1 per 25,000 Based on 15 sq. ft. of $500,000 water for 3% of pop. Neighborhood Centers 1 per 25,000 (Currently City has two $500,000 existing centers) Outdoor Theaters (non - commercial) 1 per 20,000 $ 50,000 Golf Courses (18 hole) 1 per 50,000 $80,000 /acre Land 6 Develop- ment Total 1.6 million Note 1: Most of the above- mentioned facilities are desirable in small communities, even though their population may actually be less than the standard. Every effort should be made to light all facilities for night use, thus extending their utility. 2: For C.S.A. No. 50, neighborhood and community centers can be treated as one in the same. Source: A.tianal r and n k Open qp,,g C andardsl National Recreation and Park Association; Washington, D.0.. 1971, Amended by Bill Holley, Community Services Department, City of Rancho Cucamonga, (5- 6 -80). - - TABLE 11 NATIOIIAL RECREATION AND PARK OPEII SPACE STAIID.ARDS SPACE STANDARDS FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS Suggested space standards for various units within the park. The minimum size is five acres. Area in Acres Facility or Unit Park Adjoining School Separate Park May apparatus area - preschool .25 .25 Play apparatus area - older children .25 .25 Paved multi- purpose courts .50 .50 Recreation center building * .25 Sports fields * 5.00 Senior Citizens' area .50 .50 Quiet areas & outdoor classroom Open or "free play" area Family picnic area Off- street parking Sub -total Landscaping (buffer & special areas) Undesignated space (10%) Total 1.00 1.00 .50 .50 1.00 1.00 * 2.30 ** 4.00 11.55 2.50 3.00 .65 1.45 7.15 acres 16.00 acres *Provided by eie^entary school * *Based on 25 cars @ 400 sq. ft. per car. Source: Na`_ional Recreation ana Park Ooen Space Standards Pational Recreation and Park Association 6lasnington, D.C., 1971 -53- TABLE 12 NATIONAL RECREATION AND PARK OPEN SPACE STANDARDS SPACE STANDARDS FOR COMMUNITY PARKS Suggested space requirements for various units within the park. The minimum size is 20 acres. Area in Acres Facility or Unit Park Adjoining School Separate Park Play apparatus area - pre- school Play apparatus - older children Paved multi- purpose courts Tennis complex Recreation center building Sports fields Senior Citizens' complex Open or "free play" area Archery range Swimming pool Outdoor theater ice Rink (artificial) Family picnic area Outdoor classroom area Golf practice hole Off- street parking Sub -total Landscaping (buffer & special areas) Undesignated space (10%) Total *Provided by Jr. or Sr. High School * *Based on 330 cars 0 400 sq. ft. per car Source: National Recreation and Park Open Space Standards National Recreation and Park Association Washington, D.C., 1971 C .35 .35 1.25 1.00 * 1.00 1.90 2.00 .75 1.00 .50 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.50 15.60 3.00 1.86 20.46 acres .35 .35 1.75 1.00 1.00 10.00 1.90 2.00 .75 1.00 .50 1.00 2. CO 1.00 .75 3.00 ** 28.35 6.00 3.43 37.78 acres TABLE 13 NATIONAL RECREATION AND PARK OPEN SPACE STANDARDS OTHER RECOMMENDED FACILITIES In addition to the special facilities previously listed, the following facilities are reco:caended and desirable in or near every community and should be provided as the need and conditions dictate. Aquariu.rs Miniature golf Arboretums Model airplane areas Arenas and coliseums Model boating ponds Beaches Motorized vehicle areas Bike rights -of -way Flu<_eums Boccie courts Natural areas Botanical gardens Nature centers Campgrounds Nature trails Casting pools Picnic areas Coasting and tobogganing areas Running tracks Culture centers Scenic overlooks Day carps Shuffleboard courts Drag strips Ski centers Fishing piers Soccer fields Football fileds Spray pools Handball courts Stables Hiking and riding trails Stadiums Horseshoe courts Surfaced play areas Ice curling rinks Teen centers Ice rinks, natural Volleyball courts Jogging paths Wading pools Lakes and rater sports Wildlife preserves Libraries Zoological parks Marinas and boating centers (for powered and non - powered boats) Source: National Recreation and Park Open Space Standards National Recreation and Park Association Washington, D.C., 1971 -55- TABLE 14 SELECTED OUTDOOR DEFICIENCIES - RANCHO CUCAMONGA FACILITY STANDARD RANCHO CUCAMONGA _ f I N . Needed Available Deficient Baseball 1 per 12,000 4 2 2 Softball 1 per 3 000 - 14 39* -- Tennis 1 per 4,000 13 15 -- Basketball 1 per 2,000 25 52 -- Swimmi ng 1 per 25,000 2 2 -- Community Center 1 per 25,000 2 2 -- 1. Deficiency equals number needed minus number available 2. Deficiencies are based on Standards as indicated by Table * These are improvised fields-set on school playgrounds. There are no formal, dedicated softball diamonds in the City. -56- TABLE 15 COUNTY SERVICE AREA No. 50 ANNUAL BUDGET YEAR BUDGET 1970 -71 $ 5,275.00 1971 -72 19,217.00 1972-73 56.546.00 1973 -74 66,770.00 1974 -75 87,981.00 1975 -76 192,212.00 1976 -77 224,671.00 1977 -78 341,850.00 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ANNUAL BUDGET - COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 1978-79 $ 240,495.00 1979 -80 293,161.00 -57- TABLE 16 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 1972 -731 VALUATIONS AND TAX RATES 1972- 812_ Net Secured Net Utility Net Unsecured State Reimbursed Total Tax Tax Yaar `JAIl,a ti nn Valiurinn VaIv tinn Fvcmnrinn< Racc Tnv u.,ro 1972 -731 33,392,930 2,307,490 933,670 2,051,590 38,685,680 0.1171 1973 -74 31,102,000 2,315,510 11080,880 6,395,460 40,893,850 0.1171 1974 -75 64,918,700 26,744,140 6,617,270 13,055,185 113,335,295 0.0613 1975 -76 77,343,510 27,669,770 9,318,805 15,670,870 130,002,955 0.0702 1976 -77 93,178,270 31,494,030 9,402,020 16,009,605 150,083,925 0.0829 19// - /0 _135,[03,133 _ ._ 03, I5 /,LYu _ _ Iu, /lu, /JU -_ [U,U33,jou 1978 -79 ^175 677.300.___34,844.090 12,775,200 23.479,855 246,976,445 .0 ._lo7o -An 73_a,,64R AA5 37 MA 31n 20.635,175 31,820,405 324,935,775 no rate Source: County of San Bernardino Tax -Rate Valuations (1972 -77) John H. Bulmer, Auditor - Controller Valuation (1977 -79) Office of Auditor Controller 1. 1972 -73 thru 1976 -77 valuation and tax rate will be C.S.A.50 -58- TABLE 17 SCHOOL DISTRICTS WITHIN RANCHO CUCAMONGA Alta Loma School District Chaffey Union High School District 9350 Base Line Road 211 W. 5th Street Rancho Cucamonga, California 91701 Ontario, California John McMurtry, Superintendent Mike Dirkson, Superintendent (714) 967 -0766 (714) 986 -2711 Central School District Cucamonga School District 9457 Foothill Blvd. 8776 Archibald Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Dr. Norman Guith, Superintendent Chris Arce, Superintendent (714) 989 -8541 (714) 987 -6941 Etiwanda School District 6925 Etiwanda Avenue Etiwanda, California 91739 Carlton Lightfoot, Superintendent (714) 899 -1701 -59- TABLE 18 PUBLIC UTILITY AGENCIES SERVING RANCHO CUCAMONGA 1. Cucamonga County Water District (Water Supply and Sewer Service) 9641 San Bernardino Road Cucamonga, California 91730 (714) 987 -2591 2. Chino Basin Municipal Water District (Regional Sewage Treatment Plant Facilities) 8555 Archibald Avenue, P.O. Box 697 Cucamonga, California 91730 (714) 987 -1712 - 3. Southern California Gas Company (Natural Gas) 300 West "B" Street Ontario, California 91764 • (714) 983 -9561 4. Southern California Edison Company (Electric Power) 1351 East Francis Ontario, California 91764 (714) 983 -1746 S. General Telephone Company of California (Telephone) 207 West "0" Street Ontario, California 91764 (714) 983 -1811 6. Foothill Fire District (Fire Protection) 6627 Amethyst Alta Loma, California 91701 (714) 987 -2535 -60- City of Rancho Cucamonga FIGURE 1 ...... .... ........... _..... iaoa yaw �aoo —61— NORTH i ORDINANCE NO. 104 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL 9F THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, /t0 EMERGENCY ORGANIZATION AND FUNCTIONS The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows: Section 1: Purposes The declared purposes of this ordinance are to provide for the preparation and carrying out of plans for the protection of persons and property within this City in the event of an emergency; the direction of the emergency organization; and the coordination of the emergency func- tions of this City with all other public agencies, corporations, organi- zations, and affected private persons. Section 2: Definition • As used in this ordinance, "emergency" shall mean the actual or threatened existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within this City caused by such conditions as air pollution, fire, flood, storm, epidemic, riot, or earthquake, or other conditions, including conditions resulting from war or imminent threat of war, but other than conditions resulting from a labor controversy, which conditions are or are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of this City, requiring the combined forces of other political subdivisions to combat. Section 3: Disaster Council Membership The Rancho Cucamonga Disaster Council is hereby created and shall consist of the following: (a) The Mayor, who shall be Chairman. (b) A Council member, shall be Vice- Chairman. , , (c) The Assistant Director of Emergency Services. (d) Such chiefs of emergency services as are provided for in emergency plan of this City, adopted pursuant to this ordi- nance. (e) Such representatives of civic, business, labor, veterans, professional, or other organizations having an official emergency responsibility, as may be appointed by the Director with the advice and consent of the City Council. Section 4: Disaster Council Powers and Duties it shall be the duty OZ she Ra,.cho C„CATunV,5.. it is hereby empowered, to develop and recommend for adoption by the City Council, emergency and mutual aid plans and agreements and such ordinances and resolutions and rules and regulations as are necessary to implement such plans and agreements. The Disaster Council shall meet upon call of the Chairman or, in his absence from the City or inability to call such meeting, upon call of the Vice - Chairman. 3t Ordinance 104 Page 2 Section 5: Director and Assistsnt Director of Emergency Services (a) There is hereby created the Office of Director of Emergency Services. The City Manager shall be the Director of Emergency Services. (b) There is hereby created the Office of Assistant Director of Emergency Services, who shall be appointed by the Director. Section 6: Powers and Duties of the Director and Assistant Director of Emergency Services (a) The Director is hereby empowered to: (1) Request the City Council to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a "local emergency" if the City Council is in session, or to issue such proclamation if the City Council is not in session. Whenever a local emergency is proclaimed by the Director, the City Council shall take action to ratify the proclamation within seven • (7) days thereafter or the proclamation shall have no further force or effect. (2) Request the Governor to proclaim a "state of emergency" when, in the opinion of the Director, the locally avail- able resources are inadequate to cope with the emergency. (3) Control and direct the effort of the emergency organiza- tion of this City for the accomplishment of the purposes of this ordinance. (4) Direct cooperation between and coordination of services and staff of the Emergency organization of this City; and resolve questions of authority and responsibility that may arise between them. (5) Represent this City in all dealings with public or private agencies on matters pertaining to emergencies as defined herein. (6) In the event of the proclamation of a "local emergency' as herein provided, the proclamation of a "state of emergency" by the Governor or the Director of the State Office of Emergency Services, or the existence of a "state of war emergency," the Director is hereby empowered: (i) To make and issue rules and regulations on matters reasonably related to the protection of life and property as affected by such emergency; provided, however, such rules and regulations must be confirmed at the earliest practicable time by the City Council. (ii) To obtain vital supplies, equipment, and such other properties found lacking and needed for the , rotection of life and property and to bind the City for the fair value thereof, and, if required immediately, to com- mandeer the same for public use. (iii)To require emergency services of any City employee and, in the event of the proclamation of a "state of emer- gency' in the County in which this City is located or the existence of a "state of war emergency," to command l"' Ordinance 104 Page 3 the aid of as many citizens of this community as he deems necessary in the execution of his duties; such persons shall be entitled to all privileges, benefits, and immunities as are provided by state law for registered disaster service workers. (iv) To requisition necessary personnel or material of any City department or agency; and (v) To execute all of his ordinary powers as City Manager, all of the special powers conferred upon him by this ordinance or by resolution or emergency plan pursuant hereto adopted by the City Council, all powers con- ferred upon him by any statute, by any agreement approved by the City Council, and by any other lawful authority. (b) The Director of emergency services shall designate the order of succession to that office, to take effect in the event the Director is unavailable to attend meetings and otherwise perform his duties • during an emergency. Such order of succession shall be approved by the City Council. (c) The Assistant Director shall, under the supervision of the Director and with the assistance of emergency service chiefs, develop emer- gency plans and manage the emergency programs of this City; and shall have such other powers and duties as may be assigned by the Director. Section 7: Emergency Organization All officers and employees of this City, together with those volunteer forces enrolled to aid them during an emergency, and all groups, organiza- tions, and persons who may by agreement or operation of law, including per- sons impressed into service under the provisions of Section 6 of this ordinance, be charged with duties incident to the protection of life and property in this City during such emergency, shall constitute the emergency organization of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Section 8: Emergency Plan The Rancho Cucamonga Disaster Council shall be responsible for the development of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Emergency Plan, which plan shall provide for the effective mobilization o' all of the resources of this City, both public and private, to meet any condition constituting a • local emergency, state of emergency, or state of war emergency; and shall provide for the organization, powers and duties, services, and staff of the emergency organization. Such plan shall take effect upon adoption by resolution of the City Council. Section 9: Expenditures It shall be a misdemeanor for any person, during an emergency, to: (a) Willfully obstruct, hinder, or delay any member of the emergency organization in the enforcement of any lawful rule or regulation issued pursuant to this ordinance, or in the performance of any duty imposed upon him by virtue of this ordinance. (b) Do any act forbidden by any lawful rule or regulation issued pursuant to this ordinance, if such act is of such a nature as to give or be likely to give assistance to the enemy or to imperil the lives or property of inhabitants of this City, or to prevent, hinder, or delay the defense or protection thereof. 41 Ordinance 104 Page 4 (c) Wear, carry, or display, without authority, any means of identi- fication specified by the emergency agency of the State. Section 11: Severability Lf any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications, and to this and the provisions of this ordinance are declared to be severable. Section 12: The Mayor shall sign this ordinance and the City Clerk shall attest to the same, and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage, at least once in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulation, published in the City of Ontario and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of 1980. • AYES: NOES: ABSENT: .ATTEST: Lauren M. Wasserman, City Clerk �t� Phillip D. Schlosser, Mayor • BEATIFICATION 1. Common name: Cherbak Family Home 2. Historic name, if known: 3. Street or rural address: 9983 Hillside Road City: Rancho Cucamonga Zip: 91701 county-San Bernardino Assessor's parcel no. 20108340 Zone: North 180' of the h of the west 11 of the S/E ', of the S/W Legal description: of Section 23 TLNR 719 SBBN excepting W 113' thereof. 4. Present owner, if known: City: Rancho Cucamonga • 5. Present Use: Residence Other past uses: None Robert E. Smith Addres 9983 Hillside 91701 p public Zip:. Ownership is: private -xx Original Use: Residence DESCRIPTION 6. Briefly describe the present physical appearance of the site or structure and describe any major alterations from its original condition: Rock house. This was the original Cherbak home. George Cherbak was born in this home in 1901. (Actually, he was born on this location in 1901). This house was built in 1914 after the first house was destroyed. All of the lumber for this house was hauled out from Los Angeles in one load. 7. Locational sketch map (draw and label site and surrounding streets, roads, and prominent landmarks): f rJ I:3L^) 8. Approximate property size: Lot size (in feet) Frontage Depth or approx. acreage 3/4 acre 9. Condition: (check one) a. Excellent x h. Good_ c. hair_ d. Deteriorated_ e. No longer in existance_ 10. Is the feature a. Altered ?_ b, Unaltered? 11. Surroundings: (check more than one if necessary) a. Open land x b. Residential x c. Scattered buildings x d. Densely build -up_ e. Commercial_ f. Industrial_ g. Other d. Public Works Project_ e. Vandalism_ f, Other. 13. Dates of enclosed photograph(s) March 25, 1979 NOTE: The following (Items 14 -19) are for structures only. 14. Primary exterior building material: a. Stone xx b. Brick first fi.00r c. Stucco_ d. Adobe e. Wood xx f. Other second floor 15. Is the structure: a. On its original site ? _x b. Moved? c. Unknown? 16. Year of initial construction 1914 This date is: a. Factual xx b. Estimated 17. Architect (if known):. .. .. ....... .... ,:.::. 18. Builder (if known): "Cherb'ak Family 19. Related features: a. Barn_ b. Carriage house_ C. Outhouse_ d. Sheds) e. Formal gardens) f. Windmill g. Watertower /tankhouse h. Other xx i. None A gas PUMP— IRMse. An open garage for tractors SIGNIFICANCE 20. Briefly state historical and /or architectural importance (include dates, events, and persons associated with the site when known): Built with a minimum of windows facing to the north because of the strong winds in the area. 21. Main theme of the historic resource: (check only one): a. Architecture xx b. Arts & Leisure_ c. Economic/Industrial_ d. Government • e. Exploration /Settlement f. Military_ g. Religion h. Social /Education 22. Sources: List books, documents, surveys, personal interviews, and their dates. Personal interview with George Cherbak and Bob Smith, April, 1979. Design Resource Study made by Cal. State Polytechnic University, Pomona. 23. Date form prepared 2/80 By (name): Helen S. Kilmurray Address: 7178 Hellman City: Alta Loma, CA zip: 91701 Phone: 987 -2732 Organ i zati on:Hi storic Preservation Commission City Use Only 1. 13( AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS FOR DEDICATION OF LAND, PAYMENT OF FEES, OR BOTH, FOR PARK AND RECREATIONAL LAND IN SUBDIVISIONS.] Pc. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does ordain as follows: Section 1: Intent and General Provisions. The intent of this ordinance is to provide for the development of park and recreational facilities through subdivision regulations, in an area where the need for parks has been determined. Each subdivider of land for residential use, shall, as a condition to the approval of a final parcel map or final subdivision map, dedicate lands or pay fees in lieu thereof, or a combination of both, for park and /or recreational purposes. Dedication and /or fee requirements shall be conveyed to the City prior to approval of the final parcel map or final subdivision map or prior to issuance of building permits. Section 2. Requirements. Land or fees required under this section shall be conveyed or paid directly to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The City in accepting such land or funds shall develop the land or use the funds as herein provided: (A) use o7 Land and Fees. T7le la,;d fe , combination thereof are to be used only for the purpose of providing park or recreational facilities which will reasonably serve or benefit future residents of such subdivision. (B) Establishment and Development Time. Any fees collected under this ordinance shall be committed within five (5) years after the payment of such fees or the issuance of building permits on one -half of the lots created by the subdivision, whichever occurs later. If such fees are not committed, they shall be distributed and paid to the then record owners of the subdivision in the same proportion that the size of their lot bears to the total area of all lots within the subdivision. (C) Land Disposition. In the event that opportunities for better recreation facilities than those provided by the dedication materialize, the land so dedicated may be sold with the proceeds therefrom being used for suitable park and recreation facilities which serve the neighborhood in which that subdivision is located. (D) Only the payment of fees shall be required in subdivisions of less than fifty (50) lots unless agreed otherwise by the City Council and the subdivider. (E) Standards for Dedication. The amount of land to be dedicated or the fees to be paid shall bear a reasonable relationship to the use of benefits of the park and recreation facilities by the future residents of the subdivision. The City Council hereby establishes a ratio of five (5) park acres to one thousand (1,000) population, in accordance with the adopted Park and Recreation Element of the City's General Plan. -I- minimum amount of fees to be paid shall be computed by using the following formula. FORMULA: NSP (L +D) = minimum fee 1 ,000 WHERE: N = number of proposed dwelling units. S = planned park acreage per 1,000 population. P = population per dwelling unit on a scale and density set by the responsible public agency. L = fair market value of parkland per acre as represented by the land being subdivided. D = average cost per acre to develop park as determined by the public agency. (G) Amount of Land Required. Whenever the requirements of this section are complied with on the basis of providing park land, the minimum amount of land required shall be the amount which could be purchased with the fees computed in Section 2(F). (H) Park and Recreational Use Land Fair Market Value. The fair market value shall be determined at the time of filing of the parcel map or final map in accordance with the following criteria: (1) The fair market value as determined by the City Council; or, (2) If the subdivider objects to such evaluation he may, at his own expense, obtain an appraisal of the property by a qualified real estate appraiser from the general area approved by the City, which appraisal may be accepted by the City Council if found reasonable. (I) Combination of Park Land Fees Required. When only a portion of the required park land is dedicated as required in Section 2(G), a fee computed pursuant to Section 2(F) shall be paid for any additional land that would have been required to be dedicated. Section 3: Procedure. The requirements of this Ordinance shall be met prior to the approval of the final parcel map or final subdivision map, or prior to issuance of building permi.ts, by the provision of park land in whole or in part, the payment of a park fee, or by a combination of both as required by the City Council. (A) City Option. At the time of filing a tentative tract map or a minor subdivision plat for approval, the City shall determine whether dedication of property for park and recreational purposes or in lieu of fees are necessary. If the City desires dedication, the area shall be designated on the tentative tract map when submitted. (B) Action of City. At the time of the tentative tract map approval, the Planning Commission shall determine as part of such approval, whether to require a dedication of land within the subdivision, payment of a fee in lieu thereof, or a combination of both. -2- N with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act. Where fees are required the same shall be deposited with the City prior to the approval of the final tract map or the issuance of building permits. (D) Determination. The Planning Commission shall determine whether to require land dedication, require payment of a fee in lieu thereof, or a combination of both, by consideration of the following: (1) Recreational element of the general plan; and (2) Topography, geology, access and location of land in the subdivision available for dedication; and (3) Size and shape of the subdivision and land available for subdivision. (E) Park and Recreational Use Land - Credit for Private Open Space. Where private open space for park and recreational purposes is provided in a proposed subdivision and such space is to be privately owned and maintained by the future residents of the subdivision, such areas shall be credited up to fifty (50) percent against the requirement of dedication for park and recreation purposes, as set forth in Section 2(G), provided the Planning Commission finds it is in the public interest to do so, and that the following standards are met: (1) That yards, court areas, setbacks and other open areas required to be maintained by the zoning and building regulations shall not be included in the computation of such private open space; and (2) That the private ownership and maintenance of the open space is adequately provided for by written agreement; and (3) That the use of the private open space is restricted for park and recreational purposes by recorded covenants which run with the land in favor of the future owners of the property within the tract; and (4) That the proposed private open space is reasonably adaptable for use for park and recreational purposes, taking into consideration such factors as size, shape, topography, geology, access and location of the private open space land; and (5) That Facilities proposed for the open space are in substantial accordance with the provisions of the recreational element of the general plan, and are approved by the Planning Commission. Section 4. Exemptions. The provisions of this Ordinance do not apply to commercial or industrial subdivisions. Section 5. Severa bi li ty. If any sub - section, subdivision paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase in the ordinance, or any part thereof, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections of portions of this ordinance or any part thereof. The City Council hereby declared that it would have passed each section, sub - section, sub - division, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, sub - section, sub - divisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases may be declared invalid or unconstitutional. -3- 6. 1 the _ s the City Clerk shall attest to the same, and the City Clerk shall .cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage, at least once in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulation, published in the City of Ontario, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of 1990 ATTEST: City Clerk -4- CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Regular Meeting 1. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Citv Council was held in the Lion's Park Community Center 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, on Wednesday, May 21, 1980. The meeting was called to order at 7:04 p.m. by Mayor Phillip D. Schlosser who led in the pledge to the flag. Present: Councilmen Arthur H. Bridge, Michael A. Palombo, Jon D. Mikels, James C. Frost, and Mayor Schlosser. Also present: City Manager, Lauren Wasserman; Assistant City Attorney, Robert Dougherty; Assistant City Manager, Jim Robinson; Community Development Director, Jack Lam; City Engineer, Lloyd Hobbs; Finance Director, Harry Empey; and Community Services Director, Bill Holley. Approval of minutes of May 7, 1980. Councilman Palombo requested that item 2c under Council Committee Assignments, CETA Regional Council, be deleted. Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Palombo to approve the amended minutes. Motion carried 5 -0. 2. ANNOUNCEMENTS. a. Mayor Schlosser announced that Jon Mikels had been appointed by the president of SCAG to serve as a member on the Community and Economic Development Committee for 1981. b. Mikels said he had attended a recent SCAG meeting and the topic of discussion was the SCAG '78 growth forecast figures. C. Staff requested that item 5M be added to the agenda, an urgency ordinance esta- blishing a moratorium on condominium conversions. d. The meeting would adjourn to an Executive session to discuss employer - employee relations. e. Mayor made an announcement encouraging people to file applications for city service. He said vacancies occurred occasionally on some of the committees and commissions. f. Palombo announced that the Arrowhead Justice Association is now dissolved. Mikels added that the entire LEAA budget would be eliminated this next year. g. Staff requested that item 5F be considered after item 5G and 5H. Council concurred. 3. COMMISSION REPORTS a. Historical Commission: Leonard Gorczyca, Chairman, said the Commission acted on the designation for the Garrett Winery, and it will appear on the next City Council agenda. b. Adv!sory Commission. There were none. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR. a. Approval of warrants - Register No. 80 -5 -21 for $407,600.68. b. Request removal of a Pager from the fixed asset inventory. Value: $259.29. C. Set date of June 6, 1980 for public hearing to consider an appeal on Director Re- view 80 -06 - Arnold Anderson. The development of an industrial site located on the north side of Sixth Street, approximately 600' west of Turner. d. Release of T.O.P. bonds for Terrax Corporation in the amount of $2,000 for sales office on lot 21 and subdivision sign on lot 21 in the amount of $500. Tract 9590. e. Approval of Improvement Agreement for Director Review No, 79 -64. Recommendation: It is recommended that Council adopt the Resolution approving the improvement agreement and direct the Mayor and City Clerk to sign on behalf of the City. RESOLUTION NO. 80 -45 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, APPROVING I."LoRCVE- MENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 79 -64. f. Transfer funds from County Maintenance Account to Contract Maintenance Account In order to continue with the present mimi,al level of sweeping service for the remainder of the fiscal year, it is recommended that the Citv Council authorize the transfer of funds from the County Maintenance Account to the Contract Sweeping Account. The amount of $5,000 is recommended to be trans- ferred to the Contract Sweeping Account. g--- Appcowl- oE- Dlaigtegawee- Agxaeweg4- €eF- TPa € € #e- S }gps }e -aE -BE #weeds- Avenue -end FOucth- Stcaat. Item removed for discussion. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Council approve the Traffic Signal Maintenance Agreement and authorize its execution by the City. h. Release of Bonds. Tract 9321. Located north of 19th Street and west of Sapphire Street. Owner: Crowell /Leventhal, Inc. Labor & Material Bond (road) $ 77,000 Labor & Material Bond (sewer) 38,000 Labor & Material Bond (water) 27,000 Tract 9322. Located north of Highland Avenue and west of Jasper Street. Owner: Lewis Homes of California. Labor & Material Bond (road) $ 74,000 Labor & Material Bond (sewer) 21,500 Labor & Material Bond (water) 26,500 Tract 9337. Located on east side of Turner Avenue between Foothill Blvd. and Arrow Route. Owner: Butler Development. Faithful Performance Bond (water) $ 50,000 Faithful Performance Bond (sewer) 36,000 Labor & Material Bond (water) 25,000 Labor & Material Bond (sewer) 18,000 Labor & Material Bond (road) 85,000 Tract 9348. Located on east side of Turner Avenue at Palo Alta Street. Owner: Tent Land Co. Labor & Material Bond (road) $ 52,000 Labor & Material Bond (sewer) 23,000 Labor & Material Bond (water) 22,000 Tract 9350. Located on west side of Sapphire Street between Banyan Street and 19th Street. Owner: Yellow Brick Road, Ltd. Labor 4 Material Bond (road) $ 33,000 Labor 4 Material Bond (water) 10,000 Tract 9352. Located on soutwest corner of 19th Street and Hermosa Avenue. Owner: Inco Homes. Labor 4 Material Bond (road) $ 50,000 Labor 4 Material Bond (sewer) 18,500 Labor 4 Material Bond (water) 26,500 Tract 9352 -1. Located on southeast corner of 19th Street and Ramona Avenue. Owner: Into Homes, Inc. Labor 4 Material Bond (road) $ 50,000 Labor 4 Material Bond (sewer) 12,000 Labor 4 Material Bond (water) 19,500 Tract 9355. Located on southeast corner of Beryl Street and Almond Street. Owner: R. L. Sievers 4 Son, Inc. Labor 4 Material Bond (road) $ 53,000 Labor 4 Material Bond (water) 19,500 Tract 9358. Located on east side of Turquoise Avenue at Appaloosa Court and Galloway. Owner: Crowell /Leventhal, Inc. Labor 4 Material Bond (road) $ 40,000 Labor 4 Material Bond (water) 25,500 Tract 9366. Located on northwest corner of 19th Street and Haven Avenue. Owner: Valle Verde Ltd. Labor 4 Material Bond (water) $ 7,000 Labor a Material Bond (sewer) 5,500 Tract 9370. Located at northeast corner of 19th Street and Haven Avenue. Owner: Vale Verde Ltd. Labor 6 Material Bond (road) $ 28,000 Labor 4 Material Bond (sewer) 5,500 Labor 4 Material Bond (water) 10,000 Tract 9396. Located on north side of Church Street between Turner and Haven Avenue, Owner: Thompson Associates. Faithful Performance Bond (road) $ 74,000 Labor 4 Material Bond (road) 37,000 Labor 4 Material Bond (sewer) 9,500 Labor 4 Material Bond (water) 7,000 Tract 9480. Located on the south side of Base Line and west of Haven Avenue. Owner: Kaufman /Broad, Inc. Faithful Performance Bond (sewer) $ 61,000 Faithful Performance Bond (water) 42,000 Tract 9582_1. Located northerly of Wilson Avenue and east of Haven Avenue. Owner: Deer Creek Co. Faithful Performance Bond (storm drain) $100,000 Labor d Material Bond (storm drain) 50,000 Faithful Performance Bond (street trees) 5,330 Tract 9585. Lcoated at northwest corner of Base Line and Haven Avenues. Owner: Thompson Associates. Faithful Performance Bond (road) $130,000 Labor 6 Material Bond (road) 65,000 Labor S Material Bond (sewer) 12,500 Labor S Material Bond (water) 14,500 Tract 9591. Accept roads and release bonds. Located on southeast corner Hillside Road and Archibald Avenue. Owner: Apple Company. Faithful Performance Bond (road) $ 66,000 Labor S Material Bond (water) 7,500 Tract 9591. Located south of Hillside Road and east of Archibald Avenue. Owner: Michael J and Helena M. Leon. Faithful Performance Bond (road) $ 66,000 Faithful Performance Bond (landscape) 20,476. Tract 9305. Release of bond and acceptance of substitution bond. Located at Hermosa and Victoria Avenues. Release of existing bond.. Labor 6 Material Bond $ 76,000 Accept substitution bond.. Labor 6 Material Bond $ 30,000 Frost asked that item "g" be removed. Motion: Moved by Palombo, seconded by Mikels to approve the Consent Calendar not to include item "g". Motion carried 5 -0. Item "g ", Approval of Maintenance Agreement for Traffic Signals at Etiwanda Avenue and Fourth Street. Frost asked if the street at Etiwanda and Fourth Street was a city street. Mr. Hobbs said one - fourth was the city's. Motion: Moved by Frost, seconded by Palombo to approve item "g ". Motion carried 5 -0. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS. 5A. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE HISTORICAL ORDINANCE NO. 70. Report by Bill Holley. Title read by City Clerk Wasserman. ORDINANCE NO. 70 -D (second reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SUBSECTIONS (c) AND (d) OF SECTION 10 OF ORDINANCE NO. 70, CREATING AN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COK41SSION TO ACT IN ADVISORY CAPACITY TO THE CITY COUNCIL IN THE IDENTIFICATION AND PRESERVATION OF HISTORICAL OBJECTS, EVENTS, STRUCTURES, AND SITES, AND TO IDENTIFY PERSONS OF HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE TO THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. Motion: Moved by Palombo, seconded by Frost to waive further reading of Ordinance No. 70 -D. Motion carried 5 -0. 5C. ZONE CHANGE NO. 80 -03 - THOMAS COLEMAN. A request for a change of zone from R -3 to M -R for 2.4 acres of land located on the north side of Ninth Street, approximately 1,000 feet west of Vineyard Avenue - Assessor's Parcel No. 207- 262 -28. Staff report by Jack Lam. City Clerk Wasserman read title of Ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. 102 (second reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 207- 262 -28 FROM R -3 TO M -R LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF NINTH STREET APPROXIMATELY 1,000 FEET WEST OF VINEYARD AVENUE. Motion: Moved by Palumbo, seconded by Bridge to waive further reading. Motion carried 5 -0. Mayor opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Palombo to approve Ordinance No. 102. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Bridge, Palumbo, Mikels, Frost, and Schlosser. NOES: None, ABSENT: None. 5D. ZONE CHANGE NO. 80 -05 - JUDITH AND THOMAS STEPHENSON, A change of zone from R -1 -1 to R -1- 20,000 for property located on the northwest corner of Kinsman and Whirlaway. Staff report by Jack Lam. City Clerk Wasserman read title of Ordinance No. 103. ORDINANCE NO. 103 (second reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 1061 - 511 -6 AND 7 FROM R -1 -1 TO R -1- 20,000 LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF KLUSMAN AND WHIRLAWAY. Motion: Moved by Palumbo, seconded by Frost to waive further reading. Motion carried 5 -0. Mayor opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Bridge, seconded by Palombo to approve Ordinance No. 103. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Bridge, Palombo, Mikels, Frost, and Schlosser. NOES: :lone. ABSENT: None. 5E. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO EMERGENCY ORGANIZATION AND FUNCTIONS. Staff report by Bill Holley. City Clerk Wasserman read title of Ordinance No. 104. ORDINANCE NO. 104 (second reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RELATING TO EMERGENCY ORGANIZATION AND FUNCTIONS. Motion: Moved by Bridge, seconded by Palombo to waive further reading. Motion carried 5 -0. Mayor opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Palombo, seconded by Mikels to approved Ordinance No. 70 -D. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Bridge, Palumbo, Mikels, Frost, and Schlosser. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. 58. APPEAL OF ZONE CHANGE NO. 80 -02 - WATT INDUSTRIES. A change of zone from R -3 to C -1 for property located on the east side of Haven Avenue between Lemon and Highland. Mayor Schlosser gave a review of action taken at the May 7 Council meeting. City Clerk Wasserman read the title of Ordinance No. 101. ORDINANCE NO. 101 (second reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY :OUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING THE WESTERLY 557' OF ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 201- 271 -53 FROM R -3 TO C -1 LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF HAVEN AVENUE BETWEEN LEMON AND HIGHLAND AVENUES. Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Frost to waive further reading. Motion carried 5 -0. Mayor opened the meeting for public hearing to the proponents. Scott Bell, Vice President in charge of the project, addressed Council. Those addressing Council in opposition to the proposed zone change were: Fred Sherman, resident at 6225 Dakota Roland Smith, resident at 6235 Valinda Craig Nelson, resident at 10560 Lemon Dave Hudson, resident at 10557 Heather Mr. Paul Wilkinson, Linscott, Law, and Greenspan Traffic Engineer, answered some of the questions raise by the residents regarding traffic and traffic count surveys. Others addressing Council were: Vito de Vito Francesco, attorney representing property owner. Sack Sylvester, property owner. Jerry Rrane, architect for the project. Mayor closed the public hearing. After some Council discussion, the following motions were made: Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Palombo to deny passage of Ordinance No. 101. Motion failed by the following vote: AYES: Mikels and Palumbo. NOES: Frost, Bridge, and Schlosser. Motion: Moved by Frost, seconded by Bridge to adopt Ordinance No, 101. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Frost, Bridge, and Schlosser. NOES: Mikels and Palombo. ABSENT: None. Mayor called a recess at 8:50 p.m. Meeting reconvened at 9:05 p.m. with all members of the Council and staff present. Mayor opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the hearing was closed. Council discussed that the word "director' should have been added to Section 3(c). Council had requested this at the May 7 meeting. It had been inadvertently overlooked in the retyping. Motion: Moved by Bridge, seconded by Palombo to approve Ordinance No. 104. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Bridge, Palumbo, Mikels, Frost, and Schlosser. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. Motion: Moved by Frost,seconded by Palombo to appoint Arthur Bridge as the Vice - Chairman. Motion carried 5 -0. Mr. Bruce Chitiea, 7943 Appaloosa Court, offered the services of his company to work with the City in emergency planning. 5H. ADOPTION OF INTERIM RECREATION ELEMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN. Staff report by Jack Lam. Mayor opened the meeting for public comment. Ralph Lewis, Lewis Homes, expressed that 5 acres per 1000 population was excessive. He said the new buyer would have to pay considerably more for his house. He asked that this be tabled until the BIA could have a chance to study this. Mr. Wasserman explained that this was only an interim measure and that we needed this now. Mayor closed the public portion of the meeting. Motion: Moved by Bridge, seconded by Mikels to approve Resolution No. 80 -47 and to waive entire reading. Motion carried 5 -0. Title read by City Clerk Wasserman. RESOLUTION NO. 80 -47 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE ADOPTION OF THE GENERAL PLAN. 5F. PARK DEDICATION ORDINANCE. An ordinance designed to provide park land dedication or fees to provide park improvements to the residents of new subdivisions. Staff report by Bill Holley. City Clerk Wasserman read title of Ordinance No. 105. ORDINANCE N0. 105 (first reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING RE- GULATIONS FOR DEDICATION OF LAND, PAYMENT OF FEES, OR BOTH, FOR PARK AND RECREATIONAL LAND IN SUBDIVISIONS. Motion: Moved by Frost, seconded by Bridge to waive further reading. Motion carried 5 -0. Council discussed the ordinance; its wording, if section 2 -D precluded a policy of providing for the small park, and the necessity of passing this before July 1 when Propositicn 4 goes into effect. Council decided upon the following changes to Section 1 of the ordinance - the last sentence should be as follows: 'Dedication sh::.: be conveyed to the City concurrent to recordation of the final parcel map or final subdivision map or prior to issuance of building permits. In lieu fees shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of building permits." Mayor opened the meeting for public hearing. Those addressing Council were: Doug Gorgen asked Council to consider having amount of fees for condo- miniums, PUDs, and apartments equal. He recommended that the item be tabled for further study or at least remove Section, 2 -F. Ralph Lewis said the fees were excessive and should be studied. Jerry Brian, representing the BIA, requested that the item be postponed until it could be studied. He proceeded to point out some incon- sistencies. Bruce Chitiea, 7943 Appaloosa, asked questions regarding equestrian trails. Sharon Romero asked if there was a rebate included for landscaped trails. Staff said not in this ordinance. Jeff Scerenka Mayor closed the public hearing. There being no further Council discussion, the Mayor set June 4 for second reading of Ordinance No. 105. 5G. REVISION TO ORDINANCE NO. 8 WHICH ESTABLISHES A PARK AND RECREATION TAX FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. The proposed amendment to Ordinance No. 8 would be to residential development not covered under subdivision regulations in Ordinance No. 8. Staff report by Bill Holley. City Clerk Wasserman read title of Ordinance No, 8 -B. ORDINANCE NO. 8 -B (first reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING RE- CREATION TAX FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND PROVIDING FOR THE ADMINISTRATION, AMOUNTS, AND CREDITS THEREOF. Motion: Moved by Bridge, seconded by Frost to waive further reading. Motion carried 5 -0. Mayor opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the hearing was closed. There being no Council discussion, the Mayor set June 4, 1980 for second reading of Ordinance No. 8 -B. Mayor called a recess at 10:45 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 11:00 p.m. with all members of the City Council and staff present. 51. APPEAL OF SITE APPROVAL NO. 80 -01 - HONE AND ASSOCIATES. Proposed shopping center to be located on the southwest corner of Lemon and Haven Avenues. Staff report by Jack Lam. Mayor opened the meeting for public cement. Those speaking were: Doug Hone, property owner. George Godlin, 6344 Haven Avenue, speaking in opposition Paul Hersey, 562 W. 18th Street, Upland, representing the Stanley Allens who wanted to go on record as favoring the development. Allan Snapp, architect for the project. Motion: Moved by Palombo, seconded by Bridge to deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's decision, to approve Resolution 80 -48, and waive entire reading. Motion carried 5 -0. City Clerk Wasserman read title of Resolution No. 80 -48. RESOLUTION NO. 80 -48 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF SITE APPROVAL NO. 80 -01 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER TO BE LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LL40N AND RAVEN AVENUES. Doug Hone requested that Co.mcil refer this item back to the Planning Commission and the Director Review Committee to work on the signing and landscaping re- quirements. Mr. Dougherty said that the City Council did not have the jurisdiction to grant the request this evening since the public hearing had been closed and the public had gone home. Mr. Lam said that Mr, Hone had the option to go hack to the Planning Commmission at any time. He would not have to have City Council directive. Mr, Hone with- drew his request. 5J. ZONE CHANGE NO. 80-04 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - ACACIA CONSTRUCTION. A clan.ge of zone from A -1 to R -3 for property located on the southwest corner of Baker and Foothill Boulevard, Staff retort by Jack Lam. Mikels said he would abstain from this issue since he had property on Baker. City Clerk Wasserman read title of Ordinance No, 106, ORDINANCE NO. 106 (first reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 207- 191 -31 AND 26 LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND BAKER, Motion: Moved by Palombo, seconded by Bridge to waive further reading. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Bridge, Palombo, Frost, and Schlosser. ABSTAINED: Mikels. Mayor opened the meeting for public hearing, There being no response, the hearing was closed. There being no response from the City Council, the Mayor set June 4 for second reading. 5K. ZONE CHANGE NO. 80 -06 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - DELL MC DANIEL. INC. A change of zone from A -1 to R -1 for property located on the northeast corner of Ramona and Church. Staff report by Jack Lam, City Clerk Wasserman read title of Ordinance No. 107. ORDINANCE NO. 107 (first reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REZONING ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 1077- 301 -37 FROM A -1 TO R -1 LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF RA.MONA AND CHURCH. Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Palombo to waive further reading. Motion carried 5 -0. Mayor „tend; the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the hearing was closed. There being no discussion by Council, the Mayor set June 4 for second reading. Motion: Moved by Mikels to approved Ordinance No. 97 as changed by the City Attorney. After further discussion, the Council concurred a change should be reflected In the title also. Mr. Dougherty read the new title. ORDINANCE NO. 97 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, IMPOSING A MORATORIUM UPON THE FILING, PROCESSING, AND APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE AND FINAL MAPS FOR SUB- DIVISIONS CREATING BY CONVERSION, FIVE (5) OR MORE CONDOMINIUMS, COMMUNITY APARTMENT CON- VERSION PROJECTS CONTAINING FIVE (5) OR MORE PARCELS, AND CONVERSION OF DWELLINGS TO STOCK COOPERATIVES CONTAINING FIVE (5) OR MORE DWELLING UNITS, AND DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF. Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Palomho to waive further reading. Motion carried 5 -0. Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Palombo to approve ordinance No. 97 as an urgency measure. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Bridge, Palombo, Mikels, Frost, and Schlosser. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. 6. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS. 6A. CARNELIA.N PARKWAY PROGRAM. Staff report by Jack Lam Mr. Steve Long, Genge Consultants, made the presentation of the proposed land- scape plan for Carnelian Avenue from Foothill Boulevard north. Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Palombo to approve Concept "B" for Carnelian Street and Design Concept "B" with a mixture of Alternatives 1 and 2 for the planting plan of Carnelian Street. Also, that special attention be paid to the intersection of 19th Street and Carnelian to give that node added emphasis through landscaping. The project to begin from Foothill and proceed north. Motion carried 5 -0. 6B. ARTICLE 8 TRANSPORTATION CLAIM. Staff report by Jim Robinson Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Frost to authorize the City Manager to sign the Article 8 claim and to authorize the following distribution of TDA funds for fiscal year 1980 -81. A. Omnitrans $173,608.00 B. City of Rancho Cucamonga 502,881.00 $676,489.00 Motion carried 5 -0. 6C. RECOMMENDATION TO DELETE BROKER OF RECORD FOR CITY HEALTH INSURANCE. Staff report by Lauren Wasserman. In order to enable the city to seek alternative policies for health insurance, it is necessary to remove the broker of record. Many companies are reluctant to submit proposals as long as the city has a broker. Motion: Moved by Palombo, seconded by Mikels to delete the broker of record for the city's health insurance policy beginning July 1, 1980. Motion carried 5 -0. 7. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS. A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODES. Report presented by Robert Dougherty, Assistant City Attorney. Council spent some time discussing if the City Attorney should also be required to file. Motion: Moved by Mikels, seconded by Bridge to include the City Attorney and Assistant City Attorneys it the appendix to file conflict of interest reports. Motion failed by the followini; vote: AYES: Mikels. NOES: Bridge, Palombo, Frost, and Schlosser. Motion: Moved by Frost, seconded by Palombo to approve Resolution No. 80 -49 and waive the entire reading. Motion carried 5 -0. City Clerk Wasserman read title of Resolution No. 80 -49. RESOLUTION NO. 80 -49 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ITS CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODES TO INCORPORATE BY REFERENCE THE FAIR POLITICAL COMN[ISSION'S STANDARD MODEL CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE. 8. ADJOURNMENT. Motion: Moved by Palombo, seconded by Bridge to adjourn to an executive session not to reconvene. Motion carried 5 -0. Meeting adjourned at 1:30 a.m. The executive session adjourned at 3:00 a.m. Reeysp/epccttnff[,ully submitted, Beverly Au[he l Deputy City Clerk