No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985/11/06 - Agenda PacketC� Miy, z i 1 wan CITY OF RA NO-A) Cc r uvjYVCA aTy AGENDk 1�Y:T% Lion, Perk Community Canter 9161 Dese Lint Road ktnebO Cueaeenge, r,lifornie davember 6, 1985 - 7150 P.N. ,111 iteas sabwittai for the Ci y Coamuil Ageds want be to writing. The deadline tor, svbdttims chase its" to 5100 p.r, on the Nadea,Amy prior to the meeting. The City Clerk's Office receives all not! hear. 3 ,4 A. e, 1. CiLE TO nlnR Pledge of Al2,11ance to VISE. Roil Cell: Bright __, Euquet Nikels Dahl _, end Ring C. Approval of Minutes, September JA, 1985 Catcher 2, 1985 October 16, 1985 A. Thursday, NCvesbor 7, 1985, 7300 p.m. - HISTORIC •. PRESERVATION CONNISSIOd, Lions Patk Comru,ity CeISCO. 8. Saturday, November 9, 1985 - 7TR ANNUAL POUNDERS DAY PARADE. b C. Nednecday, November "1 1985, 7100 P-aw - PLANNING CONMISS ION, Lions Perk Community Ctator. C. Thuredsy, November 21, 1985, 7350 p.m. - PARR y DBVELOPNTIT COMMISSION. Lions Park Comwanity Center. V E, Thursday, December 5, 1985, 7130 p.m. - ADVI80R1 COMMISSION, Lir,, Park Comamity Coater. (Combined November - December meting) 3 ,4 : n :0 �+ a 7. i` City Council Agenda -2- 0avomker 6, .P85 " •. OOL I� fame - - r The following Comsest CAlendar its" are Directed to be ^ rwttaa aad uomr- eoatrovereial. Thar will be acted upon by the Council at sea tlwe dtkwt 413e3uiou. A. Ap -rove: of W2rr9n0, Rag:ater No's. 85 -11 -06 and 1 Payroll ending 10/277e3 for the total saount of 9710,086.69. B. Approval to receive and file current Iavastrot 6 Schedule as of 10,129/85. C. Pnrvard C1ai■ (CL 85 -29) sAainot the City by Southern '16 C411fornl4 Batson Coapacy, property daeago. August 96 �. 1984, at north Bide of Base Line, east of Hermes, to City Atcornsy and Insurance carrier for baadliog. D. Alcoholic Beverage Application No. AS 85 -0 for Ou -Sala 14 ' beer 6 Wine Bating Kata License, Brooklyn "oar's Reid , Deli. Inc., Lawrence, P. Guarnisri, 8403 Havan Avanut. E. Alcoholic Beverage Application No. AD 83-20 for 16 Off -Sale Beer 6 Wine Feting Place Licetaa, Speady'e Pizza Expruu, Inc., Scott Weikel, 9142 Foothill Loulavard. P. Approval to eueopt Parcel Nap 7731 street improvements, 18 relaana performance bond and tiling a Notica of .n "- Completion. F Releavet Faithful Perforaenca Banda 62266000.00 '• RESOLUTION NO. 85 -291 20 A RBSOLUTICN OF THE CITY COOBCIL OF THE CITY OF AVECSO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTIDG + " THE PUBLIC MIROPENESYB FOR PARCEL NAP 7731 _ )% AND Ab THORIZr W THE PILING OF A NOTICE 07 , COHFLEI'IDU FOR THE VORR - G. Approval 01 ).aprovement Agreement and Improvement Sorority for Pa.val Nap 9204 located on the nortbvast corner of Birth Street and Ewan Avenue subrActed by Reusley -Noon Propermi OA. 'yw1.� }.AiFiM�. i.V,k ���.ie�'.a.J ,.: •tl.�h,� � :. ,�.�'1.7AiRR��';�'i1;ev'Y) City Council Agenda RESOLUTION N0. 85 -292 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL Of THE CITY OP RANCHO C7CANONGA. CALIFORNIA. APrROVIMC PARCEL HAP 9204. (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 9204). IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY H. Approval of Real Property Imnrovaaatt Agreement and Lien ABra$mant submitted by Rancho Cucamonga Partners in connection with D. R. 04-47 located an the south side of Foothill Boulevard between Vineyard and Hellman Avanuds. RESOLUTIO3 90. 65 -293 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITT COUNCIL OP THE CITT OP RANCHO CUCAMOMCA. CALIV0W4, ACCffPrIMC A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND LIEN AGREEMENT fROM RANCHO CUCANOMOA PARTMERB, ?OR DEVELOPMENT RBVIrJ 66-42 AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CI1T CUP% TO SION THE SAAR 1. Release of Bonds f Depositor Terre ytata PjARA11 Com>uni tv - Owner Lwlo X00146 of California. T t 12]16 9[rne[fpQrDlltlaaIICA Accept: Haintenancs "ord (Street$) $10,100.00 Relea$at Faicaful Performance Bond $101,000.00 (street) T tT�lc Accept: Mainteusuce Bona (Models) 95.610.00 Release: Paitaful Performance (Models) 856,100,.00 T •.r 12]16 -1. BuajGi ^e Bride$ Accept: Nsintensr -a used (Bridge) 96,300.00 Rale4se: Paitbfrt Performance (Bridge) 863,000.00 I=t-12117- 9trut,lRpreYAjgy u Accepts Maictenancs Bond (Street) 814,800.00 Releeset faithful Performance 9141,800.00 ( Street) govecbor 6, 19SS s �1,_�, .7�s •p f n� City Council Agenda - November 6, 1983 'sh Tract 12117 -1, Model, Accept: Maintenance goad (Model@) 910,100.00 ,•` Relssees Faithful 2crforwnce 6101,000.00 (Model@) Tree[ 1*e64. Sc - rut 1 - e Accepts Halatenaace land (Street) 614,290.00 Relcaae: Faithful Perforaaace $142,900.00 (Street) Trwct 2]6S. B[rare ienrwwsente Accepts MALU.snance Bond (street) 925,212.00 ' Ralaaaes Faltbful Parformatc $252,120.00 (Street) Tract 12402, Rtorm Drein. Terrw 91ats Pew•• a Ch,! Accept: Maintenance Bond (S.D.) 038,964.00 Relemea: Faithful Perforaanre (S.D.) 6389,630.00 s Tent 12402. Peru[ T -prae [ • Accept: Nalatenanne Bond (Street) 913,578.00 Releases Faithful Perforaance 6135,771.75 ` (Street) , RESOLUTION 00. 85 -294 50 ; r A RESOLUTION OF THR CITY COUNCIL Or INS CITY ". OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING i THE PUBLIC IIIFROVEMlYZS FOR TRACTS 12316, 12316 -1, (MODELS), 12316 -1 (BABE LINE BRIDGE), 12517, 12317 -1 (MODELS), 12365, 12364, { , 1[402 (STORM DRAid, TERRA VISTA `C PARKWAY 6 CRORCH), AND 1202 r J. Approval of Professional 8ervides Coitract with C.I.A. 51 " Engioeeriag Consultants (CO 85 -113) for slurry ewQ ing on variouo City street@. The design posts vill be 61,339.90 r, plus IOK coutiogency to be funded fro% 83 325 Gas Tax funds. s �1,_�, .7�s •p f n� n 4{ 0 City Council Agenda -5- Novaeber 6, 1985 R. Approval of Prefaseiooal _Services Contract with 66 RaudolPb Slubik Associates. Inc.. (CO 65 -116) for PraParation of noacepta and final plane and Contract ' documents for the installation of caked island landscaping an Raven Avenua from Arrow to Nineteenth StLdet. Amount not cc eactad 418,500 to be drawn froc budgeted Esoytificatioa funds. L. Approval to authorial the City Engineer :o accept 81 facilities and eassmaato for a Flood Control %str!ct stt:■ drain "tending tram Carcettea Street to the future Red Rill Fork. N. Approval for the City Manager to attend a Leednrsbip Confsran.a Decsaber 5 -I. Funds are ovaitsble in the City Manager's travel account for thin expenditure. N. Approval of RQcOIutian to amend fees for bicycle 81 license renewal as allowed by the State of California Vehicle Cods. A Ali h� .v....<1• . '�Y i', � i, , � ,1t Ai 11��tjf('fry �i• •t- RESOLUTION 110. 80-4A 86 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE RANCHO CUCAMOXA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RESOLUTION N0. 80 -4 rSES FOR THE RENEWAL OP BICYCLE LICENSES 0. Approval to appropriate funds in the amvent of 85 915,000.00 to the Administration Contract Services Account (01 -4122 -6028) for Vector Ccntrol Contract Services. P. Approval to Transfer 914,000.00 from the finance 86 Departmrat's Personnel Account ( /-4130 -1100) to finance Departtwnt Contract Cervices Account,(1- 4150 - 6028). Q. Approval to Authorize an Adjustment in the Grading 87 Specialiat Salary Ranges R. Approval of 1985 -86 Housing Repair /Rebabllitation Loan 88 Contract vitb the County of gam Rnrnardlao (CO 85 -115). S. Approval co authorize the iosuance of boodu and avard 95 sale of bonds for Park A Recreation A.D. 85 -01 (Red Hill A Heritage Parks). A Ali h� .v....<1• . '�Y i', � i, , � ,1t Ai 11��tjf('fry �i• •t- City Council Agenda -6- 1ECOLUTION N0. 85.295 A RESOLUTION OP THE CIIT COUNCM Or TUE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAKONCA, CALIFORNIA. AOTSORI2INC AND P107I0MG FOR THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS PURSUAR TO THE "INPR091KENT BOND ACT OF 1935" 115 119 123 r r. �1 't ;. n ' r � � :t) RESOLUTIOD 210. 85 -2% Novetber 6, 1965 A RESOLUTION Or THE CITY COORCIL OP THE CITT 96 - OF IWC80 CUCANONCA, CALIFORNIA. MARINO AWARD 103 FOR SALE OF BONDS. AND PNOVIvI157 POR TSB ESTANLISHM111T Of A RRDSKOTION FUND T. Approval of a lot tine adjustment for California ' Re tizeaeat Villas, Ion., (CO 65 -116) adjacent to the 105 Red Rill Coaaeanity ?ark project and approval of • joint 114 coat sharing between the CIty and Developer for the proposed atop drain and landscape project. U. Approval •0 accept ss complete a 6.5 acra park mite dorelopmant, known As Church Street Park Project and t authorize the Director of Community Services to file Notice of Comrletion. Y. Approval of Contract between the City of Rancho Cuema:ongo and the rity of Artesia (CO 83 -117) trsaefer:ing private activity bond allocation for Cary Roarer Associates. R Approval to send out bond notice# of redemption to registered bond holders of assessment district 82 -1 (6th Street Industrial Park). R. Set public hearing - November 20, 1985 - Val'- Rancbo (Calmark) - Development Agreement. An amendment to the legal description of real proprty subject to an aaendmeat between thm City of 2.0000 Cucamonga and Cal- Rancho, Incorporated, regarding a senior eitisen housing project located vast of Archibald, at the terminus of Lomita Court. i Y. Sat public hearing for December 4, 1985 for intent to vacate the non- vahiele access rights as dedication on h parcel Map 4029 located on the south side of Summit r Avenue, cost of Stlwaoda Avenue. 1 ' io . ( Lf� L�: #•T TIZ`�. ���.Y1,NL � .�'fVl .iv�_)X} Lali.. .. Y 115 119 123 r r. �1 't ;. n ' r � � :t) s Novetber 6, 1965 96 - 103 ( . 105 114 115 119 123 r r. �1 't ;. n ' r � � :t) lei City Council Agooda -7- November 6, 1985 RESOLUTIOA R0. 85 -297 L26 - A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CCUNTI OP BAN HER1AWIN0, STATB OF CALIFObNIA, DEC'.ARIM3 ITS INTENII," TO VACATE NON- TSU'MH ACCESS RICNTU ON THE BOOTH SIDE OF COMMIS AVENUE FROM ,TISANDA APEBOH AL030 TUB FRONTAGE OF ' PARCEL MAP 4C29 APYLT pP V .AvRIpG rddreOtON utCISTOB— PINYIN 128 rVPII t` a REYRIY�ARif DL4QOPNRR7' ELPIEI BS- ^ A� iyq MIRI- Hievaca - Construction of a mLOL storage de- elopmemt, with office totaling 45,000 squats Peet Oct 1.17 acres of land is the Industrial Art (Subarea 6) District., located on the north tide of 4th Street, cast of Turner :veoua - APN 210 - 371 -03. g. =gRR Pt PB Rnverl_n9_9YQSRIVr AMONMAtT - Proposed 171 awadnents to Chapters 1118 and 19.08 oP the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Cain pertaining to the preservation of trees on private property ORDINANCE N0. 275 (first .ending) 185 Al, ORUINANCE OF THE CITY COL .IL C! TH8 CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMUDfi0 CHAPTER 17.08 Of TOO RANCHO CUCAMOBOd HUNICIPAT. CODE, ABSOLUTE POLICIES. rEETAINING TO THE PSWEVATION Or TREES ON P21VATE PROPPRTY 186 ORDINANCd NO. 276 (first readin;: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL Of THE CI77 07 RANCpr CDCAMONCA. CALIPOPAIA, AMENDING COAPIER 19.08 OF THE RANCHO CUCAND53A H031CIVAL CODS. PERTAININU TO THE PRESEDVATION OF TREES ON PRIVATH PROPERTY 1" C, a f 1 }�yl •r :a .+ "1® J t I7y � City Council Agenda -8- C. �M�TVNInN rOV ,.Q)tQjEAECC No. z7a -- yr.O(ITERy, DOUR nave rrTrerr ¢�!I rrn - A time extension for Ordinance Ito. 274 containing Interim Pollcies to to applied to davelopsatt projects along Toothi'1 Boulevard prior to COMPletiaa of the Foothill Boulevard Corridor Plea. ORDINANCE NO. 274 -A (first reading) AN ORDINANCV OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUC.%XOAGA, CALIFORNIA, EXTENDING THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF ORDINANCE NO. 274 PERTAINING TO THE ESiABLIS !NEXT 07 INTERIM DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE FOOTHILL CORRIDOR D. h'jHVmT Am igj&Lm m.Ar AMyRXRN= 85-04D __dA1RIL9 - A t -quest to ■nand the Laud Use Nap of the Oeaeral Plan from Low Density 9osidsotisl (2-4 du /ac) to Medium Density Residontial 1, -14 du /an) for 13.53 scrag of Land located on the scutu aide of carom Boulevard between Archibald sad Turaar - APM 209 -055 -02, 03. 1 14. 12SOLUTIOM NO. 85 -298 A RESCLUTLON OF THE CITY COUNCIL Of THE CITY Op RANCHO CUCAMONGA, DENYIEG GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 85-04D. HANKINS. REQUESTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND EL8NENT OF TUB RANCHO CUCAMONGA CESERAL PLAN FROM LW DENSIrf RE3IDENTIAL (2 -4 DV /AO) TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (4 -14 LU /AC) FOR 13.5 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED SOUTH 07 FBRON BOULEVARD AND EAST OF ARCHIDALD AVENUE E. ¢NVTRONM¢NTL l?0¢cBM¢Nx Lx0 GEna air. or. /r nunm��y. flS�aE - nar.v CONa^veCTION - A request to amod the and Us* Nap of the General Plan from Lou Medium Density Residential (4 -8 du/ac) to Medium Density Residential (4 -14 du/ac) for 5.3 acres of land located on the north side of Bess Line Road vast of Tops - APLN 202 -025 -1, 4. 7, 8, 12, 13. A 14. r [ 263 d., Y Novesbar 6, 1987 � ?' 4 221 242 r °y , 262 l [ 263 d., Y i, } sHs� fX 4.' i e•�^ .( City Council Agenda -9- RESOLUTION NO_ 85 -299 A „ESCLOTION OP IHE CITY COUNCIL 01 THE CITY OF 6ARCH0 CUCAMONGI„ CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CI19M PLAN AMENDMENT 00. 85-046 - DALY, AWNUIL" THE LAND MSS V,"ENT OF THE RANCHO CU"ONCA GMERAL PLAN FEW Low igt'mm DR1"" RESTJSRTIAL (4 -8 MAC) T. MEDIIJU UIHSI77 RLBIDENTIAL (4 -14 DU /AO) 13^ 9.! ACRIS OF LAND LOCATYD ON THE NORTH 81�L cl DABS LINE ROAD VEST OF TOPAZ P. �j$,iR4IItl7a1. AeR R9ROrf AYD OEN: Af. r /,n,vnN�li dI-04P �M tgiQ AP[[nE Ata,{;flTre - A request to stand the Oeoeral Plan Land Us* Map fro, Healy Industrial to Ceaers' Industrial on 45.6 acres of land 10catn! ut tLe aoutbaaet corner of Arrow Highway and Roebe•t.r Avenue - APR 229 - 121 -01, 1., 19, 21 -28. P. 14 .- 11C1(111SIi�6(r.JiQfiYa9NrY'i Aw:i :Nn0Eta7aG AP[�IP_,If Msr dtli unb 2lI ns na - &WjM13ELAV M2 AaROC2Ane - A reque -t to aunt the lnduatrfal $pacific Plan from M . A n IgOact /Noavy Induatrial (Eubsrea 9) to Ceoaral ..''otrlel (Subarea 13) 04 45.6 acres of land, located • Abe southeast corner of Arrow Highway and Rochester Aaeuue - AFN 229 - 121 -01, 14, 19, 21 -28. RESOLUTION NO. 65 -300 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF WE CITY OF RANCHO CUCANONCA. CALIFORNIA. APPROVING MIRONMENT.IL ASSESSMENT AND CENERAI, PLAN AMABDNEFT $5 -04F, ROCHESTER AVENUE ASSOCIATES, AMENDING THE GENERA:, .^...:M LAA'D USE MAP FROM HEAVY INDUSTRIAL, TO C!HIERAL IUDUSTRIAL ON 45.5 ACRES OF LAM LOCATED AT THE 80UT4xmr CORNER OF AP.ROA' NIGWAY AND ROCHESTER AVENUE - APR 229- 121 -01, 14, 19, 21 -28 :o November 6, 1985 284 285 283 L , 326 k 4 ro • -10- November 6, 1985 I` City Council Aped• ' J� OADIAANCC A0. 277 (lSrat readia{) 321 AN ORDINANCE OF Egg CITY COUNCIL Of THE CITY +' OF RAECRO CUCAMOZGA, CALIFORNIA. INDUSTRIAL ASSESSMENT AND - LAVIRCANEMTAL SF6CIIIC PLAN ANSIIDMENT SS -03. ROCRESIIM THE INDUSTRIAL .. A °END$ ASSOCIATES, A14EUDIAO PLAT PROM MIN IMUN IMPACT /8EAVT . ,Y' BFECITIC' IEDOG'.RTAL (BUB►REA 9) TO CLNERAL INDUSTRIAL AT 13)SON!'45.6 gD�ANDj RICHNAY®AND ;I T� REA - An 229- 121 -01, 14, 19, , "RCCNESTLR AVENUE y, 21 -28 - - 328 '. y if f CEEBdd —•� G. oi&4 CIK9H MQ� A.1 as:badaanl Mot teat Io6ustriel S�anitic Y1io leado <usaubaoo�idat +tiooe Induatrial) add ia{ ' (General related to performance Io uIrOwatsrate{ory (Subare +i9 Minimum Ia,aebuoine gas• '" + + And existing 347 - ORDINANCE NO. 278 (first reading) , AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY Of RANCHO CUCAMORGA, SPECIFIC - CALIFORNIA, REVISING THE IPDUSTRIAL PLAN TYRT FOR SUBAREAS 8 AUD 13 (GEtl ERAL CdNSIDERATIOHS INDUSTRIAL), ADDING LAND USE REQUIREHBNTS GF SIB REf.AtH1 SO PERrORMA1ICE MINIHUM IMPACT /HEAVY lADUBTRIAL 1 ADJOINING CATECORY (SUBAREA 9) . AID EXISTING BUSIHESSES M ANEADHENP:Y OP1iERA� 343 ' H. �W cocehZNT Aw•D er. - �R(n.q - A request to amend the General le° to Medium Resid6ntisl (4 -14 Land Uea NaD free du /ac) o° 3.67 free of land located on tbo aortbvest Avaaue - Fortson of ,i 19tb Street and Arcbibeld , -, corner of APP 202 - 1091 -21. 373 • EE94L7Z14A 110. 85 -301 J � A RESOLUTION Of TH. CITY COUNCIL C1p •XDENYIA " OY RANCHO COCAMOACR. tALIPOHR3Ai AME2DMZMT 40. 83 -040 •• CEROLD - ., , a' GENERAL PLAN REQUESTING AN AMENDMENT TO TS$ LAN OSC CUCAnONGA GERZ841 PLAN ,\ •,,,• ELEMEMT OF T13Z RANCHO FRdI OFFICE TO MEDIUM RgSLENTIA O(4-14 1,10-TED + DU /AC) , 01: 3.67 ACRES OF LAND. STREET Ab'I ARCSIBALC 89TRN02- L ,,( i AVENUE APR 1091921 NlRii , S la r �I Clq Connell Agenda -l3- Nw•nber 6, 1985' I, �m►lfri T,!r yn..� CQNS[CYIeII VITN ,,,,++a�jON tle. t �`LxsA+:Yf 12670. 12E7D -1 SAD •J. 1271y2�19_I_T�, MAElI3i4H6LR•Dxel ° x :; . I Alm A� aArieN 11 FOR r..tw , ?dIe ANO lo2te m e,esSLLSEY:IW.Ya1iiSElllYfII 11j9RI ^Y NQ. Z, CESOLUTION No. 85 -302 A RESOLUTION 07 THE CITY COUNCIL OF TBE CITY CP RANCHO CUCANO!gA, CALIFORNIA, ONJENINC rU3 VOFZ IN CONN"MON WITH ANNE[ATIOH NO. 13 TO STRENT LIOHTIYO MAINTESANCE DISTRICT N0. 1 AND ACCEPTING TRW FIM. EROIRSIA'S R[PONT FOR TRACT N0S. 12670, 12670 -1 THRD 4, 12319, 12319 -1 TEND 8, 12830, 12673, 10210, 11915 RESOLUTION NO. 85 -303 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY CUUNCI:L O+ THE Clir OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ORDtlrVG TOE WORK IN CONNICTI04 WITH ,AXVMATIOY N0. 11 TO STREET LICUrINC MAINTESANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 AND ACCEPTING THE FINAL ENGINEER'S REPORT 709 MCT• NOS. 12830 AlD 10210 J. QyMIND THE 40 r TN enauvr SIGN VITB AYp AttON NO 2A 2019 � 10 AND 12520 TO t. ND8 APE I.INT[um RESOLUTION NO. 85 -304 A RESOLUTION 07 TEE CITY COUNCIL OF TUC CITY OR RANCHO CUCAMOHCA, CALIFORNIA, ORDSRI3o TILE WORE IN CONRECTION WITH ANNEEATION NO. 26 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENAIICE CISTRICT N0. 1 AND ACCEPTINQ TIC FINAL ENOINEEEJS REPORT FOR TACT NOS. 12010 AND 12830 E. CoserorRAYIel nr ++.R +++.arw MIADO it lRIVArH jr,�'rofTr ■o,m ,L., nrAriar 7n TDE Rrn O OPNTt� v saD Aprrnvlrl rr± seeOANQe Qr �i�i —' «��' EIltICilAttON E7 7 RI[Drsn ^7MRNT AL•rlCr ` 374 - 385 J93 39: 400 402 %•:ilyr,Y.:�� T jsl. dP City Council Agenda —12— 0 RESOLUTION 10. 83 -303 A RESOLUTION v7 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIPCRRIA, TRANSFERRING 1983 PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND 1IMIT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OP THY. CI17 Or RAICHO CUCAMONGA AND APPROVING THE ISSUANCE Of CERTIFICATES Or PKITICIVATION BY THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF TEE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA FOR THE HAVEN COMMERCE CENTER PROJECT Ia_.irjkA2WAA2=Ll1QtlRa:R A. LvlctorlA UUJAAXL -W DAMS -AIM Reny VSat� Cy ITY 7.IMIte TO 400 9Erj RAFT O► AHCHIEALD AVja ORDINANCE N0. 279 (Yir■t reading) AN ORDINANCE OP THE CIIY COb:CIL OF INS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFOartA, ADDING NUMBERS 21 AND 22 TO SECTION 10.20.040 TO THE ® RANCHO CUCAIONCA MUNICIPAL CODE RWARDINO PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIY.ITS ON CSRTAIM "IT STREETS B. CONSIDER 'TOM 1 AN ORDINANCE j ADD A RRf.TION TO jQN CITY RECULAITOMn FOR THE PRC; f,Sj{,•UC OP VESTI10.7 TP.NTA*''y MAPS FOH ORDINANCE NO. 280 (firm reading) AN ORDINANCE 07 THE CITY (OUIICm OF THE :ITN CP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, C.STFORNIA, ADDING SECTION 16.49• TO THE WNICIPAL CODE, ESTABLISHING REGULATIONI. FOR VESTIY.0 TENTATIVE MAPS FOR RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS C. ORDINANCR PROVTDTNC TO TIM DEER CREW COMPANY CREDIT TCNARDS 9YAT019 DEVELUPl11? 1'EFS (THIe INPLEHMU A EMER COUNCIL DECISION) - Ordizanee to implemedt credit approved by the City Co•meil at its Oe Gobor 18, 1985 meeting. ■ v November 6, 1983', ,r 40e _ E, r 408 409 411 416 421 I �Y I . City Council Agenda -13- ORDINANCE NO. 281 (first reeding) AN ORDINANCI OF SRI CITY CpuNcm OF THE CITY Of RANCHO CUCAMONUA, CALIFORNIA, APPORDINC 30 THE DEER CRETE COMPANY A CREDIT APPLICABLE TO SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT FEES 6. CITY y:La'�g•R l�Lew ee�yye A. APP►A7. 0} T[E[ lE+IOPAY. }RKiT AS -)P fYi 11526) - [AMDKA SCE r.01}olanal - An appeal b7 ■ resident of the approval of a permit to reaw^ selected trees within Tract 11626 located on the north side of Almond, at the terminus of Beryl. D. D[SICN_AT7DN O} KCIO[Art- . ei.Nrrrr•dr CoN AGC m_ AAtR RESMiQCIA IN TRt T AO1WQmT -�L_W R YawL07m0 P[pOUCTID[-- ONA�TION PIIIIONR - A status report of the Stste's designation of aggrsgm•e rescurces In this area and a Resolution requesting the State Mining and Caology Board to modify said desigcatioo within the City linits and City's sphere of influent'. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -306 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY CUUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA. CONCERNING TOR STATE'S DESIGNATION OF REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT CONSTRUC^.IPT AGGREGATE RESOURCES IE THE CLAREMONT- UPLAND A" SAN BERNARDINO PRODUCTIOL' CONSUMPTION REGIONS C. RECOMMENDATION FOT BPMIA� ;RT7N0 Tn DISCUSS CITY' 1Ar11,1= - Oral report will be given by City Manager 7. CODNCr7, w1=U A. fLODICILVONAN mcgr'S R}QUA? TO ltr +QE9C CORN _n BEGAlDIM7 POLICY FOR FUTURE A9 Bp99NENI D197P.ICTS E. COUNCILMAN DAIL:& RpAfDEg7 TO DISCUSS AFwvTAT7DK CORGERAB ON TSS GSTY'B NO ^TILE K 9p e[ i November 6, 1483 .I 422 424 446 451 453 �t I J�� • J♦ J.. J . • l Q. l• I J Y V I'• I n `T w n I•• I••.n JL• �4. • •C. uY n•I f: rin ,V tl`• :LI ~:p'. 1 1•r 'V VnY !•r:Jn •p + r'r C'rn f ^..♦ Iv .n Y, r . •1 •.1 L 1 v w .^ •r •.Jf1 < 1 IJ ' 1 n 1 j♦ \; • ' V l�u=, P.J .. I�gYYI J.. .u;`Y n•ry ../ r CI I Vw• V yPO. ;•11 Jl. f.n MM1l�M1 nn Ilr r•l YY • r•� YI VIU '�Y •IN _N 1• cl l Y ;.'Y JYYY�Y J.rY rq VMWYY 1'� rY J J' YJ YY I l J'Y fV r r ' 1 ! 9 N I 1 I Il W •' 1^ L � 1 Y r � IIIJIJ H L I �1 ♦1� W XLIY I 1 J f5; n J 11 Ir• lJ • ••1 r 1 W l•1 Q . � .. 1 N n JI 1 1, ♦ I •IV NNZ y J 1 i ' J 11 J L U 4, N Y� 1r• 1 J I 1 4 n l • Y• n, V w 4 r 1 ,Y, nl ti Jl1 J J G ' I YI . � ^LJ J.I .J r. n'. •l /•J -wJ�L CCJ LLLL�• LL"'2 1 - /.•'Y � 1 l � � "�4. fLn \I .Nr - -• _ la CJW m aJ, a 1 _ 4 SJ �r•t J•.•1 •t �u.'.J C II _ �JCJr -r V_�r, � •I Vl ul r `1• 1 7 V _ •� r -� 1 •r u rl W '� •1 _ �; 1 Y I r-r J_ r[♦ M1, -: n 4 •. y M V � �3iiJ ' I I I' 1 F N • • � I 11 \ •YI ••J IJ• y 1 I n 4 � C uiO ILL!. :.•! I Z .r .I "I � i , u.-'' u .. I u `. I z' N,1•. uprc u .. 4 I �a I nl J ul o J c ) f'_L LI y wl n • S w �I,y U�Z 4 Iu .(. ; gt�NUU11 y CnJ LL; J,h OU OI I�1.K.14 u1Z021c i1 � ?c1.LWyNyJ I WI•f >.rI 21C' i � .'lil .JN N' 6n Ma•.+jN 144 U••• Imo" •"11 r. rJINM6.J I-1 •1 t � ' I °'• W W Z• J n G aJ .. � J lu 2 r .I •" LL c �� IS � I';l � IU llw •.c G b3 u.�..- u ^• 1 1 1 nJ SONrI' ,rJ �W W'.ly ul� S Ia YI =r�•.Ji J /4111 .I )nI•d••N OIL �Jp I .M {v 1 . 'i Ur•••nvv.4 a�yN" CIU U1L q •N l9 J/ SI> _ (� 1 r-.,.J �'IV j�K;y♦ Y cl j jW rK�JI ••JUN�L LLUI7 ,7 W IJ 1.•Q y4 •`i I • JI 'C J! � u�U C. r•,�IYN� /. raW Jl•r J JLLr�L�r V �4 Y_uJ •k 1 IYU42l••J4 • G +1-rIN J 11 K, .QY•CK Lxl�yVIYNIW ^JJrt�N Y> l ^r .. 4.u✓ iRNl�n'••6IV • I 'y i 1Q •'11.L .Jnl —n Trc J•.I YfO4I 4- ,1..L 1-r\YYJJw .- LL }.�- �IC >Q•'•�rl 1 QwV..J.IZ _ •!u ; 14 4 K•14 J•L n 46 a 4 rM,Im JD11 n, 1.L �� n�N 1 J� jVil S�V.J �.y 11 f' hjyl '•L�,LL i � .I V.. •v ^nfvJ U.NWa U'i .�nl w�lr • "J ., I•r ry O.rPY. wrl.r\•n./',n 1 I .JU JM1in .n rr ry.J .frW ICIFC -f.�Jl ,-i „:� J a• �.r Y\ J\ M1 ., m V\lJJ\ . j�' • � I r I • 1` �•�t p ��LL11��Vl V, Jam_ �tJ y n r .T13Ye ,°°°°°°WWWCWW 4A i.. .- Ji?>stii. a, , '�N7•:�”. r.�/.:..'. .:�3- "•1'x'1%= �1 1 I 1 �• 1 1 1 u 1 . I V 1 Y 1 1 .a 1 I •l 1 1 1 11 I 1 I Ii II II 1 1 1 'I 1 • 'c 1 I; —II I 1 1 1 . 1 1 1 1 1 1 h.J wNY� \ \•v. -1 .Jh J•. L.I/h U':)U. l`I J ) . )JPI U• T a _ • :r \.. )Nt. ..T U. Q• •IPY J11 V ;yY;�, N .1.r ".".:I lI uY •. J•)•.• '• ,u. • I•)1:'I G u1�� ,NY NO Yr \J al r`.1.• p... •J..Y rI \YV .. •I J'.I •V .(\r. ITYI v J• T .•. LL. T S \ S t •w - Y ^I.. fJ ," T a ., ,� r•) T 1•, Y -. N V •• Lrl T .T \I NfU••• • V•.n J•., •_ •y JVN.T, •I IV (vl•.•t n\I.I rr•�n`r ,.•'�; VY YT fY fTU YYY i'JY Nwl r" �I•Nl•N CI.I� G•I! .r.Jt)(i V.J t.JV JYVw YSY VSY lYYV Ti NV "p• JIA n- • ..•JI L 1_ u? .I• • r N ... -. •-. Y J J _ Ij J j It J I• /1•n I�� JI Y 4 Imo• �' ,LLC / ,1� "li / a :L •., ZI u I � <tti�l n � r LL p. �. . •n � JJi . L. y4.1 wrJ � Q• K I` .LL ^i • ti i ) r a11�J1 _• -•JJ7� - n. - i�r t11.4 �... L L .• �J . y rl t •1 i LL LL J r r •. J ^ T 1 LL � J 1. ..r. I•r a!'. ' ^ J� .J 7 •1.I a. .t �� • � i•J ♦ K I I I � I I I I LI I I I I I l I I I ii l]� oolJ„ IZ i �' WI .< ly= I •I�'s "I_ z! u I ^ ', ut »223t�L a) tJl'Y J'VSw UVIJ, D.IW:E J UUU C)•Uli <LL^ WWYLL FYI %un•IO nL\ IOO TI.? YIa2 r. .S•In Iu =w Y4 3. J'LW ~Nrl�yl "T"Uh•7UIQ Ou YQ6i<Q J(4U ]^ L u 6 •LU <tt Sw'6 �. LF• IU Q.YU JIJJJ4] rnm / IOW It)Li> -1 YOIa W2ILLJ ms-tL U W IS �QNOy •^2 JOII p'» Q <Q <Q JJ.- r1YZh -1••r l-� <,1• CLnrL VIWUf)Lli_\Y� OSIT I!J:)C)r 7�I�J 7QQ QI< Q'QQU JL ZIQW�V .:.) <11i WIUJ <.N d'JLW V� IU \I iUUV )JULI t]IC')_I WIIYIYWIIIW LLLLi LLL LLU' t11LIQV� 1 I i I i t�0•JUU SU S.n4 �I2 .-r h `•IIN Y) u\ ... [\ V .-. N O J ti +1'r•1 r'• u.I 'i h T N S I•. . _ WWVI.W. TP JY.VN•NN.- .flr..y TrVNr,Ih IV,NTh W.y N�dl.l yl ....0 U\•r I II IV' f\ (\ 11 ()'.\ h J ."I U) 1• ...r I•.. J Jr T r V r... Y Y C 1f\..I YI N U. ^I 1 I I ! I '• JPiYN..I'PI�. -IL-i •O .E .-. p � T I n - z fl-...... -. _ .mac`_' � • - s)1 • r r. . y1 r� j I K I 1 a- 1 ( I C 1 I ' I I 1 ' I 1 II I I� I f 1 � I II •i I I; r Q t- :f LL J M W I' 1 J' 11 >• 1 Q 1 +I 1 II J' Y'1 ... J •.\YJ 1 ^.l JO )� t \rJJ• • JJ• un \- J :fl \rlV YhYJ V•J i.J .IVYnL. \, Y•- fl ^\i\V\ 'IJ�rn `ll `•'I () : Y. .r .. nL anN• Y: r^ry �J+ ,. l•vY^ .. JrJ •Jm�- .y - JY n1J V 1 VI 'Y r� ..^ rLL• !r •. Ir ♦ .n •. J J .Y UnIF .r J•`•ry •,Y \\.JF li •. .-r rv•.r .l -JV•J ry IP.o r•• Iy+yr> YJY J .fV YJ'Y �r••JL_ �. I1 , nV\w \. u -ry v. •. -. „I'n FFI- FFFFI -•r U• J ^• � L•Nh• - >U•V J`T \ J rJ•U•. .. )L rL. J• Y •r Y J Y l u J J J' J' Y Y n Y f Y Y f J J Y Y' �• . •f Y J' v J' Y J •/ Y Y J• •' J' Y J •J If)V .. WWV .•v O...1 )^•. .-u .. ..u"JJ4. ..• )..U: \,t r.I n JI n Jr N T:1 IJ JW V ri ^ 4( K + 'Lrc rr' W a J V � W W •J rJ � us r 1.LR N .r r .J ^ 'A1 p.n JI rN•,'4 tr~ v1- .'1 .1 -♦ J1 y J -t J � J - J 'J J vi Jr Ja• f_ l - ) ♦ 1 J •- �). l J J0.. LHI •Y • J.,.• J- ♦.,J _I J .Jr J� \,J•nrJJ uJ.l •JY• J-r Vr J J. _' J JCJJ 1"••1J J V14J rj IJ u. _ 1L LL ) - lV \r • •-11,4 L 1' -1-�.♦ r I •/` /.r ••JAL •- - JJ - Y _ I t- - - � J 1 • � yL ` J > • 4t_ I. `V . -N•n �r J•\.nAY r� J >JV• -•_ I} •+ Iy >4 >. •tr . L - [ :� � rV . n / _ VY q2 .L !rte 1•f y r ^^ • 1 I •c L' 4 ILL � ✓J I II"r 1 u•y1 N^ W I' I W 1 J L14 O YQ -• Mm .n (n s•r� K C~L.L I W �L•II 11 Y 'L -J_ L <LL Uc>IIi 1J 4 rw 6 • li u LJL IU i1 H)• r^ S O L14 I •••�J'nJ • ••aL .I r1 • J V YS.W JJ Q 1 r/n . • •2•n. ) (- LDI 'N SJZ U6WI"11 •�-LI'r J J - J• "-'<•I ]�W L -r +•Q•'L L •I .} '.0 I �.._iIII ULL0.wuLL U W I -r N Oii J J •S'o I I 'L W _nLI • ' I\WY J}y ' uF M7l -AJ V+S-4 W2( .0 Q OZ r2L U-JO JJI tJJL IJJamY/ I I V ^ rJ .I r iILJWMO4 QLM6ZA ' IYS440 �J ' ' UFr) --♦ I• U •M+ ••+•r Irv• S • C ) tYNL -u )JW I JVJ . ••J • •'-1 A Q i J Y• -1 J .- J n,' O SI W •Y I J IV \' 1 L I W L 1 L U i Y I V ^I +•['•n „�� 1... 1. J•-rLI .J .0 J1..11Lrr JJIyiL1QO 1�.J•••WQ(JJJr- /' O a •2 -r 6 I u J r•♦ li rd< 4 6 ZJ J�1 G 4 4 •- Y � 1 al ••• w '• K•Ja ulu)O nl nJl�.]t]J (>• LJ UISII -(24G WWr•1 [.i JL<SI -JY al. LV -W NL<• NJ.G J1ruWQJ4l 41. nNl�•o 1'VIK Jr] 401"04; •♦ J ]r; l -' ^L.P •:SLY <-1 LJJ1.J. L4lL L 1N 1..1JJ••I ] -XK %11••W )J JTL^ fl '-♦- ♦<]WO -(QW. WQU 4•+4Qa (r •IJ lUJ1�•QWw•n OIJ.L 4 1 •.w•+.♦ -1 ]•)�YY -IJKa Z.n J]: �. •S1 ].KT 11� >: .•ZY G')i)p,1 In rV l \.• v♦\ _rV-f n. ••rr)J r -r•, •4 u'YIFOrn VrW:• I•n •♦I- •-11'I L) ^1♦IY. +.. LL\.jY .J ••' •r.•JYN•_V I• rVL \JNJO NI -•J •.rFW niN,l.rl frlF Op LPI r-r.W F• \y OF d^I JJ'�F • \♦J -N JrVO \V• - O IIJ YIICI I I I IQ iJ 1 N♦ • 1 1 J u..n ri Ua1r .rJl - .. 1'. -r •9 r. aJ rJ 'V uJ'!J• '�:J wl (•t-rV la. • r V l arw r 1)n•� /i fJ y Y -In UY.I .• Vr .ar L Y r f- In I • _ I ' 4ra la'fl vl- IP`. .r Nrrl r... Ir yI P�U ^W.•l J' \�.� lAJ•'I n�r J.n ., r-r JY •n 1Q1 •.t U•PJ .• nJ•U J•A4.. JCIU .J �L_ r .W I YY: JJ.t'Y.V.(yYY fl JYyY•J 1.J \J• .,�� � • ra .- ).. .. aaJv J. !) tea. ..• a � r .. ..0 .J Jt•YIU.,J s. r n t n.n JI In Yr .n •l rn JI n n h N i ni J J rY -) 1 ti r-r M r-r M r� Fr rl .-I Fr . nn r-r . r • _I J aIT 2S -Cu c`f J J J♦ J J I J 1 i i t ♦ r , �� .1 J v r1U .i' r Lr, YIJY IU I 1 V•l)1 )rI vl n IL �a 1 n v 1 J Q � c irt _ Yli -♦uIL .a o n` I 1.1 v ' <Jr ') KJN V 4l. a,• r_ Y , irl �. r> L L V n ^S, r1jLL .Jr • ' [ Ji rl J.n 4 _ r i���ilu _ - ♦fa rl]tJU L INLLLLvI •_.. al. • r� 7.1�h r !. al .f ^ -J ,• '1 . r • W J J v` I � v .. I InN Y dN • aml IJ (J r6d01♦ JG ' 2 '�Y NI�n II'n� I rTJ f WwWWUU ! � 1 � p J •""n O 2 .n J 1-r Ulj..r).JtRC .Vi urr T 'LO xI 1 -Qrt4�a •faQ � C YQIJ nJl Jr•I udj r`•a '•• •PY•r L6rr r..rr.n 4 1 JVL' I • r')' J.L Q•nLLGI.. r I Jr QL >L l- •L v 1a 1 ' MNN4 tL V.yy Zr J 4 Q l7 SNl LL)JO UICIjJ•I � 11 _ 2 r {L J UI a•J �I W W N ('j I._ J t- 4 It U L W LLIIA. {L ' a .7IrW I IpJ WUJ> UDJ yY G1'.'•OW Lr Ow rl,..rr ' C ' UI�J S JC .Y IL )"K JN I') IrI1S JYI Li rIIJJd YW,JI�JJJr. U•` i S •-I J r 2 , n W D•• W U 4 o J ' J L ] 9 6 N 4 J� K 4 Q Q V 1 v LL I �IrJ rn IL.1 CJ d•J 'IJQ Q'IL rC R' >1-I d' IJ WQ QLIC MV1JN I•U UIIIaI r 6 i IUUr_L /. 14 J,-- .I- a9�QKwJy IVf nQ<OlJ _4 YILL I f+ 1Y �'.L •IJ ^t);r lQl'SQ 4rnL 7W .1[1IW�.41 UIQW WI•J ri 1 _ • .~i ' LL •: 'Y aUQr�r.CJ nj� I u a I ]-J V•J Gr•-W O. C dV 1 fY .U�•W W'r t J 1 r.alt)r_ �LCQtJ 1Jn M.J 114rY� IC�1 JUWyI1 NIOLL ti'2�GU�FIS `F . ' -N 1 Q -1 ,.rIWWOJLac tf ur Lr>Yr•4ULLSG L2.2 >2..C> •7 DD:J ..^ .{ tvl I Q4 la 64 'ru nlw 4 )K Q144Q.YIVI L1 Orp0 Jfl I gull d.•Rd RY da. [.LL4 _LL YL'>U Y[t LJ LG nln,n +r orinJl p.ChN m✓Iw Nrin.nn \ yO Y 1 I •R '•CI U \Y„ Jl•1 J .JJ•'IIN VYIU VIV 1•1'Y1J •` s QI1 J• V JJN Jrr I l -f-.�ti {�:. l L.1 tJ•!V'U �,u.0 •ti J.. .J U'r•Ir •IV .n Wra r- J^r0• -r .Cl \Jlrl ry •rllrl J•Nh ~yr+rn w•-r •a i; fV' -a J J.a ..tU J.rJ' -IJ .Y .rLVJ J" -r_O.. J.'llrNfn')J •.0 )q .l:l.•1'O 1 r ,L'a I JJy•ar lyr I(V J`f Ja 1 N.J J•r.N •-I 'r IJJ 'pY� .\N. ' :VIgJ \ Jy • .•Ir• U(J" I Y.•YfV ,. ICJ, 1`YwaJ II ynr�) Y. IPA • ♦'a LL` I •Jl_ 11 S'• r I� VI-•M •.n• i al Y• • r. 1'a I Y a I n Y rV 1 1 � ' 1 N.•rYy JPr. ..IV.q l.a. ra aV .•1J '! Nr'IV v<,V •J.. a; Iln'I,J'J 'fY YY1J �J ri� ±._` ' 4 i aJJ YW \11 J Z 1 a�Y\N a.a . \4a r \Y \LLI '� • 'n' VAaa yr(• ♦ IUl\ \n. n l0 1 �) 1 • a"' urr LaJ Ut a�JhU I " u I 1 •� i� an.n it . A C JT y ^ r M ••a r•a r ` 1 IL W K 1 W lJ 1 u II C I.r S^ ri 1 V� I IJ W aC "A- If W ^ < I '� I ^ • l� � 1.1 Ilr: •Jrl r r LI rlf.l •1r — I 1 11 .I 1• r v J iI J f u •Ln Y. ,L 1 — •rl J r •� 1 -C •L r.� N I W •n J1: J L J .I ^ n : 1 Q - ., ...1 W • L Ir a � C 111 � n • '�' I � (•• a L � ' I � eC 1 I I 1 I 1 V U LL 1 1 L� I ILJ • I G 1 - � ti I OI)d � ^n I I L�a♦ .V'. I J1^ I I"'; I.� �•i � .av � I I _ — 1 z as _- i1 CJr]a u -Cl Lylan ; ..II• n -1�' ♦ (Lo `I 6 1 IY At .0 Y Kr ;AUI ,J U•]j JVLL }I —I ni .Jr O J:at Y as M QIyW r Y >• T• 1� J• 6 1 .-I rl•— .:1� C LLlall•n ``SII I �JV I JJJNi Q1j nI..IJW �` I W�H >J,•�J'�Il•� IY IU Qi1)1 —N 1 LL 1 LQjwV 60.1 1`OC]VI .0 )�C F,- y' W -Aryl 2LL•J4C ♦7r Ny)U•JW� VYVI 1 }L] )] t•WJ NS N Y ?.L Y1J W1.•I • (] I L` .nl.0 •"I J •y dra• IIIC � •2•- LEI —O7 1lL JC SI'(a1— VNN.., LLUYOKIICJJ�J.0 AaGL GLL1..1 '1" KTaC 7w.c6 L•-�WQ NN6 l I(J 1 _ -Y I.I J.iMY ( J 1 ry J Q . Q J s t} )!- •) o + \J II 1- .Ir��LIKUJI�( IYI"IUrr WOSLLI.JWR•<W III �LL'�KaYI ] alW •- ) J l'1 > V Gr • J i • U III.J rl F-IH IU IL•I I; I• I, W j,• ILO 1 J 114.2Q.l.TQ.tOJIJ .11aUrplr•r.IQ 1 C].• ! ±W QJ �.t Su1N •l o•Y ^021L !- rrr ^ti0 • MKQK /Lln QQJ4W WaJS�T. JLLJ �; N Jl Arn an vl 1•n r ul Nanr� )I— '•1— •,IJ =''Jd YI'/ l' IIK J•(lY �QµY1• I !La C 1 NWJ• J JI•l a- IY..✓YW•OU I I LLII in �•n l A Jr •lr•1'Jr'V!I•ry."I .J II/arla0(II YI'.I .(_••1 .4 {nIJ J1'I+I "n ' l J J •.1 I 1 lL ' <?(: 'a�a(� �I Ia JJIr'Y) J Y�YY.p.l II J N O l J a J.q 1 r )' - it <_. e— 'i *J_c_ (�T�r': -i a.{ ,l3^Tri _ - ��.• ` a fm[����U.. . 9 T �y� fl• DATE: TO: FROM: 80O3ECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAM014GA STAFF REPORT C 0� a October 29, 1985 9 C a `: L ` City Council and City Manager �d ,> Eobart A. Ric co, Assistant City Manager 977 Receive sad File - City of Rancho Cucaaooga Im7estaeat schedule statue Report as of October 29, 1985. PURCHASE MATURITY INTEREST INSTITUTION DATE DATE AMOUNT ¢ATE Foothill Independent Dank 08 -02 -85 10 -31 -85 100,000 0.07125 Bank of America 08 -06 -85 11 -04 -85 200.000 0.07425 Great Neotern Savings 02 -07 -85 11 -04 -85 100,000 0.09125 Far Neat Savings 6 Loan 08 -08 -85 11 -04 -85 100,000 0.08200 Foothill Independent Bank 05 -08 -85 11 -04 -85 100,000 0.08000 Foothill Independent Bank 08 -08 -85 11 -06 -85 100,000 0.07250 Foothill Independent Bank 08 -20 -85 11 -18 -35 100,000 n.07250 Foothill' Independent Bank 08 -19 -85 I1 -18 -85 730,000 0.07250 Foothill Indtpendent Back 08 -21 -85 11 -19 -85 100,000 0.07230 California Federal Savings 09 -18 -85 1120 -85 1701000 0.07950 Foothill Independent Bank 10 -25 -85 11 -22 -83 1,Of0,507 0.07125 Foothill Independent Bank 07 -25 -85 11 -22 -85 100.000 0.07000 American Savings 05 -29 -05 11 -25 -85 100,000 0.09250 Foothill Independent Back 06 -27 -85 11 -25 -85 100,000 0.07125 Foothill Independent Bank 03 -30 -85 11 -26 -83 100,000 0.07300 Foothill Indsps.4ent Bank 10 -28 -85 11 -27 -85 130,000 0.07125 California Federal Savings 09 -18 -85 12 -04 -85 100,000 0.07950 5 y c Investment Status Report Page 2 Pootbill Indepeadent Ban!: Foothill Iadependect Bank 7ootbi11 Independent Bank Foothill Independent Bank Great Western Saving3 ,Foothill Independent Bank Vineyard National Bank Central Sevialm 7ooth131 Indepsndent Bank Foothill Ia4apen0ent Bank Foothill Independent Bank Signal Savings California Federal Savings Foothill Independent Bank Foothill Independent Bank Foothill Independent Bank Bask of America Upland National Dank Glendale Federal American Savicgs Blak of America American Savings Vineyard Rational Bank E PURCHASE DATE 08 -21 -85 08 -22 -85 08 -13 -85 08 -14 -85 06 -20 -85 06 -28 -85 30 -28 -85 10- 01-f,5 07 -02 -85 O4 -l0 -85 08 -12 -85 01 -09 -85 07 -17 -85 00 -16 -85 07 -15 -85 07 -15 -85 10 -16 -85 07 -29 -65 05 -02 -85 09 -30 -05 09 -30 -85 08 -12 -85 07 -17 -85 MATURITY DATE 12 -04 -85 12 -04 -85 12 -11 -85 12 -12 -d5 12 -17 -85 12 -15 -85 12 -27 -85 12 -30 -85 12 -30 -85 01 -06 -86 01 -09 -86 01 -10 -86 01 -13 -86 C1 -13 -86 01 -13 -d6 01 -13 -86 01 -14 -8t 01 -27 -85 CI -27 -66 02 -05 -86 02 -05 -86 02 -l0 -86 02 -12 -86 AH,Qw 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 800,000 749,341 106,nU0 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 200,000 100,000 INTEk3..ST RATE__ 0.07250 0.07250 0.07250 0.07250 0.07600 Treasury Billal 0.07750 0.08750 0.07125 0.09000 0.07375 0 10250 0.07600 0.07375 0.07125 0.07125 0.07375 0.08500 0.09350 0.08750 0.07275 0.08750 0.07750 0 0 "M r.� ti Investment Status Report Page 3 PORCBASS MATURITY INTEREST Crocker National Bank 10 -14 -65 California Federal Savings 08 -22 -85 Great Vattern Savings 08 -19-85 Foothill independent b.A 10 -21 -85 Guardian Savings 06 -23 -85 Eureka Federal Savings 08 -23 -85 American Savings 10 -02 -85 Chino Valley Banc 10-02 -85 California Federal Savings 10 -02 -85 California Federal Savings 20 -02 -85 Chino Valley Bank 10 -02 -85 American Savings 6 Loan 10 -02 -85 Califotnia Federal Savings 10 -07 -85 lalifornia P:uaral Savings 10 -07 -85 Pacific Saviag• Bank 03.08 -85 Coast Savings 4 Loan Od -09 -85 Progressive Savings 6 Loan 03.97 -85 Bart of America 08 -15 -55 Gibraltar Savings 6 Loan 06 -18 -85 Sun Snings 6 Loan 03 -18 -8: Golden Pacific Banc 04 -05 -85 Great western Savings 07 -09 -85 Long Beach Savings 6 Iota 04 -30 -85 M - va' 02 -12 -86 02 -18 -86 02 -18 -86 02 -18 -86 02 -19 -86 02 -19 -86 03 -05 -86 03 -05 -86 03 -05 -86 03 -05 -86 03 -05 -86 03 -05 -86 03 -06 -86 03 -06 -86 .03 -06 -86 03 -06 -86 03 -07 -86 03 -13 -86 03 -17 -86 03 -18 -86 04 -03 -86 04 -07 -86 04 -07 -86 100,000 0.07500 100,000 0.07950 100,000 0.08000 100,000 0.07250 100,000 0.08800 1061C00 0.08750 100.000 0.08750 100,000 0.0,600 100,000 0.08050 100.000 0108050 100,000 0.07600 100,000 0.08750 100,000 0.08000 100,000 0.08000 100,000 0.10400 100,000 0.07625 100,000 0.10100 100,000 0.07725 500,000 0.08000 !00.000 0.10500 100,000 0.10500 100.700 0.07700 100,000 0.07700 i 0 a As of 10 -29 -95 Grand Total: 12.038,599 *1 Treasury Bills are purebesed at a price bel w their maturity value. They are quoted and traded on the Fasis of yield to maturity. The approximate interest earned on this six month investment will be 828,000.00. *2 The approximate interest earned on this investment will be 934,000.0. *3 Securities which are backed by Poole of government ensured or guareateed mortgages. i Bate 4: All investments are Certificates of Deposit unless otberwiae noted above. ra 's' m S: 1 N � U i k�IS,lI i.� tea.± "r • x lavestaent Status Report Page 4 INgyfTDTIDN FORCRASE MATURITY _DAn AMOUNT INTEREST RATE - Bank of Beverly Bills _PATE._ 1:»18 -85 04 -16 -86 100.000 0.08400 0®i Bank 05 -16 -85 05 -15 -86 100.000 0.09500 Southwest Saviags 6 Loan 05 -20 -85 05 -20 -86 100,000 0.10000 Fidelity Federal 8avit3s 06 -17 -85 06 -17 -86 100,000 0.09250 Imperial Savings 09 -23 -85 06 -30 -86 100,000 0.0%300 American Savings A Loan 06 -29 -84 07 -07 -86 100.000 0.13200 American Savings 4 Loan 07 -09 -85 07 -09-86 100,000 0.09375 Beverly Bills Savings 07 -15 -85 07 -15 -86 100,000 0.0940P Sears Savings Bank 03 -22 -85 09 -26 -86 100,000 0.10700 - S Pacific Savings Bank 10 -24 -85 10 -24 -86 91.224 0.09620 Gibraltar Savings 6 Loan 02 -14 -85 02 -20 -87 100.000 0.10250 Dean Vitter Reynolds 04 -18 -85 05 -15 -88 97,191 Treasury Bi11*2 Lincoln Savings 6 Loan 02 -13 -85 02 -13 -90 100,000 0.11125 Government Nat'l Mortgage 0446 -84 01 -15 -2011 890.346 0.13090 *3 'f " As of 10 -29 -95 Grand Total: 12.038,599 *1 Treasury Bills are purebesed at a price bel w their maturity value. They are quoted and traded on the Fasis of yield to maturity. The approximate interest earned on this six month investment will be 828,000.00. *2 The approximate interest earned on this investment will be 934,000.0. *3 Securities which are backed by Poole of government ensured or guareateed mortgages. i Bate 4: All investments are Certificates of Deposit unless otberwiae noted above. ra 's' m S: 1 N A y° r is "' v . _'1 �'i:f[`: µ1,•y' ' .. ,. .. n .� _ .v... Southem Ca8fornto Ed/aon Company Ck +I R 0 ROA ROt[YGAO GA�I.ORRIA •I)]O — Ar October 28, 1905 no ovva•aRVa ,.,. r.... 94 -06790 wor.n.owrz c.u,uR�.an] CERTIFIED NAIL Iws iv ai,l City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Baseline Road, Suite C Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Reference: Date of Occurrences 9 -9 -84 Locations North side of Baseline, naet of Hermosa, Rancho Cucamonga, CA Our File Not 84 -06790 Damages $5,452.42 Gentlemen: On October 18, 1785, we forwarded to your office our estimated "aim Against a Governmental Agency it,, the amount of $3,000.00. Enclosed to our amended claim in 'he amount of $5,452.42, which is she actual coat to repair and /or replace our damaged facilities. Please irelude our file number on your check. Thank you for your cooperation. Si,werely, M. Williams Claims Collection Reprossntative MW /lx840 „ enclosure CITY U RANCHO CUCAMONGA tOMINISn' TI( DI OCT 311995 5 �yei9ltllUlpi1�2i314�918 :, }d • J�}N.F�"t�i� f c M'R my- t �r r + •i °j "j ft r Sour CAUrc A Etl' n Cogan 22" MAL "M Av0AY2. P.0.20; as te•, 2002M40. GL F* lh *1770 t� STATEMENT OF CLAIM ' T01 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CLAIM NUMBERI B4- 06790 -056 INVOICE NUMBERI 10- 129 -021 INVOICE DATEI 10 -16 -85 NURK ORDER, 4SOr -2269 COST TO REPAIR AHD /OR REPLACE FACILITIES DAMAGED PRIOR TO AUGUST 09, 1985. LOCATED ON BASELINE APPROXIMATELY 46 NARDS EAST OF HERMOSA, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, MATERIAL TOTAL MATERIALSCELLANEOUS TOTAL LABOR CHARGES ( 13 MEN, 126.50 MAN — HOURS) MOTOtIZEO AND CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT 23.50 MRS. PSSGR. CARRYING VEHICLE L O.5O MRS. ON OR UG VEH WIDEP.RICKS 23.50 MRS. OH OR UG VEry M /DERRICKS TOTAL M070RIZED ANON CON^• RUCTION EQUIPMENT CONTRACT WORK - -- TOTAL AMOUNT DUE - -- 1 Z/ •255.65 4.147.11 653.41 31 t.25 95.45:.42 f_ :.; OCCUPATION TITLE _ LINEMAN /CABLE SPLICER ',LINEMAN /CABLE SPLICER .'APPRENTICE LINEMAN /SPLCR ,GROUNDMAN ORIVIaR ACNT OIVII 1 TRANSM CONSTR FOREMAN LINEMAN /CABLE SPLICER LINEMAN /CABLE SPLICER APPRcNTICE LINEMAN /SPLCR APPRENTICE LINEMAN /SPLCR GROUNDMAN DRIVER 'TRANSM CONSTR FOREMAN LINEMAN /CABLE SPLICER NORMAL OVER DOUBLE TIME TIME TIME AMOUNT 170b5 ^Y 'DETAILS OF LABOR COST HOURS ` Si , ATTACHMENTS" .00 '' �• .y 10.50 4.00 CLAIM NUMBER? 84- 06790 -056 77 TOS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA .00 39i.32 10.50 4.00 INVOICE NUMBER, 10- 129 -021 1.00 .00 .00 31.69 8.00 1.00 INVOICE DATE, 10 -18 -85 - ' 8.00 1.00 .00 350.63 i ' 1.00 WORK ORDER, 4505 -2268 OCCUPATION TITLE _ LINEMAN /CABLE SPLICER ',LINEMAN /CABLE SPLICER .'APPRENTICE LINEMAN /SPLCR ,GROUNDMAN ORIVIaR ACNT OIVII 1 TRANSM CONSTR FOREMAN LINEMAN /CABLE SPLICER LINEMAN /CABLE SPLICER APPRcNTICE LINEMAN /SPLCR APPRENTICE LINEMAN /SPLCR GROUNDMAN DRIVER 'TRANSM CONSTR FOREMAN LINEMAN /CABLE SPLICER NORMAL OVER DOUBLE TIME TIME TIME AMOUNT HOURS ------------------------------------------ HOURS HOURS 4.50 .50 .00 •184.49 10.50 4.00 .00 541.37 10.50 4.00 .00 39i.32 10.50 4.00 .00 266.21 1.00 .00 .00 31.69 8.00 1.00 .00 403.27 8.00 1.00 .00 350.63 5.00 1.00 .00 234.61 5.00 1.00 .00 169.59 8.00 1.00 .00 253.42 8.00 1.00 .00 172.42 10.50 4.00 00 606.67 10.50 4.00 .00 541 40 94.147.11 �Ait - eswl ra4'M41 maw WYOIq lir. i:17 147 14, 1.41 0 SauSraa t.111M=La SUN= as. S.O. ba NO am raM, tlail*wmk 11770 Sttaa Vwrea a y,618 bt 60Jr0011104 a 501. ' "" tb6 labs ed abet to lows a Pair as r+90wtsL t ow. .�r �'Llen. ZOMM M0a, Harllrr d Mo=rc f6 c j t\ omator s�.v. r 431.00 /pu he, i1GS.oa O. 511 aadLOr yn ■ 31.iR spas hr. 149.2S N Kawrrallay s.Sn.: 30.00afas hr. 140.00 far tar Mta1 aSa a[........... co umh Tor, 7 r -&- /I-&- Sop Trop" r 1 PSw ha1lSm: - 0 W� ___._..._ —_. _.�.. ,r ..s.. >•r Cn kolrrrNMr.+rMNA >A1« f.n,I F, rArff IJ(1 11 W. (.I M....7 ,...P.. w•M.rM r MI NM r.«4 >x..rd r.M1... ..a Y>« a1 M M\kM+,. N . 4•n «. AI dy. M .A ,r..okr. r rater W.• r ^- .I.Ir.I .,> N M Mw.w N M AkN.i. 1•..r�. .. C..M Aa. IL STAN a C.WIIDIN4 CM1.., N..' CAD..: vxCDGwlL711 _....._.o«.J.:_J....._._......_ . •M1- M M1 �.• .ter. w \T -r .....w iw. +1 • �• W •....r ^ .r.. e.��.+.•.r. �.rr ��4 M1iwr.r rF 4 IL AIrnCAM r• •-•_ � M1� 1• �t�•rrr.w..�y 34N MIN 1= _uLT[ +A1.__- ........... APPMOITION Cr MANWRO! :_COPY._- ` .Y „l"M 1 FMUnA Y....Y \Y...•.rr•rwrr.• l ^ AIrN[�lt]N I.fl� lACGIIYI.1[ OtV�M1 l+OMItIR 1. IxrY.71 a OCWII{y .In�Y. ..� / +f.. • �...r ~r._ Yr.ry. UwN rkP�'� Re r- IAI dNlk «r•fw Irol r..d.w — 1 uam -^ Fv.,.«, C,Y. Nil! San BP[na[.11nO On -32lc Nau[ S 1_lne AM«AN, C I.f..d.d,rkp . {° ❑ ra.nrr ❑ - --- -_ _ _ cart! MAUD 1O 2.f5 C.Ipt 1611 _ jp l.•w.N. r «N[IGSi✓.+w,.s r'� � %t1._�.ww N. r.tr.c.elbN .I1Yr F. «111..Z_.�•it..ww a?�!'Ll:.x..� Ie.efdw.Y./r Li.r - r .r•d L I.M411 a AM C.MNI . t:wP. �r.r • eYOUkhn 9ou['I NPAa D >Il to AgiF/..fr l.A 244 .a•a.. D.\w 1! 1 ;11 N 6 O '• '• P[.a /Gtknl,l[ 11TN(p Y /RWlACIIJ,yJJ 7nf +ua Mn lock - 3r 11964n /. -CMl [ >POl +� ' Annual T".]a • l•T . MfO0.1 >e d0. ['• 41ad )all r I SdwJ HAVOn AVR. �r r -,ff n[n0 _ve. -nmfa TJTAt j - ♦ w r..w« L«e.4 JMr Try• N D. «� r. M Irwr rwl. r l M.G. AdA.r fA 6F.•r IM1w> WBA.. �• a`r Gn Lrn1 ___._..._ —_. _.�.. ,r ..s.. >•r Cn kolrrrNMr.+rMNA >A1« f.n,I F, rArff IJ(1 11 W. (.I M....7 ,...P.. w•M.rM r MI NM r.«4 >x..rd r.M1... ..a Y>« a1 M M\kM+,. N . 4•n «. AI dy. M .A ,r..okr. r rater W.• r ^- .I.Ir.I .,> N M Mw.w N M AkN.i. 1•..r�. .. C..M Aa. IL STAN a C.WIIDIN4 CM1.., N..' CAD..: vxCDGwlL711 _....._.o«.J.:_J....._._......_ . •M1- M M1 �.• .ter. w \T -r .....w iw. +1 • �• W •....r ^ .r.. e.��.+.•.r. �.rr ��4 M1iwr.r rF 4 IL AIrnCAM r• •-•_ � M1� 1• �t�•rrr.w..�y 34N MIN 1= _uLT[ +A1.__- ........... APPMOITION Cr MANWRO! It ITAN a CAWO«M C.Mrr N____._.. .___:D.e._ .................._.. v M1 t,r.' �r.�.. •r r.r.. w ..w 4 r�.r r �-w..r. ,n 4 ....�,:: ^ 1rn.4�.•.Y.r �Mn.r•w �.../n .In�Y. ..� / +f.. • �...r ~r._ IAI dNlk «r•fw ` — 1 II. I.o•., M.nS.. W s,.r Cur W 4 CN. M S& WN, b!«r rA4 LSrI F. D,w Ur 014 AM«AN, C I.f..d.d,rkp . {° ❑ ra.nrr ❑ - --- -_ _ _ cart! MAUD 1O 2.f5 �'- _ jp l.•w.N. r «N[IGSi✓.+w,.s r'� � %t1._�.ww t;,�I.• «111..Z_.�•it..ww a?�!'Ll:.x..� .� r" T.^11:.: "'J i{`Jb�(d '`p�Y )tf�y1`°f ^,;t- •1 M�:1 � .r _ > ° �w .y:�+�J�L�+y( ♦��iy,{����(f1��1 61 Xillu Ii ru } 3�oiLLaa 3aae's - - d I IIA4P.0 Aueuue 1 I }. vALhn�i I UkCAAJ Teia 3rton CLY�i �nt2's 4eft- eLs Is Loc�E•o(� oil -YAg j&riJjaKr CoQaeR 4kuea Adeiv a AuD •HR"W' 4Fw6 , ;t lz -tie 1 MkR-f SloPADG Cl&-.eP -. u gopztrq Cu21ZeWrtq L.UeDb 2ojU/06 aC RD7'ACenlr'f QaPe21 �s Offm m e ct A-C Meerd /-Lmus fitAC *�& EFrsr 12ND1sa2.Ae. PMIZ Solt -41 yLZ)U..5m t- 7we wf-.S7/UfFrCe P&oFeurcwrrL Cizij AL RAIM 2-au!!u6 e Same AS Alwoe. lJ ' AMRATIMA POE fs400ePal6 APYPIAM NESS 1. TIM) Of UCLV W N T 1r OAlrrr N AkWi1 er..P COAeAI rt Lwrrr, W.fAP11 •.a•Mt N....,ar.,.w. tt.A..e+11.•.er.APer /r OPi SAFE BIE0. 1 NIME fwaAN.M,1AAwlaew� L IwWA 00 AIAIIrA1(gN 2651 ha!�n CAI eln A..ne nm 1a. nl.� ft 92!08 - 0 Pori_ e. IIwA IAA wY MM aNnwM N e taYal/ IF AY.A IAA «AI NIYNe wry a M An.k.Nf N 1\a Akr'� /„ P/:.A EXPRESS, UIC• " iw.2eeEe go. p:r II.t. Nr PrlNN, asP4 :wr IYI0 or nANACp y rN m e pmb ' ( dr • II" hm.p0 20 Annuel Fee 28.00 Rairm Yeu91n. ,r. 8/T Eerry V1101 kendel VP • a /YrNe.arw Tpeedy'S Pizza EApreeT _ IA AMIKANT APf MknON tY TRANE /E4O1 IL STATE J/ CAw01MA CAwt/ N—.—.....» ..--b... ........... .»..�� De NN L'tUA BMWs TA4 EWI FN VIVAO AN Cm Ono AAMI•Aa ❑ f..44—A. •Ar aP%atl ✓ IPM•\_._..» .._._._..._tORtS NAM1f0 ._...._....._ ..............Y'r ej rwrK 2651 ha!�n CAI eln A..ne nm 1a. nl.� ft 92!08 - 0 Pori_ e. IIwA IAA wY MM aNnwM N e taYal/ IF AY.A IAA «AI NIYNe wry a M An.k.Nf N 1\a Akr'� PwweA CAwN An r rgAYer N h bfNw+ I AO iM1•Y1• IA h+ M1I Mn ' II.t. Nr PrlNN, asP4 :wr IL ArOa N . 1 A ".MM« a.N1IJ Y N YY 4Y N • AMI .1 \Na N 1\I j.NAwaMI 01 . \,N�K DDI O 1. .•e M .r 4N r una r fwna N l..WwN N. d Oa r« wn M t. MMrfa ILtnOt CW.N 4 13. STATE OI ..AlwoltAA C.1 N .........___.......-». ....».....b. .................. . _.. .•, .N v. IA AMIKANT APf MknON tY TRANE /E4O1 IL STATE J/ CAw01MA CAwt/ N—.—.....» ..--b... ........... .»..�� Y [r, I wlw. ✓ ..� �, aIw wt_ ,.1....11 V ♦ w ,rr .1. ,.nw Mr r w .,.w M _ a�aN Yw. w, w ��• wYw. N. .. �• .,.r .r• aw I.i.. «Ara •w•� N w M+, JI r' � . w,�a wl.. . w. w•. iY ,.«.. Id. AY..ftIN Ik,.NNd IL Ak1 Nl.wtwbl L ..,,_�N.Mt` 1 CITY CF RAAYVN n•f;u -� _ Iry18TF..• TICK' ` t/ If. lo~ N ✓Mt W deAa1 Or W LP C W CMN 4. De NN L'tUA BMWs TA4 EWI FN VIVAO AN Cm Ono AAMI•Aa ❑ f..44—A. •Ar aP%atl ✓ IPM•\_._..» .._._._..._tORtS NAM1f0 ._...._....._ ..............Y'r ej rwrK 7 S 1 �J 3JJJi a p ' O (� / Q` P• P T � C• � S�EebYi ?,ZSA 6LWesS:WC. urJeA � o�L � MuSrG I I . PLu: 4mfUM4's'F.�A eepeesSVC, IS ( .0cR-rBD olv tie AJd,2; HrdcSi c.6.evei1 of eo67AiLL SouLetJnrtb "r> bao snZeer u,74,w the blto51C PLrs Gemre2. 40 ?aoP curl? Cu2/ifti7Lq gcmez) n G2mmwa es.�mfiLt,f1L 1105n «,Arrg126PeznEr. AJoC714- IL,,,z Try f��srZYuiii itsr �r(- Sou>ti /MP2f /l6//afbaS,T- 'PvT1ixrn, war c,l. Crammelkoit Cne ko&AL Pzfv,j ,, -5.6yecr'f2oPe2r`l Aub A- DS.)ce"T 912oPParlfs h'LC - 20"Jeo Afeer.- UG io 'lAe �i' eO&RL /PLrritl. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAAIONGA cl:c Al STAFF REPORT C%> C z 197-1 1 DATE: novemoer 6, 1985 TO: City Council and City Manager FPON: Lloyd B. Hobbs. City Engineer BY: Michael D. Long, Senior Public Works Inspector SUBJECT: Acceptance of Parcel Map 7731 street improvements, release of performance bond and filing a Notice of Completion Parcel Map 7731 has been completed to the satisfaction of tho City Engineer. It is recommended that the Council approve the acceptance of the project, direct the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder and release Performance surety. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council accept as complete Parcel Map 711, pass the attached ro�.olution authorizing the City Engineer to flie the Notice of Completion and release perform:anco bond for $226,000.00. * p 'V a Attachments %•�y'oC,q � �f I rn� y •,t �41 M I 9a, • i RECOMIN6 REQUESTED lift CITY OF RAROIO CUCWRGA P. 0. sot 607 Ranc*3 Cucumn7a, Calit"la 91750 UMER RECORDED NEIL TO: CITY CLERA CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMOMEA P. 0. Box $01 Rancho Cucaamga, California 91770 LVTICE W COIILETIOR NOTICE IS HEREBY UIEEN THAT: 1. The undarsigned it in owner of an Interest a• estate In the hereinafter described •eal property, the nature of which Interest or estate tat PARCEL AAP •731 2. The roll hey and address sf the undersigned owner It: CITY CF MICMO CUCMMCA. 9720 -C Base Line 2011, P 0. Bat 607, Rancho Cucsmtgt, California 9:730. 7. On the 6th day of Mora -ber. IS85, there w.s aowaleted on t "e y hereinafter descrilwd reel property the work of Iexproeenent sot forth to the contract docuaerts fart PAM.I. NAP 7731 A. TBe nan, i the original oontr¢tor for the .mrk of lspr e:Xnt as a .hide was: SANTO ANITA DEVELOPMENT S. The •al propirty, referred to heraln Is Hltuated in the City of Rancho Cucmnga, Court? of San eernirdi +o, CallfornL. and Is described at foilm WEST SIDE OF HAIEN AVEhIIE. SOOTM OF 7TH SMEET LITY OF RANCHO CUCM4GA, . tunicical c".rppratto,. Omar .1 .Y` RESOLLTION NO. EU- 06 -07R .f� A RL30LUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RAMHO _ FAR PARCELCMAP PUBLIC FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION rUR THE WORK PNEREAS, the construction of public improvements for Parcel Map 7731 have been rompleted to the satisracrinn of the rity Engineer; and WHEREAS, a 9otice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work complete. NMI, THEREFORE, be it resolved, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernard:io County. PASSED, APPROVED, a..d ADOPTED this 6th day of November, 1985. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ® M' ATTEST: an . eIs, ayor Sever y A. Authelet, y Jerk I, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, �• California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular (special, adjourned) meeting of said City Council held on the 6th r, day of November, 1985 Executed this 6th day of November, 1985 at Rancho Cucamonga, California. ever y u e et, ty er T •a i a, i L7 r W R C \\ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAWNGA STAFF REPORT DATE: H ,vember 6, 1905 - T0: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd d. Hubbs, Ciiy Engineer BY: Linda Deek, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: Approval of Improvement Agreement and Improvement Security for Parcel Map 9204 located on the northwest corner of Sixth Street and Haven Avenue submitted by Kensley -Moon Properties. Parcel Map 9204 was approved by the Planning Commission on July 10, 1985, for I he division of 8.41 acres into 3 parcels in the Industrial Specific Plan Development District located on the northwest corner of Sixth Street and Haven Avenue. Tao Developer, Kensley -Munn Properties, is submitting an agreement and security to guarantee the construction of the off -site improvements in the fallowing amounts: Faithful Performance Bond: $100,000.00 Labor and Material Bond: S5L,000.00 C.C. S R.s have also been approved by roc City Attorney. RECOOMPIDATIOM It is •ecommenled that the City Council adopt the attachrd resolution approving Parail Map 9204, acccpting sale agreement and security and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign slid agreement and to cause said map to record. Respe tfull su)s(ttt , L8t{ :de Attachments Via✓ •uhn... MMIQ a 1 *alcVjWQ.iIJJy 6 3 L- TY OF RANCHO CLICA,NIONGA ENGINEERING DIVISION VICINITY MAP N e R ' F OD CRT N[UI[W G...•, R•rm (',UCAMONGA COUNTY -WATER DISTRICT LLOYD •«nur.. W. MiChACL u v .Ir••oina .� cwum. u.0 tt+.o u my n,• .a, all. CARL[ R.ANQ[I.SON C EVCRLY C. BRAOCN VICTOR A. CH[RSAK. JR ?11M 1 CHARLES A WEST October 25, 1985 n . `N • , City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Department P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Attention: Mrs. Barbara Krell Centlemene Kensley /Moon Properties, Developer of Parcel Map No. 9204, situated in Rancho Cucamonga, have deposited with this District a Material and Labor Bond, a Faithful Performance Bond, and a Utilities Improvement Agreement for the waterline and sewerline construction for said project. These bonds and agreements ara being accepted by this District as - r: an assurance that said improvements will be provided, as stated, i within the boundaries of the Cucamonga County Water District. At this time, the waterline and eowerline improvement plans have nest been approved by this District. r, if you have any gJestions concerning this matter, please contact , =d. the undersigned. •� Yours truly, ski CUCAAMMMOO/NGA COUNTY %ATER DISTRICT 4 Betty F en , ,7 Secretary I7 Q3 1 r t fi r gi R R CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONLA IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR PARCEL MAP 9206 Bade and entered Into. Into, BY THESE eelwith That prool Si,eSmo %t the Municipal Code and Regulat'ans of the City of Rancho Cuca.onga, State of California. A municipal corporation, herslmeftsr referr- ed to as the City, by ai.d between Said City and RwnmtaY�MOOn Properties, 9665 Wilshire Blvd SOlte 650 eevecly Halle. CA 90) 2 hereinefter referred to is the ;evgloper :HAT, UHERCAS, sold Oeva'ontr desist to develop certain real property 10 laid City located an the northwest corner of Sixth Street and Haven Avenue; and WHEREAS, Said City has established certain requirements to be met by told Developer as prerequisite to granting of final approval; and WHEREAS. the execution of this avretmenl and posting of laproveeent security a hereinafter cite&• and approved by the Lity Attorney, are daoaed to be ulvaLnt to prior completion of said eaquh &mina far thS pu rpo[w pF aecurtng aald approval. ROW THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between the City and the Developer as follows: diva taper �a expense all l.nrove.enti described on page to whereof within Ig .Onthl from the date here, /. 2. resolution ohll the Council al of sold sold effective City n apprvvInq ofthls agreement. This agreement shall be In d :fcu•t on tna eay faII3.. Ing the firs anniversary date of said approval atla ad s an eaten. Sion ,/ floe as bean granted Ly said City as heralnaltee proved- to comyyseta then p cYlSiOnsr of ethis oagreement,t lIn writiing which than i days prior to the default date• and Includingg a Statement of circumstances of necessity for additional t1we. In c:.close Slam of such rnquest, tie City reserves'tha riCht to nrfer LM istl meta,a old efuffl,!en�v u Of gthecoimprovement security sand ot� require ado uataen(s thereto worn warrss 4d by substantia) changes thereto 6. If the Developer falls or neglects to comply rit% the provlslons of this agreement, the City shall nave the rigve et any tine to cause said provlslons to be completed by any la. ful .menS, and thereupon to recover fro. sale Dere lover andf-• his Surety the lull coat and expense Inurred In so doing. 5 Canstrction permit, shall be Obtained by the Bevel oper from the Office Of the City Eegl.tser prior to Start Of a•, work wlthit. the public rlght•of.way, and the developer anal Conduct such wcrk In fail Compliance with the regulatio-i contained therein. Non•COapllence may result In stopping of t•. mark by the City. and assmesnent of the penalties provided. 6. Public rtyyht•cf•way Impr.vament work required sheet _ ha constructed In Can /arsance with approved improvement olaAo. Standard SpeclflcaSlon ;, and Standard Drawings and any spaelal �t amendments thereto. Construction shall Include any trans ltloa and /ar other Incidental work deemed necessary /of drainage gr •,i _;t 1 l •.iii; a..4�rt�a: �r,G� ��� !1'.•� .�t ��5+ *.f •Yr.'1•lrfi.t 5•!e4 �}+= ~�,�'��yqj, :�r fC�,i d Y f A 1 public safety Error% or asat,slons discovered during construe, tlon the11 ba Corrected upon tht direction of the City Englnaar. kevised work due to sold Ilan Modifications %hall by ^ covered by the provisions of this a/reawent and secured by the smrety eoverinq the original planned •arks. 7 Work done wlthln existing street% shall be 4111gent. ly pursued to completion; the City shall have the right to complete any and all work 1. the avant of onjustivied delay In CORP l etloe. and t0 recover all cost and expense incurred f.0a the Developer and /or his Contractor by Iny lawful meant. C. The Developer $hall bs responsible for repla'.ement, relocations, or removal of any component of any 1rr19:•:wn •star system In conflict with the rmqutr ad Work to the sell ifactlon of the City Engineer and the owner of twe wet. system. 9. The Developer shall be responsible for removal of All loose rock and other debris from the public right-of-way. 10. The Developer shell plant and met ta.n parkway trees as directed by the Community Development Dlrecior. 11 The Improvement security to be furnished by the Developer to guarantee completion of the terms of this agreement shell be subject to the approval of the City Attorney. The prin- cipal amount of said Improvement security $halt not be lets than the amount show-as 2 FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE Type Principal Amount: SIIS,000.00 Rams and address of surety: MATERIAL AND LABOR Typoo Principal Amount: S 67,500 00 Name and address of surety: CASH DEPOSIT MOMUNENTATtOR Typo: arinclpal Amount: S 1,350.00 Naas and adJ•aat of surety: 10 BE POSTED PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE BY THE CITY PArtmp,K6KIP A"NOWL900MNMT b e Ymumuaa��Y 61yav �. /I_JIZY(.�(d� ,•�1(( OnlMlnt�. Kel '(1.�fi)hr•i ,e�aWmnw f Lou. lY a l`nCr�/�LZtl�AAY' /� Ma YV1ea(Ypnad MOOM1 WW[,pPYma110ppaT• y b �1clrrcL,s I71roti -A WFIMAL aeAL C'parK •ahtra+nmma AI efll A ACCVtA marYaMmm O +nrt W.YaIW •I!<Ipy evtl:M1 Geun m FAAnV )oar OM WnuNawhla•KVtA IM +iInM lnalMVal onMWIOIIM . Sq n."I'M Ile paMMMPane KYne +iMptpW MInN NIeMaPanlp m,MJae 11 ��CCVV Wo�ops l!]S 14) yA1N[3]mrMMKWIit1Y W. I) .1/ r �,cfl� /L.,• -fit , M� Y pMINm By: Mayor Attests City Clark Approved:_ til�ttornay OEFELOPER'S SI.MATURES MUSI BE hOTARICCO I P � �vti` .ti a r FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND WHEREAS, theiyitf Council of the Cite of Rancho Cucamonga, State of California, and Ransley /Moon rope_ ties (hen inafter designated as principal•I have entered into an agreement whereby principal agrees to install and complete certain dasllas4ed +' public teDrovementt, which said agreement, dated ll and Ident+i red as Project vercel Map 920a tt here Ty ra ernd�Fo .` cad made a part hereof; and,` - WMERFAS, said principal Is re9ulnd, under the terms of We agreement to furalSh A bond for the faithful performance of said + agreecent A0.1, THEREFORE, we the hrinetpal and a.lboa Ivrurenee Compavy 7 as Surety, are held and Iirmly bound can o e y,o anc o Cucaeongn thsreloaftef called City') in the at n•1 sum of One Mund red std Twenty -Firs Thou ;end and 06/100 Dollars ($123,000.00) tawfa, money of the United States, for the payment of which sum Succisatrs rase utors Os made �nl at,gtors, jointly sand Our severally: firmly by these presents. The condition of this obligation Is such that if the Above , bounded principal, his or its heirs. executors. administrators. successors or As9190s, $he" tie All things stand to and abide by. , and well and truly also and perform the covenantS, conditions and provisions In the SAW agreement and any alteration thereof aid* � as therein provided, on his or their part. to be kept An Poll o aspects taccor(,ag dtontheir atrue therein specified, And eai9, And and eaployeas, asytertlnva stipulated City. tits thisofficers. obligation•t Shall become null and void; otrerw(l T. it shall be and remain In full force and effict. As a part of the obllgitlOn secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified t�erdfor there shall be Included costs and reabaneble capaases and fees, including reasonable ai *^ -ney'f ails toi beuto db asCcoats naoec iccivaady+nnany`]udjoeni rendereeon, The surety harem)) stipulates and agrees that no change, estanilan of time, alteration car addition to the terns of the •i', - ant or to the .'art to be performed thereunder or the saoci- flc ;tons accomptny6,g the same $halt In any,sid, affect Its obligations an this bond, and It dies hereby waive Attics of .,ny of tIm S ch terms `ofa the agreement nor to the- wor..eor altration ther specifications the .M WITNESS WHEAEOF, this strument he$ bean dui executed by the or+ inacIpal and Surety above named. on October I!r _ 198 ✓. R Wb6.1 ce caar+n*Ana ales o- ac yvA :aa r�PLEASE ATTACH POWER OF y.TTORNEV TO ALL BONDS ` SIGNATURES MUST RE•ROTMIEEO C"'M I ':"- J"„r51: t:•`'.� L -.Lai` �_.,_ ' M OI•UAA 025802 +a LABOR. (IMO MAJ[RIDLtlFiat GOAD WHEREAS, the City Council of the Cltyy of Rancho Tuamonga, Staten of California. and Ranslaymoon Droperttme (Rerelnafter mercer designated as principal-) have entered Into in z agreement public al ovemen Omtall and COMDleto ter ate Peslg7nave puDife lmprprementf, rh lch � sold agreement, dated t a I983 :;o to Map 9201 ff Aerr 7y n irrad o i I- ent made part hereofte anAPlrCel WHEREAS, under the terms of $314 a reemrt, required before entering upon the perfOrmAPcV the nwork. ' or to file s good and sufficient payment bond wlte the City of rancho Titled 114 to secure the Stain to which reference is eau• In Title IS (commenclnq with Section 3082) Part of 1 of Dlrisios 3 o• tie Civil Coda of the State of California. sy�o�,, pfirielf abound corporate are, hold unto the City of Rancho Cuumong4 and all contractors, su contractors, laborers, Malarial man and other persons Nog /sd In the performance of the in Civil fn the the Hundred ofe .umr 00 /190 Doll and 00 /lOD Dollars 12,500 00) for materials furnished or labor thereon of any kin, r or for amounts due under the Unameloyment insurance Act with respect to Such work or labor, that said surety will PAY the sees In an amount Mot exceeding the amount herelnabore set forth r and also In case soft Is brought upon this bond will PAY in addition to the face amount thereof, costs and reasonable expenses sod fees. Includlog reasonable attorney's fees. Incurred by City in SuccessfullY enforcing suet+ obligation, to be awaroed and fixed D) the court, • and to be tarn as costs an to bas Included In the Judgment therein rnde•ed •to Dthe expressly that t4is shell, Inure tiny and of all persons. companies cowyyarmttons entitled to file Claims under Title 1S (commaicinq i wlti� Section 3082) of Part 1 of Divlfon 3 of the Civil Code, so as to flue a right of action to than or their assigns In any suit brought upon this bond the this Should lose sse 111 Decome fotiherwisef null and void, tt shell be and remain In full force end effect. r' The surety hereby stipulates and agHef that no charge. time. alter atlon ' •, r agreement or sna I sclflsetlons accompanying the seer tarot shalll a to any i manner affect Its abllgaTlons on this bond and It does here. by waive +3+ notice of any Such change. extons ;o n, Alteration or addition. tAe IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Instrument his been duly executed by principal and 1 surety above named, on 0110.1 to , 190 "/'P a,le °• • cane. Cuu see_ --i- t� gesture) r -- n_ a—CrF.- lt'11t. llllla sh.,P.r Gk% PLEASE ATTACH POWER OF ATTORNEY TO ALL 30NDS ,• SIGNATURES RUST 8E NOTARIZED ':"- J"„r51: t:•`'.� L -.Lai` �_.,_ ' M M �I 0 SUBDIVISION GJARARTEE NO PERFORMANCE (SETTING OF FINAL MONUMENTS) city Called City of n`anehe Cucamonga p, 0. a0a 507 Rancho Cucamonga, Cal;/ornla 51710 Gnntleaen: Pursuant to Chapter 4, Article 9, Stcti)n 46491 of the Government Code, the undersigned hereby o reel that all son Gets shorn on the final asp 0I 8Arc01 Nan 9704 an to be tat and furnlskal by the su0dlrfder'f angina or or surveyor on or oefore S apaclfled I1 the Engfnasr's or 54rveyor's Certificate ' 'nA agreat to furnish the notes thereon to Cnmpletr all en9lnaerinq requIrmentr spactrlad 1, Section 66497, if the Government Code The undersigned hands you herewith the sem of t 1,340.00 as a Cash depos n, said deposit to guarentw that the monuments will be set and the notes furnished as above provided en nr before the data specified and that the engineer or surveyor will be paid by the anaersigned It Is further understood and agreed that In the event :he gndersigned fails to comDtate tha above requires"rts within the time so"Ifiel, the CItY o/ NanCnO Cut ason9a 1s 'uthorlsed to Complete said reuairement3 Or Dace them to be is '.'ad and the cost thoranl tf to Do a charge against asld cash dapae't, and the .` City of Ran Cho CuCUOna'e is authorltad to make the nvccssary transfer free sold cash da Dotit to the credit for the pr000r city fund It Is further agree4 that If the undersigned does rot present evidence to the City Cc nc!l that he has paid the engineer or Iurve.or for the setting of the flpni monument$, end if t:• enqlnear or surv.yar gives the notices prescribed in Section d6097 of the government code the City shall pay to said engineer or surveyor, the cash deposit here In made. If the 'Ost of sampleting said rmquirtmants etceeds the ataLnt -.t the Cich deposit, the undersigned agrees t0 pay the difference withb thirty (30) days after retsi<ing rrltten statement free the Ty of Rancho Cucamonga specif7Ing the amount of the T Jlffarence between the cash deposit and the actual cost of said -' riquirementS Cordlilly, �6!!164/Nwfl FPpeklzrle< SYbdividt- �1E..� S tAL5"I12C &L,3 't,Ift: Si Add,. Iuus is Date /r iZ IOn The depositor of record (far return of any portlnn of the c deposit) shall be Vt;14(c- a MOO I 112Lr ?nr . 5klvutE ',I, I.) I" NOTE: TO BE SUOMI TED FULLY FILLED OUT AND SIGNED 0 RESOLUTION NO Ell- 06 -OIR -I "- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL Of THE CITY OF RANCHO - - CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NO. 9204, (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAF N0. 9204), IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY WHEREAS. Tentative Parcel Map No. 8204, submitted by Keastey -Moon Properties. Subdivider, and consisting of 3 parcels, located on the northwatt corner of Stith Street and Haven Avenue, being a division of a pdrtiort of Lots 11 dad 14 of Section 13, T.I.S., R.7W., S.B.M. per plat of Cucamonga Fruit Lands, filed In Book 4 of Maps. Pag+ 9, Records of San Bernardino County, State of California was approved by the Planning Cemnission as provided in the State Subnivisioa Map Act and is in compliance with the requirements of Ordinance No. 28 of said City; and WHERFAS. Parcel Map No. 9204 is the Final Map of the division of land approved as shown on said Tentative Parcel Map; and WHEREAS, to greet the - equirements established as prerequisite to approval of the -'nal Map, stld subdivider submits for approval said Final Map offering for dedication for public use the streets delineated thereon NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the city of Rancho T- rtamonga, California, as follows 1 That the offers for dedication and the Final Map delineating sa::e be approved and the City Clerk is authorized to exeeute the certificate thereon behalf of said City; and 2 ThL said Parcel Map Io. 9204 be and the same is hereby approved and t're City Engineer is authorized to present same to the County Recorder to be filed fr- record. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADLPTEb this 6th day of November. 1985. AYES: HOES: ABSENT on . es, ayrr r ' x E r.� DATE: TO: FROM: 7V: _JBJECT: -- CI1'Y OF RANCHO CUCAAIONGA STAFF REPORT c�xcw ttpl, <� > i3 U !> November b, 1885 t977 City Council and City Manager Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Enginter Barbara Krall, Assistant Civil Engineer Approval of Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement submitted by Rancho Cucamonga Partners in connection with Development Review 84 -47 Development Review 64-47 was approved by Planning Commission oo February 27, 1985 for the development of a retail commercial building located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between Vineyard and Hallman Avenues. Rancho Cucamonga Partners, developers of the site, have submitted tie attached lien agreement to guarantee the future construction of the median island on Foothill Boulevard fronting their site. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council adopt the attache: resolution accepting the Real Property improvement contract and lien agreement and authorizing the Citv Clerk to cause same agreement to record ResDL ly submi!/, tte , LjH Attachments - c L K GC Gol MH M_ c j ht LM M 0) E cc ree wx r. 1 GC 7, j 1 L. am —Tx 1 1. s 7P. MH a WNW M -all &"man... Naha JJI A LLJL-il 1 0 1r] MCONON: IN w■ ■"w■u ■womm ■ -LM ----JU J to NORTI I CITY OF FEE, ltd• IY7 RA NCI-10 CUCAMONCA TrrLz:. i. z, PLANNING DIVGON EX"IfUT SC,,LE, s U • awiwmvw­� a s ACCORDING RCDOCSTEO By - and WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO- CITY •LEAK CITY OF RANCHO LUCAMD -.. n Boa 807 RARCBU : "r° A. CAt IEORMiA 91730 REAL PROPERYY INPp0yCMENf CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT OR 8v— 7 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered Into this tstb day of xtoUar . 1985• by and between RAN" -ro lFGK%JGA Y] 01335• • eui[nreta foNe .•ncar• (he N,inafter referred to as -Developer'). and the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMOAGA. CALIEORRIA• a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to cs •City'), provides as followst WHEREAS• as s general condition precedent to the Issuance of a billding psrmit for 0 R 84-47 devetepennt the City requires the construction of missing off -ate street lmprovements including one -half landscaped media,, island adjacent to the property to be developed; and WHITENS, the Developer desires to postpone construction of such fepcovements until a later date U determine' by the City; and - WHEREAS. the City Is agreeable to such postponement provided that the Developer enters Into this Agreement requiring the Oevelo;er to construct said Improvements, at no expense + the City, •Ater denr,d to do so by the City, which said Agrr. - shall also provide that the City may construct said Improvr-- If the Developer falls or neglects to do so and that the shall have a lien upon the real property hereinafter deterlb- • ,� Yy pecurlty for the Developer's Dq *Iarmance, aid any repayment City D I • S ROW. THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE: ^ I. The Oeveloper hereby agree$ that he will 1.atall off -mite street ImProveeeet% Including one -half landscaped aedlan Island In accordance and compliance with all applicable ordinances resolutions, rules and regulations of the City fn effect at the time of the installation Said Improvements shall be Installed upon and along Foothill Ilvd., not to exceed the :eeterline of said street or beyond the frontage of the aubJect property except as required to provide for adequate drainage and traffic transition per City Standards. Ito, v+a':','vA_"i`,'e ;r.., .•�; ,'. ., t 2 The Installation of said improvements shall be completed no later than ore (1) year following written notice to the neveloper from the City to commalcg installation of the Stec. Installation of said teprovenants shall be it no expense to mesa City. 0 In the event the Developer shall fall or refuse to complete the Installation of W4 1 ^provements In a timely manner, City may at any t se thereafter, upon giving the DeveloPer written notice of Its intention to do So, enter upon the property hereinafter described and complete said Improvements and recover all costs of completion incurred by the City from the +• D Daveloper. , �i a. To secure the performance by the Developer of too - t terms and conditions of th s Agreement and to secure to- repayeent to City of any funds which may be expended by Cite v completing sold tsprovesents .00e default by the Oevelo:• i here.nder, the Developer does by Chess presents grant, bargain, t� h t' s sell and convoy to the City. In trust• the following described real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. County ofr 4. wY. S San Bernardino, State at California. to -witl East IBS feet of Parcel I of Parcel slap 25TO. recorded In Book -Yrwg I' r 2 22, Pages OS of Parcel Naps In the Office of the County lscorderj •Claijs '. •,, o of San 0ernardino County, California Y Y i 'f S A trust for the purposes This conveyance If - described above 6 iow, therefore, If the D•vtloper shall faithfully > perform allthen this +bonus conveyance things ahall be void �nothervise this It ct$ and Agreement, shall rem$In in full force and affect and In & rspactt shall and the consid red and treated sof the part1 s iwith &I Gras ec art th ereto of a ri State of Cillfornlab and the any rother applicable at+tute�opertH ning to mortgages on rfai prooerty. 7 This Ayreamant shall be binding Upon S"d shall Inure administrators- to the benefit of the hubs, the Dart successors and ssl0ns of tech of Lf hereto e. To the extent the t," to•Developer'ct this shell be Agreement as a mortgage. amortgagor the the Ctr11 hall ofa the State ofg C&ll forntos and Any other statute pertain -1 to mort0ages on real property p. if lager action 1, torecorard and sumo whichn the C1tr of the provisions of this Agrswant, tf entitled sled to ncorar from the Developer hereunder or tt ,halllobe the entltlemortgage o created "Torhits cestsn and Prevail reasonab'e attorneys fees As shall be awarded by the Court 7 35 a; -• 1 IN WITNESS UNEREOF, the parties hereto have eaetuted this Agreement on the day end year first above written CITY DEVELOPER' eMCeO csxamwA vtsrtueree. CITY OF RAPCMO CUCAMONGA, . G.11[ot..La lol•t voetur. at[ CALIFORNIA, a auilcipal uaao tvcu A IMSans, . au m[o 9 ... [dt part .... hip corporatiun as \ on q f M.Ypr .rry Ymtd, ,ungiM r.[t.cr DYM1 YaL yI11AKt\L. . Gltto[.L corm. ATTEST: LIP —serer y u a Y-- APPROVED AS TO FORtI: 1t�l City Clerk .............................................. .••iiiL'tNEV ..u• STATE OF CALIFORNIA )) COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINOI ss as .19 ,before the un ers arse Dory u c, Den one y ippeara ,(DiTQ'ifIQFyS and BEVERLY A. AU18CLET personalty known to as to be the Mayor and City Clark, respectively, of thr CITY OF RAVCNO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA a aunlclpal corporation, and known to me to be the Persons who OAOCutad the within instrument on behalf o1 said muntclpAI corporation, and acknowledged to as that such municipal corporation executed it WITNESS MT NANO AND CfrICIAL SEAL. o dry 94sture l erArearcUey,w F a ,� S nrta iAFwaEeCa: _ YF P'wa11 y,� •rM1wwgwLL R.u•.wen =b, l .1Vw W.s {`Yw,I, YV.nY Pblw YY.wRS�,.O.^m,YdN wow- . -.FYry c B ._1�mP•MYNwMeAY g � -�� tiytM wlwn4�•""'b mb M1/w wwaYw M1.wr..y.'�yn�M1 rY L.tCfaM1� y 7^e�++ • �G rw worunac.ta arw. = i wsu gywnY.ewi.,mwaY°°w.wt�.ww Fe ofelrj,tL iG J// L i „t"n F/tL.rlu Y�1 (GGL) a .. i RESOLUTION NO. -&H --bM- R Q5 -aq 3 i- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO it IMPROVEMENT ACCEPTING A ;n CUCAMONGA PARTNERS, FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84 -47 AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME �•` WHEREAS, Development Review No. 84 -47, located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard between Vineyard and Hellman Avenues, submitted by Rancho 4 Cucamonga Partners was approved on February 22, 1985; and WHEREAS, Installation of one -half landscape median established as prerequisite to issuance of Building Permit has been met by entry Into a Real r 'property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement by Rancho Cucamonga Partners. A NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Cicy Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California does accept said Real Property Improvement. -�! Contract and Lien Agreement, authorizes the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign same, and directs the City Clerk to record same in the Office of the County Recorder of San Bernardino County, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and AGOPTEU this 6th day of November, 1985. h: AYES: NOES: ABSEI,T: T ke s, ayor �.i �a h. +■ ■ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT . ,; ■ DATE: November 6, 1985 0 ? c T0: City Council and Pity Manager 19^ ' <:r FROM: Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer SUBJECT: Release of Bonds and Nott of ompletion J'. pC Developer: Lewis 'icmes of California P° 0. Box 670 Upland, CA 91786 ' )' Project: Terra 111sta Planned Community: Tract 12316, Street Iegrovewnts r °1 Accept: Maintenance Bond (Street) Release: St0,100.00 >� Faithful 2erformance Bond (Street) $101,000.00 Tract 12316 -1, Model:: .Y Accept: Reiease: Maintenance Bon,, (Models) $5,610.00 I Faithful PPrformance (Models) $56,100.00 Tract 12316 -1, Base Line Bridge w Accept: Release: Maintenance Bond (Bridge) $6,:00.00 Faithful Performance (Bridge) $63.000.00 Tract 12317, Street Improvements Accept: Maintenance Bond (Scree:) Release: $14,800.00 .n Faithful Performance (Street) ( f141,800.00 y, A V x 1001, �K CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Release of Bonds and Notice of Completion November 6, 1985 Page 2 Tract 12317 -1, Models Accept: Release- Maintenance Bond (Models) $10,100.00 Faithful Performance (Models) $101,000 00 Tract 12364, Street Improvements Accept: Maintenance Bond (Street) $14,290.00 Release: Faithful Performance (Street) $142,900.00 Tract 12365, Street Improvements Accept: Maintenance Bond (Street) $25,212.00 Release: Faithful Performance (Street) $252,120.00 Tract 12402, Storm Drain, Terra Vista Pkwy., 5 Church Accept: Maintenance Bond (S.D.) $38,964.00 Release: Faithful Performance (S.D.) $389,638.00 Tract 12402, Street Improvements Accept: 0 Maintenance Bond ( Street) $13,578.00 Release:- ' Faithful Performance (Street) $135,771.75 RECOMMENDATION The improvements listed above have been completed in an acceptable manner and It is recommended that Council accept the maintenance guarantee oonds, release the Faithful Performance Bonds, and authorize the City Engineer to file Notices of Completion for the improvements. Respe fully submit /` LB :b- Attachments < : .l ■ RECORDING RMSTED 3T: CITY OF AARCHD CUCAMUIGA P. 0. Box 607 Rancho Cucaaonga, rxlifornia 91730 WHEN RECORDED PAIL TO: CITY CLERA CIIT DP RAAC40 CUCAM PSA P. 0. Boa 807 Rancho Cutasooga, California S1730 NOTICE OF COMPtETI01 NOTICE IS P2RMY GIVEN THAT: If The unde herainafter 4•tcrlbaHr�eiM properLY, thern tore of Interest Interest or estate Is: TRACTS 11316, 123:6 -1 fle30ELS), 12315 -1 !86E LINE BRIDGE). 12317. 12317 -1 (MODELS), 12'64, 12165 12402 (STORY MIN. TERRA VISTA PARXV,Y 6 DM.NCH). AND 12402 2. The full IM and address of the unGntgned owner If: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAVIGA, 33204 Base line Road, P. 0. Box 807, Rancho Cuca,cmga, Califorela 91730. 3. On the 6ch day of havnAer, 1965, there was conplated on tho hereinafter described real property the Yore of teprovxent sat forth to tae cmntraCb dccusmts fv: TRACTS 12316, 11316 -1 (HOOELS). 12316 -I (BASE LINE BRIDGE). 17717. 12317 -1 (MODELS). 12361, 12365 12402 (STORM DRAIN, TERRA VISTA PAROAT B CMDNCIJj, AND 12402 4. The haw of the original contractor o, the Ylrt of Iemrrrem nt as a whole WAS: LEWIS HOMMS OF CALIFORY:A S. The real prclwrty referred to herein 11 situated in the City or follows: :ucac*12A County of San Bernardino, Ctlifornlc, and is ascribed AS /ollpf: TERRA VISTA PLANNED C(r"AlTT CITY OF RANCHO CUOLMDYGA, s municipal Corporation, D. ' aato Lloyd s, t rq I //d P —rC0Ccmp&nV- 33,'VMWM ,An w ralarna921,01 1141999.1411 %2131402 113" SUBDIVISION I\1PROVEMENrS MAINTENANCE BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESEA" S. / ' ' 't9 tiu�n i 106490 _ TIIAT wc.—I EWIS— HOMES OF CALIFORNIA ,n Fr1nsrI end DLl ELOPERS INSURANCE COMPANY a esvpoeuson organized and doing business under and hs untie w the L%e.:l me x.nc of Gllfom a and duly bcemed to conduct a general surely buslnhs In the State of Cahfomm as Secty. are mid.md Iltrrlp hound unw as Oblmcc.mthcsumu( TFN T1f OtiSAND ONF H 1NDRFD AND N01100 IS 10 100.00 1Dollan. for uhieh nay mcnt. ucll and truly to be made. ire bind uurselves. true heirs. eseeumrs and succn%ors. jointly and stwmlly finnl) by they presents. Till: CONDITION OF THE OBLIGAI ION IS SCCII TH.sT st'I IEREAS. the.bo%v named Principal. as a condition OUhe Offing of the linal subdn lston nup of (TrxuParce's \tap No a e u o entered into in agreement or agreements %rah vld Ohl pce to owplelc she mlprm emcnts %TV. niW i sad agreement or agnYmmr.ts WIIEREAS sad a }reerKnl pmsided that Itmcspal shall guarantee replacement and repair of lnipnncmenp as dcxnbcd therein f1-2 ICnod or one sear folLwtng final acceptance of sad Improsemenss. NOW TIER EFORE. n the aNnc Pnnctpal dull rmdemnd) the Obligee for all loss that Obltgee nuy suslam b) reason of any dcfemw matenals or uertmamhtn %huh become ap; rent dunng the pens: of one )ear from and after acccplame of the said projw by Obltpee. then this obligation shall Iv said. othcrsvne to remain to full [once anJ cl feet w CUNhorA1ION ame re the tud Bs C1fnw fOSlIMBERNARDIND 'Ili —' , I rs, October 14. 1985 e, m„ e.,p,�Yne.,.gn.aerla.,y�woewwa, Ll "W nas.dsuranny ao Richard A. Lerfis AusenOS'tr.evn b ew (a prang to w an tM tsssM of wYlsdus• ssl1Y'1eq b M tlss Osr4an 1.M u was tM .vwlmau.twrnu&"nsef_ LEWIS HOMES OF CALIFORNIA 1A.1 Ass pvNor" ItLI ..'lows " ssnhln w1lnnnsnt Will tlna. Yp�ltenMMIMItYe •M�r�rutMpwunt�Ipugon O /On;11: StAI. j Oegts d eater PeithtI"sod nri shim MM nits, r Ad EDNA A. ROBINSON p Ig1Yf ft,,C c '"' IM YIIL i .nee�M all" M �aa I B i (;.. �•, yF1 as jiff sire ssswro'ro col+ %61'n444r.17, I0l1 YltfR[87 ^ i j x •rYbW u1dc00r uni. a >P� yre� _ �. ma4n.mrpmew e.rl�.A na Inson o T cDomppnyrs - Y Ina.nncl TA, Coprny u "•f`u ° uu\r Nu 106373 311 W. Ca..'ama929a1 • 1.90918)1 zlhaoz-;an hifl SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS MAINTENANCE Rf1ND AWR tLL SIEN BY TIIESE PRESENTS TIL \Toe LFNT3 HOHFC nF_Cp_►rIFORNTA _ and DEVELOPERS I.NSURANCECOAIPA NYamrpoeuwnnrgamte JanJ,lnngbu.uu..,Inder n,IM anaer,r 'J�hmnryl. of CJbtorma and July llcamsed to conduct a general surely busui: , in the SLVe of CalrrormJ u bunt f he Ia•A VtIujjd urlO are hcW and rimdy IvmnJ unto -- r'TT,, nc ..a L[! CHCAHONOA J. Obltgm. In the sum IN eTVF THOHSAN. ;TY HNNTIRFD TFN NO/10(LIS C "'1 ID.hars. 4+r ohtch pa)mcm. oell JM truly lobe made, orbcul outvcl,e,. Iwr he.......tors and ,ucc.c%%4.. foal) .rod setemlry Gm•J0 by Thew prewnts THE LONDITION OF THE OBLIGATION 15 SUCII THAT• %M1,Rl- AS the JbM, named Fnmpul. is a colNmon w)he BLng.t the B, I >ubdlsyston map nt tTnet I'Jnclt %IJp �n _17315 enre•ed Into Jn Jercemcntor Jgnerxnh unhand Ohlun In wmphtt rtc.0 +n •m rh 'a'd J_Teemcnl or 19mcmenlr I., and In %%M RE AS .enl agrt: menl pma W.•J that PnmrPal nhJll guamn4c rgtlaecmwt and %patrol .npnwcnnm, t, d,..rsiw uwr,:n tora ryn.d rN n/IC sur IWIIV mg boat .cceptan.<nf vrd Impmmmau. %01v TI IEREFORC.) the Jbo,e lhttmtpal +lull inaemnlfv the Oblrem for all to,%that Obligee may sigint bs rej,n m J.ry d;vcllse matcnah or oro Lman,hip ohnb Income Jppu=..1 dunng the NT'(4 Of one year Train .nd after accrplJnm or the ,a.l pwwl by foimaAn.v W— 1 STATE Of rAUFORMA / 8 C'DUw1r°roiwrS�%`ABERNAROIHO a, October 14, 1985 1 ►aa.�AU.,..sm yMy�lleblyNMYb W II? seeewp..eA,AY Rlthard A. Lewis WnanW HWn IOM (xpro+Mb mi M IM MW tlYb,lU•AOIy tl/bFOb) b M IM P�nmwM��KV W IM - .lue/Ibrow�nt�.ur.p�AF.C�LEWIS HOMES OF CALIFO�IA Attr•r, ,r n Pwhwob mY we""d " vllhb Nun enmt W bM'I.MpF4bMtlWIWW WL.IM IMFwbrWen O'VI CIAL _ eenrgwepuuw�ryWlsw..le pruyry�s��cvw ar.A ?j,�. EDNA A. R081 p M1IY/. nnat Ives , lueoarb . r WITH(Va'ry lrnrG WaFWawl a. - r' �I, R-1 a A�RobinsurrCu_.� am.r.. bremeJl /,owrl..cn 4 1k r �� °�M s �-a.•i ....,ter_ ,L./a��e(, � i c l Company 170 suvn AOM) NO 306831. Alu,•en a, CL,n9i901 $+ 17141999.1471 PRI \III 1x1(21314W-713" 11 Nil 1— SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS MAINTENANCE BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS TI IAT sw _LEHIS HOMES OF CALIFORNIA It1n "NI. aml Us, ELOPERS NSURANCE COMPANY a corporation orgsntmd a of do ng bu%tnes%undsr and M %slue of the leu %,.t ,he Dtafc st CA,fa lu and dul, hcensad In conduct a general surety bus ncas to the b_ Cahlsm a a• huMt% Ore held msl timoly Mouul woV CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA as Obhgec. m [tie win Of SIX THOUSAND THREE HfIND RFn aF }IS Nn, s na 15 „6,*300..f;0 I Dalian. hw ufuch payment. %sell and wily robe made. or bind curwI%cs. our heirs. c%srmms and suaawrs, jointly and ss%era0) lomly ry these presents tiff, CONUI rioN OF THE ORLIGATION IS SUCH THAT kVI1FRF,1 the abo%c n4med Principal. as a cuodaton oflhe Olo:g d the Inual wad,, mon snap of tT=l Parcel, \lap No 12316 -1 entered ran an ag mmmt oracramenh anh wJOlt-zechs rmpletc th unpnnetrtsm•spe •u.Jt� said ur,%n .nl or e;r ements W OFRF iS •.uJ tenement pru%tded that 1'rmctp.1 -hail guarantee rplacorert and npan M m pm %ements a. Jcssnbsj ulercm for I"me,.I , ne %car hn.l u,cptanse of aid tmprusemems NMI, T11,11hFORC. n the abuse Principal shall mit=m,e the Obligee hwall k,a that Utilise mi.t) su%tam by reason of any d dretnc materials a• workmanship uh ch twome appam.t doing the period of one year limn and atf Y aecepanee of the aid project by Ohio See. then this obligation shall he sntd. tithe vi tw to remam to full force and cl'csi —.__. •• •' ^' -`. -.' _- a••-•• ✓..,n Pnorimll is IKreto affixed and the s.wpsowc s.•al and the name W :t. said CORPORATION �yy� BTA"EWGVIr A W 1 COUNVYor � BERNARDIUO on October 14. 1985 b,t,,,,,,gR„ ,,.yr,e4RRa,RPpwxm . w br yq atRjAY,eRAW...ee,M Richard A. Lewis tasrwuaYk„9.lonm.lorpoYO neon Doty NYw oluf4l .csay.sjaw I01r1M Yrtanwtr Yervl.ofor ` M1fYA bruYm Y1M p41Ret LP415 HOMES OF CALIFORNIA kuonl •% , t IN emotiosAW Ors Yaweq ao. rR,t4 NeOutive. 914 a atw9wboYdlom .NYhyeMY.GMWYw.laa%d P• ,�. UillelAL RAAI. r6 D4hsR d.4lC asnnnsh'o low Ml YSd p.rWnNA°R.c1A.1 � EDNA A. RODINSON ✓• dr YqL l ,WIY. W.IK C....O.x,a t, �J%A, , .en.cw4s o,rs:a u sy%`�.' � yyr„•pb ys,���yV� Mr Geanss anGVSS Wr 17.1917• to t 14'% ai�lr{yr l •• • 1 fff.° fuss fN GRC41 nelYYI.MI) t � LIMA R, Robinson Insuurlu DRn1R, "w "_Y__ 000 wtahrs An 4m Cu4xa 82801 111 +19994471 tIt' 12131+02 -78r7 NNM ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS MAINTENANCE BOND ',uNn •,n 106432_'°' I RI \RI \1 Nil __ _ THAT ,c - rEWTC mamrA nE rar1FnR`Ta - andULVELOPERSINSURANCECO \IP. \NY uogvuylon Llsan -v;J +n Jnln•_I�,.• � .w [age 'If LAlf'"sa a11d duly hccnwd to conJ '=-.mill. ' Ja finw. tv uk unit) w. a gcncnl suety buanps m Ihe.'itac rY C,hromu ,. auretc, n. AIJ,nd lingo. h ;Inn unto RTTY RF R,CHn (•type ogle a. OhhgtY, Yl Ne wet of F11n RTFFH THR�NR nNF HIIH _ -- — 6m c pm. pa)mem well aml lmly to h made. ne blrol Lwnehee, sir hln�c.� lot,juid,u,ccsson�11% and ,owntly 11mJy Fy 1hc•c prc.cm, TIM CONDITION OF THE OBLIGAT10.N IS SUCII TEIAT MIF.RE\S the aAhe named Pnhelpal, m a eum4lion oflhe filing m (k final ,uAlluslon Inap w 15a,ePo6roU \I+p \n '—12317 _,ntered Into in +grecmnJ oragrcnmo„ „nn ,+W UhLCO. m aW aerremnl It .grcrrrls u,nlpltle the n-�.•,:m.rt. ,�,II1:JIn f 6111 RL 1h . +nla.reemCal pets m,d nnal Prlm'Nl shall gu"afffee r,Pla„m.nt iml r,P+.r n,nlpnn enkut,+, ., •,nr.J m, r, In •a r, rn,W ,v „a. ,c,L wnLn.Ing , vi accept+uar of u.d nnpnnt)n 1. i, NOW THE REFORF if thc+bu,cPnikgnl,h,ll,ndemm()Wa Ubh_•c for all l.,,i h, l unY„c nu,•a,t+m b)rm.un.n n,l, .•r 4nrintlmn•n .Llca t1•^onle aPIMMU dunnu the pen„I 14 one +I tmm and .w, ae.cpt,ce 14 the ,,Id III~ h) CORPORATION �TAIE Or e4 _Ir OR \I .RANG Cow -ri nt— ATN8ERK4RD IN0 I rI STAreO C Ir I 65 7 o„ October 14, 1985 "Maa7..p.,en,R,. RicharC A Le�irjs�*I+ a'"a"Y°"a"In'"°IC' Rww,M bKOnmPw laaw. aollualwe. wa. wr. uerr ..s7.k.Im1»tn.o.no,.no..wvtw nw A MNn YnnLeanlydn wrin LENIS HOMES OF CALIFORNIA 11 ,- — m4 w w o" ar.4 flo w.d tmI .b1,M 1.v1M,L4IIR .I1n I n ,I K\II,Mt/4PPd tOO. )n.t IWNI M qlM TIM 4�M IY.M RI bPP +JN W0 (OFFICIAL 4rA1. Rtv1nU•A1 aLd qN °wtwwnKn.+wxae EDNA A. ROOINSON Into Y19� P • nOlYr ..,.LK ,..•,SY� ii I4nMgt M,KI A M..:.MLYb [0YM.1 WRNEaa reP8W 4nd oakkl.sN WOanl+sua4prrt Yrr I7, I917 ,. EQra A. Robinson �� fM""'IOte�na1i1°"04 {1 ANO\k %l L %IFN BY THESE PRESENTS. ❑ ATssc _ LFNTS HOMES OF CALIFOPNIA amIOE\ELOPERSINSURANCECO \IPANY am "I• ^' ,NI. w CAllomu and Jul) 1¢cnsed to candon a Senenl surety bustnc%nln the Sure r YCahl Rnmua dSumq me held and 1 m % b,mnd ontu CITY OF RAH HO CUCAHOYGA a, Obbece. in the sum or TF.ltt_Iuzul! ON HINDRFD AND NO /Inn 15- 10y10D�0q..__I p,lh,rs, Inr %h,ch p.nmcm. udl and lmly to be made. uc bind ounclsus. uur het ". cw%uturs and >ucrswn ...nns and ...Mill, linnl) by thew pn.ents HIE CONDITION OF THE OBLIGATION IS SUCH THAT %%IIF"RI \5 the ab,lse named Pna.tpal. A a m•,ddwn,dJhc filing of the final .utdnmma map of (Tn,.1.Par..b %lap Nil - 12117r1 ,nter,sva,.an agrrement or agreement, wuh vW OM ece to.nmpl., da• r,ri em,n, ,. ,aid agrc: m, 11 w a¢rttntrnb \ \III 't3 \s ,••d ., •nement presided 111, Pnnupal %hill euanntee mp".ement unit r,p_ r in uupm•,nwhr. a.,kwtlad .r „111,44 crud w or. ,a• h,rwmy' Imal x.epiancc rt aJ ,mpm.emunn. NOU rHFREFORE nthe aros:Pns,pa,.ha, mdemmlythe Obhg:e far all h,s,.hm Obliget may.u.tatn M ma, n•a and a, n•.nse ­” - •,6u h h•cnme arrant during Ile fend a1 tire )car Win and after ae..ptanre of the .aid pnggt h) COREURATIO4 1 w 1�IDp ale ill t,.e •a,J SSATE OF CAI UbRNA c�pAttrT wcw OfOM BERNAROINO .1-185 _ I s. October 14, '.985 Mb +h Rr rn,GwMerra.. 0aw vuW+e is Rro eer uYf siRtR,ORrRanRRr R,1 P,lchard A. Lew1s IMIwuMy \ngmb r✓♦la POnUb R,Raw 1M MMES tleRGrKSRrYJMIM,OfIb W M gnarl r/ho RaRMRE IM RRRN wtwyalu R,R ypy ar LFNIS HOMES OF CALIFORNIA .�nrc uR MrR,Rr,rRa Rrt .r.ewa dr ,.ttry, tntlnR,,,,µ Rnd .-e+.. IXAI. s .OMIIRd,}dbRMtMfhR2tlwoaewMdey RRRylavlon G /I,e1AL eRAt. 1. Is"a of "Id gnnrsia Rile rRRlRtldNrwrtlRa rrRyp � (DNA A. ROBINSON Y 1 W,Mr rVRl4 G,4J.W , R4 YIi 14124 BIM, M v Y I t/F R:.n..a,q (parr. 1YffMW �tue,d Rnd RRYYwt Wter_r a,ae4wnAt ?.1911 .� r ! ' tM E na . �" /L frh"R,.R roraRteaRlntl.rlw..q jj obinson T J 1� � a• •1 - iJIrr111tYb/� Company " wtnvor n 97901 I.r,`1, ., 106321 _ :7:41999-1471 2 UHa2.7W7 _ 1101 kill `t Nil �-• SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS " MAINTENANCE BOND ANO\k %l L %IFN BY THESE PRESENTS. ❑ ATssc _ LFNTS HOMES OF CALIFOPNIA amIOE\ELOPERSINSURANCECO \IPANY am "I• ^' ,NI. w CAllomu and Jul) 1¢cnsed to candon a Senenl surety bustnc%nln the Sure r YCahl Rnmua dSumq me held and 1 m % b,mnd ontu CITY OF RAH HO CUCAHOYGA a, Obbece. in the sum or TF.ltt_Iuzul! ON HINDRFD AND NO /Inn 15- 10y10D�0q..__I p,lh,rs, Inr %h,ch p.nmcm. udl and lmly to be made. uc bind ounclsus. uur het ". cw%uturs and >ucrswn ...nns and ...Mill, linnl) by thew pn.ents HIE CONDITION OF THE OBLIGATION IS SUCH THAT %%IIF"RI \5 the ab,lse named Pna.tpal. A a m•,ddwn,dJhc filing of the final .utdnmma map of (Tn,.1.Par..b %lap Nil - 12117r1 ,nter,sva,.an agrrement or agreement, wuh vW OM ece to.nmpl., da• r,ri em,n, ,. ,aid agrc: m, 11 w a¢rttntrnb \ \III 't3 \s ,••d ., •nement presided 111, Pnnupal %hill euanntee mp".ement unit r,p_ r in uupm•,nwhr. a.,kwtlad .r „111,44 crud w or. ,a• h,rwmy' Imal x.epiancc rt aJ ,mpm.emunn. NOU rHFREFORE nthe aros:Pns,pa,.ha, mdemmlythe Obhg:e far all h,s,.hm Obliget may.u.tatn M ma, n•a and a, n•.nse ­” - •,6u h h•cnme arrant during Ile fend a1 tire )car Win and after ae..ptanre of the .aid pnggt h) COREURATIO4 1 w 1�IDp ale ill t,.e •a,J SSATE OF CAI UbRNA c�pAttrT wcw OfOM BERNAROINO .1-185 _ I s. October 14, '.985 Mb +h Rr rn,GwMerra.. 0aw vuW+e is Rro eer uYf siRtR,ORrRanRRr R,1 P,lchard A. Lew1s IMIwuMy \ngmb r✓♦la POnUb R,Raw 1M MMES tleRGrKSRrYJMIM,OfIb W M gnarl r/ho RaRMRE IM RRRN wtwyalu R,R ypy ar LFNIS HOMES OF CALIFORNIA .�nrc uR MrR,Rr,rRa Rrt .r.ewa dr ,.ttry, tntlnR,,,,µ Rnd .-e+.. IXAI. s .OMIIRd,}dbRMtMfhR2tlwoaewMdey RRRylavlon G /I,e1AL eRAt. 1. Is"a of "Id gnnrsia Rile rRRlRtldNrwrtlRa rrRyp � (DNA A. ROBINSON Y 1 W,Mr rVRl4 G,4J.W , R4 YIi 14124 BIM, M v Y I t/F R:.n..a,q (parr. 1YffMW �tue,d Rnd RRYYwt Wter_r a,ae4wnAt ?.1911 .� r ! ' tM E na . �" /L frh"R,.R roraRteaRlntl.rlw..q jj obinson T J 1� � a• •1 - `�,' D•VeIPP•r• i5Y✓ Company : Ae V 'lb ma 9:d7 1;4: 178" . ,.0 t azaen KNOW ALL \ILN BY THESE PRESENTS lJ w•.D ,) 7_�0269S_ _ SUBDIVISION INIPROVEMENTS MAINTENANCE BOND ft lAf uc r FRj3_BOMES OF Vt.IFMTA I +Pncaryl. Jnd Oh \' ELOPERS! NSURANCECOtIP-\NYaeutpnrahwi, rganaedanddomebuanc .,um.4r.mdblunm,dtln ax.uftl•.. Jtatc of CJIIfAMM and duly hnnscd to conduct a gcmml sumly busimm In the S ,e M Gldumu J, Surcts..' iield and bmll) bnAw unto CTTY nF RAI1r0 Clrf'A_ MOHA FOURTEEN THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED J,Uhllgce,mthesumof NINETY AND NO /100 is 14.290.00 1ptBJn fore nh pa),ncn1. sell and Truly to be nude, we bind uuneUc.. uur hc:n. cxccuiu and sucason. dumtl) and x,emlh Rnnly bt Ih(� pre.ena TIIE CONDITION OF ME OBLIGATION 15 SUCH THAT i\ IIf RE \V the adore named IYmcgal J, J cundnlun ufdhe Fihntt 4 the rrrul whdnnrun map of ITract Par.." \lap °u __ 72364 ent4r d tutu Jn ac•cement of agreemenin unh vul Ohheee to cn nplcte the Imrnu,m•nb ,, and u •JW i.V n:.IR •rt.,..ww t, NIIIdI \N .aid a_:rwrcnt p(m•ned thA rnn tr.l. hail puanntro repUen¢nt and tcpairw tdtrnnc,u ;m, a. Jh,nlad".ran ❑ma ore J .n om ,car tnhtw,ti_ ❑nJI xeepan.e nl .ud m:ptmemerl, N()\\ TI ILREFORt II the aline Pnnctl A •hall tndcmntfs the Obligee mr-ill w,i thin 0blq.e nu• su.um by r•aw,n •,I ay Jetc,nPL Al nrr" . r null my n u h,rh h..•nnr mn, »nr Annna ,M A_,1 M AA,• ..... rmm w rr•n„n r N We ,,,d rwtw M ('0•rONAr10V D= IIJnv ni the V Id 9Ar[Oi,AIIiOPVIA _n lei C'Oulmyauatron ra 85_ tbulifyDr �N eERHAfiDINq_ I I oti October 14 1985 R b "K ichard A LLn.eh'n L un04•rirt•q•tbta + y fleteh•Mb N4 C4i4 Wt•ni••Y in 1s Primly LVa•„t0.4(ty YOYth1b@•O,1114 b•i, tai•( fYfMM'•ii0u,oilbWOt•Nro•W4nKalee V4 �- •nwt4iu4nigrC.iiDiNal IEHIS HONES OF CALIFORNIA ,uP•(m••. ,,, Ia.t P+• rAn"ns YP Oil NiL1•YJ O,i •ClJi1 hiYUn W .inNtO4dWEtOtNP41 Won••.swtiPOUauNfriMgn OIIIe,I.\t. anal. t•hw or ulP Pen"M*&W wt N4Pi'M,P•Hp •,.,�.• I+ EDNA A. ROBINSON P4 NmL 3'rr•�, �� NO,Aie eueV4 l••{UMe nnr,A., irrrl ,+ ' iN NfiNAi(n0 (OVntY WRNgad •ry hind utl•PkLIiW �/•ann um Lim W,.IL 1971 + � n • (in4 Ni IMr.!•k1Y b11f -w nefil'al Nirl is ... Li oevpbparo Inwroncs r Canpany av swsm Anreut Cadana 9220' Vt4199?le]r (2131 402-79T? r' J rt SUBDIVISION' WIPROVEMEN'TS MAINTENANCE BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS MAD 0 9085455 PRI •111'1 THAT ue. LEWIS HOMI;a_OF CALIFORNIA a, Mnolul and DEVELOPERS INSURANCE COMPANY a corporation organized and doing bt„are„ under and b) t muc tf the law, ,.r the ntme M California and duty licensed to conduct a genenl surd) busrnas to the State In California as Soren, we held and rums) I.wnd unto CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED a.Oh4gcc.mthewmof. WFLVE AND N0 1100 rpv nn — iMilars. fur uhKh pa)mert shell and tzul) lobe ttude. ue bard twneAes ow corn anvton and sueeawn lomfly and, wrud) frnnly b) 11KX present, rube CONDITION OF THE OBLIGATION IS SECN MAT U IIEREAS the.t.rne named Pnncspal, as a cominlsn uflhe fdmp of the heal ,uNnston m.p,u rTrac4Par:clr .lap Nt, 1236$ enmlU mtuanagrcemcnforagp.ernenrs urth,+WOhhcec ln.nmp:etc the mipr ••e••nm, shied %wJ agrecmmin ,r agzcnwnl, 11111 RL45 ,.rd agravnsent pm, rdcd that Prm.tpal ,hall F.uunree replacemert and repair al mrpra,.nrenn at ec, -nbea mi rem ua a nmJ,4 nnc %tar fwlrr,mg final m,Yp(aric cf said rmrrmementt NM Tllf- RLFORE nth: aN,: ITmrpal shall mdemnd) the Oblscee for all has that Obbgee ma),ustam h. r.r,nn.d.r) d.l.,trsc mnenals or undmanshin uhKh become apparent dunnp the NnN td ax )car farm and aver ac.eptwrie of the ,md pmle'r by Obligee then tln, obhganen ,ha ,rd. otherscne to rentals in fu I f-,mc and elfetl ... ., au......... [nano r4 Po aid 1 COYIOMAAOY F_/1RI�% mAnwuf.tTa9 BERNARDINO tzvrmw on October 14. 1985 —Irfbro rna Pa rnovidgr44 b 140(2 PCbe b Retab "Wat"pwwr4ftsopul`4 Richard A. Lewis pu4x..byYrKArtto Ayfise""d b esb M tls MV4 Of 441111142" wkra)lb be atb pnsuIrs Nib ,mld the npl�M tnbw4rV Sr tM4panl rsr LEWIS HOMES OF CALIFORNIA still wln«al+p Paf u4cst4d mo upafr tnpmsxl and am leftror490ied Mre4sAatlrNMrbbnnrtMtlNUre4 brondrn CRIMIAl. 4r.Al, b4apne4td oennsnlynwttt4l ratdpmwYip 4naeq EDNI: A ROGINSON welUt ree \K UtM4��lU Y111L f IK M 1, O I aN a rMaarrK cau." WCeRuss".e4rm Wr 17.1911 Lip lJl K in f I.4 R`-t ln�br MkMlna►W wa o n- � 7 lunry Dveblwre t compaKa xb t'nswa Cw "nN nfo, 171x1402.737 a wzam7 ul K \O\\ At L MEN BY TIIISE PRESENTS u I.i� r r r • s ._ yr` „ J SCIIUIVISMN IMPROPENIEWS YIMNTE\ .NCE BOND j i rc�G, ,•I Z1074.6s_ 111 \1 ,t _ _ —__ WESTERN PAOFeR and OL1, 1, I.17PLRS INWRAUCE COMPANY ,,orpoirilson, reamicd and dome hu,nhc„ undar nrt h,%s u, of II[. Iau,. J we Ni,te ,J C,I urns, nN Jul. h..mN to nsnJUCt a general wn•n hu,lmv, m the S[aIt of CaLLrlll, „ \Ann ,r. Ikld,Iwl hmt) h nmd unto CISY OF NANCjj�GJjI,�MONCA THIRTY EIGHT THOUSAND NINE a, Ohhgs. m thc,um Lf JRINDBED _SLYTY EOUR a 77D _HO4100 __ is 3&, 964_00 -- -I (,,Ilan. for„hnh pasmcm Atli and IMly to t•e made. Ae Find ounel,c,. nurhelr,.,aecutnn enJ sunv,wn. Pvnll, ,nJ `,ar.d, hnnll, by thew rraxnls 11 IF CONOI TIOY OF TIIE OBLIGATION 15 SLCH THAT N IIERE AS Is, JN,,c Mamcd PnnLlP,1. a, , CLMdmrn oUhe filing of the Fnal ,uWnssmn nup of [ frxt Pa, I Al,p �•� 12402 enr,r.•J Unn m,¢r.em.•mor,lrttmena unh •,�_,ML_t m.mm�lttc ql, ..•.In e.o,cdo „IJ :ncnmm ..r .,:n.menls t \III !tF 1, A ,.nu•,rnl prm W,J that lhmclP,l•I -..lI gu,rmrecnpU-m.nt and r,p„r.a i pr.,un.nl .• .,,m.., Ib,Lm h.ra r,n•d I -„ , ,r un,l xv,pt,n., v .,id Wpnnc n,u1 \OU !II LF••s•f I the ,tu,,c rl n,lpal dl,.l m&,m,, h,.Ohhgce Nvall h•., nlan lhh,,..n, /.uvanr a.n,n , t.muh,e Ins.rr,1, ,..1,in,n.nlp Ahn/ --w ,ryarenr dunn, the 1\n,d of one ,ear In n And ,r(,r w..pun. :.d th, „W rnea.t by OM tee [Len nn aNLVtum .Fall r ,•nd ,allorAlw m mmaln in •uP lane ind Ile,, 1 CMNFORAnor a STATC ne CAU I coulmor �r BERNARDINO IaL x I on October 14, 1985 yt�Ny rn.1.(aanla,ac•a NOrary Pr,eoc Yana tar �, wdeLtLwnnn.;l, Richard A. Lewis i olrwuMlimwnumlar [NNwabraeentM laYatluu� lhWtiliaAp ra „d -Western Properties i»tM Mnm �1,o awrtM uu ,.�' 111N pre,Y,nb Y•al YK4ta0 nr1 NNIW ImbulhanL ana LdmowleeTaroehput MdtM la .cvWiM.wlpruNm OIIICIAL eCAi. 'f' Dwn0 wwahb urd mat usd l7YlMnhlN NalurlK o A. ED NA A. ROBINSON p1 fl�A. 7 W(M1 /Y /UC [MrOfMA �y /IrYM1M Will F ♦ LW .(MU.MxO cm,w • :3I. I WRNW ryhardWyhvyast YrCannutuntswn Yr 17.19!7 na A. MODinson � O Mt ,I lF, laid „ 85 i - � Csvoolxn naunnca [' Company 2)J VAMnI harm Ca. -res 9 :eJ T;J: 999 1411 ,9141 4094877 RWl% ALL Alb.% BY TIIFSE PRESENTS SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS MAIN IL' NANCE IIOND "r.0 „t 710745S -- :Ill u, 1 Nil rllATw. _ NFSTERN PROP FagS rnnuryl. and VhVELOMRS MURANCE COMPANY a ttxplrJ :wn nr!JmroJ nnJ doing •11,me , in Jar and n) um,• al u1J Ian, „i in: Stale Of CJhr( m:J Jnd Ld) 1 ucn.,•d h1 aunduet J general ,uret:, bu,:maa:n the State of Cdnum:J is Surcp am I4]it J:nl hinds bound unto __ CITY OF RANCM CUCANO14GA_ THIRTEEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED A, Ohh_ti. mthc win nl �EYENILESGHS AHD NO 1100 151..i,5.ZB..40__II>,dlJra. Inr uhlch r smcm cell tnd tmh to N n1Ade. 1r bind ounclle. wr hc,n. aaecutan and ,un'.ivm. P„nn) aid vsemll) html) by II1aw pn ^.•n1. THE C'ONDI 11UN OF rHE OBLIG.%TION IS SUCII THAT %1111- RI. AS the ann c named Prn.tpal AfJ.omlmon of Ow filing of the final auhtims:on mJP 1 (TML PJrre:: tUr \a _1 ?402_ _;nwe dinto an agrcanwnl•.rJ;Ktmrnt,u,Ih.+d Obl,.ce In o-xnplctc the miFU,. n,. m. wd 41 o em,m v+:n,,nemc 1%11112, N ,.J +:•eenwnt pros W:J ,M., Ihma pal >h dl guarantee replJae,nent and repay nt unpnn.uwnt <a. Ia,.nhcJ :::rim lure Nn.,du.,n :.,ar l+len-ng r. a, .ACep:+nac,n,Jd a pnslemrt, $011. TI P RI FORE n the ate. lull u'Jemnns the Ohli ._ l(r all lass d u Ohl,gec nu) .u.IJm b) rcawn,J uq 41 . 11e matcnals 1 %% -vio umh,p wtn- n n :.omc app.nent Dunn.- 11-c 1Vnod .r ine sc.:r I,.... P: aa:J p- a;,t h) Ohhcce. 1141 th, .,�,.�.,�,- , - ^• —.� COPrOPATIOV nJ,ne A ., ,J,d RTAIL O/GWIOII • �y _ • , • 85 BERAARDINO J on Ouober 14, 1985 hatrtwundL,al -ryd,a Mouln PJboa:n ena:Jr waatw p.aan.q.cprv.`� RichalA A. A. Lewis I p. non. alulo. nw:.. c> am.aw..onp.b.wd..fr.dery..w.ra.l low m. a.2an.no...anad ur � ---c ww1`1an.,a,.a,u . aa,yd W :stern Prooertias I Ac, 1 11n pwftn D mm asaclAaa pu n1f11,,. kJ0lnana &,it sA>•a,�r rJUn. aMeOrateoa1hl11a /aNUaa4ltMauaPbrPOaon MINA ICIAL aeAL A A. ROBINSON wlu! d"W 014mm1:I0 W Ma n'd WnnrrMb PU0Aa0 o r nal.n. Nave BINSON .n W.I., wVCr ,M ft NqP am atn.uluo cou"m PIC<mavaunOpJn Yar, I/, I9O :. ymlwH.yllw.neaJdat..a qYOI,IaarsabrMkaYnabrWas,:q W41' . I 0 RESOLUTION NO. 75 - act y A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO " CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING IKE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR 12316, 12316 -1 (MODELS), 12316 -1 (BASE LINE BRIDGE), 12317, 12317 -1 (MODELS), 12364, 12365, 1240? (STORM DRAIN, TERRA VISTA PARKWAY & CHURCH) AND 12402 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of ,,ublic improverments for Tracts 12316, 12316 -1 (Models), 12316.1 (Base I'ne Bridge). 12317, 12317 -1 (Models), 12364, 12365, 12402 (Stoma Dra;,a, Ter -; Vista Parkway S Church) and 12402 have been t completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work complete. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resoled, that the work is herety accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to ign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of November, 1985. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: .On D. Mikels, ayor ATTEST: vela erTy 7775E e e , y re—FF I, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CITY CLERK of the Clty of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at e regular (special, adjo- erned) meeting of said Cit, Council held on the 6th ° day of November, 1985. Executed this 6th day of November, 1985 at Rancho Cucamonga, California. f; every A. u he e y er 1' r I'. k'.. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT FDATE:November 6, 1985 TO: City Co.nc11 and City Manager FROM: Lloyd 0. Nubbs, City Engineer BY: Turning Mamsaanq. Engineering Aide SUBJECT: Arproval of Professional Services Agreenent with C.I.A. Cngineering Consultants for slurry sealing on various City streets A proposal for the above subject services was received from C.I.A. Engineering Consultants to slurry seal streets within the City. Several :streets to the City hive minor cracking in the pavement and any delay in applying a slurry seal nay :cruse c1stly overlay or reconstruction. It will also prevent deep and bigger alligator cracking to develop on the pavement and will enhance the longevity of the life of the pavement. RECO4REMDATION It is recommended that Council award the Professioral Services Agreement for slurry sealing of various City streets to C.I.A. Engineering Consultants, and authorize execution of the contract amcunt of 51,133.90 plus 10% for contingencies to be funded by SS 325 gas tax funds. l Respegfully submit, , 167 1 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT _ This Agreement is made tnd entered into this day + of 19, between the City of Rancho Cucamonga, a Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as •CITY•) and C. I.A. Enainnerino Consultants (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT"). A Recitals. (1) CITY has heretofore lssuad its Request for Proposal pertaining to the performance of professional services with respect to tFe preparatioo of contract documents slurry sealing and .heater remix of various streets FY 85 -86 ( "Project" hereafter). (ii) CONSULTANT has now submitted its proposal for the performance of such services. (iii) CITY desires to retain CONSULTANT to perform professional services necessary to render advice and assistance to CITY, CITY's Planning Commission, City Council and staff in the preparation of Project. (Iv) CONSULTANT represents that It is qualified to perform such services and 1s willing to oerform such professional services as hereinafter def feed. Nr4l, THEREFORE, it 1s agreed by and between CITY and CONSULTANT is follows: B. Agreement. 1. Definitions: The following defWtions shall apply to the following terms, except where the context of this Agreement otherwise requires: 7/31/85 _i_ (a) Project: The preparation of Contract documents for slurry se_ no and heater renix of various "treats FY 85 -86 described in Exhibit "A" Scope of Services hereto including, but not limited to, the preparation of maps, surveys, reports, and documents, th,, present,.tion, both oral and in writing, of such plans, maps, surveys, reports and documents to CITY as required and attendance at any and all work sessions, public hearings and other meetings conducted by CITY with respect to the project as outlined in the Scope of Services. (b) Services: Such professional services as are necessary to be performed by CONSULTANT in order to complete the project. (c) Completion of Project: The date of completion of all phases of the project, including any and all procedures, development plans, Agh maps, surveys, plan documents, technical reports, meetings, oral presentations and attendance by CONSULTANT at public hearings r:garding the project acceptance for construction is set forth in Exhibit "B" Project Schedule attached hereto. 2. _CONSULTANT agrees as follows: (a) CONSULTANT shalt forthwith undertake and complete the project in accordance with Exhibit "A and applicabie with Federal, State and CITY statues, regulations, ordinances and guidelines, all to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY (b) CONSULTANT shall supply copies of all maps, surveys, reports, plans and documents (here'n.ifter collectively referred to as ,y 1 "documents ") including all supolemental technical documents, as described in Fwir Exhibit "A" to CITY within the time specified in Project Schedule., Exhibit, 4'TY f • • 480. Copies of the documents shall be in such nurbers as are required by Exhibit "A". CITY may thereafter review and forward to CONSULTANT comments regarding said documents and CONSULTANT shall thereafter make such revisions to said documents as are deemed necessary. CITY shall receive revised documents In such Corm and in the quantities determined necessary by CITY. The time limits set forth pursuant to this Section 83.(b) may be extended upon a written approval of CITY. (c) CONSULTANT shall, at CONSULTANT's sole cost and expense, secure and hire such other persons as may, in the opinion of CONSULTANT, be necessary to comply with the terms of this Agreement. In the event any such other persons are retained by CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT hertby warrants that such persons shall be fully qualified to pe•form services required hereunder. CONSULTANT further agrees that no subcontractor shall be r retained by CASULTANT except upon the prior written approval of CITY. 3. CITY agrees as follows: (a) To pay CONSULTANT a maximum sum of 53.700.00 _ r for the performance of the services required hereunder. This stem shall cover the cost of all staff time and all other direct and indirect costs or fees, including the work of employees, consultants and subcontractors to CONSULTANT. Payment to CONSULTANT, by CITY, shall be made in accordance witn the schedule set fo -th In Exhibit 'C' 'L, (b) Payments to CONSULTANT shall be made by CITY in accordance with the invoices submitted by CONSULTANT, on a monthly basis, and " +u. xA such Invoices shall be paid within a reasonable time after said invoices are r r. received by CITY. All charges shall be detailed in Exhibit 'C" either with }® respect to hourly rates or lump sum tmounts for individual tasks. In no -3- event, however, will said invoices_ exceed 95% of individual task totals described 1i Exhibits "A" and "C ". (c) CONSULTANT agrees that, in no event, shall CITY be required to pay to CONSULTANT any sum in excess of 95% of the maximum payable hereunder prior to receipt by CITY of ail final documents, together with all supplemental technical documents, as described herein acceptable in form and cantent to CITY. Final payment shall be made not later than 60 days after presentation of final documents and acceptance thereof by CITY. (d) Additional services: Payments for additional services requested, in writing, by CITY, and not included in the " ape of Services as set forth in Exhibit "A" hereof, shall be paid on a reimbursement basis In accordance with the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit "C ". Charges for additional services shall be invoiced on a monthly oasis and shall be paid by • CITY within a reasonable time after said invoices are received by CITY. 4. CITY agrees to provide to CONSULTANT: (a) Information and assistance as set forth to Exhibit 'A" hereto. (b) Photographically reproducible copies of maps and other information, if available, which CONSULTANT considers necessary in order to ca..)Iete the project. (c) Such information as 1s generally available from CIT° files applicable to the project. (d) Assistance, if necessary, in obtaining informatic- from other governmental agencies and /or private parties. However, it shalt oe CaNSULTAHT's responsibility to make ail initial contact w'th respect to the gathering of such information. -4- SS i 5. Ownership of Documents: All documents, data, studies,_ surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs ,.nd reports prepared by CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement shall be considered the property of CITY and, upon payment for services performed by CONSULTANT, such documents and other identified materials shall be delivered to CITY by CONSULTANT CONSULTANT may, however, make and retain such copies of said documents and materials as CONSULTANT may desire. Any use or reuse of the plans and specifications except at the site intended or any alteration or revision of the plans or specifications by the CITY, its staff or authorized agents without the specific written consent of the CONSULTANT •hall be at the sole risk of the CITY. The CITY agrees to hold harmle!s and indemnify the CONSULTANT against all damages, claims and losses including defense casts arising out of any such alteration or revision, or use or reuse at another site by the CIP , its staff or authorized agents. o. Termination: This agreement may be terminated by CITY upon the giving of a written "Notice of Termination" to C085ULTANT at least fifteen (15) days prior to the date of termination specified in said Notice. In the event this Agreement is so terminated. CONSULTANT shall be compensated at CONSULTANT's applicable hourly rates as set forth in Exhibit 08', on a pro. rata basis with respect to the percentage of the project completed as of th- date of termination. In no event, however, shall CONSULTANT receive more the- k the maximum speclft.:d in paragraph 7 (a), above. CONSULTANT shall provide to CITY any and all documents, data, studies, eurveys, drawings, maps, models, - A photographs and reports, whether In draft or final form, prepared by ill -5- - Y CONSULTANT as of date of terminat! -on. CONSULTANT may not terminate this-- Agreement except for cause 7. Notices and Designated Representatives: Any and all notices, demands, invofces and written communications between the parties hereto shall be addressed as set forth in this paragraph 7. The below named ind'viduals, furthermore, shall to those persons primarily responsib' nr the performance by the parties under this Agreement: Blane W. Frandsen u- or Civil Engineer, for and an behalf of -ne CITY and Hotch Bedrosian for and in behalf tf CONSULTANTS, C I.A a Associates, 9581 Business Center Drive, Suite "G:. Pancho Cucanunna, California 91730 Any such notices, demands, invoices and written com„jnications, by mail, shall be deemed to have been received by the ad•fressee forty -eight (48) hours after denosit thereof In tr', United States matt, postage prepaid and properly O addressed as set forth above. 8 Insurance: CONSULTANT shall neither cwmnce work under this Agreement uat11 it has obtained all insurance req, fired hereunder in a company or companies acceptable to CITY nor shall CONSULTANT allow any subcontractor to commence work on a subcontract until all insurance required of the subcontractor has been obtained. CONSULT'NT shall take out and maintain at a14 tixes during the term of this Agreement the following policies of Insurance: (a) Worker's Comnensaton Insurance: Before beginni ^. work, CONSULTANT shall furnish to CITY a certificate of insurance as prop, that it has taken out full workers' compensaton insurance for all persons when it may employ directly or through subcontractors in carrying out the work specified herein, in accordance with the laws of the State of California. �f. In accordance with the provisions of California Labor -Cade Sectlo, 3700, every employer shall secure the payment of cempensstior to his employees. CONSULTANT prior to commencing work, stall sign and file with CITY s certification as follows: "! am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which -equire every employer to be insured against liability for workers' rnmpensation or to undertake self Insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the p?rformance of the work of this Agreement*. (b) Public Lability and Propert Oyu rmage: Throughout the term of this Agreement, at CONSULTANT's sole cast and expense, CONSULTANT shall keep, or cause to be kept, it full farm and effect, for the mutual benefit of CITY and CONSULTANT, comprehensive, broad farm, general public liability and automobile Insurance against clam;, and liabilities for personal injury, death, or property damage ari,irg from CONS'ULTANT'S activ'ties, Providing protection of at least One Millior Oollars (51,000,000.CO) for bodily Injury or death to any one person or for any one accident or occurrence and at least One Million Dollars ($1v000,000,00) for property damage, (c) Errors and Omissions: CONSULTANT shall take out and maiiitain at all tires during the life of this Agreement, a policy or policies of insurance concerning errors and omissions ( "malpractice ") providin7 protection of at least w / n for errors and omissions ( "malpractice ") with respact to loss arising from actions of CONSULTANT performing eagineerine services hereundr- ,n behalf o' CITY. ' - 3, (d) Cenerat Insurance Requirements: All insurance {,® required by express provision of this Agreement shall be carried only in it .7_ .SO `�• -• responsible Insurance companies licensed to do business in the State7 of California and policies reauir•eo under paragraphs 8.(a) and (b) shill name as additional insureds CITY, its elected officials, officers, employees, and agents. All policies shall contain language, to the extent Obtainable, to the effect that (1) the insurer waives tha right of subrogation against CITY and CIT1's elected officlals, offi.drs, employees, and agents; (2) the policies are priro�ry and noncontributing with any Insurance that may be carried by CITY, and (3) they cannot be cancelled or materially changed except after thirty (30) .lays' notice by the insurer to CITY by certified mail. CONSULTANT shall furnish CITY with copies of all such policies promptly upon receipt of th -m, o• certificate evidencing the insurance. CONSULTANT may effect for its own account insurance not required under this Agreement. 9 Indemnification: CONSULTANT shall defend, indemnify and save harmless CITY, its elected and appointed officials, officers, agents and employees, from all liability from Lois, damage or, injury to persons or property, Includ.ng the payment by CONSULTANT of any and all legal costs and attorneys' fees, in any manner arising out of any negligent or intentional or willful acts or omissions of the CONSULTANT in the performance of this Agreement, including, but not limited to, all consequential damages, tft the maximum extent permitted by law. 10. Assignment): ho assignment of this Agreement or of ary part or obligation of performance hereunder shall be made, either in whole or in part, by CONSULTANT withoot the prior written consent of CITY. 11. Indaoendent Contractor: The parties hereto agree that CONSULTANT and its employers, officers and agents are lnaependent contractors �. unde- this Agreement and shall not be construed for any purpose to be N -8- :.:> > 59 employees of CITY. _ 12. Governino Law: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed In accordance with the laws of the State of California. 13. Attorney's Fees: In the event any legal proceeding is instituted to enforce ahy term or provision of the Agreement, the prevailing party In said legal proceeding shall be entitled to recover attorneys' Oees and costs from the apposing party in an amount determined by the Court to be reasonable. 14. Entire Agreement: This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, eithe- oral or in writing, between the parties with respect to the subject matter herein. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representation by any party which is not embodied herein nor any other agreement statement, or premise not contained in this Agreement shall be valid and binding. Any m ^dificstion of this Agreement shalt be effective only If it is In writing signed by alp parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first set for'h above: CONSULTANT 'Hotch Bedrosian CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Jon D. Mtkels—,—Wa—yor ATTEST: Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk Gate: Date: Approved as to farm .—rte" ✓ ttorney -9- U i �J, N Exhibit "A" PROPOSED SCOPE OF SERVICES TASK 1 - P•epare Technical Spe`Ifications (Special Provisions) A. Assambl: required technical Information - Collect recent Slurry Seal and Heater Remix Specifications from nearby agencies, most recent recommendations from Asphalt Institute, and solicit comments from contrators and agencies regarding traffic. control, specific provisions, emulsion break characteristics recently Encountered, etc. Obtain through others core samples and laboratory testing to speclfy application rates for "reclamite" or equal solutions. B. Ass(mble required information from City of Rancho Cucamcn(ta - Draaings and plats, budgeted funds available, Project No., and specific description, etc. C. Write Special Provisions and Bid Sheet. 1. Major Elements - a. Materials - Bituminous materials and emulsion properties. Aggregate properties. Storage and handling of ma.:rial". b. Methods - Heater remixing reclamite and slurry. Proportioning and mixing. Spreading and placement inci. acceptable rates and temperatures. Protection from damage. e. Measurement and Payment - 2. Minor Elements - a. Protection of existing improvements. b. Sequence of work /hours of work. c. L1canse and permit requirements. . {;ir.�ryY+ : -'r �`t.t •Yf a. i�, ` �..��F' `fi ! .i, a4 +j.":hV Ll Exhibit• "A" (Continued) - 2 3. Traffic Contrcl - a.Street closure and signing. b.Notification of residents and posting. c.Coordination with other agencies: ` Fire Cepartment Ambulance Service /Paramedic: Water Agency Rubbish Collection Service Sheriff /Police Dept. /Highway Patrol 4. Miscellaneous Provisions - TASK 2 - Assemble and Edit Specificatinn Package A. Assruble final document: Notice Inviting Bids Instructions to Bidders Proposal Forms (Including Bid Sheet) Contract and Bond Forms General Conditions Special Conditions Location and Vicinity Map - Plat showing limits of work to b^ done B. Edit for Consistency 1. Soarch 'Boilerplate" for global replacement phrases and replace with applicable information: Project Title Bid Time Bid ,Day Nondays Authorized Date 1 Publish Date v Liquid M-)unt ` 2. Check General Conditions, Information to Bidders Notice Invit - Bids, etc., for general consistency and consistency ,. Technical Specifications. Special attention will be paid provis)c,s regarding mea-urement and payment, traffic contr- , hours of wL�k, notification of residentt, acd coordination w);n other vancles. 3. Deliver completed package to City of Rancho Cucamonga for final review. a 2 Exhit it "A" (Continued) - TASK 3 - Prepare 4ist of Prospective Bidders Assemble data .rom other agencies regarding bieaers who ha +a recently performed tike work in an acceptable manner and prepare maillny list for Notices Inviting Bids. All work proposed under this Scope of Services will be performed by Donald D. Todd, P.E. Hr. Todd's experience with the slurry seal process is extensive. The Drocess was in use in Inglewood during his employment with that City s9actiwhereshe participated in the development process for force - account ea18ng During his tenure as City Engineer for the City of Klamath Falls, Oregon, extensive use of :he slurry seal prncess was employed, utilizing a coarser aggregate than is normal in Southern Ctlifornia and applying the seal to streets which would be classified as candidates for overlay in most communities in this state. In Vista, slurry seal was applied under contract, and Mr. Todo was responsible for developing the specifications and administoring the contracts for the annual prtjc..ts. TASK 4 - Have performed by other core sampling and laboratory testing of such® to aetermine application rates for "reclamite" or equal solution. FEE BUDGET TASKS 1 -3 TASK 4 3 (3 $2,200.00 S1,500.00 $3,700.00 r i • \ al:ffi Exhibit \ ( _ § , § �` § : { } ` \ EO } � { . — ! § — } } } \ \ m } — � �. � / • - y� � J 41AENGINSERING CONSULTAN S Exhibit "L" 30110110105 .- Yl.'I ENGINEERING Principal Engineer .... .....................$58.00 /HR. Staff Engineer ................. ...........$44.00 /HR. Drafter ...................... ...........$36.00 /HR. Senior Inspector........ 6 ................. $40.00/::8. Inspector .............................. ...$30.00 /HR. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Principal Geologist /Soils Engineer ......... $60.00 /HR. soils Engiraer /Staff Geologist .............$36.50 /HR. Laboratory Technician .. ....................$32.50 /1m. Field Technician ...... .....................$32.00 /HR. SNAI/EYING Principal Land Surveyor ....................$55.00 /H.R. Associate Land Surveyor ....................$44.00 /HR. Su vey party of one ............. ..........$50.u0 /HR. Survey party of two ... ....................$115.00 /HR. Survey party of three . ....................$135.00 /HR. MISCELLINEOOS Clerical Services., ........ ...............$24.00 /HR. Computer Time .............................. $30.00 /1LR. Electronic Total Staticn ......... .......$20.00 /HR. prints, reproduction, and mist. costs at cost + 15% Mileage at $0.24/mile - Rates ne9c- za1ol4i'n:eendent on s1.za and scope of proposad proj act. Proposals upon request. \ � OSS18usinam CanterOnve,Sulta O,Ranct -o Cucamoni;&CA91730 (714)989.4755�J 2197 Calla Rhmosc. Thoumnd Oaks. CA 0 1362 (805) 529.7148 9 0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE. November 6, 1985 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer SUBJECT: Approval of Professional Services Agreement with Randolph lilublk Associates, Inc. for preparation of concepts end final plans and contract documents for the installation of median island landscaping on Haven Avenue from Arrow to Nineteenth Strc<t Attached for Council execution is a consultant contract with Randolph Hlublk Associates for the preparation of concepts and final plans for the Installation of median island landscaping for the subject project. The Council previously approved contracts with Madole and Associates and DKS Associates to develop street improvement plans and geonetrics for the actual island construction. This contract completes the package requirements to develop plans to construct the island. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council approve the Professional Services Agreement with Hlublk Associates, Inc, for preparation of concepts and final plans and contract documents for the installation of median island landscaping on Haven Avenue from Arrow to Nineteenth Street. Amount not to exceed S18,50U to be drawn from budgeted Beautification funds. Respe tfuily submitted LBH:jaa Attachments v 0 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT This Agreement is made and entered Into this day of 19 , between the City of Rancho Cucamonga, a Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CITY ") and Randolph Hlubik Assoefatu, Inc, (hereinafter referred to as 'CONSULTANT"), A. Recitals, (I) CITY has heretofore issued its Reruest for, Proposal pertaining to the performanco of professional services with respect to the preparation of landscape design concepts and worLing drawings for median Island landscaping on Haven Avenue between Arrow Route and Nineteenth tr t, ( "Project" hereafter) (ii) CONSULTANT nas now suomitted its proposal for the performanre of such services. (111) CITY desires to retain CONSULTANT to perform professional services necessary to •ender advice and assistance to CITY, CITY's Planning Cormission, City Council and staff in the preparation of Project. 1 (iv) CONSULTANT represents that it 13 qualified to perform such services and is willing to perform such professional services as hereinafter l defined. NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between CITY and CONSULTANT a� follows: D. Agreement. i Definitions: The following definitions shall apply to the following terms, except where the context of this Agreemant otherwise requires: 7/31/85 -1- 7 , (a) Project: The preparation of Haven Avenue Nedlan Island Landscape Concepts and Plon - Arrow Route to Nineteenth Street described to Exhibit "A" Sco,.e of Services r -eto including, but not limited to, the preparation Pf maps, surveys, reports, and documents, the presentation, both oral and in wrltim, of such plans, maps, surveys, reports and documents to CITY as required aid attendance at any and all work sessions, public hearings and other meetings conducted by CITY with respect to the project as outlined in the Scope of Services. (b) Services: Such professional services as are necessary to be performe-4 oy CONSULTANT in order to complete the project. (e) Camoletion of Project: The date of completion of all phases of the project, including any and all procedures, development plans, O maps, surveys, plan documents, technical reports, meetings, oral presentations and attendance by CONSULTANT at public hearings regarding the project acceptance for construction is set forth in Exhibit "B" Project Schedule attached hereto. 2. CONSIMANT agrees as follows: (a) CONSULTANT shall forthwith undertake and complete the project in accordance with Exhibit "A and applicable with Federal, State and CITY statues, regulations, ordinances and guidelines, all to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY. (b) CONSULTANT shall supply .opies of all maps, surveys, reports, plans and documents (hereina "ter co'lectiveiy referred to as "documents ") including all supplemental technical documents, as described in Exhibit "A" to LITY within the time specified in Project Scheduled, Exhibit -2_ Copies of the documents shall be in such numbers as are required by Exhibit W. CITY may thereafter review and forward to CONSULTAN' comments regarding said documents and CONSULTANT shall thereafter make such revisions to -aid documents as are deemed necessary. CITY shall receive revised documents in such form and in the quantities determined necessary by CITY. The time limits set forth pursuarit to this Section 02.(b) may be extended upon written approval of CITY, (e) CONSULTANT shall, at CONSULTANT's $o'e cost and expense, secure and hire such other persons as may, in the opinion of CONSULTM, be necessary to comply with the terms of this Alreement. In the event any such other persons are retained by CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT hereby warrants that such persons shall ':e fully qualified to perform services 7 • required hereunder. CONSULTANT further agrees that no suocontractor shall be retained by CONSULTANT except upon the Prior written approval of CITY. 1i 3. CITY agrees as follows: (r) To pay CONSULTANT a maximum sum of SI0,300 5. for the performance of the services required hereunder. This sum shall cover the cost of all staff tine and ill other direct and indirect costs or fees, including the work of employees, consultants and subcontractors to CONSULTANT. Payment to CONSULTANT, by CITY, shall be made in accordance with ' the s-heduie set forth in Exhibic "C° (b) Payments to CONSULTANT shall be made by CITY in accordance with the invoices submitted by CONSULTANT, on a monthly basis, ant su.h invoices shall oe paid within a reasonable time of *er said invoices are 1. , ti received by CIT All charges shall be detailed in Exhibit "C" either with ^ respect to hourly rates or lump sum amounts for indi ,lddal tasks. In no ' h �. w e (b) Photographically, reprcducihle copies of maps and other information, if available, hhich CONSULTANT considers necessary in order to complete the project. (c) Such information as is generally available from CITY files applicable to the p�o,iect. (d) Assistance, if necessary, in obtaining information from other governmental agencies and /or private parties. However, it shall be CONSULTANT's responsibility to make all initial contact with respect to the gathering of such information. • event, however, will said invoices exceed 95% ,f individual task totals described in Exhibits "A" and "C" r (c) CONSULTANT agrees that, in no event, shall CITY be - ^quirea to pay fo CONSULTANT any sum in excess of 950. of the maximum payable hereunder prior to receipt by CITY of all final documents, together with all Supplemental teihnlcal documents, as described herein acceptable in form and content to CITY. Final payment shall be made not later than 60 days after Presentation of final documents and acceptance thereof by CITY. (d) Additional services: Payments fvr additional services requested, in writing, by CITY, and not included iw the Scope of Services as set forth in Exhibit "A" hereof, shall be paid on a reimbursement basis In accordance with the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit "C ". Lharges for additional services shall be invoicad on a monthly basis and shall be paid by i CITY within a reasonable time after said invoices are received by CITY. 4. CITY agrees to provide to CONSULTANT: (a) Information and assistance as set forth in Exhibit •A" hereto. (b) Photographically, reprcducihle copies of maps and other information, if available, hhich CONSULTANT considers necessary in order to complete the project. (c) Such information as is generally available from CITY files applicable to the p�o,iect. (d) Assistance, if necessary, in obtaining information from other governmental agencies and /or private parties. However, it shall be CONSULTANT's responsibility to make all initial contact with respect to the gathering of such information. 5 Ownership of Documents. All documents, data, stuEtest surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs and reports prepared by CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement shell be considered the property of CITY and, upon payment for services performed by CONSULTANT, such documents and •'h,-r identified materials shall be delivered to CITY by CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT may, however, make and retain such copies of said documents and materials as CONSULTANT may desire. Any use cr reuse of the p :ns and specifications except at the site intended or any alteration or revision 07 the plans or specifications by the CITY, Its staff or authorized agents witho,Nt the specific written consent of the CONSULTANT shall be at the sole risk of the CITY. The CITY agrees to hold ham,,less and Inde,nnify ti,, CONSULTANT against all damage,, clains and losses including defense costs arising out of any such alteration or revision, or use or reuse at another site by the CITY , its staff or authorized agents. 6. Termination: This agreement may be terminated by CITY upon the giving of a written 'Notice of Termination" to CONSULTANT at least fifteen (15) days prior to the date of termination specified in said Notice. In the event this Agreement Is •so terminated, CONSULTANT shall be compensated at CONSULTANT's applicable hourly rates as set forth in Exhibit 461, 0.1 a pr, .a lasis with respect to the percentage of the project completed as of t� ate cf te.Tnination. In no event, however, shall CONSULTANT receive more the, the maxin mN specified n paragraph 3 (a), above. CONSULTANT shall provide to CIV any and all documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs and rel. s, whether in draft or final form, prepared by ' .. MMMW,i,wv1 CONSULTANT as of date of termination. 0- CONSULTANT may not terminate _this Agreement except for cause. 7. Notices and Desionatpd Represactatives: Any and all notices, demands, invoices and written communications between the parties hereto shall be addressed as set forth in this paragraph 7. The below named individuals, furthermore, shall be those persons primarily responsible for the performance by the parties under this .ereement: City: Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer, P.O. Box 807, Rancho Cucamonca CA 91730 Consultant Randolph Hlubik, Mission Inn Rotunda, Suite 205 3616 Main Street Riverside, CA 92FOl Any such notices, demands, invoices and written com:tunications, by mAil, shall be deemed to have been received by the addressee forty -eight (48) hours after deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid and properly addressed as set forth above. 8. Insurance: CONSULTANT shall neither commence work under this Agreement until it hAs obtained all insurance required hereunder in a company or companies acceptable to CITY nor shall CONSULTANT allow any subcontractor to commence work on a subcontract until all insurance required S 0.4 the subLontrartor has been obtained. CONSULTANT shad take out and ma„;;:in at all times during the tenr. of this Agreement the following policies of insurance: r (a) worker's Cmmpensaton Insurance: Beforb beginnin7 work, CO?ISULTART shall furnish to CITY a certificate of insurance as proof i that it has taken out full workers' cayensaton insurance for all persons whom it may emplo) uireztly or through subcontractors in carrying ou; the work 4 Y specified herein, in ac:ardance with the laws of the State of Callf)rnia. •'` ai .. r. 1. In accordance with the provisions of California Labor Cade Section 3700, every employer shall secure the payment of compensation to his employees. CONSULTANT prior to Commencin.,- work, shall sign and file with CITY a certification as follows: "I am aware of the provisions o" Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self insurance in accordance with the provisions Of that Code, and I will comply with such -)rovisions before commencing the performance of the work oi' this Agreement" (b) Public Liability and Property Damage: Throughout the term of this Agreement, at CONSULTANT's sole cost and expense. CONSULTANT shall keep. or cause to be kept, in full force and effect, for the mutual 0 benefit of CITY and CONSULTANT, comprehensive, broad form, gepp-ral public liability and automobile insurance against claims and liabilities fm personal injury, death, or property damage arising from CONSULTANT's activities, providing protection of at least Ore Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) for bodily injury or death to any one person or for any one accident or occurrence and at least One Million Dollars (S1,000,030,00) for property damage. (c) _Errors and Omissions, CONSULTANT shall take out and maintain at all times during the life of this Agreement, a policy or policies of insurance concerning errors and omissions ( ^malpractice") providing protection of at least 11cn.DDp for errors and omissions ( "malpractice ") with respect to toss arising from actions of CONSULTANT performing engineering services here•:nder in behalf of CiTY. (d) General Insurance Requirements: Ali insurance required by express provision of this Agreement shall be carried only in -7- , 7� responsible insurance companies licensed to do business in the State _of_ California and policies required tinder paragraphs 6 (a) and (b) shall name as additional insureds CITY, its elected officiais, officers, employees, and agents. All policies sh311 contain language, to the extent obtainable, to the effect that (11 the insurer waives the right of subrogation against CITY and CITY's elected officiais, officers, emplofees, and agents; (2) the policies are primary and noncontributing with any insurance that may be carried by CITY; dnd (3) they cannot be cancelled or materially changed except after thirty (30) days' notice by the insurer to CITY by certified mail. CONSULTANT shall furnish CITY with copies of all sich policies promptly upon receipt of them, or certificate evidencing the insurance C014SULTANT may effect for its own account insurance not required unde,, this Agreement 9. Indemnification: CONSULTANT shall defend, indemnify and save harmless CITY, its elected and appointed officials, officers, agents and employees, from al liability fr.tn loss, damage or injury to persons or property, including the payment by CONSULTANT of any and all legal costs and attorneys' fees, in any manner arising out cf any negligent or intentional or willful acts or omissions of the CONSULTANT in the performance of this Agreement, includina, but not limited to, all consequential damages, to the maxinuo extent pernibed by law. 10. Assignment): No assignment of this Agreement or of any Part or obligation of perfornauc.e hereunder shal be made, either in whole o- 1n part, by CONSULTANT without the prsor written consent of CITY. 11. Independent Contractor: The parties hereto agree that CONSULTANT and its employers, officers and agents are independent contractors f' under this Agreement and shall not be construed for an 9 y purpose to be S' employees of CITY. '.2. Governing Law: This Agreement shad be governed by and construed in acciraegce with the laws of the State of California. z 13. Attorney's Fees: In the event any legal proceeding is instituted to enforce any term or Grovision of the Agreement, the prevailing party in said legal proceeding shall be entitled t, recover attorneys' faes and costs from the opposing party In an amount determined by the Court to be reasonable. 14. Entire Agreement: This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, either oral or 1r, writing, between the parties with respect to the subject matt-!r herein. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representation by any party which is not embodied herein nor any other i agreement, statement, or promise not contained in this Agreement shall be valid and binding. Any modification of this Agreement shall be effective only if it is in writing signed by all parties. 11; WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first set forth above: I CONSULTAN Date: J CITY of RANCHO cocArtonoA Date: Jon a s, ayor ATTEST: — 9everT A. Authelet, City Cl er Approved as to form: ty— Ci— ACEoornneey " 9 7 .,s EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES General To prepare prellminary design alternatives and comparative costs for staff review and convent; then, following selection of a preliminary design alternative to produce complete working drawings including planting, Irrigation, and constructiou plans /notes /details In addition, will provide bidding assistance, field observation services, and attend public meetings et City's direction. A. Preliminary Planning: I Project Base Sheet - He will prepare base sheets at 40 scale cr tee Lora Arrow Rt. thru 19th St I development area (to be used through the working drawing process) and a 'typical treataent' base at 20 scale 2 Horticultural Soils Analysis - He will collect composite soh —samples from the project area for horticultural soils testing. Consultant will co- ordinate the laboratory testing of the samples and - eceive a soils report which will define the soil type and the necessary soil amendments for plant- ing. Consultant will co- ordinate the procurament of all soil tests and bill the City separately for reimbursement 3. Pro ect Site Rev +ew - We will visit /review the site and verl y ex st ng site conditions and adjacent development 4 Prel+m!nary PTlan, - we will prepare 2 preliminary landscape development a ternatives delineatino tie proposed landscape ! development. Th4 plans.will illustrate the scale and relation- ship of the median co.^tponents and will depict all typical elements of the median, their approximate location, and general description. S. Preliminar Cost Stud - we will prepare preliminary cost i stu es wi cn can a used to fix the working drawing and construction installation budget, and aid in alternative review and comparison 7(a �. •:x t C FIELD OBSERVATION: We will ma x periodic field ab•ervation visits of v;� project during each phase of construction to support the City :.ispector. Site visits have been projected as-follows; the list represents an estimate of the time per trip needed for the project Additional time may be required depending upon the construction schedule and contingencies. ••r 77 B. WORKING DRAWINGS: Upon the architect's and your review /approval of the preliminary plaD, we will prepare the following working drawings in sufficient detail to-- facilitate construction. Drawings shell be of durable quality ink on myiar to conform to City standards for Public Works 1 Construction Plan d details - This plan will layout staking of hard and softscape at aas and naIcate al. landscape earthwork to be done. We will co- ordinate'with the Civil Engineer so that rough earth quantities for berms are in place prior to landscape construction 2 PlantTna Plan b Details - This plan will locate and identify all T,, ms of p ant mater a to be used I Irri ation Plan b Details - This plan will layout all piping, valves, contro equ D�r'en�t aeA sprinkler heads for irrigation of the planted areas and co- ordinate servile connectiGns with Cucamonga County Water District and Southern California Edison 4 S ecifications - We will prepare notes /specifications identifying ail types and qualities of materials and methods to be used in construction Contract documents and final contract preparation will be the rt..ponsibility of the City 5 Bidding Process - We understand the City will disperse the plans/ —bids request from the appropriate contractors and dill recieve bids. We will assist the City in the evaluation of the bids received 5 l'onstrurtion Cost Estimate - We will prepare a construction cost estimate which w be based on current area, volure or other unit costs for the landscape elements. 7 City shall provide street sections and all plans and specifications for nedian island curbing and pavement replacement t C FIELD OBSERVATION: We will ma x periodic field ab•ervation visits of v;� project during each phase of construction to support the City :.ispector. Site visits have been projected as-follows; the list represents an estimate of the time per trip needed for the project Additional time may be required depending upon the construction schedule and contingencies. ••r 77 I RECOMMENDED VISITS: 1. Landscape Contractor Orientation Meeting 3 hours 2. Irrigation - Mainline and equipment 4 hours 3. Irrisation - Coverage test /review as- builts 4 hours d. Planting - Soil prep /review earthwork 4 hours 5. Planting - Spot plant material /approve fine grade 6 hours 6. Final Inspection /begin landscape maintenance period 4 hours 7. 30 Days Maintenance Period J hours B. 60 Days Maintenance Period 3 hours 9. 90 Days Maintenance Period 3 hours 10. General Administrative Time 6 hours NOTE: The above field program vas orepared with the understanding that the Owner wlII provide a full time field superinteadent for all worK including day to day Inspection and project adminstratton Our role will be one of support. making recoamendations as may be necessary .± V ill I�' 7 EXHIBIT •B• y • SCHEDULE HAVEN AVENUE MEDIAN ARROW ROUTE TO NINTEENTH STREET RANCHO CUCAMONGA ' DESCRIPTIO14 COMPLETION TIME- AFTci, WOPK AUTHORIZED I Develop Base Sheets, 2 Weeks 2 Preliminary Plans and Construction Cost Alternatives 3 Weeks 3 Planting Plans, Irrigation Plans and Construction Plan s'arking Drawings 7 Weeks 4 Prepare Cost :stimate and Specifications 2 Weeks After Plans based upon Approved Plans Approved S Bidding dnd Bid bvaluation To Bc Determined 6 Constructicr Period To Be Determined • Base Sheet Development to commence upon rereipt of approved plan view median island curb layouts. NOTE Times indicated are exclusive of agency review time requirements I a- , EXHIBIT C FEE SCHEDULE A. Our fees will be billed at our Normal Hourly Rates. In addition to this, charges will be made for reimbursable items 1. Preliminary Planning Per I.A Preceding 5 Working Drawings per I B. Preceding LUMP SUM $18,500.00 2 Field Obcer °ation per I C. �rc_er.ing NORMAL HOURLY RATES Principal Landscape Architect's time at the fixed rate of: Landscape Architect's time at the fixed rate of: Project Manager's time at the fixed rate of: Landscape Designer's time at the fixed rate of: Professional Staff's time at the fixed ra,e of: HOURLY HOURLY $65 00 per hour 45 $55.00 per hour $40.00 per hour $30 00 per hour $25.00 per hour OUTSIDE C°-.VSULTAIITS Services of outside consultants not listed in this proposal. at Our direct cost, plus 16% of the actual cost of their services for co- ordination REIMBURSABLE IT..MS Reimbursable items, such as the cost of blueprinting, graphic reproduction and photo copying, at our direct cost plus 15 %. 17J CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA �cc�eio STAFF REPORT DATE: November 6, 1985 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd 8. Hobbs, City Engineer SUBJEU: Approval of authorization for City Engineer to accept facilities and easements for Flood Control District storm drain from Carnelian Street to the future Red Hill Park The Flood Control District currently owns and ope-ates a storm drain connecting with structures on Carnelian Street north of Base Line Road to the Red Hill Bssin. As a part of tho Red Hill Park project, this system will be enclosed and extended through the park. The Flood Control District has requested that the City accept the facility maintenance and easements as a logical extension of the park drainage system. Due to the constraints being placed on this system by the character of the park drainage system, Staff concurs in this request. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council authorize the City Engineer to c... re the necessary documents and accept easements t3 allow the City to assume responsibility for County Flood Control drainoge facilities connecting Carnelian Street and Red Hill Park. Res JL`yo'!Pc`ctl,.` Ys b itte Fr9�"� Attachments S/ .- ^S �,, s Y�.a'. •-» Sew-- ,i�r''� a _ �-,-,y..,- • -fir. �.' %i 2�E � ' �- L �,�, _ s 7 d 2.A 34` • jd " - 4 mw • I�, ^[ 1.11 ,ri• Qi' '- /y�'r1 �` a -`•w•° _�, , •� ( • i/ �� '• } �-Y <i -.1:4 y/ w �Y�.P. M4TC F�IU,[r.•�f ..V� ' bfy � . � -'•" i Imo- °0� . 7Y- ` —.,/' °• o.S 42• 1. `of 2-3 EASE LINE RD. ( i��• ��A '911�Fr r ' �' ,0'3 S 4 . `�t�'` 11• : =-:;:r yr' -75 r ~• �� •V,� . - < r� i CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COMPREHENSIVE STDRM DRAIN PLAN PROJECT NO.2- 2 N. Euclid Avenue JUNE DRAWINO I OF 14 =� �j�'►E,1�7 Ontuto, C CA !lI &'oo nel a .,: 7M • CITY OF RANCHO CUCluNIONGA STAFF REPORT Date: October li. 1985 Tow Mayor and Members of City Council From: Robert A. Rizzo. Assistant C+ty Manager + Sy: Elisabeth Stoddard, Assirlaat Finance Diractor Subject: Vicyclo License Fee Amondment The City of Poncho Cucamonga has adopted the Fee Schedule of the State of California Vehicle Cade ragirding issuance and renewal of bicycle license fees The State of California has incransed the allowable fee to be collected by a local agencl f om $.SO par ynar to 51 00 par year with re- spect to a bicycle license. renewal. It is rocomnendod that Resolution E0 -4 be amended to raflact the feel fm bicycle license roneoal ao ellowed by the State of California Vuhicli Cale �'t1 ® RESOLUTION NO. 80-4A A RESOLUTION OF SHE CITY COUNCIL OF TIE CITY OF RANCHO _~ LVGNCNGA. CALIFORNIA. AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 80-4 PEES FOR THE RENEWAL OF BICYCLE LICENSES 11 WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has adopted by Recolution No. 80-4 the fee sebedule in Division 16.7. Section 39004 of the Vehicle Coda; and WHEREAS, these faeo ate amrnds,d from time to rime. NW, TSMREFO=. BE I' RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga that the fol .wing fee for renewal of bicycle licenses, be amended: (4) For each bicycle license renewal, the sum ebnll not exceed one dollar (91) per year. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of Novecbet. 1985. 44 :i r• 13 S1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA t� �l canr 0' MEMORANDUM c 4 C L ,T,7 I DATE, November 6, 1987 TO: Member* of City Council and City Maaager FROM: Mark. Lorimer, Administrative Analyst-�4� SUBJECT: APPROPRIATION FOR VICTOss enx- L CONKnT R> R RVTC a The City Council will recall that in early AuBueq it approved an cgreement with Gene Zdunovski, our Vector Control Consultant, to provide consulting services within the City. In orda_ hat the City may honor the agtaeaent, en appropriation in the amount 915,000.00 mat be moda to thn Administration Contract Services Account (01- 4121 - 6028). This appropriation will cover all costs associated with tkw vector control consulting sarv(ces It is recommended that the City Council authorize the appropriation, not co exceed 915,000.00 for vector control consulting services vith Mr Cane Zdun"ski, and that that appropriation be node to the Administration Contract Services Account (01- 4122-6028). Should you have any ouestions or comm6ots regarding this matter, please contact me at your convenience. HL /kop r: E I* H nfT nP D AXIn Vn MT Alrnvn. 9 is CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATBI October 28, 1983 T0; Members of City Council and City Manager � FROMt Mark Lorimer, ddciuistrotive Analyse-4 -t°� c1KAAr4 Y � 4 w C CI r1 A z Vx � 1977 SUBJECTI APPROVAL TO AUTNOR12E AN ADJUSTMENT IM TIM GRANIr SPECIALIST SALARY RANGE I The City Council will recall that in May of this year, approval was given for an equity adjustment in the Plan Checker's salary range. This approval was granted because of the City's lock of success in attracting suitable personnel. Since then we bava experionced greater success at fillivg that position. Currently, we are experiencing a similar dilemma with the Grading Specialist position, in that recruitments have been met with little success in attracting qualified personnel. The requirements of the Plan Checker and the Grading Specialist are similar in that both positions reviw plans for compliance with state and local codes. In addition, both positions require a minimum of three years experience working in similar capacities, supplemented by spat ial Lzed training in the field or a bacbnlor's do ;rae frou an accredited college or university. Both the Plcn Checker and Grading Specialist positioae oharu similar job tasks and education/& perience requirements. The current control point for the ?Ian Checker is at stop 406 ($2,624.00 per montb), while the control point or the Grading Speciali.it Is presently at step 396 ($2,497.00 par oc.,cn). This adjustment represents a ST differaa,,a. The following salary range adjustment is recomae�ded. SALARY �P fMONTRLY) Current Grading Specialist Control Point 396 $2,496.00 Currant Plan Check Control Point 406 $2,624.00 8e..o,meoded Gradirg Specialist 406 $2,624.00 Control Point RECOMMEMDATIOR The City Council to authorize an adjustmoar for the Cr. .ng °racialist salary range from current cm Irol POW step 3960 $2,496.00 to aijusted control Point step 406, $2,624.00. ML /kep 817 s Al 11 e CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: November 6, 1985 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director BY: Rubin Yu, Associate Planner �Gnfp�i. 10' $ SUBJECT: 1985 -86 HOUSING REPAIR /REHABILITATION LOAN CONTRACT WITH SAN BERNARDINO CGONTY BACKGROUND: For the past several years, ':he City has been offering the epifpaai— Serrtce Program for senior, disabled and handicapped residents, and the Rehabilitation Loan Program for low and moderate income residents. Funded through Community Vvelopment Block Grants, these programs provide funds for necessary repairs such as plumbing Improvements, roof repairs, heating, new paint and electrical improvements. Pie programs are Aimed at helping low and moderate income residents maintain a safe and healthy living environment. Since 1982, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has contracted with the County of San 5ernardino to adminis:er the above mentioned Housing Repair /Rehabilitation Loan Programs. The County evaluates loan and grant applications, perform; hnme repairs, and coordinates rehabilitation loans, as required vnder the Federal regulations for rehabilitation programs supported by Block Grant funds. The FY 85/86 contract extends the terms of the existing agreement through Jun 30, 1986. The alloted amount (S80,ODO) has been funded by the City Council as a result of Block Grant hearings to May 1985. The County of San Bernardino runs a virtually identical Housing Program on a County -wide basis. The County's Office of U:anunity Development has an established mechanism to administer Housing Assistance Programs. Due to the limited scope of the City's program, contracting housing rehabilitation to the County appears to be the most cost - effective way of providing this service. sW 19" d• CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT November 6, 1985 1905/86 Houaing Pepalr /Rehab. Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the contract between the City of ancko Ccamunga and the County of San Bernardino to continue the implementation f the Housing Repair Rehabilitation Program be approved. _ 1Res ectfumlts bmittedf JACK LAM Community Development Director JL:RY:das Attachment: Cortract W _ COUNTY Of SAN afRMARVINU ENVIRONMENTAL , OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ��-� -� fueuc WORKS AGENCY 474 Vint fifth 51r11t • 8an Bnnardino, CA 024154040 (1141383.2503 KENNETH C tOP%NG �rj•� o ";,y Mmt�ultw N--1 tHOMAS LAU R U0.1N D4,cta DNKI al CdNANYn' Dwabpm,nt — RECEiVED- cITY of RA RANCHO Uctober 8, 1985 IVNIMONOA OCT 9 1985 Mr. Otto Kroutil, Senior Plattner All 7(Bj9j1Q1111i111121a1415i8 City of Rancho Cucamonga , 9320 Baseline Road. Suite ho, Cucamonga, CA Rancho, RE: Contracts Rehabilitation and Repair Program Dear mr. Kroutil: ENclosed is original plus four four copies of contract for 1985 -85. Please for Board '4 review and obtain appropriate signatures to return forward approved copy all your file. signatures. He will have please call me at (714) 383 -1703 or Connie Chambers you a2563?estions. at Sincerely, ENVIRONMENTAL PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OF THOMAS R. LAI.111, Director ( Gi TEf c COY Housing Program Manager M1: bj,1 Enclosures a: 90 I, °1 m C 0 h T R A C T _ and between Hthe ACOUNTY rIOFi SAN aBERNARDINO (hereinafter ireferred yto of as "COUNTYB)tand the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ( hareinarter referred to as "CITY'). WI T N E S S E T H HHEREAS, both COUNTY and CITY are eligible to apply for orants from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, pursuant to the provisions of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974; and WHEREAS, both COUNTY and CITY have been approved for funding in the form of a Community Development Block Grant under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, for the program year beginning July 1, 1985, and ending June 30, I 986; and rIHEREAS, both COUNTY and CITY have each developed a community development plan pursuant to Title I of the Act that includes a Housing Program that will help meet the housing assistance needs of lower income persons residing in their respective jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, the Department of Housing and Community Development (hereinafter referred to as HCO "), as the COUNTY entity responsible for administering thego Federal Community Development Block Grant Contract and CITY desire to coordinate their efforts to maximize utilization of personnel and resources and increase the efficiency and economics in administering their Housing Assistance Program. NOW, THEREFORE, COUNTY AND CITY for and in consideration of the tual promises and agreements herein contained do agree as follows: 1. The purrose of this Agreement is to utilize 9CO's repair crews to make repairs on ant for Rancho Cucamonga senior and handicapped and disabled homeowners as part of the CITY's housing Program. 2. The CiTY hgreby authorizes the COUNTY to utilize and assume responsibility for COUNTY work crews to accomplish essential repairs on housing units of homeowners in the CITY of Rancho Cucamunga who qualify for Senior Repair grants under the CITY's Community Development Block Grant program guidelines as administered by the COUNTY. 3. a. COUNTY shall act as the agent for the CITY in all matters related to assessing, estimating, assigning, and effecting all repair work to be conducted as part of the CITY's Senior Home Repair Program and Housrng Rehabilitation Loan Program. 0 91 ,. 0 u. Each party agrees to indemnify, defend and save harmless the any from wrongful Act claims losses from the performance of this contract. C. The CCURTY shall indemnify and hold harmless CITY against any liability claims, losses, demands, and actions incurred by City as a result of determination by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development that activities undertaken by County under the prsyram or programs failed to co Ply with an and disbursed to the County understhislre agreement thereto were improperly expended. billed by xpended 4 The terms of this agreement shall become effective on the date mentioned above and shall continue in full force and affect during the CD6G Program year, beginning Jolty 1, 1985 and ending June 30, 1986 or until conclusion of the program; in any event either COUNTY or CITY may terminate this program relationship by giving the other party a written notice 30 calendar days before termination is to take effect. 5 a. COUNTY agrees to process to completion a mirimum of nine (9) Housing Rehabilitation Loans. b. COUNTY agrees to perform all necessary work to complete minimum of twenty -five (25% Senior Home Repair program grants. c. COUNTY administrative costs shall not exceed 25% of the program anddloan pro ciessi g, legal sfees, laltitle include reports and supplies. In limited grant no event hall administrative costs exceed $1,500 per Housing Rehabilitation loan aria $1,000 per Senior Rome Repair grant. d COUNTY and CITY declare that 1 work performed in accordance with this agreement shall not exceed a total of J. ,000. one work covered by this agreement shall consist of Repair and Rehabilitation Lcdn activities. Reasonable efforts will be made to expend 60: on the Loan program, which is to include deferred and formal assurance, as well as regular luans, and 40% on the Senior Home Repair Program. 6. CITY shall assume sole responsibility for planning and implementing all outreach activities anq, efforts ano fnr the printing and dissemination of rll written material 7. a. HCD shall submit itemized monthly statements of work performed, the number of applications received, the -j%ber of enrollments, and the number of completions. Ethnicity of clients whose work has been completed, is to be prov a,e monthly for purposes of reporting to HUD. b. At the close of each quarter of the program year, COUNTY shay. bill CITY for costs incurred during that quarter, pursuant to the terns rf this agreement 8 In the event this agreement 1s terminated by any party for any reascn, COUNTY shall be paid by CITY for all services rendered on the basis of-the percentage of work completed on the date notice of termination is given, and except for the obligations described ir. Paragraph 3b and 3c of this Agreement, neiAber party shall have any further obligaticn under this Agreement. 9. CITY and COUNTY hereby agree to meet in an informal meeting to resolve all d.sputes arising out of or relating is this kgreement or the breach thereof 10. CITY and COUNTY hereby agree that the employees hired to work in the repair progrm.+ described herein will meet the minimum standards currently required in the COUNTY's housing Program. 11. All information obtained from or about the participant shall be used solely for the purposes of this Program and for determ.ning eli3lbility. The names of participating individuals and all information obtained from or about them will be held in absolute confidence by the CITY and the Department of rousing and Community Develop.nent and its employees Any information requested by other County departments, State, local, or federal agencies which would pemit the identification of a participant or his /her address will Se granted only upon receipt of a written permission from the program participant. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the governing bodies of the parties hereto have authorized this Agreement and have caused the said Agreement to be executed as of the date hereof. By: ayFl —tir A REST: ty er APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: _ —City Attorney Ry• Chairman, Boara of upery sors ATTEST: Deputy APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM Alan K. Marks COUNTY COUNSEL eputy aunty Counsei Dated: 93 0 I ATTACHMENT 01 Pre rac. Expendltures Total City P,agram Expenditures $80,000 Program Expenditures by Percentage and Dollars a) Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program 60% of $80,000 a $48,000 b) Senior Repair Program 405 of 580,000 a 532,000 11 /13/84 /jj 10/01/85/bjj HP2 -RAN CUC AGMT 1 -1i F. MACKENZIE BROWN - •Yenw.o...LO D .+.O. 4w •.+wC,.0 L YL .61 C N OwN ..w O• . .O . . L O+ •. YLCOn f L w l.i• L.N OiL00 ILOI .LL •L• L O..n OL Ia1.11µ.01L RANCHO UNTA 11 CALIIOANIA 02017 [eL N wnac.tL 'lial LL l:, yL v [,.W. L.b LLln 9•L + [ +L Oc 1 1 October 23, 1985 a...... William Holley[ Director Comm unity Services City of Rancho Cucamonga P. 0. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91720 RE: PARK AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (HERITAGE AND RED HILL COMIUIIITY PARK) Dear 8111: Enclosed herein please find the following Resolutions[ which are now ready for consi- deration .nd presentation to the City Council at their meeting of November 6, 1985: 1. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF BONDS: This Resolution approves the terms and con7itions under which the bonds will be issued, authorizes the printing and delivery of the bonds, and approves the Official Statement. 2. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL AND MAKING AWARD FOR SALE OF BOND: This Resolution awar s e sae o a ons cO 5tone & oung erg an approves the maturity schedule as set forth in the Stone & Youngberg proposal. As has been previously discussed, it would be appropriate to place these itams on the consent calendar so long as the proposal frrvn the underwriter has been distributed to the City Council prior to the time of the Council meetia9. t_ usual, upon adoption of the Resolut s it is requested that conformed copies of I the Resolutions be sent to this offic . Very truly yours. F. MACKENZIE BROVN FMB:bd encl. cc: Lauren Wassserman, City Manager Beverly Authelet, City Clerk Larry Rolapp; Fieldman, Rolapp & ASSOLia:es John Doyle, Stone & Youngberg 9s rl s' 0 RESOLUTION NO. 85- ;�q,5 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMORIA, CALIPORN 1. AOT90RIZINC AND PROVIDING FOR THE IS- SUANCE OF NDS PUPCJANT TO THE "IMPROVEMENT BOND ACT OF 1915" WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has beretofore uadertahen proceedings pursuant to the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972", being Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, and has formed on assessment district pursuant thereto, said special asseasmen• District known and designated as PARE AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (HERITAOH AND R1) HILL COMMUNITY PARKS, (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District „); and WHEKW6 the City Council has, by Revolution, determined sad declared that bonds shall be issued to finance the eatimatod cost of the proposed iar pavement for the Assessment District under the "Improvement Bond Act of 19 5”, being Division 10 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, and it is necessary to estab %ish terms and provisions of the issuance of such + bonds; sad �RiOtQ° WHEREAS, there has ace been presented for consideration by this legis- lative body an Official Statement containing information including but not liar itud to the Assessment Dio trIor and the type of bonds, including term and con - ditione thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, IT I6 HEREBY RESOLVID AS FOLLOWS, SECTION 1, That the above recitalc are all true and correct. SECTION 2, Regf.tered EVRQL. Said bonds shall be issuable only as fully registered heads in the denomination of 55,000, or say integral multiple thereof, .except for one bond maturing in the first year of maturity, which shell include the amount by which the total esour exceeds the maximum integral multiple of 95,000 contained therein. SECTION a, Dace o! Eaad A. All of said bond$ shall be dated the tad day of September, 1985, and interest shall accrue from that date. BECTI�,. 41 kjA•.urfrg an_d Dt rl The bonds shall be Lssued in aerial form vith annua maturities on July Tad of every year eucceedfag ten 09) months after their date, uattl the whole to paid. 'rue amount maturia6 edch year sbaLl be such so to result in Approximately ee•.al annual debt service during the term of the issue as reflected by the inetcast rate and /or rates sad principal amounts maturing in the respective Y..ars of mt••ra•v, and the Toes- ' surer or designated Registrar shall, iam,edaataly upon complerion of the cash collection period, prescribe the ecnomfustione of the bonds, which shall by in ;Y convenient amounts, not necessarily equal. and shall further provide for tbalr issuance and delivery. ?6 1. Reavlaaoa No. 85 -e+a Page 2 SECTION St 1at=M. Bach bond shall be of a single meturirY and — said 0 shall boar interest at the rate as sac foreh in the accepted bid proprsal for toads from the Interest payment dace next preceding the date on uhieh it is Sucheaticated and registered, unless &aid bond Le authenticated and regis- tered as of an interest payment date, in which case it shall bear interest from said interest payment date, or unless said bond is authenticated and registered prior to the first interest payment date, in which case it @ball bear interest from its date, until payment of its principal Rum has been discharged. SECON a, ?1Ame of parent. The principal and interest on the bonds shall be TI payable is lawful coney of the United States of America at the office of the Treasurer, or such paying agent as my be de.e.goated by Resolution of the legislative body. Principal and iarerust on said bonds st411 be paid by check or draft to the registered Owner thereof at his address ns it appears on the books of registration, or at such address as may have base filed with the Treasurer for that purpose, as of the 15th day immediately preceding said interest payment date. SECTION Is $u,dayigy. This bond, or n portion thereof if issund in a denomination greater than $5,000, shall be subject to redemption and payment in advance of maturity in increments o: $5000 as provided in Section 8768 of the Streets and Highways Code, on the tad day of Mach or 6epterbar in any year, by giving the notice provided so Slid law .a the registered Owner thereof at his address as it appears on the, books of registration s pr ad by paying foei- psl of and accrued interest o� curb redeemed amount. together with a premium equal to five percent (5I) of the redeemed principal Amount. If lose than the entire bond is redeemed, the unredeemed portion shell be reissued to cbe regis- tered Owner thereof. SECTrOR Rt jraeafrr n�f g.,,f stns Ry.��g� Any fully registered bond may. in accordance with its terra, be transferreL upon shoo books of registra- tion rrl,Lred to be kept pursuant to the provis one of Section 11 by the wner in whose new it is registered, or by his duly aethotised attorney or legal representative, upoa surrender of such fully registered tons for regi•gra :ioa Of such transfer, accompanied by delivery of a written instrument or trauofer in a form approved by the Traaurer and by the Owner of said bonds. duly executed. The Treasurer shall require the payment by the bondholder requesting such transfer of any to or other gwarmoental charge requirei to be paid with respect to such transfer and su,.h charges as provided for in .lie system of reg- ietracion for registered debt eoligatious. No transfer of fully registered bonds uhall be required to be made during the fifteen (15) days nest preceding each imtarest payment date. 77 1. LJ Resolution Mo. 85 -*** Page 3 SES'TION.4t Lirhsn•e Of Registered B d . Fully registered bead, -0az be exchanged at the office of the Treasurer, or designated transfar agect /registrar, for a Ilke aggregate principal acount of bonds of the as%& ae- ries, interact rate and •*turity, subject to the term stud a mditicas provided ir the system of registration for registered d-ibt obligations, including the Pgmaat of certain nhargcas if any, upon surrender and cancellation of this bond. Open such transfer and exchange, s new 1edisterad hand or bonds of any a:ehorisrd detleduatinn or denoadnations of the same maturity for the a&= ag- gregate principal sweet will be issued to the :rannferat in exchange therefor. SECTIOS_Ut Enok• of ReeietrAURh. 'there shall he kept by the Trea- surer sufficient books for the registration r,d transfer of the bonds and, upon presentation for such purpose, the Treasurer shall, under such reasonable regu- lations as it aq prescribe, register or tr msfer or cause to be registered or transferred, on safd register, bonds as bereinbefore provided. MWOR 118 LLMLien of Bo+td. The bonds shall be executed in facsimile by the Treasurer en. by the City Clerk, and the corporate seal &ball be i printed in facsimile on the bonds. The beads shell then be delivered to the transfer agent and registrar, for authentication and registration. In case no officer who shall have signed or at :sated to say of the bonds by facsimile or otherwise shall cease to be such officer before thn authentication, delivery and issuance of the bonds, such bonds nevertheless may be authenticated, doliv- ored and issued, nod upon such authentication, delivery and issue, &hall be as binding as though those who signed and attested the same had re"Ined in of- f icn. NECTION U: Anrh.ntfwtinn. Only such of the bonds •• shall bear thereon a certificate of authentication substantially in tue form balm, =nosily executed by the traasfar *gent and registrar, shall be valid or oblig- atory for soy purpose or anti fled to the benefits of this Resolut(on, and such certificate of the transfer agent and registrar shell be conclusive evidence that the hood, so authenticated have been duly executed, authenticated and de- livered unreutder, and are entitled to the benefits of this Resolution. FO&/ OF CERTIPICAM OF AUTHENTICATION AND nEGISTRATIOU This bond has been authenticated and register-] nu **- * * -85. Bye BANE OF AMERICA NT b BA as Transfer Agent and Registrar c, Resolution Po. 85 -0,4+ Page 4 - e_EGTIOA 17: AaPIltis011ii`t ���g ��nn •�d iraesfer of Hoed a. Th. .ransfer of any bond nay be registered on,y upon such books of registration up- ' om surrender thereof to the traasftr agent and registrar, togother with an aa- aignneat duly executed b/ the steer or ais stilts" or legal representative, in satisfactory form Upon any such registration oQ tranaer, a new bond or bouJA shall be authamticnted and delivered In exchaege for :uch bond, in the name of the transferees of any ienoaduatiou a- denomiestioar authorised oy this 8esolu- ties, and in an aggregate principal amuse equal to the principal amount sf such bond or principal amount of ouch boau or house so surrendered. In ALl cues is which bond., shall he exchanged or transferred, the transfer agent and registrar shall autheaticute at the earliest practical time, bonds in accor- dance with the provisions of this 9esolution. All bonds surrendered in such exchauge or registration transfer shall forthwith be cancelled. TbN logiula- rive body awry make a cbnrgo for every such exehaage or registration of transfer of bonds sufficient to relsburse it for any to or other governmeataL charge required to be paid with respect to such exchange cr registration of transfer. The transfer egeot and registrar shall not be required to arks ouch =change cr registration of transfer of bunds during the fifteen (15) days iweadiately pre- ceding any March tad or gepteabAr 2nd. SECTION 14t Ovnershin of pjaja, The person in wbIse now any bond shall be registered abell be deemed and regarded as the absolute owner thrreof for all purpnees, and paymeut of or an account of the principal and -^imptLon premium, if any, of any such bond, and the interact In any such hoed, shall be m..de only to or upon the order of the registered owner thereof or his legal representative. All such payments shall be valid and effectual 'a aatiafy and discharge the liability upon such bond, including the redemption premium, ,f any and iatereet tharean, to the extent of tho sum or sum so ptld. SECTION IS: lfati.L&t&L Dee wed, grel= ar Lest Bends. In come any bo:.d secured hereby shall become cutii4ted or be d strayed, stolen ur lost, the legislative body shall cotae to be executed and authenticated a new bond of like tare ..md tenor in exchrage and substitution for acd ups.. the cancellation of such murtlatcd bond or In lieu of and in substitution $or such bocd de- stroyed, noleu or lost, upon tha owner's paying the reasonable expeases and charges is connection therewith, end. in the cast of a toad destroyed, stolen or lost, his iiatag •.th tbt legialative body of evidecce satisfactory to it and to the Audits: tbaroof [has such bond vu, destroyed, stolen or lost, ud of his ownership thereof. and furnishing the legislative b•-dy with tudeanily sat- isfactory to ic. SECTION 16: Cape ell at, an of Sands. All botch paid or redacaed, ei- ther at or before maturity, shall be cancelled upon the poyawalt at reacwptiop of such beads, and shall be delivered to the trcasfer agent and registrar vLAn such payment or redemption as made. All bonds cancelled urder any of tba pro- visions of this Resolution shall be destroyed by the transfer agent sod registrar, which shall execute a certificate in duplicate describing the bonds so destroyed, and shall :etain said executed certificate In its permanent files for the issue E (7 9 raolutioa Ito. 85-N ^ago 5 7 AL stir afT g 171 Reserve Fund. Pursuant to Part 16 of Di -is.30 10 of the - California Street$ and Highways Code, as emended, there $bell be created a ape= cist reactive fund for the bonds to be designated by the o *ee of tLe Assess Cnt District tad specified as the special "guarva Fund ". The kts.urve Fund $bill be funded at follows The initial designated &must equal to 7,5% of the banu proceeds shall be deposited is the Reserve Food. Monies in the Reserve Youd shall be applied of follows: A. Amounts in said Reverse Fund @hall be transferred to the r.ielµu- ties fond for the bo..d@ if, as a result of deliuquenciea is the ptpment of asseamsuts, there are insufficient =also in said As- deoptlon ford to p ,.y principal of and interest on the 60341. Amounts ao transferred Shall be repaid to the Reserve Fund from proceeds from the redemption or foreclosure of property with re- aper[ to which a" atel9saaat is unpaid and from payments of the delioquent auoaewantsl B. on July 15 of cacti rest the owner of interest earoed to the Pre- ceding June 30 by the iwastroot of morJes in the 2eserve Fund in permitted inveetWr.t. and not preriwoly transferred, shall be transfarred from P i.•,srve Fund co the vadeeptiou Fund, is the ranair provided in Ps 16 cf scid Division 10; C. Whenever wets in the forerve Fund are euffitieot to retire all of the bonJ6 cutscandin6, plus accrued interest thereon, such mon- ey s5a11 be transferred no the Redemption fund for the bonds and collection of the remaining unpaid enesswute shall Gene. D. Ilia swuat of the suruul Reserve Fun: disbursement cf earned in- terest shall he credited toward installments of unpaid assessments each year duziag %Lich any part of the bondo remain outstanding. Toe Auditor' Record, prepared pursuant to Sectfon 8682 of the Straits Pao Si,Lhways Code, aball reflect credit., aasinst each If the unpaid aaeesmeate in the eauner prnvietd in Section 22656 of said Cede, in awunts equal to each parcel's proportionate share _ of the annual resezve fund diebur:am.nt. No portion of tha annual P.tserva'Fund disbursement shall be trans- ferred in any year in "cuss of the •mount vb.ch would cause the gesarwe "uud to fall balm the original amount of the Reserve Fund. g. In the avant that may annual Reserve Fund disbursement was not fully ode in any year because to have done so would have caused tLe Renews Fund to fall balm the minimum $mount for that Yost, the Treasurer may thereafter transfer and credit any *=unto in aces@ of the minimlm amount toward the aeeasaat installments duo in subsequent years. X60) m- Resolution Bo. 85 -a*+ Page 6 SECTION 18t Ieerevement FoeQ. The proceeds from the sale of the bonds, after deposit of required amounts is tbo Reserve Fund and the Redemptiou Fund, shall be placed in the fund hereby created pursuant to Sections 10602 and 10424 of the California Streets and Highways Code, as amended, vbirb shah be called the "Improvement Fuud ", and the manias in said Fund shall be used on- ly for the purposes authorized in said assessment proceedings. Any surplue in the Improvement Fund after completion of the improvements shall remain in the Improvesrat Fund for a period not less than two (2) years from the receipt of bond proceeds as pi ided in Section 10427.1 of the California Streets and Highways Code, and thereafter shall be utilized or distributed as determined by the legislative body. SECTION 19; g.dwestien peed. Principal of and interest on said bonds shall be paid out of the Redemption Fund created pursuant to Section 8671 of the California Streets and Highways Coda. Accrued interest paid by the purchaser of the bonds, if any, shall be deposited in tho Redemption Food. In all respects not recited herein, said bonds stall be governed by the provisions of the "Improvement Bond Act of 1915 ", Division 10 of the California Streets and Highways Code, as amended. SECTION 20; (,Rygypt ea Peres lRgt, The legislative body hereby cove - nante that upon default of any asseamat payment due, it will cause Superior Court foreclosure proceedings to be brought within one hundred aighry (180) days of such default and thereafter diligently prosecute to completion such proceedings. Such foreclosure proceedings nay be d4ferred if funds are ad- vanced to the special Reserve Fund to keep said Fund continually at the level set forth to the Section entitled "Reserve Fun" set forth hereinabove. SECTION 21: COyeJant to LP" Asswast+nr. The legislative body hereby covenants that it will, pursuant to Chapter J of the 'Landscaping and Ligating Act of 1972 ", annually levy an asseasmeac within the Assessment District suffi. cient in amo•mt to pay tba debt service on the bonds for the fiscal year to which the assessaot applies. SECTION 22t Order to Print and M2hwntlracw Ben4n. The Treasurer is hereby instructed to cause bonds, as set forth above, to be printed, and to proceed to cause said bonds to be authenticated and delivered to an authorized representative of the purchaser, upon payment of the purchase price as set forth in the accepted proposal for the ale of bonds. SECIIOP_IL Arb ltrege Cwreifiu ee. On the basis of the facts, esti matea and circumstances now in existence and in existence on the date of issue of the bonds, as determined by the Treasurer, aid Treasurer is hereby authorized to certify that it is not expected that the proceeds of the issue Wit be used to a manor that would cause such obligatiots to :. arbitrage bona•. Such certitication shall be delivered to the purchaser together with the bonds. SECTION 24; Desfangt1oe of Transfer Anent" pnvinv Anent and •� BRg.Ittrtt. The BARB OF AMERICA RATIONAL. TRUST 6 SAVINGS ASSOCIATION is hereby ~ designated transfer agent, paying agent sad registrar with respect to these �•. proceedings and the bonds to be imbued. ✓i_ i C Resolution Bo. BS -see Page I SECTION 25t O.ririel Se.temeet. The Official Statement, as prepered and submitted, is hereby approved and adopted, and the execution and distribu- tion is hereby asWorised. A copy of said Official Statement aball be kept on file vith the transcript of toese proceelings and recain open for public in- spection. PASSED, APPkOYRD, and ADOPTED tail 6tb day of November, 1985. AYES: NOEBt ASSERT: .Ion D. Mikals, Mayor ATTEST: 0 Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk I, BEVERLY A. AOTRILET, CITY CLE7E of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Rdsol:.tion vat duly passed, apprwed, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Cal- ifornia, at a regular (special, adjourned) meting of said City Council hold na the a day of e, 19aa. Executed this a day of e, 19ae at Rancho Cucamonga, California Berarly L Autbclet, City Clark /O c)— 1.- ■ e r 'RESOLUTION N0. 85- d Q A RUSOLUTIUr OF ME CITY COUNCIL OF " CITY OF RANCUO CUCANONGA, CALIFORNIA, NAKIM AWARD FOR SALE OF BONDS, !ND PROVIDING FOR TIE ESTABLISRNBII OF A REDEMPTION FORD WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucaaoags, California, has heretofore instituted and conducted proceedings under the terms and previ- sionw of the "Landscaping aad Lighting Act of 1972 ", being Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets sad Highways Coda of the State of California, for the con- struction of certain public works of improvemeats together with appurtenances dad appurtenant work, in a special asssssant district known and designated as PARE AND RECREATION IHPROVENENT DISTRICT (HERITA:B AND RED BILL COMAUNITY PARTS) ( heteinafter referred to as the "Assasasent District"); and WHEREAS, in the Resolution of Intention it vas deteraiaed and declared that Loads should Issue under the provisions of the "Iapro,remat Bond Act of 1915 ", being Division 10 of the Streets and Righvays Coda of the State of Cali- fornia; and V HEREAS, there has am been received, in propr form, A vritren pro- postl (hereinafter the "proposal ") for the purchase of :aid bonds to issue un- der said proceedings, which ,s considered to best serve the interests of "data of land included vitlia the Assessment District and should be accepted NW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS; SE"ITOH 1; That the above recitals are all true and correct. ?ECTION 2, Tbac the proposal ra:eived from Stone d Youngberg for the purchase of improvemeat bonds representing unpaid assessments in @aid Assess - meat District is hereby accepted and approved. SECTION I, That-, 8 id salt is subject to Q1 the term and coaditions as set fortb is the R"Olutica of Issuance sad in the accepted proposal. SECTION A, That the Treasurer be, and hereby is, directed to have the bonds printed inmxdiately, and said Treasurer shall then have said bonds signe: and delivered upon receipt of the anouut of mooias due pursuant to said propos- al wad upon the performance of all the conditions as set forth in the proposa SECI2@i.1: That the interest rate or rates on said bonds be, and the same hereby is fired at the rate or rates as set forth in said accepted propos- al. /O3 - Resolution No. 85 -+f'' e Page 2 S _ SrCiIOP At That cba Trussuror Is hereby authorized and directed to keep a redemption funds designated by the name of the proceedings, into vhiclr -, he shall place all Au" received for the collection of the asseslmeate aad the interest thereon, together with all penalties, if applicable, thereon and from which he @ball disburac such funds to the registered oune.. Under no circust- stances shall the aaid bonds or interest thereon be paid out of any other fund except as providai by 1". Said fund shell be kawn as the REDEMPTION POND, and sball be desigoated by the acme of this Asressmeat District. 'd SECTION 7t That the Treasurer shall transfer monies as necessary from ,'•w the SPECIAL RLSEINb POND in the manner and form as authorized by law. J v' PASSED, APPBOPID, and ADOPTED this 6c6 dry of November, 1985. z AYES NoEst ABSEM ,t Jon D. Nikels, Meyor i ATTEST: Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk " I, BEVERLY A. AOTRELET, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamoogs, California, do barely certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approveds and adopted by the City Council of the City of Pancbo Cuumngs, Cal- ifornia, at a regular (special, adjourned) meeting of said City Council held on the + day of x Ereeutad this + day of +, 14++ at Raacbo Cucamonga, California. e Beverly A. Authelet. City Clerk :LCZ ~ i .:. �. "?et:'W�'= Vii'.•. 0 r L H CITY OF RANCHO CUC.OIONGA STAFF REPORT / � c o vv- L977 8 Z r Date, October 30, 1985 > I Tm City Cwneil and City Reneger From, Bill Holley, Director, Community Services Department Subject, CALIFORNIA RETIRERENT VILLAS, INC. ADJACENT TO THE RED HILL CCMNUNITY PARS PROJECT 1A GROUND, Earlier, the City Council approved the development plane for Villa DOI Rey Retirement Hotel located on the nouth side of Base Line Road next to the proposed Red Hill Community Park. The future park site includes property which surrounds the proposed Retirement Hotel project on the east, South, and a narrow 66.71 foot vidr strip on the wet. flee attathad Exhibit A. Because of thia na -rw, Potentially unusable strip on the vest side of the developor's property, a lot line aCjustment was proposed to -round wt' the park boundary. In this adjustment, the developer indicated he would agree to move his lot line westerly to tha edge of the existing park boundary. See attached Exhibit B. In order to accommodate t:,is lot line adjustment, the developer will he required to develop a storm drain improvement Over an existing atom drain channel Mich feeds south into the park property from Sage Line Road. See Exhibit C. This Storm drain would than ,cnnecL• to the park's storm drain system. In order for the storm drain system to work, the pipe size would greatly increase over what the developer would have been required to provide to drain his property alone. Accordingly, the developer formally proposed to share the costs of the storm drain and related landscape costs to a maximum total of $50,000. The lot line adjustment would provide 1',a developer with 12 feet more property than Mat the city would receive to insure that the developer has adequate area to cone•ruct his facility without encroaching onto the storm drain area. See Exhibit D. As part of the development conditions, the developer would be required to provide the City with a store drain easement over this area. In exchange for the extra 12 feet, the developer has indicated that he would pay the City the tact o_e the property based upon the City's purchase price of the property paid in January of this year. In order for this work to proceed it is necessary for &a City Council to approve the proposed lot line adjustment and authorize the opening of oscra. to accomplish the adjustment It is also necessary for the City Council to approve the attached agreement which provides for the joint parttcipaticn of the City and devaloper in the atom drain construction. Page 2 California Rotireaent Villas, Inc. October 30. 1505 REMMMENOa TIONBi 1. That City Council approve the lit line adluswent and the opening of escrow to accomplish the proposed lot line adjustment and related sale of tho 12 foot strip of ptoparty. 2. That •.:Sty Council approvr the attached agreement for joint cost sharLlg cf the proposed at,,= drain and landscape project. BH/ba w6 .. 1. • • Vs i In .Q a x� I e � •.f � V7 o f, 05 ,cTl,r_ Flo CQ10 14 LU y�� 4� ,00a�fi _9_SS.ol.ocfi n OIV � .off n � 1 tt G$ + V °o I. iN �� , _ .�� •ere e_u.11.oa N n W 11 �. a�;e � 1 t-- 'u•os�s / :arr rod a..17 .t7.n5� .• tea, L >'sy/ e S •w C of \ \i0 J� t Y ;6 W •,-Vfu) 1� 1 II 0 „ n l ....„ 'e-• Sri• /f8vn =rd a�17.1 c °c'9 W w i 11 I /I I ti j � n 3 � r 3 I t � 05 Q I L. T „ ?' 6 ` � M r 41 I. �L•� V 1 I c 0-0 i I iMM 7 t Y ;6 W •,-Vfu) 1� 1 II 0 „ n l ....„ 'e-• Sri• /f8vn =rd a�17.1 c °c'9 W w i 11 0 'ate C 1 J W a V 4r'lu J I I I I I�— JI I ry �N yr F M I : t W 'e i I y N i Sul .09 ' cs cEr bil � r I ,u9 1i 0 V h 4 1 J V 1. V WI M Q-// , con .� °T'n3T '.J ,.oan Y i � I v al o �, T W 7nM Yl -..V 1£,040 t--'?f •o Sa'��S3ss bid V'17 .4 -1.14 �V c"! IN n N �U J 2 ? XJ t1! � V L t 4 C Q ly a_ -' era. i - _w arm/ a��in �^ - I �I lI � �..._Siii7 Mj t �S'9M I I tL• ' ' k w J 0 o J Pig • _r- . .ar '-` 3 u.u, van = i ¢x p p I � � r, .c 2 ` t 0 t' X s AGP.EEMERT WITH RESPECT TO THE CONSTRUCfIGN OF CERTAIN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS This agraament is entered into ay and between CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation ('City' heteinafter), and RANCHO CUCAMONGA RFTIREME!'S VILLA, A California Limited Partnership, dba Ville del Ray, ('Developer" hereinafter). W I T N E 9 S E T H A. Re..itals. (1) City Poseessos interests to that parcel of real property depicted on that diagram attached hereto and marked Exhibit "A' and hereinafter referred to as •public improvement area.- (11) City and Developer desire to crovide 50% of the costa of providing atom drain, landscape and sidewalk !oprovements to be located in the public improvement area ( "said improvements* hereinafter) in conjunction with the development of Villa del Rey Retirement Hotel. (iii) Said improvements are referred to by K.J.N. Develwpmont Carp. by letter dated Apr_! 25, 1985. The estimated construction cost thereof to the sue of 550,000.00. P. Agreement. NOW, THEREFOR£, t . parties hereto agree as follows, ' I. City agrees to cause eotd improvements to be constructed ini 2 completed in accordance with Citl stardares •,00" all documents being recorded providing to City itz interests in 0e public improvement area, provides tha the costs thereof shall be borne by the parties hereto in accordance with an, subject to the terms and cordltione set forth herein in the followina percentages, City - sot, w� '.; Developer - 50%. +'3 The phrase 'project costs" as utilized hereinafter in this a reer" shall be the City's payments to its contractors for the construction of sa „�„ toprovements. r-a LA 2. Upon its receipt for bids for said improvements, City's engineer shell mail to Developer his estimate of the sum necessary to be deposited by Developer so that Developer's deposit to that date will be equivalent to fifty percent (507) of the amount then estimated by said engineer for the project roots up to $25,000,.00. Within ten (10) days of said moiling, Develvpar shall deposit with City by certified check the amount specified in said mai:ed estimate. The Money so received b;. City shall bo utilized to in part complete said lm, awnts. City shall have the right to reject all bids if the responui.,, low bid exceeds the sum of $60,000.00. 0. Upon City's completion, of said improvements City shall cause a firal accounting of the project costs to be called to Developer. in the event that the amount therefore depo.ited with City by Developer cy.:eode fifty percent (50%) of the project caeca sham in said final accounting, City shall include in said wiling its warrant in such amount as will cause Developer to have btrne fifty percent (SO%) of the project amt. In the avant ttat the amount theretofore deposited with City by Developer is less than fifty percent (50%) oa the project I,-- a)-own in said final accounting, said wiling shall include a statement to Developer indicati,.g the Amount raceseary to G maid by Developer to City to make Developer's cottributlon equivalent to fifty pa.z3nt (50t) of the project costs so long as Developer is required to pay no core than $25,000.00. Such amount shall be due and payable ro City by Developer within thirty (10) days of City so wiling said accounting and statement. 4. In the even_ that Developer fails to timel7 make the deposit spa lfted In paragraph 2 hereot my caanret'a :ie�w City shall have the so.,, option to deem this agreement to be terminated as of tao due .late In question v w -) teen noti:e thereof wiled to Oevalcper within five (5) business days of id due date. Upon such termination, City shall have the right to recover rod Deyelo;e• as damages any and all amounts expanded by City with respect to jesigning said Improvements and implementing a bid procedure. Further, Developer shall then be deemed to have violated the condition of approval of the subject development with all attendant Ooneaquences thereto. 5. Any and al. pr7"nta and /or not.ces to he wiled to City pursuant to this agreement shall be wiled to such party a> the attention of Mr. Dick Meyer, at P.O. Sox 807, aantho Cucamonga , California 41730, or to such other address as is contained in a novice received by Developer spacafically t'Iferring to this agreement. Any and ell notices, statements or Other do.. rents to be wiled tr Developer pursuxn- tr, this aaceeeent shall be wiled to that party at 245 Fisher Avenue, Suite D:, Costa Mwsa, California 92626, or at such other address as indicated in a notice provided to City by Developer calling particular attention to this agreement. 5 u el ■ 0 4� a� 6. Should City bring colt to enforce any provision or provnstone ofn this agreement and prevail therein. City shall be entitled to recover its reasonable attorneys$ fees as fixed by the Court. IN VIM-ESS tiE"OF, the parties hereto entered it this agreement as of the date eat forth bolow opposite the name a each ea a -ty. Dated, Dated, 0,t2-1" 1%81 CITY OF RANCHO CUCA40NGA By Mayor By _ City Clerk RANCHO CUCAMONGA R- vTIRFIRNT VILLA, CALIFORNIA RETIREMENT VILLAS, INC. GENERAL eARTNER4 6 y � Z:� -3- /, /-3 eX _ �l a i • t 1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCA3IONGA STAFF REPORT Date. October 29, 1985 To. City Council and City Manager Prom, Bill Holley, Director, Community Services Department Subject: ACCFPTANCE OP THE CUMCH STREET PAR:: PROJECT BACXCROUNDt G�MQIi+ 8 1971 ,Is Church Street Park Project has been completed to the satisfaction of the Director of the Community Services Department. It is therefore recommonded that the City Council accept the project from the lxrlborough Development Corporation and direct the Director of Community Services to file a Notice of Completion for the nark. RECOPMEMDATION, That the City Council accept as complated the Church Street Park Protect and authorize the Director of Community Servicer to file a Notice of Completion. 1 r Ll 1* CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: November G, 1985 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: lack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director BY: Linda D. Daniels, Senior Redevelopment Analyst SUBJECT: TRANFER AGREEMENT OAF PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND ALLOCATION G AC GARY R BACKGROUND: On April 17, 1985 the City Council took action to execute Owner a_t. pot bo _Xgreement No. 8S -I between the City, the Redevelopment Agency and Gary Ncnter Associates. As part of OPA 85 -I, a Certificate of Porticip -,ton financing program far o proposed neighborhood commercial shopping center was discussed. As part of that discussion. OPA 85-1 Indicated that the City and Agency would proceed with the proposed finanung but that it was the applicant's responsibility to secure all needed private activity bod transfers from other cities, counties or the State. EVALUATION: Gary tinter Associates has approached the City of A.'esia regarding the possibi qty o a trmrfer of their private activity bond allocation In the amount of $751,000. The City of Artesia has agreed •o the transfer provided that the City of Rancho Cucamonga consent to the following items: I. The allocation Is to be used strictly for the proposed financing of a n� +.borhood commercial stopping center which Is being proposed by Got:, Kanter Assoc!ates. 2. If Certificates have not been sold by December IS, 1985 the allocation will revert back to the City of Artesia. Staff has reviewed the proposed Agreement and has no concern with the proposed conditions of the tronsfer of the private activity bond allocation. RECOMMENDATION: Authorise the Mayor to execute the Agreement between the Ci:. OT —Wrtes o and the Ity of Rancho Cucamonga for the transfer of $751,000 In pnvat.� activity bond allocation. Res ecOull submitted, L s, Community Development Director JL:LD:kop attachments Agreement //5 1. IGBEEFCIl7T FOR TRA SFSR OF DEBT LIMIT ALLOCATION FOR ISSUAECE rr I'dDOSTRIAL DMIELOPMENT BONDS THIS AGTIEENEITT is entered into to this _ day of , 1985, by and between the CITY OF ARMSIA, a California municipal corporation ( "Transferor City'), Iona thu CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMJNGA, a California munfcipe: corporation ( "Transferee City'). R E C I T A L SC A. for the 1985 calendar year, Transferor City has received an allocation of private activity bond debt limit from the State of California in the amount of $751.000 (the "Allocation'), nureuanc to Section 103(c) of the Internal Revenue Code and the proclamation of the Governor of California of July 19, 1984. B. Pursuant to said Proclamation, Transferor City has the authority to transfer all or a potion of said Allocation to other public entities. C. GARY RANTER ASSOCIATES ( "Applicant') has requested that SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY -ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($751,000) of said Allocation be transferred to Transferee City in order to facilitate Iransferee City's issuance of industrial development bonds for GARY RMITER ASSOCIATES proposed 9950 Vest Foothill Boulevard, Rancho Cucamonga, California. WHEREFORZ, in consideration of the covenants and promises contained herein, the parties hereto agree as follevs: AGREEMENT Subject to 411 of the ter" and C'sh"ciaifa a t forth hera,'sbe• Transferor City hereby agrees to trsne Els sem W.JM .a ,Pvrv.gm TR0.veAlsl DOLLARS (S751,000) If itm A11A. atc_om ("L a"if •ad Alp, .at " + , •ra r Ar City, and Transferee City agree, a scup' 'UCh traa.r-ar f .m 15 Sold transfer will be ri ^ine.4 by a resoluti,ja 4£ the C +:y Ccun: 1 a Tt +sfcror dlty I Ic the a' It that Tr,nehr. C'" bA' all said bond. foi IsVejoprr•s pr ned projec, utll •Ina n • craasfet .a Allocation ithin six (6) ( Cpn rha after the r feztlra n ,e of rhis Agfwaat, or SAL, a e tzber h of the year is for ea.fm, the r abeferre-e A.10ta: ion to Ikea. :. vht ev r ,p •. chla A.grt bent shall 'arsinrt# •nd r}y L[ev rs:' t she 1 nvetr r Trane'erpr Ci,., ;t the tvrnc rh..: only y pox -A transferred A11otj-io is nit iced „r t, tale of bo^.... Ivy Transfer" racy 4it:,in the eb., it- eenti- tat rime ;r:9d, the rcsainaaR portf n of the 'Ansfarred Alincerton shr„ R,w..t to :r"sferar City, Tht 54rtla hers'+, say setva�tiy ogteo a vr-t .%$ to ezttno [te tame period containej L aafa. 3 This tareeesnt fe n ^' t be couatrut-1 e, obiiga'ing Transferee City r: etll bmadr 'Archer tu, the bens Elr Of CART F ITER ASSOCIATES project or any Other pro lace, jtj na 2 r 11 M �c A X15."_ Y ! ,)I ThESS UUEREOPt the parties hereto have antered into this Agreement on- `ss day v -1 % *or first above written, the date on which the City Counci) of the- Tram!tra Cdty 4„�voq• the Agreement (the "Effeetive Date'). CITY OF ARTESIA BY C - I e.. �_rf i t 40 C.1 I ,,: A tsa.,• Nayor CIT OF RMICNO CUCAMONGA gY Nayor ATTEST: • City Clerk City of Rancho cue anoage I U ilk November 6, 1985 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT In 19" TO: City rswncll and City Manager FROM: Robert A. Rizzo Assistant City Manger 6n: Jerry Fulwood es.,rsment Revenue Coordinator SUBJECT: Authorization and Approval to Publish and Mail the Notice of Bond Redemption for the 6th Street Industrial Park (82 -1) Assessment District The City of Rancho Cucamonga has oca:mulated over one million aryl four hundred thovand dollars in prepaid assessments that are applicable to the 6th Street industrial Part (82 -1) Assessment District. These funds ore revrved for early redemption of bands within the Assessment District. This will ensure that property owners are not assessed for Interest expenses of outstanding redeemable bonds; presently, these bonds are costing the district 12% In Interest expenses. Consequently, the City must publish and moil a Notice of Redempticri to Iron d holders at least sixty days prior to the actual bond reuemption date. Accordingly, opproeal is requested to publish and moil the Notice of Redemption to the bond holders. The Notice of Redemrtion Is attached for your review. JBFunk //I? �'- 1•wv October 28, 1985 Dear Boad Rclder: A notice of Redemption i+ attached for the Ci.y of Rancho Cucamonga s Street improvement Bonds, Assessment District B0: 82 -1. Jerry b. Pulvood Aseiumaat Revenue Coordlostrr i Enclosure i, cc: Eobart Rizzo JBp /bkt s _ 0 0 i i17 Anne P. Leeper 2505 via Pinola Palos Verdes Estates CA 90274 B E M 6 Coepsay 5821 Rutbars Road La Jolla, CA 92037 Daniel S 7.urora 2...1,10 1127 Yall Street La Jolla, CA 92037 P107ence C. Bailey 1001 Center Streit, Apt. 98 La Jolla, CA 92037 Harvey S Leslie Wager P.O. Box 7370 Iaclioe Village, RV 89450 Joan Parkins 1024 via Miramal Palos Verdes Estates, CA 90274 Judy 6 John Sampson 101 Reed Rancho Road Tiburon, CA 94920 Marcel J. CrLstin 3503 Indiana Street Son Diego, CA 92103 Norms Loreto 11956 Ad -rao Place San Diego, CA 9212P Stephen 6 Maribelle Leavitt 3014 Washington Street Ss Francisco, CA 94115 Arthur 6 Ann Mirassou 1655 Bluebell trive Livermore, CA 94550 Barbara Yo4ig 1053 Mariposa Street Berkeley, CA 94707 Dorothy Cbadvick 124 Oak Enoll Lane Brat: _ty. CA 91010 0. Stuart 6 Pinola Bruder P.O. Lot 2244 Rancho Santa Pe, CA 92067 J. Roy 6 Elisabeth E1 an 1328 Cannon Er'_ve Sacrameato, CA 95825 John R. Siglw Box 1399 La Jolla, CA 92036 [Ira J. LaValle 5331 Calumet Avccue is Jolla, CA 92037 Nancy Constine 630 EI Caaioo Dal Mar San Francisco. CA 94121 Robot,. Bender P.O. Box 31 La Jolla, CA 92038 Virgin.e 6 James Gooch 19 Gillman Street Irvino; CA 92715 n� p0T7CC JP RFDEMP u TO THE HOLDERS OF: CITY 07 RANCRO COCAMOHCA STREET IEROPEMENT BONDS ASSZ35KZNT DISTRICT NO. E2 -1 NOTICE IS HEREBY CIVLA that the City of Rancho Cucamonga (the "Agency ") has ea11.,{ or redemption on January 2, 1986, )__j.400.000 Principal amount of tae "City of Rancho Cuu:monga Straat ImProvememt Booia, Aseeameat Otatrict No. 82-111 (the "Bonds ") at the red, -mptiou price cf 1051 of the principal 'count thereof, plus accrued interest to the date of r.dbmptiou. The Bonds to be redeemed are membered as follows: 103 163 230 303 104 164 231 305 105 165 232 j07 106 166 233 308 107 167 234 309 108 168 235 310 109 169 236 311 110 170 237 312 111 171 236 313 112 172 239 314 113 173 240 315 114 174 241 316 115 175 242 317 116 176 243 318 117 177 244 319 118 178 245 320 119 179 246 321 120 180 247 322 121 181 248 323 122 162 249 324 123 1113 250 325 326 38) 393 391 392 393 314 195 395 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 605 406 407 408 409 410 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 303 504 588 706 838 589 707 839 590 708 840 391 709 841 592 7'C 842 593 71, 843 594 7'2 844 591 713 845 596 714 146 597 713 b.., 598 71(• 848 599 717 849 600 716 856 601 719 851 602 720 852 603 721 853 604 722 854 605 723 855 606 724 856 607 725 857 608 726 858 609 727 859 986 987 988 989 990 041 YY2 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 IICS 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1338 1546 1339 1547 1340 1548 1341 1549 1342 1550 1343 1551 1744 1552 1345 1553 1346 1554 1347 1555 1348 1556 1349 1557 1350 1558 1331 1559 1352 1560 1353 1561 1354 1562 1355 1367 1356 1564 1357 1365 1358 1566 On January 2, 19866 the Bonds designated for redeaption will become due and Payable at the above - stated redemption price and payment will be made upon presentation and surrender at Bank of America National Tivat anJ Savings Association, Corporate Agery Service Center, Bond and Coupon Processing, 55 Hawthorne Street, 8th Floors San Francisco, CA (if delivered) or P. 0. Sam 37.109, Ban Francisco, CA 94131 (if mailed) or at its Corporate Agency Division, 555 South Flower Street, Sth Floor, Los Angeles, CA (if delivered). All bonrer Bonds moat be aurreodered with ell ancata.l cwapo_o •_riry •uh aaauenr co th• redemption date. Interest paysble January 2, 1986, will be paid In the usual saner on presentatiou of the coupon. Fran and after January 2, 1986, interest shall cease to accrue on the Bonds calve: redemption. All holders submitting their Bonds mart also submit • form V -9 in order to avoid a back -up withholding enter the Interest and Dividnnd Tats Compliance )et of 1.903. , Failure to provide • completed N -9 wilt result in a 202 back -up withholding to bondholders. The fors,A -9 ray be obtained from tie Internal Revenue Service. CITY OF L18CHO COCAMOMA, CALIFORNIA �YI Dazed: __•____ _ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAINIOMGA .�?1Liili' nrrrvu.t DATE: November 6, 1985 TO: City Col.•Icil and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Barbara Krall, Asst. Civil Engineer P r`.c_ A r~• � Z 19:7 SUBJECT: Intent to vacate the non - vehicle access rights as dedication on Parcel Map 4029 ioc]ted on the south side of Summit Avenue, east of Etlwanda Avenue and sntt'Ina Public Hearing on December 4, 1985 Mr. David Long cwner of the property located at 12969 Summit Avenue, has requested the vacation of the above described non - vehicle access rights in order to obtain access to his property. The non - vehicular access rights were dedicated to the City of Rancho Cucamonga on Parcel Map 4029. These parcels had arress to Shasta Drive. A Parcel Map Waiver was later recorded dividing the original parcels and creating the need for access on Summit Avenue to the four lots shown on the attached Exhibit rA`. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution setting the date of Public Hearing Oar December 4, 1985 for the vacation of the non - vehiclar rights as described above. in addition, said resolution authorizes the City Clerk to cause scale resolution to Pe published ten days prior to the Public Hearing. Respe tfully sutm ed, GLBH:�tyl Attachments /a 3 a @7 Access Rights to be Vacated CITY OF PROJECT:_ °-049 RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE; ACCE550.1 GN75 ON SUMMIT ENGIN -IERING DIVISION EXHIBIT;_ "A" :�: DAVID %*d- LONG A SMNG i�021 VIStaSt.,Itlwania,tclit.917JY City of Bancln O=ammg3 714 -987 -4470 October 210 1985 We are applying for the removal of the no vehicular mmment cn aece3s to the lot located at 12969 Smmit Ave. Etlavrnla, California. 'flank you, David W. rDng - ICJ RESOLUTICN NO. *ItH -e -M 097 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO - CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO VACATE NON- VEHICLE ACCESS RIGHTS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF SUMMIT AVENUE FROM ETIWANOA AVENUE ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF PARCEL MAP 4029 follows: BE IT RESOt.VED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as SECTION 1: That the City Council hereby elects to proceed under Section 6300 esea, of the Streets and Highways Code, also known as the Street Vacation Act of f941. SECTION 2: That the City Council hereby declares its intention to vacate the_n_o_r-,__veF5cle access rights on the south side of Summit Avenue along the frontage of Parcel Map 4029 a City street, as shown an Map No. V -049 on file in the Office of the City Clerk, a legal description of which is attached hereto marked Exhibit "A" and by reference made a part hereof. SEC ION 3: That the City Council hereby fixes Wednesday, the 4th day of December, , at 7:30 p.m., in the Lions Park Community Center 8uildirg, located at 9161 Base Line, Rancho Cucamonga, California, as the time and place for hearing all persons objecting to the proposed vacation for the p;rrpose of Its determiring whether saia City street is necessary for present or prospective street purposes. SECTION 4: That the City Street Superintendent shall cause notices to be pos —few consp lcuous ly along the line of the street or part thereof proposed to be vacated at least 10 day; befure the hearing, not more than 30 feet apart and not less 'hun :%•ee signs shall be posted, each of which shall have a copy of this resolution on them and shall have the following title in lettering not less than one Inch in height: "NOTICE CF HEARING TO VACATE STREET ". SECTION 5: The subjecs vacation shall be subject to the reservations and exceptTons�f an,/, for existing utilities on record. SECTION 6: The Mayor shall sign this Resolution and the City Clerk shall attest o t e same, and the City Clerk shall cause same to be published 10 days before the date set for the heariml, at least once to The�Dat_ Reepart, a newspaper of general circulation pu ;dished in the City o of 0 tarioly . CalTrDrnia, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. OE Vacation of access control on Sumit Avenue across the northerly boundary of Parcels 1 and 2 of Parcel Map 4029 as recorded in Parcel Map Book 38, ?age 2, official records of San Bernardino County, State of California. I. ABSTRACT: The applicant is appealing the Planning Commission's TTsin on Sepptember 11, 1985 to deny a request to develop a mini- storage facility The Commission deliberated on many occasions • during the processing of this project and eypressed concerns over loc size, access, and the extent this proposal would affect the I arger westerly adjacent parcel. In addition, the Commission felt the project was not properly designed architecturally, and was too linear and its scale disproportienotn to tie shape of the parcel. This report provides a swma-ry of the events and key issues leading to the Planning Cemmisslon's decision. Attached are copies of previous staff reports and minutes which describe the project in detail. Ii. BA04ROUND: The project was originally fled as Conditional Use ermP —ft 93-T6 and related file Valiance 84 -02 which was reviewed by the Planning Commission on March 13, 1985. The Commission opted to continue the publlc.hearing to April 10, 1985 in order to allow the applicant, adjacent property owner (Mr. Alan Tibbetts), and staff to meet and resolve design compatibility, access and landscaping issues. The April 10, 1985 public hearing was continued to June 12, 1985 at the request of the applicant. On April 24, 1985, the applicant deleted the carstaker's residence (which required a CUP) and the application was 'hanged to Development Review 85 -15. At the June 12, 1985 public hearing, the Planning Commission, after 3 considerable review, divacted staff to prepare a Resolution of K Dental for cons'drration at the July 10, 1985 Planning Commission H meeting. The :omeisslon decided the project was not properly designed to ra7lect the Industrial Park designation. Specifically, the blank building walls along the east and west elevations having an overall length of approximately 400 ft. were found lacking in 1 1'ta CITY OF RANCHO MAMMA tm STAFF REPORT i� c ���a A Z DATE: NovEmber 6, 1985 Intl TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Commtrity Development Director BY: Howerd Fields, Asslstant Planner SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION OENIAL FOR OR 85 -15 reques o recons er ann ng omm sZ� oon denio a mini- storage development with office totaling 45, quare feet cv 1.17 acres of land In the Industrial Pa. ubarea 6) District located on the north side of 4tn Street and east of Turner Avenue - APN 210- 371 -03 I. ABSTRACT: The applicant is appealing the Planning Commission's TTsin on Sepptember 11, 1985 to deny a request to develop a mini- storage facility The Commission deliberated on many occasions • during the processing of this project and eypressed concerns over loc size, access, and the extent this proposal would affect the I arger westerly adjacent parcel. In addition, the Commission felt the project was not properly designed architecturally, and was too linear and its scale disproportienotn to tie shape of the parcel. This report provides a swma-ry of the events and key issues leading to the Planning Cemmisslon's decision. Attached are copies of previous staff reports and minutes which describe the project in detail. Ii. BA04ROUND: The project was originally fled as Conditional Use ermP —ft 93-T6 and related file Valiance 84 -02 which was reviewed by the Planning Commission on March 13, 1985. The Commission opted to continue the publlc.hearing to April 10, 1985 in order to allow the applicant, adjacent property owner (Mr. Alan Tibbetts), and staff to meet and resolve design compatibility, access and landscaping issues. The April 10, 1985 public hearing was continued to June 12, 1985 at the request of the applicant. On April 24, 1985, the applicant deleted the carstaker's residence (which required a CUP) and the application was 'hanged to Development Review 85 -15. At the June 12, 1985 public hearing, the Planning Commission, after 3 considerable review, divacted staff to prepare a Resolution of K Dental for cons'drration at the July 10, 1985 Planning Commission H meeting. The :omeisslon decided the project was not properly designed to ra7lect the Industrial Park designation. Specifically, the blank building walls along the east and west elevations having an overall length of approximately 400 ft. were found lacking in 1 1'ta 1, CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT :(r;+ OR 85 -15 - ASSURED MItI STORAGE November 6, 1985 a . Page 2 �1- adequate architectural enhancements. Also, the wall height of 21' was considered unacceptable and further determined that the project + would create a visual and aesthetically offensive appearance. During their regularly scheduled meeting on July 10, 1985, the •, applicant requested time to re- design the entire project to address the Lommission's concerns. On September 11, 1985, the Planning Commissior, reviewed the revised architectural elevations and site plan and determined that the proj^ct proposal was still unacceptable, and bs such, development problems would have an adverse affect on the overall development of adjace..t prop arty (Refer to Mach 13, 1985 Planning Commission Staff Report). The Planning Commission denied Development Review 85 -15 through adoption of the attached Resolution 85 -134. III. ANALYSIS: The sits is a remnant flood control easement that is legally non con7orming in terms of parcel size and width. The Industrial Specific Plan requires a minimum 2 -acre parcel size (subject site is 1.17) and minimum width of 200 feet (subject site is 100 feet ). The site is designated industrial Park (Subarea 6) that is intended for development of "high quality character associated with "Office Park" type development." 4th Street is also designated as a "Special Boulevard" by the General Plan. Ideally, this non- conforming parcel would be consolidated with a larger parcel, thereby offering expanded opportunity to master plan the area. i�. -` t' However, this approach is difficult due to separate ownerships. The latest site plan (Exhibit "C", September 11, 1985 staff report) does w*, provide for shared access to 4th Street with the weste'•ly parcel. However, the Planning Commission determined that the proposed architecture did not conform to the intent of the high quality character for Subarea 6. .. e X ,'r�1) 1,44 1 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT OR 85 -15 - ASSURED MINI STORAGE November 6, 1985 Page 3 a IV. FACTS FOR FINDING: The following findings are required before approving a Development nt heview: 1. Thnt the proposed project is consistent with the General ,i Plan; and 2. That the proposed use is In accord with the objective of e "i the Industrial Specific Plan and the purposes of the i district in which the site is loeateo; and 3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and 4. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or trprovemento in the vicinity. The appeal letter it ":C "rectly states that the Planning Commission denied the project because of use. The Planning Commissions denial was based c on findings 12 and 44 anrrepeats the language of the Development Code. �K As discussed previously, the Commission's deliberations focused upon 1• design and layout. V. REMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council deny the appeal an f'+Mup o it a decision of the Planning Commission. u Jack Lan, AICP Community Development Director JL:NF *.ko Attachments: Appeal Letter from Applicant March 13, 19C5 Planning Co:rcnission Staff Report 6 Minutes June 12, 1985 Planning Comnission Staff Report 6 Minutes Septemter 11, 1985 Planning Commission Staff Report Resolution of Denial Exhibit "A• - Location Map Exhibit "8" - Site Utilization Map Exhibit "C" - Site Plan `- Exhibit "D" - Grading Plan Exhibit •E . - Elevations �Jr+Y�? 3bii! �t;ii,� *''R'Yt�� }�'i. ii!v; �1P, �Y i3N .4 �12 •.:iiiJ -' Si'� rl� ASSUREDao��r'; MINI- STORAGE, INC. ;L. 1600 FAIRWAY ORIVE (714) 370.1802 COLTON. dA 92324 September 18, 1985 City of Rancho Cucamonga P 0 Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Ref Appeal of Development Review 85 -15 Attentiont City Clerk This letter constitutes our formal request for Appca- of the Planning Commission's denial of Devolopment Review 65 -15 In our opinion, the decision of the Planning Commission wos not consistent with a reasonable inturprotation of the facts inasmuch as: P (1.) The project is a permitted use according to the General Plan, Industrial Specific Plan, and fho Zoning Code of the City of Rancho Cucamongtl (2.) No major or minor deviations were sougtlt: (a.) The plans, after many months of consultation had boon approved by Technical Review, Fire District, and Development Review: (d.) The reasons for denial as evidenced by Planning Commission comment were Lasod'upon 'use not compliance with yl design requirements. 4 Enclosed please Lind our checl. for $126.00 to cover the Piling fee. Sincere 7 R k 11 r) ' �; - T1�TY A I NIST CUt '.: � ADMI(JISTRni7�:; Charles R. wear $ p - Vice President I 29 : Certified Mail iP654627207 AM ( h:I. 6' �'n v J• : ��ys;:r ?•r�sri�.l:�,i�;`�4��4.' I' t' i ■ • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -IN STAFF REPORT , a DATE: March 13, 1985 1977 TO: Chairman and Members o! the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Howard L. Fields, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVVIIR;OOMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84 -16 onstruct on o a m n - storage eve od�T Oment, wiiW—car`a1aker's quarters, totalling 32.050 Sq. ft. on 1.44 aces of land in the Industrial Park (Subarea 6) District located on the north side of 4th Street and east of Turner Avenue - APN 210- 371 -03. RELATED FILE: VARIANCE 84 -02 I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action R uested: Review and consideration of a precise site p -i n an'd arch toctural design, and issuance of a Negative Declaration. B. Pur ese: Construction of A mini- storaas development and caretaker's quarters. C. Location: North side of 4th Street and east of Turner Avenue. D. Parcel Sfze: 1.44 acres. E. Exish,IIng�Zonin Industrial Park (Subarea 6) of the Industrial Wr a-3P' ecffTc an. F. EriWa Lan Use: Vacant. G. Surroundin Land Use and Zo�n1n!: or - scant, ez sistt nt g floo3 control channel, ISP South East - ExistingCindustrialcfacility (polyyplastic),iISF West - Vacant, ISP H. General Plan Oast nations: ro ect to - ndustr a ark North - Industrfal.Park South - City of Ontario corporate limits East - Industrial Park West - Industrial Park ITEM 1 h;N !u•,.r3 PLANNING COMMISSION f'1FF REPORT { , CUP 84 -16 - Assured Mini- Storage March 13, 1985 Page 2 - I. Site Characterlstics: Th^. subject site if ua abandonea and unimproved aoT 5 rol wasem9nt, which is Fairly level with gentle drainage a 4th Street. Presently, site has 'eight vegetation with no trees and has no significant cultural /historical aspects. II. ANALYSIS: A. Seneral: Subject site is located in an Industrt -:1 Park, category of the Industrial Area Specific Plan (ISP) and has frontage an 4th Street, which is identified as a major arterial ' and a Special Boulevard by the General Plan. These designations are subject to special considerations for both the streetscape and architecture_ The site is a remnant flood control easement that is a legally non - conforming parcel. The project proposal is a permitted use under light wholesale, storage and distribution. A condi`ional use permit is necessary due to the incorporation of a ' carataker's /manager's unit. The oarcel size is a major constraint (100 x 601) and limits considerably the potential uses that can occur on the site and poses several unique problems which the Design Review Cormittee dealt with. Lot Size. A rational approach would be to consolidate the pre er"t s to with the larger westerly adjacent parcel, thereby offering expanded opportunities to Master Plan the- entire area. However, this approach is difficult due to different ownership.; Since this is a legally non - conforming parcel of land left over from the realignment of the Flood Control Channel, and the proposed use is defined under the permitted usas of Subarea 6, , Vthe Pianning Commission should consider if the proposed use is the optimal use for the subject sito given its present state. The 1GO' x 601" oblong parcel provides limited opportunities fr for developing other permitted or conditional uses allowed in Subarea 6 (see attached listing). Secondly, the Commission should consider the scale of project ' proposal. Under the revised proposal, the building coverage or ?N deastty is aproximately 70%, which is more than twice the _ density allowed or imposed on other projects in Subarea, 6. Density ratios should be in the order of 30 -35 %. Scaling the ttr project dorm, would allow ad.quate spatial arrangement and e ",- additional design considerations (i.e., break up the buildings,, provide additional landscape coverage). 4a7 "•j ,: PLANNING COMMISSION i %FF REP9RT CUP 87 -16 - Assured Mini- Storage March 13, 1985 Page 3 A•cess. The site reveals a regional constraint that precludes any consideration for east west access, thereby constricting and limiting internal circulation opportunities with the westerly adjacent parcel. The 300 foot spacing of driveways on the 4th Street arterial would force the westerly parcel's driveway access dangerously close to the Turner intersection. A najor objective for reducing potential traffic hazards Is to limit the proliferation of driveway approaches on major arte: tats and encourage safe circulation thro,igh a reciprocal concept (driveways and e.,emp -ts) under the provisions of Planning Commission Resolot.�n xo. 78 -29. , Oes1 n. The project proposal inc.ades one of two 400 foot lon3 buildings, which will incorporate a two -story concept. its appearance Wild p"sent an expanse of blank building walls on both the west and east elevations. The proposed buildlrg has little nr no architectural relief or treatment which is somewha. inconsistent in terms of design with a Special Boulevard designation or to that required in the Industrial Park cctegory. The Commission could consider additional architectural modifications of the linear buildings. D. Oesi n Review Committee: The Committee advised the applicant to sum t rev sed UUb gn elevations more in keeping with Office Design Standards and Guidelines of the Industrial Specific Plan. of particular concern welt the blank building walls along the west and east elevations having an overall tengtl: of approximately 400 feet and revising the elevation to reflect the "Industrial Park" designation. The Committee rectN mended the utilization of 'scored block and vertical scored block to enhance the elevations. Specifically, - fluted or scc-ed concrete detail be provided on the entire second story mfni- storage.building as well as the caretaker's unit. Three bands of vertical scored block were recommended to c'rclo the entire length of the elevations and also the use of imilar materials in the block wall design. C. Technical Review Committee: The r.emnittee reviewed and approve the s le pan su0 act to revisions concerning rice access width of 26 feet, sufficient turn - around radius, and placement of fire - fighting facilities. Also the Foothill Fire District required the applicant to sprinkler the trash enclosures. R r L PLANNING COMMI5SICN i 1FF REPORT CUP 84 -16 - Assured ini- Storage March 13, 1985 Page 4 l 0. Environmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study was completed y t e applicant. 5taft has completed Part fI of the environmental checklist and dete -pined that this project may have a significant impact upon the environment by creating a visual /aesthetically offensive site. The applicant proposes lari•caping along the project frontage and enclosing the entire site !Ith a 6 foot high block wall as a mitigation measure, however due to the two -story develo;.ment cu.cept, proposed building will s..111 be in considerable view. 111. FACTS FCR riNDINGS: Before approving Conditional Use Permit 84 -16, t e ann ng Zrommlaston must make the following findings: 1. That the proposed use is in accordance with the General Plan, the Specific-Plan, and the purposes of the Land Use category in which the site is located. 2. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurfous to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of to the Specific Plan. 4. The proposed parcel shape and size is appropriate for the proposed use. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: T.:is item has been advertised in The Oail Re ort as a pu c ear ng. In addition, the prcpery was poste an notices were sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the Rroject site advertising the public hearing. To date, one letter as been received is opposition to the project. rf'�*'AA C i �e PLANNING COMMISSION 1 1FF REPI,Rf t CUP 84 -16 - Assured ni- Storage March 13, 1985 Page 5 f � - s V. OPTIONS: The Planning Commissioi may select am the following opT- 1. Approval of Conditional Use Fe-tit 84 -16 based on the Pacts for Findings, Conditions of Approval, adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval, and Issuance of a ;. Ncgative Declaration. '6 'L. Continuance to address Planning Commission concern over points of discussion and for further modification or clarification as needed. 3. Denial of Conditional Use Permit 84 -16 based on the—Findings listed on the attached - Resolutior. of Denial. Re ly submitted, RG:HF:ns Attirhments: Letter from Applicant Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit 08" - Site Utilization Map r, Exhibit "C" - Plot Plan Exhibit "0" - Design,Elevatlons Exhibit °E" - Landscapinq i'T„ Exhibit "F" - Grading Plan 6 Initial Study, Part I[ Resolution of Approval with Conditions Resolution of Genial �tl ',? ks` a`'v�r„':nl': +.z =i�3"%c= �r ='A;. �j`t +,,r "i�a I ' t 3y�a t l {1 ' MSUBAREA 6 - General Plan Deslonatlon Industrial Park �• Primary Function Subarea 6 Is located on both east and west sides of Haven Avmme extending south from Arrow to 4th Street. Whlln some existing manufacturing uses exist around Cho AT&SF track, the area Is substan- tially undeveloped In thu future, Haven Avenue wi11 servo as a major access and ga tevay to the City Developmenr is this subarea will provide for �• the high quality character associated with "Office i i Perk" type Jevelopment Permltred Use: Custom Manufaeturlug Light Manufacturing Light Wholesale, Storage and Distribution Administrative and Office "—oulld ing Malb'xnanr. Services - IlZdn ss Supply Retail Sales and Services Duslnass Support Services Cammunicaticn Services Eating and Drinking Es.ablishments Financial, Insurance and Real Estato Services F• Motal /Motel • Medical /Health Care Services Professional Services Administrativa Civic Services ik Conditional Uses Automotive Rental Automotive / L!ght Truck Repair -hlnor Automotive Sales Automotive Service Station , 8uIIJInq Supplies and Sales Convenience Sales and Services Entertai anent Fast Food ' Food and Beverage Sales - - Funeral and Crematory Services 14 Personal Services Recreational Facilities Cultural ` Public Assembly Public Safety and Utility Services 33 Religious Assembly mr �r IV-29 ? _ y, X32 4��}t�{e'. e -1 tIi. RP� &'ht�,fk x, - •i �1'-`a�:�`.'t `4 � •� F 1 ,I F •x r c • _ •atk �a 4 I.S.P. l J UJI r. irrrr■ UMMILWARFARrrPrr� t LM 7• �.,.� . � i � �u r y; 1 I.S.P was ;, • is u I i• �P��t r--7 i �• t\'OItTI.1 l A3: CITY Or rrEmn RAR'C� IO CU AMON'GA TITLE, J-11447 MV V .h.�P SI' PLANN:VG JNVLSION EXHimr,_ R SCAL& ='4'e r �,.jt 1p'lM ;� .4 Y`3Y .7r7. %d3M y.• . -..d 'q„ - �� WAR 7!S i +,4;f"w�"K+ti L'?6.�iry�'.7."i'fti,".•u7�'. : tkk' •J. .ti' F lcvr. J. w CI'T'Y Or RANCHO CUCAMON'GA PLANNING D1VISUN 1r y .. KUIt1 ;1 M� .r rrrm. ruP Bq- le _ TITLE- .5a--r—F— �TiuzsFJOJ MAP LXHIOIT " 13 SCALft li.+Y /3 9 l E, Z y n= � 33 iE *&Asna i,%�:il� ak' fii,. R+' t�. i��3Tt ''T'i'+ °!.'•h'ii ^ "ih"`i;'i +�r t i E , 1 ,i i 0 M 0 y ♦ t' �s r -I J I f ►lil, �� I ( { 4 r „K, � ms,,,µ y� _ .. _ _ _ • � �i -` JA ■; 33: jt►gcet 3 � a1. ' jt ii►g _ } '` ��i a 4 1 � ► t fit l I. �,.q '` 1, I i t __1MD, 0 G -. (I nM (T' IR � Q i•'L A" n r n. (J GLVAAWXM r ,:.i�{;•���' ,.. �(43 Iq I, •. ,c, a�y.{.'�T` ^?: � V r u r f i Sr.. II IR A" n. GLVAAWXM ,:.i�{;•���' ,.. �(43 :fir ms's: YttT'rnT�� }..�"�•Y y'�;:`y^iL'a^ .n'.9'— li. ,c, a�y.{.'�T` ^?: II `-JMdJ' :: 1- iY1i1tt' -r'y l: '.S .'Y.. �r,;�� -,�, C vv a r �aV .Yp^ if R•f3v YU'X r John Neither, representing the applicant, concurred with the staff report, - :1v Resolution and Conditions of Approval. ?' There were no further comments, therefore the public Jhearing was closed. - Commissioner Renpel advised staff that more definitive criteria needs to -be developed to determine the amount of usable open space required for higher density ranges. '• Commissioner Barker stated that he was not overjoyed with the project and felt that the product could have been upgraded. He further stated that that this • project is still very similar to what 1: already there to nearby projects. Chairman Stout agreed and further stated that he would not like to see another project of this type in Terra Vista toms before the Commission without a ' radically different architecture. ^ Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Rempel, to issue a Negative Declaration, and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 12613. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, REMPEL, BARKER, MCNIEL, STOUT c q NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE - carried x x x * ♦ O ♦ x x x x • H. VARIANCE 84 -02 ASSURED HINI- CTORAGE - A request to allow a reduction in l Me—required 15% minimum • anuscape coverage in order to construct a mini- ; storage facility on the north side of 4th Street and east of Turner Avenue in Subarea 6, Industrial Park designation - APN 210- 371 -03. I. ENVVIONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84 -16 - ASSURED MINI - ___ AGE - Construction of a mini-storage . development, w t caretaker's q:ers, totaistng 32,850 square feet on 1.44 acres of land in the Industrial Park (Subarea 6) District located on the northside of 4th K" Street and east of Turner Avenue - APN 210-371-03. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner reviewed the staff report. Edward Hopson, Assistant City Attorney, advised that specific findings ar ) listed to the Development Code which must be met prior to approve? oy th. W' Commission of a Variance which ge beyond hardship. He pointed out that the,.. findings were not exactly set forth in the Pesolutiaa and that the Commistion �• must have the factual basis for granting a variance. v Chairman Stout read the findings outlined in the Development Coae. :w Planning Ctvnmission Minutes -5- March 13, 1985 rya Mr. Coleman advised that the findings as read by the Chairman should replace those outlined in the Resolution - Charles Near, representing the applicant, presented landscaping renderings for the DevleopmetCode l findings would apply to granting a variance nt is proje -t. in the Alan Tibbets, 7957 Gardenia, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that he did not agree substandard that setbacks could also presentedtheCummission Withe justified basis asketch of a projectheo as proposing hardship. on his the pintentyof further SpecificisPlan. Mr. Tibbets further disreyard for objections to the appearance of the project, and advised that if it were designed in keeping with the density, setbacks, and landscaping of the surrounding area he would consider it a legitimate addition and support it as a traffic constraint neighbor. He &ISO eXpressed project. concerns that this project would cause a Charles Near replied that the applicant would be happy to work with Mr. Tibbets on a redesign of this project, if the Commission felt this would be a viable location for a mint- storage facility. There were no further comments, therefore the public hcaring was closed. designsof' the use and stated compatibility use with he surrounding looked area. along with • Coamissioner Barker state,' appreciation to both parties for their clear and aciculate torrents. He further stated that the applicant indicated that thore would be a practical hardship A practical difficulty is not the same as the deprivation of privileges. Further that he could not say that approval of this variance ',, aid not constitute a special privilege, therefore would be in6liaed to deny. p�l Chitiea agreed that err would constitute 9s lege. Sheadvisd h tothpeople in thisspecial areaare making design considerations and landscaping in keeping with the City's policies. Commissioner McN1el stated that this project would be detrimental to the ' surrounding property owner. He advised that he would have no objections to a continuance, but did not know if &'solution exists. hat he was a design Chaian Stout djacent parcel whenethit a s project cameobeforer thef Design R viewoCommittee. tHt suggested that both parties get together with staff to see If compatibility, e: access and landscaolny problems could be worked out. Planning Commission Minutes -6- March 13, 1985 Y Motion: Mcved by Stout, seconded by Rempel, unanimously carried, to continue the public hearing for Variance 84 -02 and Environmental Assessment "and_ Conditional Use Permit 8n-16 - to the Planning Commission meeting of .',. 9 April 10, 1985 to allow the applicant, adjacent property owner, and staff to- 1 meet regarding the above issues. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS - J. STREAMLI :LING DEVELOPMENT /DESIGN REVIEW Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. Cormissloner Barker stated that if -toff were given very strong policir.;, very strong guilelines, and very strong procedures to approve routine items, he coup see where this would allow the Commission to make better use of its time , on p••ojec' :s such as overlays and special projects. Further, that he was in _ favor of 'inding a vehicle for delegating routine, non - controversial daci,lors - allowing an appeal process and input when requested by the public. However, there nel:ds to be protection of due process, protection of an appeal process, and an understanding that if someone doesn't like staff's decision, it can be appealee to the Planning Commission. - Commissioner HOW stated that he would like to see the process streamlined; however, was concerned with not allowing the public an opportunity to voice objectlons In a public forum. Chairman Stout agreed and stated that putting the burden on the public to ask for a public hearing goes against the grain. Cornissioner Repel stated that sane people may hesitate using a process which necessitates an appeal of staff's decision to the Planning Commission. Pe further stated that staff should not have to take the neat for decisions made. Commissioner Chitiea agreed, and stated further concern with using this process on Conditional Use Permits. Rick Gomez, City Planner, advised that with this input staff had enough direction from the Commission to fine .tune this process and return to the 1 Commission with more specific recommendation. He further advised that staff would be 51eeting with the new City Attorney to receive his input. i K. SIGN ORDINANCE INTERPRETATION - VIDEO ZONE Rick Gomez, City Planner, reviewed the staff report. ` Planning Commission Minutes -7- March 13, 1985 1+4f "�� °•,'X. {;'tL%w•i?S?r:��� sl'n• %- '...cnu � �< ., - T � .. _. ��.i -:,.c �.wr�,s'cym�fi°.. t� :x CITY OF RANCHO C111IONGA r STAFF REPORT DATE: June 12, 1985 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Howard L. Fields, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: AENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -15 - onstrccc on o a m n - storage dove opment tots ng 40 112 sq. ft. on 1.17 acres of land in the ;ndustrlal Park (Subarea 6) District locsted on the north side of 4th Street, east of Turner Avenue - APN 210- 31: -03. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: ested: Review and consideration of a precise site plan and architectural design, and issuance of a Negative Declaration. B, Purpose: Construction of a mini- storage development. C. Location:_ North side of 4th Street and east of Turner Avenue. D. Parcel Size: 1.17 acres. E. Existin Zonin : Industrial Park (Subarea 6) of the Industrial rea pec f c an. F. Existlno Land Use: Vacant, G. Su�r.)undino Land Use and Zon,, art - acant, ex st ng cod control channel, ISP South - Vacant, Chevron Specific Plan, City of Ontario East - Existing Industrial facility (Poly Plastic), ISP West - Vacant, ISP H. General Plan Des, nations: Horthct- mIndustrialtPark ark South - City of Ontario -orporate limits East - Industrial Park West . Industrial Park ITEM R- C r., e" a :I r 'x ;r r 3; Z� f t.2 e II - - NING ;MISO�1AF� - - ,•(SI R Y. r i' n x r d: "`iiF?ti'i ry ' �'Y.i$+ .y', ."e, „Ct?f, =• ro`b .,, .. ^� = �A.... .i„1:,..: ` PLANNING COlMISSION�7AFF,7REPURT r' OP. 85 Assured *• • °~` Jx -15 - ai- Storage June 12, 1985 ,• =' Page 3 III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: To consider approval of this Development ev ew, the Comm swan must make specific findings of consistency with the General Plan-and Industrial Area Specific Plan. The project has been revised' consistent with the Industrial Area Specific Plan and General Plan. The project will not be detrimental to adjacent properties or cause significant adverse environmental impacts. in addition, the proposed use and site Plan, together with the rec=nended Conditions of Approval, are in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Industrial Area Specific Plan and City Standards. Iv. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission cons er n nput and- elements of this project. If after. such consideration the Commission can support the Facts for Findings, the adoption of the attached Resolution and issuance of a Negative Declaration—would be apProprlate. — -I--ly su tted, R- R) -k ' Inez itf Mann RG HF:ns Attachments: Letters from Applicant Exhibit °A• - Location Map Exhibit "8° - Site Utilization Map + Exhibit °C• - Site Plan /Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit •D" - Grading Plan Initial Study, Port II Resolution of Approval wit+ Conditions + .c ;f Chairman Stout stated that this would be acceptable, but would like to have staff bring the ultimate design back to the Commission as an informatto^ item. ` Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Chitiea, that the 1/350 parking ratio i -s appropriate, the site design 15 appropriate per the policy, direction to be given that the City Attorney and City Planner shall approve the form and content of the covenant agreement, and direction given to staff to bring the ultimate designt of the employee amenities back to the Conoisslon as an informational item. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Comi5ST01iES: BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, REMPEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COKMISSTONES: NONE - carried Motion: Moved by Rempet, seconded by Stout, unanimously carried, to continue past established adjournment time for discussion of the following item— OLD BUSINESS R. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ANG OEYELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -1S - ASSURED MINI- - ons cruc: on a a min - storage =ve opment Iota ng , ,, square feet on 1.17 acres of land in tht Industrial Park District (Subarea 6) District located on the north s,de of 4th Street, east of Turner Avenue W - APN 210- 371 -03_ Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, reviewed tF_ staff report Chairman Stout invited public convent. Charles previsions the Further,cthat that considerable landscaping wool be used to break up the linear lines of the building. Alan Tibbetts, adjacent property owner, oppased the project and stated that the building elevation which would be exposed to his site was very offensive and was-concerned with the massive ,fascade,. Further, that as this project 1s ' located on a svecial boulevard and less than 600 yards from the Havea Avenue consideconsideration. Overlay District, therefore the protect design should take those elements into Mr. Near advised that he had met with Mr. Tibbetts and City staff, as requested by Commis i se consensus could not be reached Furthertha he felthaalt tsueshad beenaddressod n, There were no further comments. 'r 0 Planning Conulssion Minutes -18- June 12, 1985 � �•ryy��ify� +�' 1 '' `fin ' • i�•ta � ''9��n`� .E . - J-' I .. J.dt A -r+ Commissioner McNiel stated that his opinion of the project had not changed; it was too linear and too tall for the shape of the parcel. - Commissione- Chitiea agreed and stated that the property is just too narrow, and not suited for this type of use. Commi•,ioner Barker agreed. Co", issioner Rempel concurred and further stated that the project was not properly designed. Chairman Stout asked if the problem was the mint- storage use and based on that type of use the Commissioners did not feel that any structure could be made of a mini - storage that would fit at this location. Commissioner Rempel replied that it was not the use itself, but the aesthetics of the design proposed. Commissioner McNiel stated that he did not have a problem with the use, but It seemed that this design maximtzed what was a very narrow ribbon of land, Commissioner. Chitiea stated tha+ she couldn't say that she did not have a problem with the use until she saw an excellently designed project. Commissioner Barker stated that he had no problem with the use. Chairman Stout asked if the applicant wanted a definitive answer at this point, or would he prefer to continue the action to allow time to do further work on the project. Mr. Near replied that Le would prefer to have the Commission take action at this time so that he could pursue further action on his part. Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by McMiet, to direct staff to pr-;are a Resolution of Jenial for consideration ft the July 10, 1985 Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried by the follcwing vote: - AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, MCNIEL, CHITIEA, REMPEL, STOUT NOES: - COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE - carried ° f f t f k Motion: Moved ay Barker seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to contin,., discussion of the following item past the adjournment tine. f i t f 4 . •;i� Planning Commission 4inutes 19- N June 12, 1985 i� t�:` '��` . •. ! > y j � yi• y ±try: Y ` . ` CONSENT CALENDAR y 6 , A. ;ES.811 REVIEW FOR TRACT 11893 - PLAZA BUILDERS - Reapplication for design �•� is few o new a evat ons for s ng a am y lots on 17.2 acres of land 1n the Very Low Residential District (1 -2 du /ac) located west of Sapphire Street, south side of Banyan Avenue - APN 1043- 411 -01. t B. TIME EXTENSION FOR PARCEL MAP 7441 - TACKETT - o La range, west o Ameth zt _ ry located on the south side y - 3, .4. C. RESOLUTION OF DENIAL FOR ENV!on"C;ITAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW U M N- - onstruct an of a m n- storage deve opmen[ Lola ng square eet an 1.17 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 6) located on the north side of 4th Street, east of Turner Avenue - APN 210- 371 -03. D. TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83 -08 - LEWIS - The development of a restaurant, on 867reacrestoot of landninctheeGeneralaCommercialivDistrict ,� located at the southnn corner of-Foothill Boulevard and Hellman - AFN 208- 261 -25, 26. Items C and 0 were removed for discussion. Motlun: Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNiel, carried, to adopt items A and 8 of the Consent Calendar. C. RESOLUTION OF DENIAL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW �- N - _ Chairman Stout advised that the applicant for item C of the Consent Calendar, OR 35 -IS Assured Mini- Storage, had requested that the item be remved from conslueration at this time and granted a continuance. Motion: Moved by IicNlel, seconded by Stout to continue Development Review 85- 15 to allow the applicant time to redesign the projegt. The item will be readvertised for a future Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: - COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, STOUT a - ` NOES: COMMISSIONERS: REITEL ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIEA - carried _ k t H > Commissioner Rempel stated that he was still concerned with this use at this 1 1 locat'on. Y, lq D. TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83 -08 - LEWIS r Chairman Stout advised that the applicant of this project r,.que`ted a f'l continuance to the duly 24, 1985 meeting. 8 Niti+• Planning Commission Minutes -2- t . -'� July 10, 19D5 - • t+ C � _ ,^�•iYl}J+W'ifS1 °�`,.'i pYf. "G`re�.�:.5 .- ,' =� ": _.. Y.� ' :�1 L`•r AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, REJ4PEL, CHITIEA. STOUT - I 'All NOES: COMISSIONER'44 NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL — CITY OF RANCHO CULAIONGA STAFF REPORT 1 -i } a: DATE: September 11, 15a5 TO: Chairman and Members cf the Planning Co mission FROM: Jack Lam, Community Development Director BY: Howard L. Fields, As•%istant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESS4cNT AND * MENT REVIEW 85 IS i -' I J ASSURED M N- c- nstrutt on o a min - storage development totaling 45 000 sq. ft. on 1.17 acres of land in the Industrial P,.rk 603rea 6) on located on the north side of 4th Street, east of Turner Avenue - APN 210- 371-03. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Review and consideration of a precise site plan and architectural Jesign, and issuance of a Negative Declaration. B Purpose: Construction of a mini- storage development. C Location: North side of 4th Street and east of Turner Avenue. 0. Parcel Size: 1.17 acres. E. Existing Zoning: Industrial Park (Subarea 6) of the Industrial rea bpecific Plan. F. Existing Land Use: Vacant.. G. Surround in Land Use and Zonln art - at t, ex st ng oo control channel, ISP South - Vacant, Chevron Specific Plan, City of Ontario East - Exi:ting industrial facility (Poly Plastic), ISP West - Vacant, ISP H. General Plan C�es1 naat�"is• ro ect .te - Indus Mal Park North - Industrial Park South - City of Ontario East - Industrial Park West - Industrial Park tTEM 0 �� c bi PLANNING : MISSIO OR 85 -15 - Assured September 11, 1985 Page 2 )RT le 1. Site Characteristtes: The subject site is an abandoned and unimproved odd control casement, which is fairly level with :entle drainage to 4th Street. Presently, site lids light vegetation with no trees and has no significant cultural /historial aspects. lI BACKGROUND: Curing their regularly scheduled meeting on July 10, 1983, the Planning Commission directed staff to work with the applicant and resolve development Issues associated with this project. The primary issue was to enhance the ddsign elevations to appear consistent with the Industrial Park designation (Subarea 6). III. ANALYSIS: A. General: The revised development plans will consist of 2 two - story7 ildings situated lengthwise and 1 one-story building along the rear property line. The buildings are comprise of 11,470 sq. ft. and 1,760 sq. ft., respectiiely. Major changes to the site plan include the use of coi•anar trees, climbing vines and cascai,:; ;.'anters (see Exhibit "E ") along the west elevation and the ,.,e of a one -story building element to be repeated twice wit•i false windows to appear as an Industrial Park project. The revised site plan currently meets all the development requirements of Subarea 6 (Industrial Park) designation and is in compliance with City regulations and standards. B. Design Review Committee: The Committee recommends breaking up t.a long architectural planes of the west and east elevations by alternating a one -story build'ng element to fragment the buildings into appearing as three separate units (see txhibit 'C"). Additionally, false windows were used 'to project the appearance of an Industrial Park complex. The Committee reviewed the revised elevations and r_ commended approval; - however, the Committee was concerned about long term maintenance of the proposed landscaping. Staff recommends that the applicant's landscape architect provide proper access to these areas. C. Technical Review Committee: The Foothill Fire Oistrict reviewed an ap;rove e revised site plan subject to similar fire mitigation measurt es imposed on the original submittal (i.e., sufficient turnaround radius, placement of fire - fighting facilities, fire protection in building design, and sprinkler system for the trash enclosures). I ,r. ',r� x - - : x. o- ..._. _ri --F- , ' _: .� ,"" >2 :agJ5F C.+,r •.44 �: Lc:.ly .C: PLANNING COP:yiSSjO(!AFF REPORT nR 85 -15 - Assured rani- Storage ;' September 11, 198: r Page 3 Community JL:HF:ns Attachments: Exhibit •A• - Location Mep Exhibij •8• - Site Utiliaati--n. Map Exhibit •C" - Site Plan /Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit •0• - Grading Plan Initiai Study, Part 11 Resututirn of Approval with renditions - 0. Envirmmental Assessment: Part I of the Initial Study was coop et y t e applicant. Staff has completed Part II of the Env'ir'onmental Chnckiist and determined that this project has been mitigated relative to concerns of creating a visual /aesthetically offensive site, and tUrefore will not w c -eats a significant impact upon the envlronmeit. III. ZIS FOR FINDINGS: to consider approval of this Cevelopment iieu,ew, t e arm ss on oust Bake specific findings of consistency j with the General Plan and Industrial Area Specific Flan. The pruject :as been revised consistent with the Industrial Area Specific Plan and General Plan. The project will not lie detrimental to adjacent properties, or cause significant adverse environa -Mal impacts. In addition, the proposed use and site x " plan, togetb -tr wit) the recommended Conditions of Approval, are in compliance with th8 applicable provisions of the Industrial Area Specific Plan and City Standards. IV. RECMMENCATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission consi ei rr" a -rnput and elements of this p•oject. If after such nl", copsideration the Commission can support the Facts for Findings. C' the adoption of the attached Resolution and issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. y ' Resgectfully4submitted, Community JL:HF:ns Attachments: Exhibit •A• - Location Mep Exhibij •8• - Site Utiliaati--n. Map Exhibit •C" - Site Plan /Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit •0• - Grading Plan Initiai Study, Part 11 Resututirn of Approval with renditions yyY I.S.P. oil. 7 14 LM I.S.P ar . .. . ...... . ......... ... ier,4' ar NORTH CITY OF rrc*vl: RANCHO CUCAMONGA TfTLC - I 1 .0 PLANNING DIVISION EXHI BM �SCALE- "I Ac "FACNA I a ro.: -- I --- I ,onn- -Fore R "If" 40 4112, tit NOR CITY or RANCHO CLCAMONGA TrrLE-..Si-re GIML.17-4TIOA) PIA PLANNING DIVISION rXlilBrr. SCALE, 16 wq 1 It a.� im dj 1,9 7 03 W •saK I OP. "I Ac "FACNA I a ro.: -- I --- I ,onn- -Fore R "If" 40 4112, tit NOR CITY or RANCHO CLCAMONGA TrrLE-..Si-re GIML.17-4TIOA) PIA PLANNING DIVISION rXlilBrr. SCALE, 16 wq 1 n � 0 th `` �a v, �i 1 4 2 a Ynn N'D05YFLLi WHEELER A.LA. MSUN[DIWSTp,ACEIMC r w.oe ,a rrc .- L NYYIYY+vY p, <�14 YiYY .0 46 p u�d w e° i .,i !it � l �i; i 'if j►;'I if ilil� I li 1 I:1 °MNI�M OVtl11.°IL �' "t, 311I� N is 1•i �IIF�N `I lL9R. —�— j .w.. —...• •. 1 1 1 e w lit 111° p u�d w e° i .,i !it � l �i; i 'if j►;'I if ilil� I li 1 I:1 °MNI�M OVtl11.°IL �' "t, 311I� N is 1•i �IIF�N `I I CITY Or RANCI-10 CUCANJOjNGA PLANNING DIVISION ITE.m. .AW Tnu.: "z"Arg scALr,- 1(-41 CI:—: OF Rk;C.gO CL•CA`IO:.CA PART II — TAITIAL STUDY ' E.�'VIRONHr --TAL CHECRLIS: FILING DATE: -- *' yy /'" PLOC NU?O3EAs 172 ROJECT • - - m.... _ sTeov PROJECT LCCATIon: /✓+ffJ' '1Si4f f• f/iv I. EWIROS`d;ATT``WAC[S (Explanation of all "yep" and uMS)he, answers are required on actachad sheets). results in; Ptopoaal have significant - c . Jy •'iii /Il•'Y.'j•�� '4i 1 Soils and Ceoloev, Y YES MAYBE AO e1gn1� fl�ant results in; A. Uns cable ground conditions or in changes in geologic relationships? b. Disruptions, displacements, c v compaction or v c• Change In topography or ground surface" contour Intervals? d• The destruction, c -- covering or modiftcstlon - _ o A' Any Potential Increase In vine o / or watery eica c condi cone? r 1, Changes In erosion siltation, or deposition? g• Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such a as earthquakes, landslides, mud_ slides, ground failure, o or similar hazards? / / h, A., Increase In thn rate of extraction and /or v v resource? 2. A dro3o , Will the '4i , e` , , M, � t Page ; YES YA_ Y9E a. Changes In currants, or the course of direction Of flowing streams, - rivers, or channels: ephemeral stream , b. Changes In absorption rates, drainage patrerns, or the! of the rate and a mount of surface water c• Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? oo — d. Change In the amount of surface water in any body of water? — / e. Discharge into outface waters, or any alteration of surface water quality? f. Alteration of groundwater characteristics? g. Change in the quantity of gtaundvaters, - either through direct V additions or vlth- drawals, or through interference aquifer? with an Quality? Quantity? / h, the reduction in the amount of water ocher - vise available for public water supplies? 1. Exposure of paopla or property [o water ralated hazards such as flooding _ -- — or aeicheaT 3. res Quality. Will the prapasal have significant maul to fn: A- Constant or periodic air emissions from mabile or Indiract ` sources? Stationary sources? b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and /or Interference with the atccinmert of applicable air quality standards? e Alteration of local or regiunal ellmacfr. conditions, affecting air zovement, moisture or temperature? 4. Moto �- 71ota. Will the proposal have significant results a. Change in the characteristics of spe,lea, Including diversity, "`C5 distribution, If any species of plants? or number ,,,,••�� �- b• Reduction 'Of the numbers of �`•••,uzc any on! ••- arti odangered speciez of plants? q ue • tare F,�„'i t�,klA`Fy���, 4, .•,r•�s �''.''.ft I, J.'.P� -Sew YES 1LIYBE NO _ __1/ 6 a c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of } Into Plants into an areal d. Reduction !n the potential for agricultural Production? _ Fauna, Will the proposal have significant results e. Change in the characteristics of species, Including diversity, distribution, or numbers of any species of animals? Is. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered spacles of animals? c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of animals Into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or =vacant of anica?s? d. Oaceriorition or removal of existing fish or wildlife habitat? S PoDularlon, Will the proposal have significant results ins r \ a, Will the proposal alter the location, distri. button, density, diversity, or growth race of the h=an population of an area? Is Wlll the proposal affect "if-ins housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 6. Sucio- Economic Factors, Will the proposal have sign!! leant results A, Ch;aga Sa total or regional socio.economim characteristics, including economic or cooercial diversity, tax rate, and property values? b. Will protect coots be equitably distributed among project Leneficlaries, La , buyero, tax payers or Project users? 7. Land Use and Planuint Considerations. Will the proposal have significant results in? g�g i a. A substantial alteration of the present or Planned land use of to area? b. A conflict with any designations, objectives, i Policies, or adopted plans of any governmental entities? br' C. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of existing consumptive or non - consumptive recreational opportunities! •��+r"itt;...�rv°1i= 3� °.as `7:I r1 -et:. ..'r� � "za. • � °t /� 7 ��.: , YES 1LIYBE NO _ __1/ 6 ., Page E. YES ?aY9E Yo •♦ S. Tr.Ico r:a ciao. Vill the proposal have s16nificant . resu Its in: 'r a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular - i, movement? / - b. E!facts on existing streets, or demand for new street constructlon? t/ c. Effects on "lazing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? ✓ d. Substantial impact upon existing transports- clan systems? ✓ a. Alterations :• present potterns of circula- tlon or movement of people and /or rood,? ' f Alterations to or effects on present and potential water - borna, rail, m.:ca transit or air traffic? B Increases ! traffic hazards to taco, vehicles, bieye)tsta — -- or or pedas tilanoi V 9 Cultural Resources, Fill the proposal have — -- algnifltant results in. . a. t disturbance to the tntagrity of archaeological, / Paleontological, and /o- historical resources? !� " 10. Health, Safety, and Huisante Fa ears. Vill the proposal baVe significant results :n: r. _ a. Crestfau of any health hazard or potential health •r hazard? b Exposura of people to potat:!al health hazards? -- �" c. A risk of C41osion or release of hazardous �- tubstances In the event of an accident? ✓ d. An Increase In the number of Individuals g or species of vector or patheuogenic organisms or the exposure of people to suen organics? =' e. Increase in existing noise levels? ✓ �:; yf. Exposuro of peopla to potentially dangerous noise levels? �lj, t; The creation of ohl ecclonable odors? ' �lsaFLAi �jry'i[ia •-+ h. An increase in light or glare? / d2 ��s�i$ t: . r`. Sw.rF�R�iE�tH°�e- sr`'{'`'/,CAY. Pi•V��!:..M..`.t .i: \I� •�J �. .::^•2:i4t�l�..'��i. a is page. ES !aM r S 3 ` 11. Aesthetics. Will the ra osai have ai ,• results in: - P p 6nlfieanc A- The obscrucc!on at degradation of any Scenic ~ vista or view? b. The creation of An aesthatically offonsiva site? C. A aomtlSee with the objective of dc.algnated or pntantial Scenic corridors? / + 1:. U, e11�:!ee and Public Services. Will the prop Oaal F.ve a slgniticonc nncd for new Systems, or alterations to the following: i a• Electric power? —• / b. Natural or packaged gas? - - c. COCUnitaCiana systems? d• Water supply? e. Nastcvacer facilities? ✓ • f. Flood control structu.as? S. Solid waste facilities? !/ h. Fire protection? / I- Polico protection? — —_ �✓ ' .i• Schools? / k• Parks or ocher recreational facilities? .-_.. —• / 7. 1. Nalnrenance of public facilities, including -k roads and flood central facilitie0 t n. Other governmental ae Nicest 73. Enerev and Scare iws Resourcis. Will the ~_ ✓ i have aSgnifnc reaulcs in: Proposal a Una of substantial or "evasive fuel or energy? b. Substantial increata In demand upon existing yr;. sources of energy? ?, C. Ai in:rease In the demand for development of new sources of energy? �1 d. M iacrcase or perpetuation of the consumption of non - renewable for_$. renewable sources of energy are when feasible 6 available ;A w• ,,. a'�, %.:. ' ?'.� s;.- ? : �v..A,lw�'k tip �t"}'�Nr. : �N* l.' vs7P .(ia':l:�gc.1Sr.�'L:Ln;._Sp4, �,�. /l/ �' ` '. ` .. Y'`,%'.�•aX,.` 2, A s. nY C Fag* g• 51 r" N YES :!APSE YO • , �• G. Substantial depletion of any nonrentuable or scarce natural resource? s, ,y Y "i< 14. Handaeory Ffndln s of Siciitfcane e. _� ' a, Does the project .luvo the potential to degrade the rtdueeatheyhabitat of fish ortWisubste nspe ^_tea, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to al"Dbte a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or anima or alirinate important esaoplas of the major periods of — California history or prehistory? ✓ b Joas the project have the potential to achlove short -term, to the disadvantage of long -can, environmental goals? (A short -term impact an the environment is one which occurs In a relatively - brief, definitive period of time while long- — tam impaccs will endure well into the future) ✓ C# Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable scans Chet the iner,onral affects of an - individual project are considerable uhen viewed In eomwction With the effects of past projects, +.nd probable future projects). / d Does the proje_t have environmental effaces 1( which will cauu substantial adverse effect on human beings, either directly or Indirectly? I1. DISCVS"OV OF LWIEOMS4TAL EVALVATIO`7 N the above a y� ua� plum ate— disc f('-a" td mitigation tivem•.aeuras)�o 9 8d as tes � .7� �'AL YIiGG /yea;_ Y//.E A.r7ac,vT dsn S•t/.ss!.yC� :,' IGtIV -off' Lxi 7i Cd�✓JriieTcNo,�i�n�s�v�sWS Suede ` AG: gS�BCT1 a! ZYU�N.vGE. iYJi� dG uNOE2 SHE a�iereTit, - o,d rF/B G y E..tis�rric� ,c r1 r v" . *fit,• `f��i- 4,.� anti :�� =:;"`a ' +t /�,�tl .r ,• `�',. f hy`�3 �I 0 MWIC"w1 ��4SY �1y xl L_I � ',W' i'+•'"�tl_ - ,R°.w�t�hg fi, e�.\'t L'uj:' ,. . r _ Y,( III. DETER,yI1ATI0`I •-� •,; �( On the basis of this Initial evaluation: •� •yr�' I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on tho environment„ and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will bi prepared. �p ;r I find that altboujh the proposed project could have a significant r'W !fact on the enviroroant, there will not be a significant effect In this case becausc the mitlgition measures described on an attached sheet have been addtl to the project. A YEGATIL= `* ? DECLARATI0:7 WILL DE PREPARED. •f ;, ❑I find the proposed project .' have a sign It an of act on the :�{ envirnmant. and an ENVIRO: :T L' ACT REPORT s Qu red. -„ Date � Ih Title �I 0 MWIC"w1 ��4SY �1y xl L_I � ',W' i'+•'"�tl_ - ,R°.w�t�hg fi, e�.\'t L'uj:' 1 : RESOLUTION NO. 85 -134 - A RESOLUTION OF THE RAND 0 CUCAHONGA PLANNIN3 CO,IMISSION OE�IYING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -15 LOCATED ON THE IARTH SIDE OF 4TH STREET, EAST OF TURNER AVENUE IN THE INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN (SUBAREA 6) DISTRICT NhcREAS, on the 24th da, of October, 1984, a complete application was filed by Don Valk for review o` the shove- described project; and WHEREAS, on the 11th day of September, 1985, the Rancho Cucamonga Picnning Commission held a public hearing to conside- the above - described project. follows: NOW, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as SECTION 1: That the following findings cannot be met: _ 1 That the proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and, 2, That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially Injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. SECTION 2: That Development Review 85 -15 is hereby dented. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1985. PLANNI�N /�i /�tCt /��MISSION OF THE CITY 0: RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: �C LD.M.v, I, Jack Lam, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamon a, do hereby certify thsc t.. *,e foregoing Resolution was duly and i" regularly otroduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the `ce City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 11th day of September, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit; �PA��. "I n ` 210- 182 -18 6; City of Ontario 3 303 E. B Street z Ontario, CA 91764 210- 182 - 04.072 - 24,29,371 -05 S. B. Co. Flood Control District 825 E. Third St. - 'inrcado San Bernardino, CA 9 ?415 • 2111 - 182 -07 Chevron Land E Develornent Co. P 0 Box 7611 ?� San Francisco, CA 94120 r7! ' X210= :71•U2 x Brooks Products, Inc. 10220 Fourth St. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 9:701 210 = 371 -07, 08 Alan R. Tibbetts, et al •5, 7957 ;ardenld Ave. Alta Loma, CA 17- ` 210- 072 -30, 33 ` -. Concetta gandala, et dl 950? Turner Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 'ordon K. Huntley 4 Assured Hini Storagqe 7,85pp H. Foothill /2C1 • ,21a1to, U1 92316 - C,.r Valk, President l Storage Mgmt. Concepts I 2050 If. roothlll B1. 201 11-31tu, CA 91376 FMW . i l -• -JJ ss+_ 13 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIIIONGA Gaza. ' STAFF REPORT %� \y i 9L i DATE: November 6, 1985 TO: Mayor anu Members of the City Council FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director BY: Dan Coleman, Senior Planner r SUBJECT: TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - Proposed amendments to apters an . a-'of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code pertaining to the prservation of tress on private property. I. BACKGROUND: In response to the City Council and Planning amnT s-Tn conce : +is regarding tree preservation policies and tree removal permit process, Staff has prepared a comprehensive amendment to the Tree Preservation Ordinance 37. At their meeting of October 23, 1985, the Planning Commission reviewed the draft amendment and forwarded a recommendation of approval to the C1ty Council. In addition, the proposed amendments have been reviewed by the Citizens Advisory Commission and Histuric Preservation Commission. Also, a copy was forwarded to the Building Industry r, Association for comments. As requested by City Council, Or. Alden Kelly, of Knapp Tree Service, has reviewed the Proposed amendments and has been invited to speak to the City Council about tree preservation from the perspeWia of an arborist. The attached staff reports fully describe •ire proposed amendments to the Tree Preservation Ordinance 37. This report provides an overview of tho Planning Commission's comments and the Input of the Citizens Advisory Commission. [I. CIEN ADVISORY COY.MISSION ACTION 9- 26-852 - The CAC reviewed the F, TIZm nary ra on September 76, 498 S and offered the following torments: Septton 19.08.010 Put ose and Intent. The C.,,4 reco.mcndeo that { preservation d t e w n rowW naracter and windbreak affect be emphasized as a City policy. In response, the following language ,1 was added s, the proposed ordinance: p j• �e CITY CCUNCIL'STAFF REPORT i. Tree Preservation Ordinance Amendment ' Ncvember G, 1985 Page 2 In particular, the Blue Cum Eucalyptus Andrews are a unique inheritance whose cumulative value as a windbreak -. system 1s a desirable resource. It is the intent of this chapter to perpetuate a windbreak system through = Protection of selected existing mature Blue Gum - Ucaiyptus windrows iu key areas of the community, and = r thrnugh gradual replacement and expansion of the system through planting of new Spotted Gum Eucalyptus winarows along the established grid pattern, as development occurs. Staff Comment: This language follows closely the policies con%a- awe Ettwanda Specific Plan. Gradual replacement was , furthar defined as being 'as development occurs° based,uponkrecent City Council direction. This policy was disaicsed at areeat yen th, a by the Flanninn mm Coihsion as discussed n t e o f o o In see on. _ This sec o� "Ei n wed a upon .e ann n9 omn ss.onTs racccimindation. Section 19.08.020 - Definitions. The CAC recommended that it thtaaent be included n the definition of heritage tree that °cons ;deration shall be given to the preservetion of trees which are'rruft br nu ear n a present excludes trees • t nu ��urther wti are rut or earing from protection. e rev! °a on October 24th, the CAC recommended thet a policy be ast0lished to preserve a' certain numbir of citrus of nut bearing trees on each lot of a new subdivision or development. Staff Comment: The Planning Commission recommended approval of consNeration to preserving citrus or nut bearinr, trees. ' �;iii taff reeomFriZds `fEy Countil discussion of this item as it has significant grading implications. For example, if a subdivision 1s oropased on a site of an old citrus grove, preservation of one or - Zvi `.re,is in the front or rear yard would require matching the •' exis :Ing grade around the base of the tree, which could Beverly - Milt greding and adversely affect draineya of the project. Many - if th•: old cttruc groves are abandoned or poorly maintained in an un;fa+tly condition that would not be desirable, to preserve. The txisAng language allows the opportuninv to preserve attractive and hcsitiy trees. Section 19.08 050 Protecticn of Exist in• Trees. CAC expressed ioncent eft7i Ehe f act o construction o walls too close to trees. `• �b,t ��' -• n C� i _ , f.. Vii•+ u CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Tree Preservation Ordinance Amendment November 6, 1985 Page 3 Staff Comment: Language was included (Subsection •F•) to state amino construction, including structures and walls, that disrupts the root system shall be permitted...0 The Planning Commission recommended approval of the language added by CAC. Section 19.08.130 T-ee Malntenenace. The preliminary draft requ re that trees on or vat, property a maintained egaal to City Standards for maintenance. CAC recommended deietion of this requirement. Staff Comment: The Planning Commission recommended apprnval of the rev se anguage that states *maintenance of trees standing upon private homeowner owned property shall be the responsibility of the owner or owners of those properties•. III. PLANNING COK41SSION ACTION: The Planning Commission was fully supportive ur tieing t e tree removal permit process to the development approval process (e.g., tentative tract map, CUP, etc.). The main deliberation Of the Plarn tna Commlssinn rnnn.rn.d merits and disadvantages of the B In discussing the Blue Gun species, the Commission -reviewed the following evidence: o Blue Gums have a very high oil content that exacerbates fire hazard, o Blue Gums are prone to dangerous Summer branch drop. This is a condition where branches up to six inches in diameter will unexpectedly break off, even on clear, windless Summer days, o Blue Gums are one of the messiest trees because of bark shedding and leaves which are a fire hazard, nuisance, and high maintenance cost, o-8 f Y — . O.. CAi�"= 1�i�•��wYS`n .l'..�•�K�.Y �.y A.': � ..`t -Jf a r CIiY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Tree Preservation Ordinance Amendment November 6, 1985 �' Page 4 l�_ o Blue Gums are brittle and top- heavy, therefore, very - prone to blow -down or limb breakage in high winds common to area, o Blue Cwms reached maturity under aggricultural conditlmis and are poorly suited for developed areas because of changes to environmental conditions such as watering habits and ground characteristics. Td balance the octal of maintaining the desired windrow character a et conrerns the Cain ss on e t of Blue Glees s ou d be VIMt re ac as v nt occurs with cleaner safer varlet o tree. rucaiyp us acu A A. po t was se ec a ecause o its sinllar growth characteristics, fast - growing erect, single- In trunked tree,branching to make wide head, up to 15 feet tall. addition, the Spotted Gum 1s strong and is not messy or water greedy like the Blue Gum. Section 19.08.010 - Puronge and Intent was revised to Indicate the • it a omm ss n cdaen at on hat g Blue bums be gradually replaced with Spotted Gum Eucalyptus as development occurs. In addition, the Planning Commission also recommended that the Ettwanda Specific Plan be amended accordingly. However, this would • not change the policy of preserving Blue Guts Eucalyptus trees that are designated as historic landmarks. The Planning Commisttdn also recommended that Section 19.08.050, Tree Replacement Policy, be 15 size Eucalyptus Maculata (Spotted Gum) revised to require gallon as replacement trees in all cases where Eucalyptus windrows must b- removed. The preliminary draft, Staff had recommended that the larger 15 gallon size trees be required only where Eucalyptus trees wara removed in violation of the Tree Preservation Ordinance. The Planning Commission felt that 15 gallon size trees .are less susceptible to vandalism and breakage. The language in the attached Ordinance has been revised per the Planning Commission's recomnandation. ill. CITIZENS ADVISORY CO}OiISSION CENTS: The Citizens Advisory omm ss on review the proPos amen ments again on October 24, 1985. The following is a summary of the CAC comments. Section 19.08.010 - Pur oze and Intent. TRe Ettwanda representat ves o r e o ect to t o anning Commission's recommendation to replace all Blue Gum Eucalyptus trees as j' development occurs. CAC wanted to preserve select Bluo Gum = windrows in ke, areas, but did not define where these areas were. There was no consensus of opinion aimng the Alta Loma and Cucamonga rt representatives concerning this issue. ^ =_ �.q rt / e j., r 't- r Y c,7 r ®. CITY COUNCIL STAFF ,REPORT ` -Tree Preservation Ordinance Amendment - '• November 8, 1985 Page 5 a Comment: This would be a major policy determination of the City ' Tune as to whetter the aesthetic /windbreak benefit of the Blue Gum Eucalyptus wlnirows overrides public safety, liability, and maintenance concerns. Recent decisions of the City Council regarding tree removal permit appeals have set a precedent to remove Blue Gum Eucalyptus trees as development occurs. Section 19 08.020 - Definitions.` The CAC ,reccmnended that the criteria o e n ng ^ er tage rees' In terms of size be defined to be more inclusive (1.e. more protective) by stating that *all woody plants in excess of fs feet to height and /ar "having a single trunk circumference of 15 inches or more, as measured from 24 inches from ground level•, ry Comment. The existing Ordinance specifies that *all woody Plants in excess of 20 feet in height and having a single trunk circumference of 20 inches or more", shall be protected. The clarification suggested by the CAC would protect those certain varieties of trees that may achieve maturity to excess of 15 feet in height, yet have a single trunk circumference less than 15 inches or more, such as certain varieties of Eucdlyptua treos. •. Section 19.08.020 - Definitions. The definition o.° °remove" should include na equate or excess ve watering" of the tree which could cause a heritage tree to die. Staff Comment: Staff recommends that this provision be included in to a nton. Section 19.08.050 - Protection of Existfn Trees. This section requ res t at a trees to a save shoo oe enc osed by a chain link fence prior to issuance of permits. CAC recomnands that this section be further clarified to' apply only to trees- associated with a Proposal for development, (1.e., suhdivlston, shopping center) dnd that the chain link fence is to be temporary in nature and not parnanently constructed with concrete footings. Staff Comment: The following wording is rec=mnded: "All trees to be save , associated with a PreposaI for development, shall be enclosed by a temporary chain link fence prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit and prior to cortraencerent of work. Fences are to remain in place during all phases of construction and may not be removed wf0uut the written consent of the City Planner or until construction ms complete; and ...0 i CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Tree Preservation Ordinance Amendment November 6, 1985 Page 6 Section 19.08.080 - Tree Re lacement PolIcPolIcy.. The CAC supported the Planning .emn ss on's recommen at own that replacement trees be 15 gallon in size; however, thz CAC further recommended that replacement be on a I for 1 basis for heritage trees removed. Regarding citrus trees, the CAC recommended that a replacement standard be developed based upon square footage of lot area, such as, 2 trees per 10,000 square feet of lot area. Staff Convent: This is a major policy decision that should be carefully considered by the Council. The City Attorney is investigating the legality of such a requirment. Section 19.08.110 - Emer enc Naiver. This oection provides for the emergency wa ver o t o perm process where a hazardous condition exists requiring emergency action to preserve the public health, safety and welfare. The CAC recommended that only supervising members of the Foothill Fire District or the City anPl n be granted the authority to authorize the destruction or • removal of a hazardous tree without securing a tree removal permit. Staff Comment. This may become impractical in emergency situations • theme a nn 1-where Fire Protection District personnel must make split- second decisions to preserve the public health, safety and welfare. in fire fighting, it is impractical to wait for a 3attal /on Chief to come and inspect a burning tree next to a house to detemine if it should be removed. Section 19.08.140 - Penalt . This section establishes that each tree remov n v OT, t 0n of the Ordinance shall constitute a taisdemeanor punishable by fine of not more than $1,000 or by imprisonment not to exceed six months, or both such fine and imprisonment. The CAC discussed the possibility of a restriction on development within the City for violators for a specified period of time following the illegal removal of a tree. Staff Comment. In discussing this with the City Attorney, it was ee Ed�fi—at there is insufficient legal grounds or case law to support such a restriction. IV. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ACTION: The Historic Preservation •; ri ss on reviewed the pre m nary draft amendment on October 3, 1985. The Comnissica recamaendtd approval and did not request any changes. The proposed amenw ent will incloide reference to the historic landmark, designation of certain trees. 7(o 1- CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Tree Preservation Ordinance Amendment - `s November 6, 1985 Page 1 iw i' V. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission. and Staff recommend that the unciT approve the proposed amendment to the Tree Preservation Ordinance through adoption of the attached Ordinances. Respectfull/y� tebmit-t`ed, " Jack Lam, AICP -, Community Development Director 'n JL:DC:ns Attachments: September 11, 1965 Staff Report October 23, 1985 Staff Report Resolution Recommending Approval Draft Tree Preservation Ordinance ' af. f ](J •I` I ,, v,i.�e V. r Jt' .:- ,�1 C:CnY -[t'1; (..i'i:'�' :.tit L',- y!'✓,.v.2 =fra f. ' � ".>F`'S:L'�+��,+ 1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: October 23, 1985 U Chairman and MEmbers of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, Community Development Director BY: Dan Coleman, Senior Planner r',BJECT: TAR PRESERVATION ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Proposed nenomrnts to apter and of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code pertaining to the preservation of trees on private property I. BACKGROUND: At the meeting of September 11, 1985, the Planning armston reviewed Uie initial concepts for amendments to the Tree Preservation Policies as contained in Ordinance 37. Based upon community input and comments from the Planning Commission and City Council, Staff has prepared a comprehensive amendment to the Tree Preservation Ordinance 37. The pr000sed amendments have been reviewed by the Citizens Advisory Commission and Historic dall to the Bulldinntitnd strysAssociatInndfor' comments wStaff haas received favorable comments from develcoers regarding tieing the tree permit process to the project revieum itself. The re osed amendments attached hereto reflect th comments an e t ons o tmese grroups. n a t on, Or. den a y, Knapp ree ervice, has reviewed the proposed amendments and has been invited to speak to the Planning Commission about tree preservation from the perspective of a tree arborlst. The attached Staff Report of September 11, 1985 fully descFibes the proposed amendments to the Tree Preservation Ordinance 37. II. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Carmtssion review and consider tffe proposed amendment, make any necessary changes, and forward a •ecommendation of approval to the City Council. JL:DC:ns Attachmeats: Draft Tree Preservation Ordinance September 11, 1985 Staff Report 1%O `t ITEM E ■ a I�` J x, � •t •t t +: r `a✓ i .moo CITY OF RANCHO C UCAMONGA s wJia D. Mfkdc (.•wlwfw• CbukaJ. Oagwf 11 J'a"y RS.a Rkau451.110i pam•IaJ.KeirFt October 3, 1905 Cary grown, FAccutivs Director Building Industry Association 1150 R. Mountain. Suite 107 Upland, California 91716 Dear Cary: •• As you have requested, we are enclosing a copy of the draft of the revisions to ' the City's Tree Removal Ordinance. The Ordinance is still beicg reviewed by our Cormeity Advisory Commission and will be forwarded to the City Council, we expect in early Movamber. Since a number of local developers who also happen to be members of the Building Industry Association Board bave been working on the Ordicanee revisions• vs had urumed the Board and the BIA were aware at the City Council �= directiea to srreo tben its emisti : tree removal i g process. Apparently, the word did not travel from your nemb.rs to the Board and we regret that very much. In the future we will make certain that the Building Industry Association is on - our list for ordinance tevisions which are taing contemplated, it those revisions relate in any, rq to the Industry. a At the time the Ordinance is considered, plwnse•feel'free to erpreae tla views er of the Association. You may also contact our Coemunity Development Director to • personally indicate any suggestions you have rega.died the Ordinance. a r-+ -/ • � Jon D. Mikela Mayor JDM /kap Enclosure -Ali { %9 e � Cl• d- L'f-^ - t,t SASSLW ROAD. SLgTC C ! FOSTOFFICE 110% 907 • RASCIIO CCCASIOSOA. CALIFORSIA 0130 •,CI jR!1418 i a# Y�C� '� :�,.f�a�•-nk':;�?S }�4r� =,v.t '�. 5:.._, .,+ f- ^t rdl�ri��l a ;bit* _•i Y= � s',<. P. .... :. :��- n II. ANAL:SIS- There are two bcsic issues with regard to tree - preservation: I. The process whereby permits are issued, and — CITY OF RANCHO CUCANIONGA windrows. The present ordinar•ce does not require an application for a tree STAFF REPORT cC slro . Typically, the applicant puts off app!ying for a tree removal permit until shortly to prior construction. Therefore, the ten day notification and rJssfbility of a lengthy appeal process before City Coudcil car result in frustration for _ the applicant and the general public. With respect to the issue of whether Eucalyptus windrows shnuld be saved or replaced, recent City Council direction follows Staff's E1977 gradually replaced as development occurs with other varieties DATE: September 1:, 1985 �9> TO: Chairman and Mvrbers of the °lanning Commission am Tr., iro osed endments to the Tree Preservation Ordinance 37 will cant v mo v the ordinance 1 e o ow na ev areas FROM: Jack Lam, Community Oevelopmait Director BY: Dan Coleman, Senior Planner ` SUBJECT: TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE REVISIONS I. ABSTRACT: In response to the City Council and Planning Commission concerns permit process, regarding tree preservation policies and tree Staff has prepared a comprehensive amendment removal tn tho ;bit* _•i Y= � s',<. P. .... :. :��- n II. ANAL:SIS- There are two bcsic issues with regard to tree - preservation: I. The process whereby permits are issued, and 2. Preservation versus replacene %, eY Eucalyptus windrows. The present ordinar•ce does not require an application for a tree - removal permit for a construction protect prior to approval by the Plannirg Commission. Typically, the applicant puts off app!ying for a tree removal permit until shortly to prior construction. Therefore, the ten day notification and rJssfbility of a lengthy appeal process before City Coudcil car result in frustration for _ the applicant and the general public. With respect to the issue of whether Eucalyptus windrows shnuld be saved or replaced, recent City Council direction follows Staff's recommendation in a 1980 report that Eucalyptus windrows be gradually replaced as development occurs with other varieties of Eucalyptus which will not cause as many problems as the Blue Gum variety, yet stilt maintain the desired windrow character. This 1s the policy established in the Etiwanda Specific Plan area. am Tr., iro osed endments to the Tree Preservation Ordinance 37 will cant v mo v the ordinance 1 e o ow na ev areas ;bit* _•i Y= � s',<. P. .... :. :��- n ' PLANNING COMISSI00 Sf c REPORT (� Tree Preservation Ordinance Revisions September 11, 1985 Page 12 c tentative tract naps and design reviews. The inton't bore is to bring dll issues to the forefront of the approval process. By reviewing all elenents of a project up front, the public is made more aware of the related iss,res early on. explicitly expressed in the existing ordinance ono Staff feels it needs greater emphasis and clerlfication. ClarifY Dreservatlan policy for trees designated as historic andmarks. Tree removal permit requests for t�iese trees must be '• rev ewed y the Historic Freservation Coma.::ion Pursuant to Ordinance 70. The Historic Preservation Cexmissi�ln tould forward recwimendations to the Planning Commission. Historic trees will be listed in the Crdinance. NnS_ As eve opment occurs, w _ replaced with c eT aner, war variety of Eucalyptus that will retain windrow ,. character. This appr„ach 1s consistent with replacement policy of Etiwanda Specific Plan. §iron then fines for illeaat tree removal. Fmpnasis placed on rep acement w t mature trees miner tiam minetary fine. Trees removed in violation of the Tree Preservation Ordinance will require replacement with the largest nursery grown trees �. available. The intent is to make It more costly to violate the Ordinance than to comply and emphasize the signifir -ce the City .1 places upon tree preservation. "`•. Public notice of a Tree Removal Permit re.,ueat will he maAn h.r,... current process wnicn says treat tree oecision has oten mrde Dy Stuff and people were notified to appeal tie decision. In essence, the current process basically puts people an the defense end leads to confusion. By placing the issue up frvrt. w, can work with the public regarding their concerns tefore a decision is made. Appeals of Tree Removal Permit actions would be heard by tht a�nPT reins Zrotmiss on. a ann ng amm ss cn s most am alt r with the design oaproject and the rationale behind any action taken with respect th the preservation, removal, or reloca.1on of trees. CJ 'ir � t✓ '/% H {igi+ii.- +. {iL'•1^d41 i�::+!,'•if .i'!�'r• ,i, >'-Sr'�r' PLANNING Co issiou—sT REPORT' Tree Preservation Ordinance Revisions • September 11, 1905 Page /3 Establishes measures to ensure the rotection of existin zees to Fe preserve g. Al trees to be saver muss a enc ose y a chain Tank ice brio -r- to grading permits and cannot be removed until c�nstructlon is complete. This will deal with past problems of construction crews not knowing which trees were to bit saved. P Establishes tree jal t% ce�uidelines to ensure continued hualth a�ndres�ervat on o trees. Particularly for Euca typtus w n rows, t eh reels ons set ors standards for proper maintenance. I11. REC0MENOATION: It is recommended that the Planring Connisslon rev at t e report and provide Staff with direction in ,he following areas: 1. Tying tie tree removal process into the development approval process; and 2. General consensus on a gradual Eucalyptus windrow c replacement policy. With appropriate direction, Staff will set a public hearing on the F ' draft Tree Preservation Ordinance revisions at the following meeting. Respectfully submitted, Jack lam Comm;irity Development Director i., JL:OC:cv ik g� Attachments: Draft Tree Preservation Ordinance • -u 0§1 �ew :7✓.F�.>iirr.. }�:hr"�`,,,r+i,. - • - '� . , ,Y. : e .: :per_':.• ,. :.nE �I"f,..�� RESOLUTION NO. 85 -161 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMAISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, 14ECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 17.08 AND 19.08 OF RANCHO CUCA.M04GA MUNICIPAL COOF. PERTAINING TO THE PRESERVATION OF TRIES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY WHEREAS, the City Council and Planning Commission find it necessary to amend the tree preservation regulations; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendments were revi =wed by the Citizen Advisory Commission, Historic P_ reservation Commission and Building Industry Association; and WHEREAS, on the 23rd day of October, 1985, the Planning Cu-atssion held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section 65854 of the California Government Code to consider said amendments. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Planning Cormmission hereby recommends that the City Council apprave and adopt the proposed amendments. 2. That a Certiried Copy of this Resolution and related material hereby adopted by the Planning Commission shall be forwarded to the City !.ounc °1. AND ADOPTED THIS 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 1985. N OF MCITV OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA , at ,4 C-r,'�•`vn^+;s.,=�:,,s'i. J,.+,�� � ` U j d'i� }I: -?g'li $ :i, , i�'. r`yY:'3r� ''G•.v' w �,�y'.,,e .':'� 7011 _ r'S'i12''@r_.•n9r V Resol`rlXr utio n ko. Amendments to Tree ,L r ,p%y q inin'ce. Page S I, Jack Lam, Secretary of the Planning Cowission of the -City Cucamonga, of Rancho f do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and �- regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the =. City of RaoLh0 Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 23rd day of October, 1485, by the fallowing vote -to -wit: bar _ AYES: COMISSION -cPS: STOUT, CHITIEA, 4CNIEL. REVEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ' ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER s 3 . r ilr} fit^ - f.. ti If a 1CL{ .�' .y,yyriy:, rt4 l ORDINANCE NO. f-}} -00-3. oJ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 17.08 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL COD£, PERTAINING 1U THE PRESERVATION OF TREES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamcnga does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: Chapter 17.08, Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Cude is hereby amended by adding Section 17.08.050 ;a8 to read as follows: Section 17.08.050 Absolute Policies E. Resource Protection 8. The Project contains trees protected by the Rancho Cucanonga Municipal Code that are worthy of preservation; an application for a tree removal perait and report have been submitted and healthy trees art preserved through proper site plannino and grading techniques. The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its postage at least once in The Daily Report. a newspaper of general circulation published in the Ctty oT ntor o, a iforiia, and circdiated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. PASSID, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this * day of *, 19 *a -AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Jon 0. Mikels, ayor ATTEST: -3ever y A. Authulet, City er 1 ila„�.i t j.G If�e �y ��y{M1�YT�� YI ` ll� � J• ` ORDINANCE 140.-K+.86-6_Q. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 19.08 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE, PERTAINING TO THE PRESERVATION OF TREES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follcws: SECTION 1: Chapter 19.08, Title 19 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby repealed. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding Cha—pt—e-r—rM thereto to read as attached hereto. The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (1S) days sfter its passage at least once in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City o nta- n, a ifornia, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamongp, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this • day of AYES: NOES: ASSENT: on H ke s, Mayor ATTEST: Beverly A. Authe et, ty er °I The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follcws: SECTION 1: Chapter 19.08, Title 19 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby repealed. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding Cha—pt—e-r—rM thereto to read as attached hereto. The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (1S) days sfter its passage at least once in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City o nta- n, a ifornia, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamongp, California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this • day of AYES: NOES: ASSENT: on H ke s, Mayor ATTEST: Beverly A. Authe et, ty er Z.•` CHAPTER 19.08 TREE PRESERVATION Section 19.08.010 Purpose and Intcat The oucelyptut, palm, oak, sycamore, pine and other trees growing within the City of Rancho Cucamonga are natural aesthetic resource which help define the character of the City. Such trees are worthy of protection In order to preserve the scenic beauty, prevent soil erosion, provide shade, protection, screening and counteract air pollution, it is pertinent to the public peace, harmony and welfare that such trees be protected from .ndlserImInate cutting or removal, especially where such trees are associated with a proposal for development. Y� In particular, the Eucalyptus windrows are a unique Inheritance whose cumucative value as a windbreak system Is a desirable resource. The majority of the existing windrows are the Blue Gum Eucalyptus variety whose brittle and messy characteristics become dangerous and n nuisance In developed areas. Therefore, it is necessary to replace the Blue Gum with a more appropriate variety of tree to protect the public health, safety and welfare, yet still maintain the desired windrow character. it Is the Intent of this chapter to perpetuate a windbreal. system through gradual replacement of Blue Gum Eucalyptus windrows and eepanslan of the system through planting of new Spotted Gum Eucalyptus windrows along the established grid pattern, as development occurs. It is the intent of this chapter to establish regulations for tha preservation of heritage trees within the City of Rancho Cucamonga on private as well as public property In order to retain as many trees as posslhle consistent with the purpose of this chapter and the reasonable economic enjoyment of said property. Section 19.09.020 Definitions For the purposes of this chapter, unless otherwise apparent from the context, certain words and phrases used In this chapter are defined as :ollows, A. �Herltage tree" shall mean any trele, shrub or plant which meats the following criterlat 1. AR Eucalyptus wh,drows; d. All woody plants In excess of fifteen feet in height and having a single trunk circumference of fifteen Inches or more, as measured twenty -four Inches from ground level; 3. Multi- trunks having a total circumference of tht -ty Inches or more, as measured twenty -four Inches from ground level; 4. A stand of trees the nature of which makes each dependent upon the others for survival; /9 `7 S. Any other tree as may be deemed historically or eultu:aily significant by the City Planner because of size, condition, location, or aesthetic qualities. 8. Consideration shall be given to the preservation of trees which are fruit or nut bearing. 7. Commercial nursery stock shall be excluded from the provisions of this chapter. B. "Remove" shall Include any act which will cause a heritage tree to die, < Including but not limited to, acts which Inflict damage upon root systems, bark or other parts of tree by fire, appLcation of toxic substances, operat!on of equipment or machinery, changing natural grade of land by excavation or filling the drip line area around the trunk, or by attachment of signs or artificial material piercing the bark of the tree by means of nails, spikes or other piercing objects. C. "Drip line" shall mean a tt%e which may be drawn on the ground around a tree directly under Its outermost branch tips and which Identifies that location where rain water tends to drip from the tree. D. " Associated with a proposal for development" shall mean any land area for which an application for a specific plan, variance, parcel map, subdivision, development/dcsign review or a time extension thereof, or special or conditional use permit has been filed with and Is pending consideration by the City or has been approved but the related project or applicable phase thereof has not )een completed. E. "Historic landmark" shall mean, for the purposes of this Ordinance, any tree designated as an historic landmark by City Council pursuant to Section 2:4.100. Section 19.0114030 Permit Required A. No person, firm or corporation shall cut down, move, dtsuoy or remove anyy heritage tree within the City limits, Including'an applicant for a bulldlng permit, without first obtaining a tree removal permit from the City Planner. 9 B. No tree removal permit shall be Issued for the removal of any heritage tree on any lot associated with a proposal for development, unless the project has been approved by the City and a grading permit therefor, If applicable to the project, has been Issued, un) ^ss an emergency waiver Is granted pursuant to Section 19.08.110. 1 C. No tree designated as a historic landmark shall be altered, cut down, moved, destroyed or removed by any person, firm or corporation without first obtaining a landmark alteration permit and tree removal permit. /0 G I� tit, M,,,. �., ty. section 19.09.040 Permit Procedures A. Prior to the Issuance of such permit, the'City Planner or designee shall - Inspect the site and shall clearly designate the trees to be preserved. .. B. Where an application for a Tree Removal Permit Is associated with a proposal :or development, the City Planner shall complete his -� Investigation and make a report to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall review the case, and shall .onduet a public hearing where required. The Commission shall grant the request, grant the request with modification, cr deny the request. , C. Subsequent to Investigation, the City Planner or Planing Commission shall approve, conditionally approve or deny the cpplfcatinn to cut down, Planner or Planning or Commissiony may Imp;see [ conditions deemed nacessdr/ to Implement the provtslons of this article, Including, but eat limited to, replacement of the removed or cut down tree or secs with tres(c) of species and quantity commbrtsorate with the aesthetic value of the tree Y trees cut down or removed; tree relocation to another site on :.he property, provided that the environment conditions of said new location are favorable to the survival of the tree, and provided further that ssch relocation is accompiisheo by quoliliM leadscape architect or qualifleo arborist. D. Where the trees In questfun are designated as a historic landmark, a request for a Tree Removal Permit shall he subject to review, by the Historic Preservation Commision end landnark &Iteration permit procedure pursusnt to section 2.24.120. The aetlo of the Historic Preservation Commission shell be forwarded to the Planning Commission. The following trees are designated ns historic landmarks$ VlMorl& Avenue. 21 palm and 02 Eucalyptus street trees facing Lots 13, j�6LOCk H; Tract BT04, Block 11; and Lots 1 and 2, Stock J, Ettwands Colony Lands (Designated 3/4/81 by Ordinance No. 138). HI Mend Avenue. 41 palm and 291 Eucalyptus sUeet trees facing Lots 13- e, ck ; and Lots 1.4, Block 11, Etfwoda Colony Lands (Designated 4/1/81 by Ordinance No. 141). _ E. Tree removal permits shall be effective following the ten (10) day appeal period and shall be valid for a period of ninety (90) days, subject to oxtetnlon. Where the tree removal psrmit is associated with a pt. mal for development, the ninety (90) days shall start from the dnto of Issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever comes first. Section 19.08.050 Protection of Existing Tram Care shall be exercised _,v all !ndivlduals, developers and contractcm, working near preserved trees so thtt r,o damage occurs to said trees. AN construction shat: preserve bei protect 'he health of trees to remain, relocated trees, and new trees ytanted to replace those removed In accordance with the follWwing measurest 117 I T A. All trees to be saved shall be enclosed by a chain link fence prior to the Issuance of any grading or building permit and prior to commencement of work. Pence$ are to remain in place during all phases of construction and may not be removed without the written consent of the City Planner vntll construction Is complete; and D. No substantial disruption or removal of the structural or absorptive roots of any tree shall be performed; and C. No fill material shalt be placed within three (3) feet from the outer trunk circumference of any tree; end D. No fill materials shall be placed within the drip lira of any tree In excess of eighteen (10) Irahm bi depth. This Is a guideline and Is subject to modification to meet the needs of individual tree species as determined by an arli or landscape architect; and E. No substantial compaction of the soil within the drip line of any tree shall be undertaken; and P No construction, Including structures and walls, that disrupts the rout system shall be permitted. As a guideline no cutting of roots should &cave within a distanco equal to 3 112 times the trunk diameter, as measured at ground level. Actual setback may vary to meet the needs of individual tree species as determined by an arbor!st or !andseape architect. Where some root removal Is necessary, the tree crown may require thinning to prevent wind damage; and G. Eucalyptus windrows to be preserved shall have adequate provisions for deep watering ana limit surface watering within fifteen (15) feet of trunk; and H. The City Planner may Impose such additional mea3ures determined necessary to preserve and protect the health of trees to remain, relocated trees, and new trees planted to replace those removed. w c rni T" wn rw. awi.�.n reW w.. 'n as tm Rio i m �r1OVi�e y aroa cormmucnon - • .i. Rio tr Section 19,08.060 Permit Application 1 - An application for a tree :emoval permit shall be Bled with the City Planner on forms provided fo.• the purpose, The City Planner shall require a tred removal permit application, together with any app :icat•'on for tentative subdivision maps or other proposal for urban development. The appllestlon ' shall be submitted with a report which shall contain the hollowing Information: A. A statement as to reamons for removal or relocation, B. The number, species, and size (circumference as measured twenty -tour Inches from ground leve0.and height of tree, • C. The location of all trees on site on a plot plan In relation to structures and Improvements (e.g., streets, sidewalks, fences, slopes, retaining .vans, file.). If the application is associated with fie proposal for development, the looatlon of all trees on site shall be dotted on a t grading plan. D. Photographs of the trees to be cut cr relocated. H. If a tree Is proposed to be relocated, the relocation sits shall be Identified and site preparat'an and relocaton methods described, P. Proposed method of removal, G. The health of any tree declared diseased, Infested, or dying shall be !1 verified by a written report of a qualified Irndseapa architect lbtensed ,yl by the State of California or by a qualified arborist. 't4 Section 19.06.070 Criteria for Hvaluatine Permib e Upon receipt of the app:Icatlon, the City Planner or designee shall Investigate ' the site and evaluate the application on the basis of the following ewerla: n A. The conditton of the tree with resi.ect to disease, danger of collapse of all or any portion of the tree, proximity to an existing structure, or Interference with utilityservlcds; ,a 5, H. The necessity to remove a tree In order to construct Improvements which allow economic enjoyment nf'tsr rro ?ertyl C. The number of trees existing In the neighborhood; and the effect ttie ' removal would have on the established character of the area end the .. property valuca; l` '.' D. Good forestry preatices, that Is, the number of healthy mature trees a t, given parcel of land will support; H. Whether or not the removal of the tree is necessary to construct required Improvements within the public street right-o!-way or within a y flood control or utility right -of -way; ,@ F. Too suitability of the h fie spectra for use N an urban areal t G. Whether or not the tree could be preserved by pruning and proper _ maintenance or relocation rather than removal, H. Whethig or not such tree(s) constitute a significant natural resource of " the City, and I. Whethor not such trees are required to be preserved by any specific plan, community plan, condition of approval, or designation as historic ` landmark. The City Planner shall give priority to the Inspection of those equests based upon hazardous conditions. The City Planner, or his or her designee, may ref, r any reqt est to another department, committee, (ward, or the Plenr.ag C..o„alylon for a determination where It is determined the appllcetiLI InVO!Ves unusual site development requirements cc unique characteristics, v ralsos questions of policy substantially more significant than generally pertain and which require Planning Commission consideraticn. Section 19.08.080 Tree Replacement Polsq A. Blue Gum Eucalyptus trees shall be gradually replaced through planting of new Eucalyptus Mamdata Spotted Gum) along the established grid pattern In IL gallon size minimum, spaced at 8 feet on centee end iroperly staked, as development occurs. } B. Where existing Eucalyptus windrowri are to be removed, they shall be replaced with Eucalyptus Maculate (Spotted Gum) In 15 gallon size _t mtnimum spaced at 8 feet on center and properly staked. �a 3 C. Heritage tree removal shall require replacement with the largest rursery grown tree(s) available as determined by the City Planner or Planning Commission. Heritage tree relocation to another location on the site Is ,j the preferred alternative to replacement subject to a written report by a landscape architect or arborist on the feazibWty -of ttansplsating the A� tree. 5 1). The Cltq Plrnnor or Planning Commission shall condition tree removal permit for ' ¢placement oP tree(.e)'xlthin a specific time po.iod and In „i accordane,, with the replacement policy established herein. E. To moist the City Planner or Planning Commission In making a determination, the vplicant for a tree removal permit may submit in °• independent appraisal prepared by an horticulturist, arborlst, or licensed landscape architect to determine the replacement value of the tree(s) to " be removed. Such appraisal shall be based upon the most recent edlt',on s' of the "Gu!de for Establishing Valor of Trees and Other Plan's ", Py- prepared by the Council of Trr» Landscape Appraisers. r3 0 Section 19.08.090 Permit — Nutifleetion Procedure At least ten (10) days prior to making a decision, the City Planner c. designee shall provide for public comment through notice to the property owners - adjoining the subject property that such tree removal permit was requested and the results of the Investigation. Where a request for a tree removal permit Is associated with a proposed for development, the public hearing notification required by Section 17.02.110 shall Include a description of the tree removal permit request. All persons engaged in failing or removing trees, and desirous of using explosives for this purpose within the City limits, shell first obtain approvals to use such explosives from the Building Division and the Foothill Fire Protection DL^trlct which approval shall be noted on the Tree Removal Permi: prior to Issuaneo of same by the City Planner or Planning Commission. In addition, the applicant shall .uralsh such bond or insurance as shall be deemed necessar. for the protection of surrounding property from any possible damage which might result from such activity. l.i _,v 193 it °alas,: Section 19.08.100 Appeal Prcc ure '• Any person aggrieved by the dnnlal or approval of a tree removal permit shall be In the described below. The filing afforded recourse of appeal manner of an appeal shall automatically suspend tho permit Issued until action thereon is i taken by the approprlate authority. In hearing such an appeal, the appeal body !! (Planning Commission or City Council) may affirm, affirm In part, or reverse the previous determination on the tree removal permit. i A. Administrative Decbion. Appeals based on decisions by the City Planner may fie iRZ-67 an eggrleved party with the Planalug Commission. Except as otherwise provided In this title, such appeal is to be filed with the secretary of the Planning Commission in writing, together with any appeal fee, within ten (10) crlendar days of the decisive action. The Planning Commission may consider the matter and may affirm or revere wholly or partly, the action which is In question. x'•� B. Plannin Commission Decision. Appeal of a Planning Commission decis on may be made by tiling a written notice of appeal with the City i. Clerk, together with any appeal fee, within ten (10) calendar days following the Planning Commis!on's decision. The City Council will ' consider the matter and may affirm or reverse wholly o: partly, the v action which Is In question. section 19.08.110 Emerrmey Waive, Where a tree is determined by the City Planner or designee to be a dangerous condition requiring emergency action'to preserve the public health, safety and welfare, the permit requirement may be waived. In the evert of an amcrgcncy eattsod by,a hazardous or dangerous tree, which condition poses an Immediate threat to person or property, any member of the Foothill Fire Protection District may authorize the destiuction or removal of such tree without securing a pnrmit therefore. Section 19.08.120 Use of Explosives All persons engaged in failing or removing trees, and desirous of using explosives for this purpose within the City limits, shell first obtain approvals to use such explosives from the Building Division and the Foothill Fire Protection DL^trlct which approval shall be noted on the Tree Removal Permi: prior to Issuaneo of same by the City Planner or Planning Commission. In addition, the applicant shall .uralsh such bond or insurance as shall be deemed necessar. for the protection of surrounding property from any possible damage which might result from such activity. l.i _,v 193 it °alas,: Section 19.01.130 Tree Nainienance _ A. The rrmintenance of trees standing upon private or homeowner owned - property shall be the responsibility of the owner or owners of rgose r properties. B. builders shalt be required to pprune, treat, and maintain existing trees and plant new ones in such a fsshlon that when the trees become City, association, or private property the tree, will be free of various derange, pests, diseases, and dead branches, The traits shall be Iri good biological and aesthetic condition upon acceptance. C. To Insure adequate and uniform maintenance, Eucalyptus windrows should be maintained In s merer that preserves the aesthetics and history of the Eucalyptus windrows, as described In Section 19.09.130D. D. Pruning prior to transfer of mature Eucalyptus windrows to the City, - essoclatlons or private owners mutt be done by builders as follows, 1. Leaves, debris, dead branches and suckers accumulated along the base of the windrow shall be removed periodically, or as may be necessary for reasons of public health and safety. 2. Dead or lecaying branches shell be removed, trunks stripped, and tree structure trimmed at least every four years or as may be necessary for reasons of public health and safety as well as • aesthetics. 3. Trees should be trimmed to preserve their natural structure; the practice of "topping" the trees Is prohibited. 4. Remove unsightly or poorly crotched limbs end heavily leaning branches. S. All cuts are to be 'made flush and/cr in line with proper arborlcultural practices. - S. Decd, diseased, or dying trees shall he removed as may be necessary,. ,. and shall be replaced with IS gallon Eucalyi kus c " E. Young Eucalyptus windrow trees shall be maintained, fertilized, and Irr!gated as may be necesary to sustain them it, healthy uonditlon. Dees trees shall be replaced with same speclen of appropriate size; replacement trees need not exceed 15 gallon slw,. ,r Section 19.01.140 Penalty Violaaor, of any section of this Article shall constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000 or by Imprisonment not to exceed six (9) months, or both such fine and Imprisonment. Each tree removod.ln h violation of this Article shall constitute a separate offense. i r Y a P, a ti CITY OF RANCHO CliCAMONGA STAFF REPORT i Y `yK •.iR��V"i`. GpGlafpy �. c';, "ATE: November G, 1985 ti v TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council m' FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director BY: Curt Johnston, Associate Planner SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION FOR ORDINANCE 274 - FOOTHILL BOULEVARD -N M L me xten5 on er . nand ce 214 conta n ng nter m policies to be applied to development pro,lects along Foothill Boulevard prior to completion of the Foothill Boulevard Corridor plan. I. BACKGROUND: As the Council will recall, on October 2, 1985, a 45- aiency Grdlnance (No. 274), containing the Foothill Boulevard Corridcr Interim Policies was adopted. As provided by State law, the Ordinance may now be extended until completion of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan (maximum 22 months, 15 days). A public hearing to receive any community input 1s required for the extension. To update progress on the Specific Plan, a Reauest For Proposal (RFP), has been submitted to selected planning firms in the area. The deadline for responses is Nonday, November 25, 1985. Curing the month of D +cemb2r, the consultant team should be selected and the contract neiotiated for Council review and approval shortly thereafter. II. RECOMMENDATIOII: It is recommended that the City Council tonduct a pu eaT, and adopt the attached Ordinance, Ile. 274 -A, extending the effective date of the Interim Policies to allow completion of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. Respektfully tub4tted, Jack Lam, AICP ✓` Community Development Director JL:CJ:cv Attachments: Ordinance 274 with Report on Action Taken Excerpts of 10 -2 -85 Council Minutes r Affidavit of Mailing Proposed ordinance 274 -A �%;,��`- Si�i.':Y't;.�b -•'S �d `�:zVY sire. �4k. ..i...�' /�� I APMA%nr P jft sTATz or cALnFORNL4 :,00UNTY0FSANBERNARDM 'of, Notics of Publ it Hearins City Cowncil • City of Rancho Cmemmongs to wit: October 250 1935 -1 cwWr WAer peraRy of porjwy dW W foregaft Is trus ad correct .1-Ited at Ontado. CaUl RTAls We 25th d3/of October .193L5 N- ' (1 7 i' i 'AYCE No. 274 AN 010TUNCg nr TIS CM C07CIL OP Ts: CITI Of ILUM COCAM61101 ADOPTING An IlTtlga.' ZOTENS) CIDINAy[C POs La TO CALITONICrA GOT®11G'sr COOL a'CCT109 6565P:e) PaTAIIIII) , . TO TIT ESTA13 =10M Of Tu 1`4 6rW, ?,dNi SUNDM3 MA' TEX i00tttnt COONI031 - .. A. 1"IttL •• r, _ 1 (1) T10 ltsmlag IMpartargt of the City of Rue" 0u4,jov a has ' beea Intimated to, Conduct and aosolsta the •foathtll SouleeuM 'COmider Studyer a study eht.rh IS intended to result in a synthesized apoifin plea of.,1 - denlep ent for,ttat Portion of foothill gouloaam ranSfag frea :tht etst'ctty. Ttsits at Greve Aa.CCt is per Creek Connel and frost re •eaa , the 0.eo yry te'' �•�' 1, the wt City Units at fast Alcdue. A Cap desarlaiat the beundarlis of.sald • -'•� study area L attached hinter arted as Wtttt 0169 nas'f, Snoorp"ted- iA Off• her.IS by this referrooe, geretnAftsr. said study area d refet^red to as -the r"thill Condor.- r t) - (111 !eosins the oaoletim of it, Teat: 111 Corridor Stay, it is 't 'foresnabl. that dteeloq.at M);pdela •ha br ll N suttted far pv"rty wtthln the Foothill Cerrlder. M -r#O"r It IS faresNebl• that sunk derelanbt aMpasa)s wou:G not Coafom to tho ultizatc apectflo Plan of dow.loNent far .hit study area and would Contradiat the speCUte pwpo:e of the unified _ speatfle plan. - (Itt) This Catioail it Conoeraed aWUt the 'twatloo'Of er orderly. W Mane., d.t•iopeent witttn the roothr't Corridor area. lcoorsleylyl to . protest the integrity of the ultimate 1Peoitie ylan and to aaAurs he continued dteelopatnt Stability of stage Properties within the study arear this r aaail finds that It in W-- ausarr to establiab interior seeing bliol•t to alidi the Plnruning Starr the it" net,saary to Samittgat• am fursulete - lne apeatftc Plan of Oval O ntnt for the Notbill Coyrtdor. _ (b) All legal DrerNutattee Greer to the adoption era :hta Ordlas'4. hale occurred. .. g. ,fh•Alntnae � ',1 . Nov, NUEiTIQI, IT 1e -?ni9T ocuum CT :SL r,: TT coosci1, Or TNZ CITY Or,AAxw COCnVp11 as FOLLOUaI_ r ' ' SfCTI05 it In all nlpeots .; is fortes is tea 200aLr Part A, of -, this Ordtnana.. r SECTION 2r': Tn. C }ty Cocnall of tta City of PWOhO Cuaaaoath h•nby r - finds as follaws, - b; The City of gaaobo Cu"congs is pns,atly dte.loptng Speedo pee s Plan of deaelpnt Iqr tae WthILL CCM rn fi dor e. e ultt� :• SCSI of this plan L to pre,iit a balamed and "Ifbf. plan of Gngnp•n :, •• within the tnathill Corridor and will ultlastely upgade the .coo*sio, ono tultunl welfare of gwraens AM txoperties "in within end sumoadt:, Foothill Carrldori b. • Paidins the uKaUtlon of the SpeCtf u Plan, t - fans.nllt that applloal Laas for dei.lopsent inaclelag the FW..hlll ; - " - will ea reaeAed that say the ultLett SCSI, and eb,.otie•a spealfto Pleas and. ) - a. The appeal of additional Subdbisiam9 war G•r :.9 , vr[ane.ar bu11dlCg D•nita, and say other SPP11Cab3. ratt6I4S`ntb H: %.a. f-X' pertaining to property within the yaothill Corridor aru•I Neu:: yen' a, lanedlAte threat So Gublla h+alth, "City or welfare of 'tboss Perseis %u t ; &'r Prep•rtla within ud sutnuading the rtothtll Corridor. y zn ry 1 �S M:. 17 . r. -1t t 1 a .= i t. b: �S 4Y; Ordinance W. Z74 1„e Z ' �(h 1 . , •daptedt SECr^dI jt the follow LAS InU rrW rtn Zoning Lw tto are hvby , •(� peminC the completion arms Lapleaeatatton of the fomthLLl' Cerftdar study, 811 denlopnnt within the foothill Cbm14or sh.1t be conduot.d to sboordanee with the foothill Ccrrtdar B.Urla rolls:., whim are attaos ' ` hereto and imorporsted in this Ordt moo as Mlblt!0e, toy sppLic•tio6 for d..elopment "thin the foothill Corridor which to inconsistent Wth the lat.rlw policies adopted herelo to hereby prohtbited. _ SICMOI kit This OrdLasase U emoted mmser the autber_ty of CAIUMl• —Lcrlc t Code Dwtioa 65951(b) and skill be at no NrUer force end'effeot fGty.ri.s (45) aw pros the date of the Sceptics, of this ' OHLmaoe u41013 thv City's ll he: eat-MA this Ordlmoo, to the manor So +, Provided in $aid 0eotim 65650(b), D[CMnB §1, This Ordimnw�is hereby dntsred. to be sn "essay n•aure pwr.uaeiTo,:m term of Califorate Oenraeeat Cate bottom 65656 and - 36957 (b) and this (MlRSOrs shall take .moot LeedUUly upon its adoption. DICTION 61 its -.ar Shall Also this Otdimaos and the City Clet4 shall cause th. swsw %A• published Within riftew (15) daya'.Rer SU pungs at lout case !a The Bat•. Bepart. a awsp•per If {mall simulattom publisbed is the Clt7 0 2�F'laI aMomLa, and oLrsu1atW U the City of proles "' ' NrasoaP, CalifornU. U330, AIf11brA1. Bad ADOPMO this Ind ay or Octoter, 1915., , Ay0i Aright, BW44t. Male, Dahl. King , (Ant Kane • L0.1IBr1 ' am* • ,I. am5r1 ' �c�"` r�rly A u:1et, city C ier F ' Z, WWLT A. num cT. crT! CLm at em City of pncho Cunasonga. , California. do hereby certify that the fomcoisg Ordlmnne was tatroaaed at regular wting of the Ccsmatl of the City of ReWhu Cusaaonge held on %W26i , day of Cotober, 1915, and vaa finally passed at a regular s..ttng of the CttY 'COUalll of the City or Naccho CYasucags held on the god Gay of October, 1995. Executed this 5rd day or October, 1965 at Baroho C+usm•n. California, ' wm y u .0 , y tr . I • • I U i OF ITEM- RANCHO COCA -NIONGA TITLE, PL,I-N,NI.NG DIVESION EXHID MINT "A' I 4",• �, Ordleaen qo. 27A � �';�ir:�y'2 t 1 CITY OP MCA, Foothill f RANCHO CCC�LNIO \G1 TIC, Study Are! PLANNING IXV6K)V F_ \HI @P a•2__ M bi-,,r v 4UH r. ✓i w t orait.x. im1 :TY rfi NA. d , M111T -6- 4' r 9 2 EEHIBIf g s.• -� 5r'�j FCOIIIILL CMIGr8 IMMIN FBttCtES y t iN�SSl3! The follafng Goal Statement and Interim Fancies w provided to guida the decision m+ktn9 process during prparatlon of the Foothill Boulevard Corridor Study. The policies address basic land use and urban design Issues unique to the Foothill Corridor, end are Intended to am &polled In fon2unCtion .iith the Deralopxnt Code, whichaver Is more Mtrictivi, unless Saniflully addressed c by that polities. Am boundaries of the Study Area include commercial, office, end residential 4 i orpartia along Foothill Bailavard, ranging from the west city limit at Gran Avenue to Car Creek Channel, and from the Dente Freeway to the as: city ;1 Ilalt at Ea' Avenue (Exhibits A•1, A -2). t1gAt STATOCrT • • Goals define community aspirations and intentions. The following Gat for foothill Soulowd attamots to spithtalte a cxple4 sat of I +Roe deallnq with land use, urban design, traffic and circulation. and economic y'+bility Into a ' eoWrohensin, understandable ml a0levable statment. .,y�• To establish a high ttality, attractive, no unifying desln Imp* reflective of community neritage and Provide t vlahP0 - sating for a ba,anced mixture of raardn m tial and Coarclel 1 as IOtia with said and efficient L-Wic circulation and +ccess. Based on this goal, the r +hewing 1.:erta aoliclos are yVrovided to scdrets development related iatvei wring preparation of the :oothill Corrloo- Study, i a r 9 2 EEHIBIf g s.• -� 5r'�j N i Cr , f?aJ e o.nc': rase e ' et "I" POtIMS r A. 04naril AMJrCocntot Preliminary Rov14h, A.1 Prior to processing development /Gesigm Rutleh, applications within the Study area the Planning C,,,1111" still conduct a Preliminary A411ew to determine Con:btency with the Interim Goal end Policies cmitaloed herein. 4 intent is to Provide direction to the 411011cant aM staff early :n the re.lew Process and avoid undee time delays 0. expenditurts. A.2 Submittal requlreamnte for a Preliminary Ravish, shall include a Site Utllilatlon My Shaming the relatioot ip Of the Site to surrounding 0roparty and leprovfMnt4 a conceptual Site Plan, AM t defcrIotion of the proposed use. Additional information ' may be re0u4sted Is dee4d necessary by an the Planner. City Vol Usltt /Extmsiens A.j Apprival of development pra;osat%. except Subdlvislun wps, shall apse ' eighteen (ad) months from the date of ypraval. The intent If to &1101 early re-evaluation of projects not yet constructed for amsssteney rltn eon adopted Foothill Coreldor Study or other then current City standards. a!, 4.4 Time eAtenslors for any devaltomert r} proposal within the Study area subject ss lapis • ,to a of approval say ot granted, ," 2 In twel' •(12) month Incr~ts and not to 4AUwd a total of•lour (4) year% ..�•y, from the Original date of aprrovsl, ^.. • i Subject to any Incontlstent proves yen ,,+4 • •f State law, and ton f011o•Ing, findings: S .. Tbs proposed land use, C r:•m, Comply1 444 condlttont of p: s• l , v Comply with l , ;'- te of he Foothill,* . . Interim Policies; b. The project Is consistent .!;•+;v i,�y� t POIIcIH, standards: • iIV• In 'It. requirements affect ihe'., :•q..t ,rP Of ton va:tlslon. iMl• • dt�•yr.� Y� , tii ^ -Nk i••p 1 !�� ", -Ilk :i" r'S "• w /iv'f Y�•, •%�i• 1/tt d 1 ipL,• ,.t .4 .�' � ri �. SU- ••t�1l�lif \1�%j +.0. �T d C. I-& ;rNting of laid time astenslcn will not ae dotrl4ntel to Inc public health, safety, or valfars or materially la,,urlaus too properties or improvement% In the vicinity. d. Current etonotic, marketing, and inventory randitions have Made It unreasonable to develop the protect prior to this tiff. Coepat10111 tys A'G $hillabe clowpaIblw with ultimtewuse% on surrounding properties, perticularly residential Y14s, an d MI 'at* potential conflicts to the .[tent practical. Mitigation amasurM may to Laster Planing. t are transltIOni of to. 9. bunting helheight, architectural fora ono djost y, landscape buffers, {wind st a Ilan vatlon, visual barriers of vind s wbj gr 6ing coedit lain lto dsrupt Ilpeauf. fght concerns, and alternative circutatlon and access. B, Lane Ys : i' The Intuit of the following policies Is to provide a viable setting for a F. balanced mixture of remldentlalI cornerI let, offlCe, and other actlrltlet of co,nity vide slgnlflCance copatiDle with fu"CVa leg land uses General Plan Amendments B.1 Applications for General Plan Land use A Vdments are discouraged. Prior to r I approval of any 0.ch tunMent. l• however, the Planning Comatniwn shall �. .eke tlU following findingu b, mat a, fie Di000s6 emend4nt It cteerly canslstant •.flit, the Intent ana them foothill Owlevard policies foe D. The pro ima land use 4 to^bC "s q h propertltl4te 111 M {Yfra: 191 (.3 property. Y• A C. The Proposed lmd u1e wl -it create significant traff`. , circulation Impacts. .' 4 :t, s •gayy 4t��1 r �ly O 'a Y:•,��q:3{' Kl,�k!a § ?!e•�i�:'•`.:1 :�.''.•. _:.�:ti.l..� .1.a: =i. ,r . � . - � P E. a ff ± is s A ordtLnc. so. 17+ ' tax. e Development otlta lots A+m,dmeitt Land Use A - ^R d the proposed land use will not be dos+ rental to prcpartlet or lagrovenents In the vicinity. 0.2 DaveletWt District Amerutnntt boundarfes may be constdvN if consistent with the General Plm Land Use Cieeeht and InWIN poi lr. •v, 'm where necessary to achieve more •agicol and •fflcf"t land use and site ptm,tr patteras. The lotert Is ti^ chow III1ltality '.ring d natter .lamming Process ar pmv!de t tool to Qhteve • r Obdectl •,R or the Inttrin Policiet 0.7 Current L.xd Ufa rapulatlo't within the Study Area shall raattn In effect. aicept that the following llalcations ,hart apply duriny preparation of the Foothill Boulevard Corridor Pier. Tat purpose 1s it avoid ItM uses which +ay have adverse telthettc Ivacts. until I specific areas of Concern. A list of pemitted In ratty Pamitted uscs 11W OR the attached tot /rl9 Use ins for the Foothill Boulevard Wittng or previously .:Islneltfl Mn bulidinea ehvll regulatory provision/ of the City. The following new land uses shall not , be estebt Ished In ene Office /ProfalNonal and Jerertl ComagrClal- Districts within the Study 1 Arai. - EvoMslon Of existing. uses Identified below shall be allowed Oubjcct to the Provisions of the Mersa Policies for the F"thill . lovard Corridor and Development Code Standards. M'mal Care Facility with evter'7r ' eePnels, pen/, or runt ' Cmterhn Contractors Yards 1 1 q N' :° J, " - ' Otdt Weie 70. 7 tln'.f , hprf h� J YZ • L t - CCUIPatnt Rental Yards r Ice Machim (uutd00r) • Mail- storage for public use .t • 4Creatlon Vehicle Storage Yard . ` Vehicular Storage Yards , The following new land uses may be established In W Office /Professional " or Waves CCmaercial,01strlcts within the Study Arai Iva a•ached Interim ' ' use Regulations , subject to the approval of a �Ond It lOnat Ole •enett. t, t t Carprntar SAM or Cabinet Shop . on y Stores and PUMICNs , (COP In OP District only) ` . nurseries L garden Sipply Stores I1 Plusb Ing Shop and SUDDItes ,�. Second Hand Stores and Pawn Shops SSpiritualists Y 3 C. Matter Planned 5*10100a tt �p i the Purpose of tilt 1KtI0n IS t0 Poi integrated do at the s.. i lest review pro ming of .n the review Drparcel matter Dlanning of dOr lied " .• ;� areas l avoid eve tingle parcels of land In winner u neat VIII avoid des future Dtasants Or Precludes future deis to I P s asn ev of adjaa wrgN In the Dest way tasible. The tpKlfh Intent recognize Yes l and solve prc0lees Oe1dn tney :q t ccur And r ni while 'icur end take advantage of OpDOtWnitles +nits they ed,t. V Mister Plans Rtgutrcd QI A COCept,,al Kaftor Plan $hail be for PII�m i+ ItvOUI Cod Junction Mlt1tMvel0p4ntA proposals wherever neCe4t3ry to esfure•, a IntngrAw development. enhance ` + h&MAIOW and orderly dtvelopmrnt, , J •� mitigate SIN constraints to adjoining .+ property and maalelle lend potential 't r n toundaries /City Serefft C.2 The area of Nester Plans &hilt not bs ') confined by Individual lot llpes, t.r, daterfilned by logical plann,ng boundaries 1 an site Conditions of ,,'a E, required by the Planning Coraeltsi0n' or ' :-t J,t City Planner, fitter Planning beyond i a. t k� it '�„xp' ,, kit•` •:`tn, 'i •' ttttfMf it'aSCftVjt�•�^.y}Xa �•;s'�v' {t �tinil.�}�t..•:.. ��,(^�F. 0rdlnanca W. 211 i.,. ease to .s ra a Content t • � {ti the bout.dkries Of soecifft •01..'.' alter It lncendCC to penult the City i D COnfdlnKlnO taro ' use am Site ~ Planning to enhance apportunitlds for 00ality development Consistent with tha �• standard) for Foothill 3NI1,4rd. do. it esyhas'' •ftfl - COme.tK1a1• p .-tatt 0 ,yniaed groups of ttr Pct,res and ur, aM provide for eyflctent fi ut/l i2nipn of iand. � C.2 At t ninhuu, tvastar of... h.fi as posted neOAttard� to assure Consistency with the IAlene of tole 0. New Oevnlopwontt The intent of the following 001104s is to establish a hl )h duality. attractive and unifying design Inge which promotes a sense of Identity and reflects comity oritage and to provide for fife end efficient traffic flo� and optt'luo vehicular and pedestrian access within to Corridor. Architecture 0.1 La architecture of new construct'en Shall be sensitive t0 the herltale Of ' Rancho Cucamonga and retail to ryerby structures of Ccaunity slgnif l csnff. Design elements may Include but a•e not limited t0. river rack /ileldsw'. wells, exposed beaswork. Yin, arbors• curved parapet walls, and covered walkways or Arcades 0.2 All aPPNCetlont for new developrnt within the study are, shill Ine,4dt a Witt" Statement of.. vchltectarll Intent Indicating how the product is • sensitive to this heritage of ean0,3 Cucamonga. Pedestrian Orientation 0.3 Site planning, Including but •t ±f Orientation and k d eanfiguration, shall enhancl e poles, CMneCtfOnS On• and off sit. t conttnuout pedettrien Sys, f reo4:rad In all new prate.. $ connections between buildings, , h,;,M KyN('•gQy'Ol, �r �C{ 7;f� fir ' 11 r O�n ��il.Fi�:: Y {1.. tiVf)wv r„to.' .{ ii):.al.K�,.rr� S 1 a ' 0rate+OCe Ce, b file t iMCr:VPti^'ilt�C D� di Wt � M a'eet street adjacent Ile",IZI &.4 trass �t stop$ .hen, t its %hall be Provided such is plans, shaded ...sing alcoves, rapanded raltways with surface AtataentI tetturlaad parpeet across I'll raised Planters, trash and nc dde , ut��f A�slaI Ale asre eecouragad. Combined Access D.e Through the natter Planning prO Can driveways onto foothill poulevard "ha lf be coordinated for eonststaney with ` talstlnf City access Policies (I.e„ 3d0' driveway eeparatton) to the utent practical, r49ardtee/ of parcel width. ' Public Transit D.S Public transit facilities $hall be Considered within all aster plans. t Convenient pedestrian access shall be Provided from dgtgnated transit facilities, such as bus clops. S'e"ttcape Design 0.6 StfeegCIP, design elaeenes for ail new PrOJects shill be coordinated - for cOnllsteAtl' with the guidelines for foothill !outer /r0 In affect at th slam M Nv, 10Dment, Including r intent $fled Iand$:aD ing with specimen trees, Dtnlnq, Ind meandering f ldewafkf in addition, strtot furniture and "I luvlel rocksdapt Ind mnument signs nay be required .sere appropriate. Landscaping DJ Landscaping shill be deslgnad to create vlsua' Inttre$t and variety to the Itr.etsufu. enhance Dulldla9 t Architecture, Duffer view/ of automoblley, screen utilities and NNlie areas, and distinguish Oa destriia•spatas front vehicular areas. E. bon-Conforming Lott /Strusture' ~ � The purpOfe 07 this Iett100 Is t0 bulldings unde• currant conditions, 4 411M COnt Mu",, of ..$sang @$ And - and prompt, eonllsttneY of design technical it, .,dl OrOughout the conversion, Or redfitgn. And study area at the tiers of dtv9IOV,,nt, Nester P'anning E.1 New 11v9ICpnent and /or COnverst— v ell;ting residential buildings to I -• use 11 pernitted m non•con.....l tots, 0rWPM such devalopmon! iMCr:VPti^'ilt�C D� di Wt � M i S f f: 0, IntC ral Part of a luster Plan d•r0 00"It Cnftstent with the Interim Policies for the Foothill boulevard Corridor and Devel~t Code standards. The boundaries of such a •: NASter Plan $hall D. detentned by the y City Planar Par Volley C.2 above• and should provide for consrl:dattdn of 1, Substandard parcels. Land$CNIA9 L2 Pegardlus of 'parcat depth,' all mar davelotwnt Halt provide a minlaau a$' building setback and average $trelt$caPe landscaping (xasured from ✓,e ultimate curb face location) do Foothill foulevard. CA StreetsaaPe landscaping and Irrigation ,hall be required to the extent practical In conjunction with substantial reconstruction, renovation or exterbr rm,111102 of existing otracturet along Foothill boulevard Involv'ng the issuance of I buildlvg P"m t. .i•V .'S,5 4tjvJ a ,e JI ,.1 �- 0[dlaertU S0,27 4 (�f� .. •,. 4..' Fag. I a_ 'E 17 OM mw Cade Nteelw Ow II. t llar- � — rsMrQr�n,.e z��3t� .. astrle Uus listed N tn'a Tole sMll be I U.1ebu N IN o: more of tM eommerelsl u u tM Mere indicated In the l� i S" a' ,4 Use in trust ditttricL Inalcatad With •P•, ilia le, t" utter d be, S U be au aAj,,Ity N categorizing a give, use In eM of procda 1n tM rvUNad N SeetNn 11.02.010 SM0 be (OUO"d. duuWU, 7rocedun rOlt OMIUM IRt R6OUt.AT1OVM COY14ClCI464OPTCtalMICT3 OP CC USt s A. O(fl�ted Ute P 1. Administrative and uecuttn otfica• P P S. Artist and p)wtegrapnic studios. a t P P P e0up NeludNg true "to of • eupplus. p P P 1 7, Cledeal end produNUl otflces• j; /. Plnanolal senlces and InfUtbtldtr. p p p fr S. Oiervit , dantsl and aced) Meltn D p t Non -utmd reined) Msale )f l uMca 0 and a only he aria o to the urvlen r • ftc1de ar4cus cutely InclEental "t,cle clearly prorided SMU be Permitted' 9Mr building , AVAL "ran P p p • r - located wit offl. of j Of mom mdil praatltioun) p p a t. PuNio buildings (library city slid calmly and. post buildings,' We vial duOlcu i5t office). p p P S. Pu0lic UtlU:Y ""Ica officer. i C Tice, tin. C C - P• �g� a,buu,tde and paramedlor)`� � -7 1yyiF�3 Y-!r't !4 .i',t.,��'t-�, 14 :'o.F:.3`i' °iA' 1'1 if Y - 10[dleanea %s. 771 . "Y �- � •,wy W2 Eeii�y^rtr-Fy list la i f�• . J (STEPIll USE RICZAMIS C �� "• USE OP BC ^'^ CC r t 10. Relr•ed commercial mes (blue nting. pN P P tlallonar r, 9mek copy, etaJ when to eat ot(lot building or P , complinl templet g. Centel femmerelat Uoss 1. Antique an" P P 11. Adult Oualnm lose Special requirements • per ?action 11.10.030) - C 7. Animal Can Facility (anlmel horpitcl, veterinarian, commercial kennel, grooming). A. Excluding exterior kennel, Pont, or C P n Ms. o. Inciud:ng extorter kennel• pons, or -• rvns. J. App.r•1 stores. - F 7. Art, Turlo OM pnategrapn.c rtudwf J" C tu;plY store. o P 0. Appliance stores and repair. - C F 4• 7. Arcades Get spac&I requiremenb per Section - C C }ye 17.10.070 P.) ?� s. Athletic and Health Club, gyms and P P P we ght rodueing climes. .ID 1. Au:omotive . suv(ces (Includir- Vr. mctercyclea, boats, Usiler and camper) 1, %•. s. Was (may have repatn As ancWry C 01) C e. rentals - C. r•pelrs (we)or enjino work, muffler ahoPS, painting. body work and - - Upholstery) a t d. Colnvp waMmg C C ( a Automatic washing C C C Ni, l • Cent's change fro, Table 17 10.0)0 of the Oeselofrrunt Code v , ��`�+���t,�. 1t.rrµµ^: ^4, , ' ; >•�. q, �,� v � .` ,:x r ..w d�"`ST ���Wi�`a +'i�i i±i. -1:7„ •±:ay'ias i•d � +. - � � 1•:�, r�!�: a t Fr , s t - - d[aln•ma ke: Fee. 0 r7i+'NSAe+;a'�•.�f:d-�r.Y; ;,t��.:.4a� -. y;,insn,,- . _ ittCi la'13f}•PE0.'4171 OP NC (IC r�ae (p la.lca a iuoUna dbPlntinf C C P ltedo s Uccluding minor feDalr 1,411 AS tun.7. brakes, batnfla. Ara, muffle" ff) Peru and"PPUtl p , 10• Bnkentl(ro aU cnlp. P P 11. Barber and bees ty drops. p p P P P lS. BlepeN shops. p P P t: Blueprint and PhaWapy itfrlca 11. Boat and Nmptr sales and esMcee. C is. stores .otrter Book, gift a C P p hut� staru� than to. Candy Warn and confeatlanutn. P P P 17. Catering ettabutbmatl. ll. CNNIng and iranmf estabtblmrnta. C P P 1D. Carport" shop or cabinet shop. ' S0. CddttaU lowgs (bar. IoNp, tarebd Includlnj related emcaMNlNI. fd %snteA InCrpandort of a C C restaurant (b) Accessory to • restaurant C C C i 11. Commercial redredlamfaelu' .. (a) Lldoot was aoh as bo•UM C C F th"t'", (b) Outdone roes such es goQ, tennis, C C C bak"cau, bamba .l. "ampo0nes. Mo. 11. Contract" te:N (screenlrf of mtdaor - st".p rdClWodl. 21. Dairy pmduet stores. p P r7i+'NSAe+;a'�•.�f:d-�r.Y; ;,t��.:.4a� -. y;,insn,,- . _ " e !j r , r i I t Zs -y- "my. . _ a _r.ry !c. -rRl'= `•1 .iAx�.r 'H'••,.•: :.�.. i,Y .i „ew .+�:• >,:Lr• �.X. cr .11'kq L'ITE�iY -u:E r1!'•.OLgftt 07E CP NO GO 11. Department Storer. - - P 22. Drive-in businesses, Including treaters. - C C (alMr that (Lit toed rtsterete) 26. Drug Starts snug p9rmaNe. E • 7 p 27 Equipment rental Yards. SP. Fart -food restaurants. C C P U. Feed/rack store - C P 20. Florist shops. P P P 21. Fwd stores and supermarkets. - p p 22. Furniture Stores, repair and upnobtery. - P P 22. General retail store. - p P 04. K.rdvare ltwts. - P P ts. Nome Improvement centers. W )laterlal stared and sold wttnin - P . enbinted bu0dingS (b) Outdwr storage of m:anal !Sea as - C lumber & bullOnr -Srsarbb 28. Nateb and dote'!. C p 21. sea 5f"" (butcher). - -. 22. Jardtoral Serelcts am luppDaS. C P P 20. Jewelry stow. - p 40. Law.ltyeelf- sernee. - p 41. Llquat stores. p P 12. Kiosks for key Shops, Mm hops. etc. In - C C parkin { lots. 40. LoeksmlNUlap. _ p p :+ 4L Nlni- statL2L tee public use (no outdoor - storage). ,y t Zs -y- "my. . _ a _r.ry !c. -rRl'= `•1 .iAx�.r 'H'••,.•: :.�.. i,Y .i „ew .+�:• >,:Lr• �.X. lees :•_f (•ITE114 US-. RE-AAM NC CC ; O3L OP r 45. Mortuaries • C C C 16. Motorcycle sales and service. - - C 47. NCWSpaPer and magaine stores, Pnating C P and Publishing. 16. Nurseries and garden suPpIY sterol - C • C',' prorlGd, In the NC district, aR equipment, supplies and material are kept within N enclosed U-S. 49. Offices and business mar`!na Stares. C P P 30. Parking facilities (mmmernall -hero fees C - P as cNgae- St. PoUttesl cr phllanthrople headNartt". C C P 57. Pet shop. - P P 37. Plumbirq shop and supp0es. - - C. $L Photocopy P P P 53. Printing Shops. - - P S6. Restaurants (other "I fast faacl. (a) With entaruinnent and/or semen C C P of alcoholic beverages (b) Incidental serving of beer and vine P P P but Without a cocktail bungs, bar, entertainnent ae dancir; 57. Recreational Vehicle Storage Pare. -• •• 76. Shot star", fates and rspah. - P P 59. Second -hand stares and pawn shops. C t0. Slnpptag Center sublet to provisions in - C C Section 17.10.070 -F.S. 61. Spiritualist readings cr "trolg7 - - C• • forecasting. $2. Sporting goods stores. - P P-�� 67. Sump and coin shop$. - P P h� LO XY It lUtER14 USE AE6LAT Y. cc H. Swimming pool ,ppll,,. all. Tailor. p Of- Taxidrmist& C • P BT. Television, to, W j,j,, and service. P p 61. Tire sales and 69. Toy stores. p 70. Toning ser'lea (.Input V.hl"IAV stodge) ?I. Trzvol Off MCI#,. P 11- TrLVPortst'zn facilities (IX4111 And No. taxi depou). C C C 73. Truck And V311a, rental. Sgg, and 741. Variety store. D. L Coy pro r3c,lalts C C C I. Convalescent lacilitles and hopa'ls. C C I. Private and Public clubs and ladio, lftcludsA; Y%IC to YWCA and C C C 4. si-nilAr youth group uses. 4- Educational institutions- PAM0131. PrIlate (Includint "gega And univenitles). C C I I. Libraries & nu:"'S' public of ;mlto. I A C C C 4- Parks and recreation fA CIUtI0s- Public private. or C C C 4 i. 7. Public utility C C 1. V04111"'I • b'I'm trade scroot'. C C 9. chtwchaj' CcAv"t3' M"Alterle, And Other C rellifous rustitutionj. C A r`_r.� ";,9yy,�,Y� or /taancikFL., jiy'<•t� Pete "{9,. {t ' IMTS14 USE 4EWtA1, •use 0. Attrrr�ry Doti OP sc cc 1. Anator/ ttructwea And uses eJaumudy InelCenul to p a ptrmiltm use and Contains, an the ume fate. P P Aranory Iwetw61 end wn eue_omj:U Inclontat to a eonCltlay; me tn0 C e e tanttNtd an the tame all,, ,y • 7. Cuatal:en rnlCen09 e• Ammement 09,1061, per Sectlon 17.10.030 -P. c O P P p E. TemoOrary L'tn 1. Temporuy we% u pr61row in Settler P 17.01-0;0 and sa0)ent to aorta pro,lt:ant. P p 0. TemWary office moe"eln, subject •o pro,mont In Sttarn IT.10.0.0-P. /. c c c r t, i. 1 . d ., ACPORT ON ACTIONS TARO rOLLaIM aolTIY a or ORousarL go. 77i Ptirsv.at to the ragoir•.At. of California cwer.ae.t,C.de S,ctiva 63856(4), ON at the eaproaW dir"ticv of the City Council of ;be City of 2 ... be a Cuo..S.a the tolloul.g co .atltu[u` • .vri Ran report o[ top elty- C..4cll . eoaeac%L .hen, ..auto@ taboo to allnl•te the condition -bleb tad to ch. _ ad.Pttam of Ordlaaao o. 370. 1 On Oetohar S, 1919, the City Cc ... 11 of the City of Rancho Curuaags adopted its Ord!aoe P.. 374 eat Rla4[ "An Ordiaoee of the city french of the Cloy 0( &*"No C4SamM4 adopelai an Sot•rl. Sating Ordinance funuoc to California Cneraaaac COS. gentle. 6963af b) ryrw14i.2 to Chu faetbliabeeat of Interim D"Otapmeat atead.Ws for :be TootbLIt Corridor.. J laid Oldlu.nee go. 274 adopted Later. ao.L.g rn.l.tion.. aff.tcia. far ego 1041r that tart"five (49) day-, prob!birl.8 nay epplleatios for dbaloq"ftt vLtha the foothill fooln•r1 Corridor Study except a coeriaca.0 vitb the l.wri. aoaL.f policies adapted by .alb Ordlvann So. S)a for the foathtll Antietam Corridor Study awn. tucemaat to the reap Lramate at old Ssccia. 69896. Ordinance go. 374 v., adopted by ch- City CnACLl app. it. finding that additional apernal. cf d "ulop.er applicativer +ltbis the study aril. other Cbes ".count to ton inter /. policies, vwld r.ault In an im.oiete threat to public b.alcb', ,fat, or vdtaw. S. Puts ..at to California Cneraaaat Coda Ronald, 69631(d), Co. (10) days print cn the expl"tian of any lvcar /ft ardierme,, or any "ta.ataA thereof "Opoa puwuant to the ttr+a at Grid eantl9u. the City Council 0411 Leave • - vrltou "pert d.acr<bt% the .•aura titan Cc all"lateAhe condition vbicb Ind to the 12optlon Of curb interim souLn cWlnaae. 3 Da October 16, 1999, at the wgulu uer(aS of the Cie) Council .t the City of 4.606 Cueamy, the City C.Yma It vas or* to a vritwA era report concerning the .usuree taken e.c•tar, to the root' Garr//oa it follw/ef the adopt Loo of raid Ordiv..zo go. 37A. At aid oat ILG, of OcR6 16, 1939, the Cie.- e..neit, by ni.ute action, auaboriaW mad direct,, ch* Ceeaunity Dnelop.at Olr"ccr to prepare, puroann to the reaulraveate of aka Cw.reu.t Cod. Settle. 69538(d).. vrito. report coacera Lat ch. action# taken follwiag, and r.laCL14 to. the adoptlon of O:dlmaco go. 274, Moreover, at Said ..atieS W Oct Wet 16. 1913, the City CauACII direcwd the City Clark to file and regain ouch -citrus rePOrt along ucrb Otdtc&n" We. lye. ACT[enr TLL pall wing the adoption of Ordinance ga. X274, the ioltovint acetone , km hoe take. "lath, ca the lncerlm ao/ag regolati.es parraf.itg to ch. FOG-hill Saul nerd Corridor Study Argo 1. At the etpfa.a I"uaat and direction of the City Co..cil, the Plaaafog Depertmat of the City at Saaeho Cueamaga b" been COOCL. -lag to eCa u ffdrta to e.n11cr and cae71e9e the •foothill Co;rlder Study- to dual" a pa. to to..lt La a vAllied and balanced a ccitic plan of dnttop.et for :fat Portico of the City of oAeha Cueamngs @Dcom•vud vL[bin the two, +, roothlll Corridor Study 1. an ongoing of"*.# vbiak veil nua.a117 w. to, .aCabtieb mat Of peranast and eoeprehatr Laa coming policiu for Ch, K a"a. Dated. October 16, 1969. Ij•j) Jack L., Commtait7 Davalgs : '� y, Director t " EXCERPT'S OF OCTOBER 2, 1985 MINUTES • e c2troY• SN'SERIH PQLICIEt. - City Council adop- 4C F49 tiaa of Interim Policies Co be appl iad to development rd projects corridor along . Staff Boulevard prior to coapletioa of the Football Boul award corridor plan. Staff report by Oeeo Ksoutil, Senior Planner. (0203 -05 DESELOFMNT CODE). Mr. Markman. City Attornny, stated that if Cwnc`l adopts this Ordinance, it Mill be in plait for 45 days- Council will then h,ve on the Consent Calendar an Interim Report, which is required by lw, updatindubliestudy oa tthe Foothill amotber Corridor. yellowing this, there vill be another p Ordinance offered which will extend these Policies for two years. This is the first bearing, then there will be an interim repot t, sad then another baarigg with an urgency ordinance which ichwill put the policies into effect for a period of two years and forty Y a Councilman King stated that on page 251 where it indicates the "f ollwic6 land uses, Me have attached the Iatazim Use Regulations to the Development Code " which basically sets forth all the different types of useo and whether they M111 be Daraltead. Each of these item are indicated in the addendum. Does vbut appears on p&ge 251 accomplish scotching independent from what the addendum accomplishes? Mr. Kroutil responded that the purpose of the addendum is to have one document Ex- which Me can band ^rt to people. This Saves a comps :henafve list of does in- can of going tbzweh the ordinance and otbnr documnts. ::ta 251 becomes Es- hibit B to the Ordinance- 3a Of Mr. joghtttheadded that the pur n b listing changes from the current development Stan- dards. cing for public bearin4• Addressing Council was: Mayor Hikels opened the use Jia Barton, Economic Dwwith the staff And people whoa will be participating Chamber will be workin g d Lase to get aooatbia6 •reread. in this study. This is s Boo <• Mayor Mikals closed the public hearing. c There being no further public response, 1y City Clerk Auehelet read the title of Ordinance No. 274. ORDINANCE NO. 274 (urgency) OF THE CITY OF NA11CNO AN CUCAMONGM COUNCIL A, CALIFORNIA, An1NZERUIZZONING ORDINANCE yUR50ANT TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTICH 65858(b) PER- TAINING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF INTERIM DrYJLOf, 0T STAN- DARDS FOR THE FOOTHILL CORRIDOR •�� NOTIONt Moved by Dahl, secoaded by King to waive full rkadiag and to adopt Or- ; dinance No. 274. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0• ., I M ZM q� L V. MIDAVIT OF :IAI.LIXG sail clerk for the City Of Rancho Cucamongn. do btr,by swear that on o approximately o'clock 1 deposited in the Cu 2%0092 Branch Of the United States Post Office located at 9607 Business Center Drive, a letter addressed to and regarding PUBLIC HEARING CITY COUNCIL MEETING 1116185 7:30PII • TI14E EXTENSIO11 FOR ORDIUANCE 274 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD INTERIM POLICIES SEE ATTACHED LAKES Signed: Decal (return to CkY-G;11�� after situing) Nam ta "Jb.'Od 0 ;.& I�A e IMllia L Fora , 9336 Foothill Blvd ' Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 , A S R Tire Service Ron Geissler 9d20 Foothill Blvd. Rancno Cucamonga, CA 91730 George Guilera 10192 Foothill Blvd. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Bill Espinoza 10210 Foothill Blvd Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (tike and Ll01.4 hard 7990 Amethyst Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dan and Kathy Wesley 7925 Amethyst Street • Rancho Cucamonga, CA 9113U Larry 0. Broedow 12596 Begonia Ct Etiwanda, California 91739 Jeffery Young 12323 Thistle Zr. Etiwanda, CA 91739 Dan Jahnke 1536 E. Princeton Ontario, CA 91764 ltelcher A.1 A. Il 11ountain Ave. Box 670 td, CA 91785 Dan Plies Plies Company 22706 Aspan Street, Suite 701 Lake Forest -El Toro, CA 92630 {lardy Strozier 3151 Airway Avenuo,Suite S Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Stephen Daniels Conn.Brokerage Inc. 9333 Base Line Rd., Ste. 100 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 attn: Ban Richards Sanford Bloom, M.D. P:9: Do:r641 Pacific Palisades, CA 90272 Gary Wild ✓ Westrend Development 337 11. Vineyard, Suite 431 Ontario, CA 91764 (Rancho Gateway Business Plaza) Pete Pitasoi The Barmakian Co. 9375 Archibald, Ste. 101 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Lowell Gomes 9567 Arrcw Rte . Ste C Rancho Cucarnya, CA 91730 Jim Barton 8409 Utica Rancho Cucamong4. CA 91730 Robert Fryar Santa Fe Pacific Realty 5200 E. Sheila Street Los Angeles, California 90040 Ap3r S Bhatia 9522 Placer Street .Rancho Cucamonga. California 91730 w /YG¢7uvr' Nelda Lovgren 1205 II. Third Avenue Upland, CA 91786 Betty Iic"y 7600 Calle Casino Lane Rancho Cucamonga, CA 917 A.H Reiter Development 9650 Business Center Drivt Rancho Cucamonga, CA 917: Att: Tim J. Beedle Earl M. Marshall and Assoc P.O. Box 8B4 Rancho Cucaynga, CA 9171 Att: Earl Marshall Garcia t, Associates 933D Baseline-Road. Suite 2 Rancho Cuamonga, CA 91730 ATTM: Jorge Garcia Bill Litchfield 10338 Central Avenue Montclair, CA 91763 ,M 3 I ■ m & *--m Atil ORDINANCE NO. 274 -A CUORDINACE OF C 78E EFFECTIVE DATE OF OROINNICEIIHO. PERTAINING - CITY -COUNCIL OF THE DEVELOPMENTSTANDARDS FOR THE FOOTHILL MCORRIDOR INTERIM , A, Recitals. Cucamonga has (i) The Planning Department of the City of Rancho Foothill Study " ,n of study which conduct i tended toompletet the a" synthesized uspecificC plan dof ructed to Soul developat Grovethat p rtion of FoothithannelPand f Freeway city limits the ea area city l attached hereto venue. map de ibiit i•A h imits at Est ".a d visa incorporated herein by this reference. Hereinafter, said study area is referred to as "the Foothill Corridor." it is (ii; Pending the completinn of to Foothill Corridor Study, the e Foothill hill Corridor. Moreover, it sislforeseeablet hatorsuchpdevelopment uld not conform to the ultimate specific plan of development for proposals vro that study area and would contradict the specific purpose of the unified • specific plan. (iii) On October 2, 1985, the City Council of the City of Rancho for development. vel pmentp within rtheaFoothill Corridorbexc pt any and to thosepconsistant bytCaliforniarGovernmentsCodep Section 65858(6), such Ordinance Ordinrnce No. 274gcoald be effective by ord nance cv!landeaftern forty public hearings) theyCityllounciliextends unless tthe effective date n the Ordinance as provided in said Section 65858(b). (iv) This Council is concerned about the creation of an orderly and balanced development within the Foothill Corridor area. Accordingly, to of continuedthe in egritystabiltty of ithosa pros in the studyeareia, rotect this Council finds that it is necessary to continue the interim zoning policies ormulate theasp�i plan an of development for the eFoothillt investigate and the Plannin Staff the Corridor. (v) Pursuant to the requirements of California Government Code Section 65058(d) for extending the effective date of an interim zoning of ordinance, on OupSe^td1N'ithda, staff report Council cancerning the theCmeasuresRtaken Cucamonga was p relative to the Foothill Corridor following the adoption of said Or o. 274. Based upon said report, a written report of the City Council was y_ prepared relative to suchlneasures taken. 3 aai City Council Ordinance Ordinance No. 274 -A November 6, 1985 Page 2 before the NO City on November pf 6, he BCity of 1 noticed Cucamonga (hearing y suat was to held the =• whether the interimlzoning regulations ontained Llnnsa1d850rdbinancealloVe 274 should be continued. Said public hearing was concluded prior to the adoption of this Ordinance. (vii) fill legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occu' red. B. Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: In all respects as set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance. during tSeCFi— abov substantial 6, evidence 1985 hearing, including Co staff presentation, the minutes of the above - referenced October 2, 1985 public hearings and the contents of the written report concerning measures taken, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The specific plan of development oforatheoFoothill Corridorearea. The ultimate goal of this plan 1s to provide a balanced and unified plan of development within the Foothill Corridor and will ultimately upgrade the economic, social and cultural welfare of persons and properties both within and surrounding the Foothill Corridor; b. Pending the completion of the Specific Plan, it is foreseeabie that applications for development involving the Foothill Corridor will be •3ceived that may contradict the ultimate goals and objectives of the specific plan; and, C. The approval of additional subdivisions, use permits, variances, building permits, and any other applicable entitlements for use pertaining to property within the Foothill• Corridor could result in an immediate threat to public health, safety or welfare of those persons and properties within and surrounding the Foothill Corridor. SECTION 3. The following interim Zoning Regulations originally enacted by�r fnance No. 274 are hereby continued: Corridor study, all developmenttiwithind the ooth111ontorridore shall Foothill conducted in accordance with the Foothill Corridor Interim Policies which are hereto incorporated this ldori ictt ant applicatioford ve'lopmentwith the FoothilCrdor whhisinconsist " with the interim policies adopted herein is hereby prohibited. w F �. " - ':`�Y` ..`: {,: \wN^ "wry -.• >. i City Council Ordinance Ordinance No. 274 -A November 6, 1985 Page 3 SECTiv. 4: This Ordinance is enacted under the authority of California�overnment Cade Section 65658(b) and shall be of no further force and effect +s of September 22, 190. = SECTION 5: This Ordinance is hereby declared to be an urgency- measure shall Ctake eeffect oimmediately dupon Sections it nadoption. ursant SECTION 6: The City C1erx shall certify to the adoption of this afters its adoptionl t uleast once ein to be The Oatl isRepo�hnewspapernol general circulation published in the City of n ar u, ai rornia, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. PASSED A14D ADOPTED this 6th day of November, 1985. Mayor 1. BEVERLY A. AUTNELET, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoinr 9rdinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Camcit of the , :ty of Rancho Cucamonga held on the 6th day of November, 1985, and was finall; passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the 6th day of November, 1985, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ATTEST% every t e et, ity er City of Rancho Cucamonga I i v _ •ca u u i 1 CITY Or rm%t, Foothill Corridor Interim Policies RANCHO CLCAM \GA •I•r,E, Study Area Boundary PLANNING DtWSQN EXHIBITS A -1 JG:LE- ----- "v 1� i% ,5 ro CITY OF RANCHO CUCAT N'GA ' PLANNING UIVLSIQN ., Yg ,c I rMNp foothill Corridor Interim Policies Mme, Study Area Boundary EXmWT? -2SCALD OCRsf ��yy�11�yy i i .A , FOOTHILL CORRIDOR INTERIM POLICIES IIMOOUCTiON _ The following Goal Statement and Interim Policies are provided to guide the - decision making process during preparation of the Foothill Boulevard Corridor Study, The policies address basic land use and urban design issues unique to the 400thill Corridor, And are intended to be applied in conjunction with the Development Code, whichever is core restrictive, unless specifically addressed by these policies. The boundaries of tl,e Study Area include commercial, officb, and residential ` properties along Foothill Boulevard, ranging °jvm tho west Cit.' limit at Grove Avenue to Deer Creek Channel, and from the Devnre Freeway tc the east city limit at East Avenue (Eihibits A -1, A -2) GOAL STATETIENT Goals define community aipiraticns and intentinns. Th? following Goal for Foothill Boulevard attspts to s)nthelize a cuoplex set of issues dealing with land use, urban design, traffic and circulation, and economic viability into a comprenensive, understandable and achievable statement. To establish a high quality, attractive, and unifying design image reflective of community heritage, and provide a viable setting for d balanced mixture of residential aqd commercial activities with sale and efficient traffic circulatior. and access. Based on this goal, the follow -ng Interim Policies are provided to address development related issues during preparation of the Foothill Corridor Study. EXHIBIT 8 ' a .a f u I� Kt i INTERIM PDLICIF.S • ` A. General Requirements: Preliminary Review A.1 Prior to processing Development /Design Review applications within the study area the Planning Commission shall' conduct a Preliminary Review to determine consistency with the Interim Goal and Politics contained herein. The intent is to provide direction to the applicant and staff early in the review process and avoid undue time delays or expenditures. A.2 Submittal requirements for a Preliminary Review shall include a Site Utilization Map showing the relationship of the site to surrounding Property and improvements a conceptual Site Plan, and a doscription of the Proposed use. Additional information may be requested as deemed necessary by the City Planner. Time Limits /Extensions A.3 Approval of development proposals, except subdivision maps, shall lapse eighteen (18) months from the date of approval. The intent is to allow early re- evaluation of projects not yet constructed for consistency with the adopted Foothill Corridor Study or other then current City standards. A.4 Tim extensions for any development proposal within the study area subject to a lapse of approval may be granted, " in twelve (12) month increments and not to exceed a total of four (4) years it from the original date of approval, subject to any Inconsistent provision Of State law, and the following rl findings: w a. The proposed land use, project . '? design, and conditions of approval caaply with all applicable : "l provisions of the Foothill Corridor Interim Policies; z b. The project is consistent,with the 4A> policies, standards,•))"' and :t- q of gthe "tensiuirements at the`t=me�k;l`A �v�: -1;:t°- _- �ilr`Y>r�•+"',» f: rt",.'n:•`'. -. _ ^,� _ ar.'> ?. Z.i'�+`x~;b;'^' ., li c. The granting of said time extension will not be detrimental to the - public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious too properties or improvements in the - vicinity. _ d. Current econpmic, marketing, and inventory conditions have made it unreasonable to develop the project prior to this time. Compatibility: A.5 All land use aiui development proposals shall surrounding properties, Particularly on Particularly residential uses, and mitigate potential conflicts to the extent I Mitigation measures may typically include, but are not limited to, Master Planning, transition of building height, architectural form and density, landscape buffers, sound turbulence, reduction visual barriers and /or grading conditions to disrupt line -of- sight concerns, and alternative circulation and access. B. '-and Use., - for a De intat of alancednmi, urehoffresidential,icmaerclal, office, and iother activities of community wide significance compatible with surrounding land uses. General Plan Amendments 8.1 Applications for General Plan Land Use Amendments are discouraged. Prior to approval of any such amendment, howeve ^. the Planning Commission shall make the following findings: a. The proposed amendment is clearly consistent with the intent and the interim policies b. The proposed land use is compatible with ultimate uses on surrounding property. The proposed land use will not create significant traffic or circulation impacts. Development Districts Amendments 1 Land Use c i n 414:SiM1�K.N1 � 4 d. The proposed land use will not be - detrimental to properties dr improvements In the vicinity. 8.2 Development District Amendments boundaries may be considered if consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element and Interim Policies, and where necessary to achieve more logical and efficient land use and site Planning patterns. The intent 1s to allow flexibility during the Master Planning process and provide a tool to achieve the objectives of the Interim Policies. 0.3 Current Land Use regulations within the Study Area shall remain in effect, except that the following limitations shall apply during preparation of the Foothill Boulevard Corridor Plan. The Purpose is to avoid land uses which may have adverse aesthetic impacts, until such time as design guidelines and tecnn!cai standards aie established to deal h specific eas of concern. A complete list Of permitted and • conditional) permitted y Provided on the aach d Interim Use Regulations for-,the Foothill Boulevard Corridor. Existing or previously approved businesses and buildings shall be alioded to continue under current regulatory provisions of the City. The following new land uses shall not Office /Profess}onald andin }fi General Commercial Districts within the Area. Expansion of existing uses identified below shall be allowed subject to the provisions of the Interim Policies for the Foothill. Boulevard Corridor and Development Code Standards. - Animal Care Facility with exterior kennels, pens, or runs - Cemeteries \ - Contractors Yards sf'` Qa9 i ,i y a i ` O( - Equipment Rental Yards - Ice Machines (outdoor) - Mini- storage for public use - - Recreation Vehicle Storage Yard - Vehicular Storage Yards The following new land uses may be established in the Office /Professional or General Commercial Districts within the Study Area (see attached Interim Use Regulations), subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. - Carpenter Shop or Cabinet Shop ` - Drug Stores and Phnrmacies (CUP In OP District only) „ - Nurseries & Garden Supply Stores - Plumbing Shop and Supplies - Second Hand Stores and Pawn Shops - Spiritualists C. Masts' ! __ „•_d Development: fhe purpm 0 trr3 section is to provide for integrated development at the earliest e.,: ibla time in the review process. Master planning of defined areas will r1 ievelopment of single parcels of land in a manner which prevents ., ac'',i.s future development of adjacent parcels-in the best way feasible. The Pacific intent is to recoynlze and.sotve problans before they occur and take advantage of opportunities'while they exist. Master Plans Required C.1 % conceptual Master Plan shall be i required for Planning Commission review in conjunction with development i proposals wherever necessary toc,assure integrated development, enhance h &rmonious and orderly development,' ' mitigate site constraints on adjoining r property and maximize land potential. Boundaries /City Benefit C.2 The area o” Master Plans shall not be ` y confined by individual lot lines, but s determined by logical planning boundaries and site conditions as required by the Planning Commission or s� $ e „5: City Planner. Master Planning beyond ""I I the boundaries of specific project sites is intended to benefit the City by coordinating land use and site planning to enhance opportunities- for quality development consistent with the standards for Foothill Boulevard, do- emphasize °strip- conmarcial" by creating organized groups of structures and uses, and provide for efficient utilization of land. Content C.3 At a minimum, Master Plans shall indicate conceptual building locations p and orientation, overall circulation, points of ingress and egress, parking lot layouts, transit stops, landscaped •r areas, and pedestrian nodes, and eircnlatlon. In addit4ni, the City Planner may require o*:,av infornatinn as deemed necessary to assure consistency with the intent of thbse policies. D. Mew Develoament: The intent of the following policies is to establish a high quality, attractive aryl unifying design image wkich promotes a sense of ideatity and reflects community heritage and to provide for safe and efficient trcffic flow and optimum vehicular and pedestrian access within the corridor. '• Architecture 0.1 The architecture of new construction shall be sensitive to the heritage of Rancho Cucacwmga and relate to nearby structures of community significance. Design elements nay Include, but are not limited to, river rock /fieldstone :Y Balls, exposed beamwork, vine arbors, curved or aarcades. alts, and covered walkways is D.2 All applications for new development within tie study area shall include a written statement of architectural intent indicating how the project is sensitive to the heritage of Rancho Cucamonga. Pedestrian Orientation 0.3 Site planning, including )ullding orientation and parking lot _ configuration, shall enhance pedestrian connections on- and off -site. A, j continuous pedestrian system is" -" required in all new projects" with „' {lyy�x}! connections bLLwee buildings, parking 1A�1�Q , .. 1 , ,�l Combined Access 0.4 Public Transit 0.5 Streetscape Design 0.6 Landscaping 0'7 areas, street adjacent sidewalks and transit stops. Amenities shall be provided such as plazas, shaded seating alcoves, expanded walkways with surface - treatment , texturized pavement across drive aisles, raised planters, ttnsfi - receptacla:, and drinking In addition, outdoor eating areas are encouraged. Through the matter planning process, driveways onto Foothill Boulevard shall be coordinated 1`01 consistency with existing City access policies (1,e., pracl cal, extent Public transit facilities shall be considered within all master plans. Convenient pedestrian access shall be provided f f facilities, uch as bus transit stops. Streetscape design elements for all new projects shall be coordinated for consistency with the guidelines for Foothill Boulevard effect development, c Including time of 1nt¢nsified Landscaping with specimen size trees, berming, and meandering sidewalks, In addition, street furniture and alluvial rockscape and momiment signs may be required where appropriate. Landscaping shall be designed to create visual interest and variety to the streetscaoe, enhance building 'architecture. buffer views of automobiles, screen utilities and service areas, and distinguish pedestrian spaces from vehicular areas. E. Non- conforming The purpose of this section 1s to allow continuance of existing uses and technical standardsrr throughout tithe � study promote aat consistency time of ( design of develoment, conversion, or redesign. Raster Planning E'L existing re dent al /buildingsrtooa new' use 1s permitted on non-conforming-.,_, lots, provided such development is_,an. , �" i �r ;f 1 ? YO Landscaping a.5 :: :. . • 1l■ •�}4 integral part of a Master Plan development consistent with the Interim Policies for the Foothill Boulevard Corridor and Development Eodg � stcndards. The boundaries of such a Master Plan shall be determined by the City Planner per policy C.2 above, and should provide for consolidation of substandard parcels. E.2 Regardlers of parcel depth, all new development shall provide a minimum ASO building setback and average streetscape landscaping (measured from the ultimate curb face location) on Foothill Boulevard. E.3 Streetscape landscaping and irrigation shall be required to the extent practical in conjunction with substantia, reconstruction, renovation .r exterior remdeling of existing structures along Foothill Boulevard involving the issuance of a building permit. a.5 :: :. . • 1l■ fil t,m rm Development Code Interim Use Rcrulations - Poo[hl BoWevard COtt der Study Area ' ' Uses listed In this Table shall be allowable In one or more of the commercial districts as indicated in the columns beneath each commercial district. Vhere Indicated with the letter "P ", the use shall be a permitted use In that district. Wh�me indicated with the letter "C ", a • the use shall be a conditional use subject to the Conlltlona! Use Permit process. In the event there Is difficulty In categorizing ? a given use In one of the districts, the procedure outlined In Section 17.02.040 shall be followed. 4 INTERIM USE REGULA77ONS FOR CO- MMERCIAL/OFFICE DISTRICTS USE OP tic GC c A. Offices and Related Uses 1. Administrative and executivo offices. P P P ^ l l 2. Artist and photographic studios, not P P P Including the sale of equipment or supplier. 0. Clerical and professional offices. P 0 ' P P 4. Financial services and Institutions. P P ' S. Medical, dental and related health P P P sarvlce3 (non- animal related) Including Isboratorles and clinical only the sale of • articles clearly Incidental to the services provided shall be permitted. wZ 'I' S. Prescrlptlon Pharmacies, (dlso when P P P Iocated within a building contain'ng R. the - offices of S or More medical practl loners) q t. u3t P P n 7. Public buildings (library, city and county buildings, special districts and post office). ,E 2. Public utlltty Gervice offices. P _ P P 0. Public safety facility (police, fire, C ambulance and paramedics). C c r `i •� (' Vf' � ••ial] INTERIM USE REGULATIONS t +� u USE - OP NC OC tr 10. Related commercial uses (blueprinting, p p P' �, stationery, quick co incidental to an office building when complex. g• General Commercial Uses 1. Antique shops - P P 2. Adult business (see special regLirements per Section 17.10.090) " C 3. Animal Care Facility (animal hospital, veterinarian, commercial kennel, ,) grooming). e. Excluding exterior kennel, pens, or C p P runs. b. Including exterior kennel, pers, or runs. • 4. Apparel stores. - P P 5. Art, music and photographi, studios a%- C l supply stores. p P -• 6. Appliance stores and repair. - C P ' 7. Arcades (see special requirements p,r Section 17.1b.030 F.) C C �,• 9. Athletic and Health Club,' gyms and P weight reducing clinics. p P 1 - �` 9. Automotive services (Including motorcycles, boats, trailer and camper) a. sales (may have repairs m anellary C use) C t b, rentals _ " C c. repairs (majo- rnglna work, muffler shops, pa:,,ting, bon aork y and _ C v4 Ktx� upholstery) ' d. Coln -op washing , ± C C C ,- ' e. Automatic washing (, C C„',.•,�j k,� "i; • Oe,iotes ch.nge' from Table 17.10.030 of the Developnent Code 0 INTERVI USE fEGULATlq 0 - USE _ Y OP NC' OC K (U Service or guoUne dispensing C C p stations (including minor repair such as tune -ups, brakes, batteries, tires, mufflers) (g) Parts and supplier p P 10. Bakeries (retail only), _ p a ' 11. Barber and beauty shops. P; P P P " 12. Bicycle shops. �F!t •r - P P ' "y. 13. Blueprint and photocopy services P P P 14. Boat and camper sales and services. C 15. Book, gift and stationary stores (other C P P than adult related mater al). 18. Candy stores and confectioneries. _ P t p 17 Cctering establishments. p • ' 1 , 18. Cleaning and pressing estsbllahmenrs. C P 18. Carpenter shop or cabinr, shop. P C* 20. Cocktail lounge (bar, lounge, tavern) f•r including related entertainment. } R (a) Operated Independent of a - C restaurant sk• ' (b) Accessot to a restaurant C C C 21. Commerclal iecrcatlen factUtles. fis <% (a) Indoor uses such as bowling, theaters, blUards, C C p 9 ` (b) Outdoor uses such as golf, tennis, C C +: basketball, basebt U, trampolines, C r" ate. �'- 22. Contractor yards (screening of outdoor storage required). 7i •�;• 23. Dairy product stores. '- •'�'� tic I . ,z ��'y�'yS }();�r'4;�ct�r'rti4 t�n;� _yy t.Yvyi.::,rr,,. ". , % � .ry , _� ,)• �„ �•, ,, �.P �f= fHCrv49�lYn Ji Q��✓�f...M S1b.= �a��i'' }�2 � h l .t�.'^.��- o��i`� >�i�T'�� }�..( ;K "i• f • 1.t INTERIM USE REGULAI•J',1ti USE OP HC CC . 24. Department stores. - — _ - .p 25. Drive -in buslnesses,Including theaters. 'C (other than fast food restaurants) _ C 26. Drug stores and pharmacies. ` G P 27. Equipment rental yards. 28. Fast -food restaurants. •r C C P 29. Feed /Pack stores _ C p 30 Florist shops. p P P 31. Facd stores and supermarkets. - P P 32. Furniture stores, repair and upholstery. _ P P 33. General retail stores. _ p p 34 Hnrdware stores. _ p 35. Home Improvement centers. (a) Material stored and sold within - p P enclosed buildings (b) Outdoor storage of material such as lumber & building materials C 33. Hotels and Motels. C _ p 37. Ice Machines (outdoor). 38. Janitoral services and suppUes. C P P 39. Jewelry stores. _ p p 40. Launay -self- servlce. _ p p 41. Liquoi stores. _ p P 42. Klosks for key shops, film drops, etc. In - C parking lots. C 7 43. Locksmith shop. vP - p P 44. Mini- storage for public use (no out storage). _ • � t r6� •SNk�.i`fi'�C.,w -''l :rk i. } � Y•i� :4�YNW>j}yj� :y r. a INTERN USE REQLATIOnS �r USE "��-- 45. Mortuaries * OP NO CC *, 46. Nlotorcyc,e sales and service, C C C� 47. Newspaper and magazine ;tares, printing anti publishing. - C C P 48. Nurseries and garden supply stores; Provided, In the NC district, C " ` C ` all equipment, supples and material are kept within an enclosed area. 49. Office and business machine stores. 50. ParKin3 facilities (commercial) where tees C P P are charged. C - P 51 Political or philanthropic headquarters. 52. Pot shop C C P 53. Plumbing shop mid supplies. - P P 54. Photocopy 55. Printing shops. P p P 56. Restaurants (other thar, test food). - P (e) With entertainment And /or serving Of alcohoUc beverages C C P (t,) Incidental serving -if bee, and wine p but without a cocktaU lounge, bar, P P entertainment or dancing' 57- Recreational Yeblele Storage Yard. v 58. Shoe stores, sales and repair. 59. Second -hand stores and pawnshops. _ P P t (n 80. Shopping g Center subject to provisions In Section .7.10.030 -P.5. C C` G1. Spiritualist readings or astrology forecasting. - - C .b C* 62. Sportlna goads store--. r; ,. 68. Stamp and corn shops. - P P e...;..5! _ P P Y'.4iYi11 ^r�iY .'1'dyj�Y�f rl'�,�rN: .rri -:t `- �l - �': �ai.S��: ? /��'.(•. nt s t INTERN USE REGULATIONS NC USE OP 64. Swimming pool supplies. _ 65. Tailor. P 66. Taxidermists. _ 6T. Television, radio sales and service. _ 68. Tire sales and service. _ 67. Toy stores. _ 70. Towing service (without vehicular storage) • - 71. Travel agencies. P 72. Transportation facilities (train and bus, C taxi depots). 70. Truck and trailer rental, sales and service. - 74. Variety stores _ D. Public and semi - public uses I. Day Care Facilities C _. Convalescent facilities and hospitals. C 0. Private end public dubs and lodges, C Including YMCA, YI4CA and similar yjuth group uses, 4. Educational Institutions, parochial, private C ( Inclvding colleges and universities). 5. Libraries k museums, public or private. C G. Parks and recreation facilitle+, public or C private. 7. Public utility installations. C S. Vocational or business trade sdmols. C S. Churchau, convents, monasteries and other C religious institutions. INTERN USE REGULATIONS NC CC P p P p C+ P P P _ C P P C C P P C C - C P P C C - C C C C r C C C C C C C C C C' .n, a t wt CC use p D. Accessory uses -OP 1. Acessory structures and C uses customm•dy Incidental to a permitted use and o containeu on the same site. 2. Accessory structures and uses customarliv Incidental C to a condit!onat •tse and contained on the same site. 3. Caretakers residence p C 4. Amusement Devices, per Section 17 .0.030 -F. " E, Temoorary Uses —" 1 Temporary uses as prc=ibod in Section p 17,04.070 and subject to those provisions. 2. Tcmporary office modules, subject to C, Provrrions In Section 17.10.030 -F.4. INTERIM USE RkULATT0 NC CC use p P C C C p P p p p C C 't t , A "`r�:.= G3rr",,;,.:i. . :Vtb.,n ?. V CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE. November 6, 1985 TO: Mayor and Member of the City Council FROM. Jark Lam, Community Development Director BY: Lisa Ilininger, Assistant Planuer SUBJECT: ""R0"ENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 85 -04D - HAwn h - request to amen d the Land Use Map P, e General -Flan frm Low Density Residential (2-4 du /ac) to Medium Density Residential (4 -14 du /ac) for 13.55 acres of land located nn the south side of Feron Boulevard between Archibald and Turner Avenu-s - APN 209- 055 -02, 03, & 14 I. BACKGROUND: The applicant requested a Gineral Plan Amendment from LOW Density Residential (2 -4 du!ac) to Medium Oensity Residential (4 -14 du /ac) for a 13.55 acre site located in the North Town neighborhood of Rancho Cucamonga. A previous Grleral Plan Amendment application for this site which requested an increase in density to Medium High Density Residential was dented by the City Council in June 1985. The attached Planning Commission report provides more detailed information relative to this item. H. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The major issues considered by the ann ng emm ss an at a September 25, 1985 hearing rere land use compatibility, consistency with the goals and policies of the General Plan and significant environmental impacts. A. Land Use Como atibiltt : The Planning Commission determined ,ha t t e oca on OT a Medium Density site rit:in an existing neighborhood which is predominently single family to nature could crette sig"Ificant land use incompatihility, particularly for proposed daisities approaching 14 du /ac. B. Cansi•tenc with the Goals & Policies oP the General Plan: The Comnissior, n tcate tat iFe s to 1 not meat a General Plan siting criteria for Medium Density development since the property is not adjacsnt to a major or secondary th:,roughfare, transit route, services, or activity centers. Additionally, the Commission state.j that the location of this project in a single family neighborhood does not provide an adequate transition of denrity. r 1111K Y, � ~z , u CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT 1 GPA 85440 - NA'AQNS November 6, 1985 Faye 2 C. invironrental ImpattS: Potential impacts exist in the areas of transportation, hydrology, public services and noise. Since .. the Commission recommended denial of the amendment, a determination of the signiticance of environmental impacts was not required. 1p proposed ic�s9u n environmental if significant requiredepr!or statement of approval of the General oPlaneAmendme t. be + The September 25, 1985 Planning Commission minutes relative to this item are attached for your review. II.. REC"ENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends dcnial of the enera an Imendment. If the city Council concurs adoptlen of the attached Resolution of Genial would be appropriate. Respe,tfully Aitted, Jack Lam, AICP Community Development Director JULN:ko Attachments: Planning Commission Staff Report, September 25, 1985 Planning Commission Minutes, September 25, 1985 Resolution of Denial .v" ti 1 1. D t1-3 Y�•n~lM14ir 'y. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAAIONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: September 25, 1985 �- T0: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director BY: Lisa A. Wininger, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL P' All AMENDMENT 63 -04D N - request to amen t e an Use ap o the enera. an from lox Density Residential (2 -4 du /ac) to Medium Density Residential (4 -14 du /ac) for 13.55 acres of land located on the south side of Feron Blvd. between Archibald and Turner. APN: 209 - 055 -02, 03, 14. I. ABSTRACT: A General Plan Amendment is requested from Low Density Aes eat al to Medium Density Residential for a 13.5 acre site the North Town neighborhood Rancho Cucamonga Exhil,it A). The applicant previously requested a General Plan Amendment to Medium -High Density Residential and was denied by the Planning Commission and the City Council. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the earlier General Plan Amendment request which included a detailed discussion of the impacts of a Medium Density Residential alternative. At the August 28, 1985, Planning Commission meeting, it was determined that the discussion of tdium Density impact; in the EIR was adequate for use in reviewing this application. At this meeting, the Commission will determine the existence of significant environmental impacts associated with the amendment,• if any, take pUblic inpat, and consider the General Plan Amendment. Ii. BACKGROUND: The pwject applicant, John Hawkins, has requested a Medium DensitAmendment edential (- 4 du /ac). In 1984, (t a applicant t Medltun High Density Residential .PlAfteretheepreparationrooff anwEiR required by the Commission, it was determined that the approval of the application would create significant environmental impacts which could not be mitigated. The Amendment was denied by the Commission, appealed to the Council, and in June 1985, denied by the Council. The applicant has resubmitted at a lower density range and the Commission has determined that the discussion of Medium D -_nsil impacts in the EIR for GPA 84 -03A is adequate in evaluating the new application. �, /'t ITEM K PLANING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Sepember GPAt5- 040 825�Ha►kins Page 2 III PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: _ A' 3 scusseRe M1estede: EIR Rndecor'sideration�ofrthenGererai�Plan Amendment. B. Location: South side of Feron Blvd. between Archibald and urner. C. Parcel Size: 13.55 acres D. Existing o_ Zvi Low Density Residential E. Existin^ g Land s?L Vacant F. Surroundin Land Uses Band Zonien : hool, designated Low Density Nort �: anc to ucamon a Residential designated South: AT & SF Railroad right of way and winery, Industrial Specific Plan East: Single family homes, designated Low Density Residential West: Single family homes, designated Low Density Residential G. Surroundin General Plan Uesi nations: ortt: ow ens ty es ent a South: General Industrial (Industrial Specific Plan) East: Low Density Residential West: Low Oensltv Residential fi• Site nagear`cannestwctFi aThsmalli dratnageacourse traversing fthe ' ofnthe site in a the -100 yeardfloodtplain and ris subject to periodic flooding. Vegetation consists of a raw ind eucalypts assortedu weeds eand grasses *' Ferod Blvd.• provides direct.haccess with main to the site. property bovndariesad- rnding into the site on the east iY. EBVIROtfriENTAL At1ALVSiS: The Firal EIR for General Plan yen ment - a scus ^es potential environmental impacts for four alternative land -is - Low, Low - Medium. Medium and Mixed use. The discussion of Medium Density Pesidential focuses on General Plan consistcnty nubllctservlces impacts and noisetheMaex�erpt transportation, hydrology. n of the EIR discussing the Medium Density alternative is attached. a i' a N PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT September 25, 1965 GPA 85 -04D - Hawkins Page 3 , A. General Plan Conslstenc . As the EIR states, the General Plan es3 crFl6es the Mad um Density classification of 4 -14 du /ac as allowing a range of unit types, from single family homes at the tew end of the range to townhomes at the higher end. At the low end of the range, development would be appropriate adjacent to tower density development. At the higher end of the range, development would be more appropriately located adjacent to parks, along transit routes and major secondary thoroughfares, and near activity c_nters. Although Medium Density ranges from 4 to 14 du /ac, of the several Medium Density projects in the area, all have been developed at the higher end of the range, adjacent to major thoroughfares; transit routes and services. ✓.ith the accompanying Development District Amendment to Medium Density, which the Applicant Indicates he will request if the GPA is approved, the development range is actually 6-14 du /ac, thus elirAnating the lower end of the development range and reducing the possibility that a less intense product will be construct:d. The EIR states that although the Medium Density Residential alternative is feasible and is consistent with housing related goals, development at the higher end of the range would be Inconsistent with siting requirements in the General Plan which recommends locating Medium Density Residential adjacent to major thoroughfares, transit and services. Therefore, the Medium Density alternative was not considered as appropriate a designation as Low - Medium density development for the project site. B. Potential Impacts: -- Trans ortation: Development in the Medium Density range could result In anndditional 1350 trips per day, distribute! between Feron and /or Main Streets. . Additionally, impact at the intersection of Feron and /or Main with Archibald could result in a decreased leve'. of circulation efficiency. The EIR states that circulation impact. could be mitigated through on and off site taprovements. M rclo v: The site is subject to 100 year floods, in addition to per -Te flooding duo to lack of storm drains to the area. In order to mitigate this impazt, major on and off site fluud control improvements would be r!quired of the daveloper. Public Services: Development of the project at an increased ens zd v represents a Cumulative impact upon the provision of fire, police and school services. Although any development of .- _ y PLANNING COMMISSI3N STAFF REPORT September 25, 1985 GPA 85 -04D - Hawiins Page 4 the site would receive service in these areas, at present, fire, police and school services have reached or are approaching capacity and will require expansion to adequately service new development in the City. Noise: The project site 1s currently impacted Dy noise from tTir. railroad line along its southern property line which could expose residents to unacceptable levels of noise and vsbration. However, the EIR states that appropriate mitigation measures such as sound attenuation barriers and building orientation could reduce this impact to an acceptable level. These measures would be Incorporated through the review and building permit processes. C. Environmental Determination: Based on the analysis of Medium ens ty n tF -EIR, noise, Wydrology and transportation impacts are potentially significant, although the impacts could be mitigated to a level of insim.1flcarce. Public service impacts are cumulative in nature and, when considered with other development in the area, could represent significant impact. The discussion of development suitability _totes that while development in the lower end of the Mcdium Oensity range could • be compatible with the existing neighborhood, development at the higher end of the range probably would not, which could create a significant land use impact. The Commission will determine the significance of the environmental impacts of the General Plan Amendment. Should any significant impacts be determined, adoptian of a statement of overriding consideration would be required prior to project approval. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT ANALYSIS: The major Issues to be considered regarding this application are •land use compatibility of the proposed dens*.ty with existing development, consistency with the goals and policies of the General Plan, and significant environmental impacts. Since the Medium Density range is broad (4 -14 du /acj, and at the General Plan Amendment level the applicant is not required to request a specific density, the amendment must be considered in terms of any density within the range. Will development in the range of 4 -8 du /ac would probably be .,mpatible with the surrounding area, development in the higher 8 -14 du /ac range could be incompatible with the existing predominantly single fancily nature of the neighborhood. At this range, development would probably occur in a multifamily townhmme or stacked flat arrangement. Development of the site in the high end of the Medium Density ,'i. .. I • PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT September 25, 1985 GPA 85 -040 - Hawkins Page 5 t 1 - ' range would be inconsistent with General Plan criteria for siting to and open space, along Medium Density projects adjacent parks major and secondary thoroughfares, and near transit routes and activity centers. Often Hadium Density development in the low to Low Density mid - density range can serve as a buffer between activities and areas of higher development and commercial site, rslocated a family separatedro esidetianeghorhooddjacenttoaschool and rnlhib the industrial area bj the railroad right of way. eased on the above discussion, it appears that the proi ct site is development to the fullest extent only marginally suitable for the Medium Density Residential category. As discussed possible in in the previous General Plan Amendment hearing for this site, thft Density Residential most appropriate alterative was Low - Medium Increasing densities above 8 units per acre could (4 -8 du /ac) neighborhood and create significantly affect es f h the General Plan. upon examination of Low YI. FACTSene FOR aFlNDanG mendmennitd determminesthat i Medium would a that _ ' rsle t s-'A daent Density the laduse g als of the General and the would not be materially injurious to the adjacent properties, 0 ow ng findings are necessary on approval: i The Amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of a. the General Plan, and; ,• b. The Amendment proe,otes goals of the Land Use Element, and; The Amendment would not be materially injurious to the adjacent c. properties. 'III. CORRESPONA been apropertyhowners sent o all 1n he y the boundary of the proposed project, to wit n eet ail other ontsite. foot dbeen supplemenal otlficatlon s gnahas also erected h anygrounds recommends Re014Et0AT1 ' tha the noeGene ral Plan required findings cannot be met. ., .v Should the Cormission concur with Staff's recommendation, approval Plan Amendment 85-040 of the attached resolution denying General Should the Commission determine tt,t the ; m{ ' tai., would be appropriate. facts for ppropri can be met, a resolution ntcortmending app.-oval t 1 J' 1t. < PLANNING COMYISSION'STAFF REPORT 'N September 25, 1985 GPA 85 -04D - Hawkins Page 6 of the General Plan Amendment to the City Council is also attached. If the Commission finds that the proposed land use change creates significant environmental impact(s), a Statement of Overriding Consideration must be adopted prier to approval of the project. Community Development Director JL:LAN:das Attachments: Exhibit •A• - Vicinity Map Excerpt from EIR for GPA 84 -03A Resolution of Genial Resolution of Approval ") 1 :i �MEDiUM --7 tj L SITE f a$CHO Lq Q rW .......... O -G ENERAL..lNUW GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS Nom CITY OF rm-Nl. 6M RANCHO CLTCAMO"\rGA T=., u' SCAM tSDN PLANNING DlV ` Excerpt from EIR for GPA 96 LOW- HEDIDli DENSITY RESIDENTIA3. This alternative %vuld increase the density allowed on the site to a density of 4 -8 dwelling units per acre. This would allow 55 -108 single - fuily detached, atviched, or multi - family units. Invaedlua residential is defined In the General Plan as - 'characterized by residential densities somewhat greater than the low- donelty residential gzoup. With gross densities averaging between 4 -3 dwelling uni.ts per acre, considerably more housing types may be used, including typical single family, single family zero lot line, duplex, and under certain conditions up to 4 -6 townhouse -type unite.' This density category Is conuidered appropriate within low - density areas to encourage greater housing diversity without changing the single-family character of the surrounding residential neighborhood. Development under this category would occur at a similar density el existing densities on adjacent properties. (Exhibit 5, page 14). The density category would be slightly lovar than recently approved medium density projects located along peripheral arterials near Turner Avenue and Arrow Route and at the corner of Peron Boulevard and Archibald Avenue. • Locating low - medium residential an this site would be consistent with the Intent of the recent approval of Tentative Tract 11915 (Table A -1, page 9). This approval places low- mediux density patio homes (6.9 dwelling wigs per acre) adjacent to lover density homes on 26th Street. The patio homes will serve as a transition density between misting North Town residences and a 322 -unit median density project approved at Turner Avenue and Arrow Route at a density of 13.3 dwelling wits per acre. This alternative is feasible. Overall, It is 4evirosmentall, superior to the proposed project. As show on the Alternative Summary Chart, this alternative project would Saaerata less traffic and Air pollutants, result in a lover Increase in Population, and result is a lesser demand for public services and park/recreational facilities than the project. It is consistent with the Scale and policies of the Coastal Plan and Development Code. It is compatible with surrounding densities. MADICY. DENSITY BRSIDENTIAL This alternative would increase the density allowed on the site to a density of 4 -14 dwelling units per acre. Thie would allow 55-190 single family detached, attached, or multi - family units. Medium density residential to defined in the General Plan as a .a 97 'classification which allows a range OE Lt,' aaermoomes to S ua1Ca end mobile hoses to ranging from conventional single-family the lout: • ^! o. the tango towhouaes. Building intensity very low denoLty ' would be appropriate ,,,,, adjacent types low still oe characterized residential areas. Hotting yP primarily by detached housing units. Betiding lent to o Intensity sc the nt higher end of range J ore mcrmett roroutes aad major secondary ocher open spaces- of this thoroughfares- uld activity nomsily be semi-detached eor attached level of intensity we units." buffer i residential realPenti,41 tea also serve areas of higher densitya co ®ereinl between aecivitias eased area, of greater ]raffle sad noise levels, at the lover end of the Development according to this designation could Decor at a similar o higher denoicy than adjacent properties. Building and building range would produce ro �lal product similar to density rO type as surrounding D arcl as P the + i Dovelopment toward the high r end .of the l aol The re dential dense a Product type existing could be cone type of zero lot line, attached or seal -aiteched. tow Dan. i or stacked flat product. have c r Several aedi m density Projects at the hgMr end of cage range Ba bit }recently been Several 01 these projects tare $it adjacent n to the areas which see S, page 16). 5, pagn[ed low- demitY [c� �ehrQa�n to eo adjacent in to the major thoroughfare$, !� These medium- density D j• and services denaity,rasidenrial areas tra¢aheavily traveled streets to buffer the Drat 'the site aDP °ere to be only moderately nutted foi devolopmnnt At ins highest end of the range, The 7rajeCt site is not adjacent to a major ?' thoroughfare as are abl nedlurdeaster projects in the at". However, SC C u •eke rreess from a saroad,ry,thoroughfars (Turner Avenue) and Se only n �uatiaa Wile from Areh! bald Avenue which is designated a Local Transit Route in the General Pluo• The site in not adjacent to tetall services. The nearest area north at Arrow ,e Roucee General A °g °ue co" However, three 1s 1a 2sna11 agiatingael8hborhoad on score ac Turner Avanua sad 77th Street o¢ n lot designated on Coe General '.� Tim for residential usao. Ce 98 J The Bite Se in close proximity to both olementary and middle school - facilities (Exhibit 6, page 1G). The middle aehaol Is directly across the street and the elementary school is about .4 mile walking dlstcnce on Archibald Avenue. There are inadequate park facilities in the area. However, the City is actively pursuing development of a park in thi North Town area. One site under consideration to a portion of the school grounds across Feron Boulevard from the site. The park is expect vd to be heavily used vitb nighttime use of ballflelds. Medium - density could appear to be an sporopriate dantity adjacent to an active park. The Bite is adjacent to heavily -used railroad tracks. A medium density designation would allow greater flexibility in designing a site plan which would provide both adequata safeguards for onuite residents and buffering for the school and residential usao across Paron Boulevard. This alternative Is feasible. Overall, it in environmentally superior to the proposed project. As show on tin Altereativa Sodary Chart, this dlteenative would generate less traffic and air pollutants, result In a lower increase in population, and result In a lesser duand for public services and park/recrcatiomal facilities than the proposed project. 'bla alceroativa Is consistent with housing - related goals and policies of the General Plan. Davolopuent at the lower and of the density range would be similar in density and building type as surrounding properties. Development at the lower end of the range would essentially be low - medium residential. Development at the higher end of the range (9 -14 dwelling units par sere) would be, in part, consistent with the Intent and defialtion of the Nedlm Density Residential �rsignatlon• lowevers It would be Incossistant with r, rise siting eritarin In thu General Plan which recommends locating m. Ara density residential adjacent W major throughfares, transit, and services. Therefore, this siternativo Is not as appropriate a designaeian for the site as low-medlum.dansity r ,idcntlal as discussed above. MID> -o88 ALTERNATIVE This alternative would consist of 10.5 acres of low- sedius residential • dovelopmant at 4 - 8 unite per acre (42 -84 units); 20,000 - 30,000 uqulre feat of neighborhood commercial and community service ueee on about 2 acres; and a one acre parkleentral plate. Exhibit 14 fllustrataa conceptual depietlon of the alternative. Essentially, the slta would be developed around a central plan that would ssrva a■ the focus of the ga, project. Neighborhood eoamereisi and community service ueee would bi constructed around the pieta, low- Danelty Residential would be located 9 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILIMO mail clerk for the Ci t7 of I, J.. `s� 1985 at do hereby guitar that on Bancho Cucamonga, (a.m. p m 1 I deposited in the approaimatelq � o'clock �— Cucamonga Branch of the Darted States Post Office located at 9607 Businoss Center Drive, a letter addre5 ad to aad regarding PUBLIC HEARING CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/6/85 7:30 PM EIIVIROI ......... EI(TAL ASSESS:IENT AIIP GENERAL PLAN ANEtIOWIT 85 -04D - RAWK114GS SEE ATTACHED U1DEL5 Date: signed: after sigaing) (return to cJ / jrtcrgu a rnnecce ritpi 6510 Archibald Ave RancAO Cucamonga, CA 91730 0009. 031 -45 Charles Hofgaarden 3115 Boyne Rd Pasadena, CA 91107 0209- 031 -45 Seb�stiano Filpi 6810 Archibald Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 0203 - 031 -77 lary Valadez 919 East Olive Upland, Ca 91786 0209 - 061.01 Elizabeth Kelly 9465 Wilshire Blvd No 203 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 0209- 061 -03 Alfonso Navarro 1125 Sneridan Avenue • Poco,a, C' 91767 0209-r!31-04 Tilo Gallardo 8210 Malachite Ave Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 0209- 061 -06 John 6 Virginia Anguiano 9747 Feron St Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 0209 - 061 -07 Angela Gutierrez 9755 Feron Blvd Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 0209. 061 -08 Susan Gomez 1346 W Princeton Ontario, CA 91762 0209- 061 -09 Paul, Joe Lopez y 1495 Edgehill Or. PocoN4 Paul, Joe Lopez 1495 Edgehill Or. Pomona, CA 91767 0209- 061 -10 Raymond S Romelia Sanchez 10989 Cypress Ave Fontana, CA 92335 0209- 061.11 Simona Diaz 8826 Reed St Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 0209- OE1 -14 Adeline d John Martinez 968 Songbird Lane Bonita, CA 92iw9 0209 - 061 -15 Rafael 6 Severiana Salcedo 9790 -11ain St - pa-cho Cucamonga, CA 91730 0209 - 061 -16 Dionisio 6 liaria Herrera P.0 Box 634 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 0209 - 061 -17 Pauline Sonillas Margaret Moreno 9722 Main St Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 0209 - 061 -21 I4�y Val z 929aEa; Olive Unia stl CA 91106 0>t -22 International Church /Foursq 1100 Glendale Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90[•26 0209.061 -28 Virgil L Paula Havarette 745 Rosewood Ct Ontario, CA 91762 0209 - 061 -29 Juanita Wright 614 Taraval St. San Francisco, CA 94116 0209= 061 -32 Esperanza Stewart 11732 Mapledale St Norwalk, CA 90630 0209 461 -33 Don L Drucella Harrison 8889 Archibald Ave Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 0209- 062 -01 Santa Fe Land Improvement 5200 E. Sheila St.Rm316 Los Angeles, CA 90040 0209- 062 -02 Topeka AtchisOn,Santa Fe RR 8897 Archibald AVe Rancho Cucamonga, CA 0209 - 062 -03 Topeka Atchison 6 Santa FE R John Dickerman 9838 E Daines Or. Temple City, CA 91780 0209 - 062 -05 cater Sanchez o ?i9 Rain St Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 0209 - 062 -06 Gas John Maldonaldo 829 Hain St. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 0209 - 062 -07 Carmen 6 Eloisa Hernandez 9833 Pain St. Rancho Cuc mgnga, CA 91730 0209- 062 -08 Ilatividad Barnes Jesus and Margarita Ayala 3813 Baldwin Apt. 4 9843 Hain Street Los Angeles, CA 90032 Rancho Cucamonga, Ca 91730 0209 - 061 -31 ° ��j� 0209. 062 -nq _ Alberc Susan Fausto David and Jud• (lagdych Frank d Angie Anguiano 6705 London 98CO Foron 8 vd 9885 Jersey Blvd. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730.1 Rancho Cucarmnga, Ca 91730/ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91 0209- C51 -18 0209 -05202 0209- 052 -13 Frank ; Irene Zamora 6700 London Avenue Rancho Cucanorga, CA 91730 0209- 051 -19 Rafael d Eleanor Torres 6710 Ldncon Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 917301 0209- 051 -20 William L Hattie Scott 1017 Wingate Covina, CA 917241" 0209 - 051 -21 Roland S Carnen Aleman 8730 Lc: Can Ave Rancho Cucaronga, C.4 917301" 0209 - 051 -22 Frank 5 Carolina Condren 8740 Loncen Ave Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 0209- 051023 Sabino and Guadalupe Lucero 9870 Feron Blvd Rancho Cucamonga, Ca 91730 0209 - 052 -03 Lara Rafael 9860 Feron Blvd Rancho Cucamonga, Ca 91730 0209 - 052 -04 Solution b Pauline Toki 9850 Feroo Blvd. Rancho Cucamonga, Ca 91730 0209- 052 -05 Mark d Nancy Flay 9840 Foron Blvd Rancho Cucamonga, Ca 91730 0209 - 052 -06 Tranquilino ar.4 Aurella Al tani rani 9830 Feron Rancho Cucamonga, Ca 9173n 0209- 052 -07 Enrique d Guadalupe Mirelez Otunicto and Cdnsuelo Anna 8750 London Ave 9635 Jersey Blvd Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730.1' Rancho Cucamonga, 0209- 051 -24 0109 - 052 -08 9 91730 Valdo d CPpriana Santibanez 8760 London Ave Craig S Beverly Helson Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730-" 6051 Falling Tree 0209 - 051 -24 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 0209 - 052 -09 Catalina Montez Victor 6 Maria Covarrubias 8770 London Avenue 9655 Jersey Blvd Rancho Cucamonga, Ca 917 30 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 917v_,), 0209 - 051 -26 0209 - 053 -10 Armando 6 Rosalinda 8780 London Avenue Mirelez James d Nancy Raymond Rancho o51u27�nga, CA 91730 " 9865 Jersey Blvd. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 9,730 0209- 052 -1) : Marcelino h Gilberta Ramirez 9890 Ferron Blvd Rancho Cucamonga, Ca 91139 Federal Rational hortgage Assn. Fourth A Blanchard '- 0209 -052 -01 B,dn, Seattle, WA 98121 " 0209- 052 -1j o�5� Clyde Wagoner • 24042 Rotunda Rd. Valencia, CA 91335," 0:09 - 052 -14 Ernesto ,. Analia Franco 9895 (lain St. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 9 0209- 062 -17 Arthur 6 La Vern Ayala 87,03 Archibald the Rancho Cucamonga, Cn 0209- 062 -19 Senita Vasquez '8470 Edain St Rancho Cucamonga, CA 0209 - 063 -04 George Campa 2015 S. ;ypress • Ontario, CA 91761 0209- 063 -05 Manuel 8 ;evera Gonzales 9849 Feron Rd Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91 0209 - 061 -06 Vidal Heza 9859 Feron Blvd. Poncho Cucamonga, CA 9173 0209- 063 -07 Sitbestre and Altagracfa Navarro 9865 Feron St. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 9174 0209 - 063 -09 Andy d Trisha Ledesma 9877 Feron St. Rancho Cucamonga, CA X173 0209 - 063 -10 Arcadfo Luna 1033 S. Donview Ontar }o, CA 91781 ,0209 - 063 -11 - rcr_angeleo Apcdoca nayoauo a .,a,yo,ec nwuaa Stanley L Cheryl Cataline Z:AS FAron 8841 Reid Avenue 93M Jersey Clvd. Cucamonga, CA 91730 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 917. 0209- 051 -07 4ter-an L Sirona Apodaca Virgil 6 Paula Oavarrete Ratan & Jennie Escobar 815 Reid Avenue 745 Rosewood Ct 8725 Pasito Ave. Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91730 Ontario, CA 91762 - Rancho Cucamonga, to 9173( OZ09- 051 -03 He `. eldo Apodoca Theresa ilolgufn Rayxnd S Alice Jf,-erez OBOS Fer 9739 Eighth Street 8715 Pasito Ave Ranch am ,ey,. CA 91730 Rancho Cuca_ -mnga, CA 91730 Rsne'a Cue=o.rga, CA 917: OcT.9- 051 -09 Maria L Francisco Oliva Alice Johnsen Elias b Rita Salas P.O. Box 392 9747 8th Street 8705 Pasito Ave. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 9173) Rancho Cucac oga, C:: 917? 0209- G51 -10 Beni Va,o Richard 6 Fay tuccato Antonia L Angelina wernanc -8JCO Pastto Avenue 8470 Edr treet 9725 Eighth Street Raecr+a Cucaaxan^.a, CI 917? Ranc Cucama�ga, G: 91730 Rancho Cucaranga. rA 91730 009- Cal -11 Georg; d Ter_;a -C ram Beulah Ka,,mgvr Alber- 3 varginia Gareta 015 5 -ass � ICASI Rhone Lae@ Heaatinven Sews, 8710 Pas to St. rA nt to, CA 31761 SA 92547 vzrms* CacaooNa, Q17z s 0.9- OS1 -12 Prado Silva: .a 3 Marge Calder P 0. Box 3352 'till Jix-%mez Jose 3 Caf4a Tager Ontario, CA 91761 Ilk Porr_illo thpiaad, CA 917aa 8727 Pasito Ave, Rancho Cuca , CA F,.7F M -051.13 Luce t Pefugia Olve -a 9830 Hain SSreet Ernei± S tnrisdre Espinosa 87I0 Raxana Ave, Gilbert A Amelia Gcnza)ez Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 - Ranch Cu- -nga, A 91730-, 555M Jtr%4r Blvd. RaX'n CuemorA-,a, C,: S?Y 0209 -01 -03 O2Gi- �5 : -11 :bey L Henrietta Gusto; Raym d L Est*-r Yorta'�7 irrald i Stella tirtliga P.O Box 366 8726 Ramona Avon a 93t1 Jersey 811d, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Rancho Cuc MIC1,a, CA 91730 R.sr+ext Cucaaovrs, CA 9171 0209. 051 -04 om- :,91 -15 Gilbert M.unas Arturo 6 Lute Salinas Rafle Stone 9814 Main Street 2730 Ramona Ave. P.O. Eox 341 ncho ' Lucaror. 9 a CA 91730 Rancho Cucamnga, CA ,1730% 0209 5051 -05 Qarch* Cucamonga CA 91 -+ CZiH- 4ri1_16 Olonisio Herrera Na'ia Pactllaz Joe b nary Le yyvva 9290 Jersey Blral. ., r .0. Box 634 ;Rancho Cuca = nPa CA 91730 Rancho Cucarr -nga, CA 91730 0209- 051-06 37,15 London Are. Randw Cuamz--�J„ Ci 917 6) Fete G Travaglia Jesus S Annie Martinee Ruben 3 Alice Flores P.O. Box 107 1668 E Princeton 10187 26th Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Ontario, CA 91764 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 209 - 085 -01 Lcgia Felipl Angeles of Cucamonga in 1364 E 9Lh St. Upland, CA 91186 209- 085 -04 Jeannie b flaky Montez 8183 Ramona Rancho Cucarv-4a, CA 9173C 209 -Oe S.07 Aususthn b Gu.`.Wupe liartlaez 8824 %--ar Aje, Rtr.:ho Cucamonga, CF, 91110 2D9- 085 -08 Eloisa E Albert Tello P 0 Box 202 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 317.0 2D9- 00,5-09 Gear -e a Robert Minllarez 1,011 Center St. 82 Southgate. CA 90280 203 -w' -10 Jae 6 Esperanza Gonzales 10077 Main St. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 2D9- 085-12 Marie b Rafaela Villarreal 100335 Main St. Ranc"D Cucamonga, CA 91730 203- OGS -17 Cancer Sanchez 8203 Turner Rancho Cucamonga. CA 91730 2- 9- 085 -13 John d Konica Padillo 10109 26th Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Santiaro d Jessie Rubacalva 10151 26th Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Vincent a Geraldine Martinez OS72 Came: Re -ch) Cucamonga. CA 91730 Franelscc b Luisa Martinez 10113 26th Rancho Cucamonga. CA 91730 Jesus Martinez ]0181 26th Ra�c:a ru,4monga. CA 91710 Ernest F izzo 10131 26th Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Jesus 8 Juanita Gonzales 10142 25th Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Anthony Ledesma P.O. Box 386 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Anthony E Elsie Ledesma 10134 25th Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Eustolia Casillas Yolanda Sanchez 529 E 'J' Street Ontario, CA 91764 David d Stella Olagu• 10186 25th Rancho Cucamonga-;.CA 9. Albina E Pilar Nunez 10154 24th Rancho Cucamonga, CA Jesus Hernandez 10185 25th Rancho Cucamonga. CA Ruben 1f Ares 10167 1 - R Cucamo CA David Olagc 10186 25 Rare ueamon CA John aWrtinez 8 Juan 13957 Daventry St. Pacoima, CA 91331 Petra L. Montecino 10141 25th Rancho Cucamonga, CA Juan d Ofelia Aguilar 10147 25th Rancho Cucamonga, CA Victoria 6 Marion 10226 24th Rancho Cucamonga, Andres 6 Marla Mungia Severo d Celia Martinez Esther Lopez 10135 26th Box 271 1619 11. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Rancho Cucamonga, pCA 91730 ibntebel o,sCAaa90640 c 0' I .'arcesina Fero :.Span an Joe S Antonia Gonzales 9533 Fe ran St. 110 S Orange Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Azusa, CA 91702 U209- 063 -12 Jose Ramirez . 9096 stain St Rancho Cucamonga, C4 91730 0209 - 063 -13 Raymond 6 Joan Nickerson 9690 ;Win St Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 0209 - 063 -14 Eziquie d Maria Garcia 9282 lain St Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 0209 - 063 -15 Joe & Trinidad Lopez 9874 Hain St. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Ut09- 063 -16 Margaret Gonzales 9066 Main St Panchr -ucamonga, CA 91730 0209-t63-17 Aurella Arias 9853 Itain St. Rancho Cucamonga. CA 91730 0209- 063 -18 Emilio L Frecia Amparan 9850 ltain it. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 0209 - 063 -19 Miguel 6 Edith Esp,naza 9846 Main St Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 0209 - 063 -20 Prado Silveria /Marge ralder P.O. Box 3352 Ontario, CA 91761 ' 0209- 063 -21 9 Commissioner Rempel stated that he was not concerned with tha density, and was sorry the applicant decided not to develop a mobilehome park. He advised that _ • one thing that is needed in the City is more mobile hone parks to provide competition for the few which currently exist. Further, the vaunt of transition is there to allow the higher density. Chairman Stout stated in the discussion about multiple family has been religously been defend; housing available throughout the to increase the density if that correct. Further, that if a piec zoned for it, this project wouh stated that because of sensitivi could be structured to rrovfde W the south, which would be very cl property now and have the sane or last few months there has been a lot of housing in the City and that the G,meral Plan M in its attempt to make a balanced type of City. He advised that he could see no reason balanre established by the General Plan is e of ground could be found which was properly I be an asset to the City. He additionally ty of transition areas to south this project gh density to the north and lmier density to mse to the density range which exists on that similar type of project. Commissioner Revel stated that this amendment would not increase the Overall density of the City. Further, that the General Plan advises that high density Projects should be placed along majzr thoroughfares; however, the density has been considerably reduced north of Base Line. Motion: loved by Barker, seconded by McHiel, to adopt the Resolution recd rending denial to the City Council of Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment 85-04 C, Mel Mack. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COFC1i5STOUERS: BARKER, RCNIEL, CHITIEA, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: —1— - tarried Commissioner Reapel stated that he thought the mendaent request would not Increase the overall density for the area. • t a a : , K. EMI1RONyENTAL ASSESSMENT AtM GENERAL pLAR 0.MEN0HENi BS-M7 - FLS:�CFitS - A request to amend a Use e a an fron Low Dwsfty Residential (2-4 du /ac) to Rdium Density Residential (4 -14 du /ac) for 13.55 acres of land located an the south side of Feron Blvd. between Archibald and Turner - APN 209 - 055 -02, 03, d 14. Lisa Wininger, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report. 0 Tracy Tibballs, Covington and Crowe Attorneys, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the request. • Planning Commission minutes -I1- Septedier 25, 1945 Nacho Gracia 10364 Humboldt, Rancho Cucamonga, opposed the amendment. He stated that when the amendment was previously requested for this site, the residents were to favor of a density change to low - medium density from 4 -8- dwelling units to the acre, but wit:i development at the low end of the range- Ramon Rodriquez, 10316 25th Street, Rancho Cucamonga, opposed the amendment. He was concerned that the increases population as a result of the project would increase the crime rate. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner darker stated that his concerns were the same as before; there is no place else in the City where placing 14 dwellings units to the acre in the middle of a low density designation would be allowed. Further, that it was the general consersus that the current drgsity for this site is inappropriate; however, this proposal is too high and i, not compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. He stated that the community advised that a more appropriate range would be in the 4 -8 dwelling unit per acre, but they were still talking about single family detached housing. Commissioner Rempel stated that he had the sane concerns with this proposal that he had with the original proposal a couple of months ago. Further, that this piece of property needs a development agreement and should not be developed with a single use, but needs some type of mixed uses. Commissioner Chitiea stated that there is no new Information to support the need for an increase to this high of a density on this site. She advised that she would have considered an amendment in the low- medium rage with a development agreement. Commissioner HcHiel stated that the residents of the North Town have contributed greatly to improving that area. He was concerned that the project would be a detriment to the community. He stated that an increase in density to this level across the street from a school site is inappropriate. Commissioner Stout stated that the 2 -4 density range currently on this site is probably not viable and that a density of 4 -8 would be more appropriate with the development of single family detached homes. Further, that the location of this property in the middle o` single family residential does not provide for a density transition.. Motion: loved by Rempel, seconded by McNiel, to adopt the Resolution recommending denial of Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment 85- 40 0, Hawkins, to the City Council. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSiONER5: REMPEL, MCNIEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, STOUT HOES: CM4I5SI014ERS: NONE ABSENT: CO}S4ISSIONERS: NONE - carried Planning Commission Minutes mm -12- September 25, 1985 'y' RESOLUTION NO +41-06 -m $5 -a9 8 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO • CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 85 -04D - HAWKINS REQUESTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2 -4 OU /AC) TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (4 -14 OU /AC) FOR 13.5 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED SOUTH OF FERON BOULEVARD AND EAST OF ARChIBALD AVENUE WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly advertised public hearing to consider all comments on the proposed General Plan Amendment 85 -040 SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga City Council cannot make the following findings: A. The Amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan. 8 The Amendment pronotes goals of the Land Use Element. C. The IMandment would not be materially Injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Rancho Cucamonga City Council does hereby deny of General Plan Amendment 85 -040. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPrED this 6th day of November, 1985. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: tver y A. Au the et, ty erc Jon 0. Mikels, Mayor '=;)WSl- .- J CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: November 6, 1985 TO: Mayer and Members of the City Council FROM: Jack Lam, Community Development Director BY: Lisa Nininger, Assistant Planner FCJA110,,6,� 0 Z SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 85 -04E D L - A request to amend the Lana use Map o the enera Plan from low - Medium Density Residential (4 -8 du /ac) to Medium Density Residential (4 -14 du /ac) for 5.3 acres of land located on the north side of Base Line Road, west of Topaz - APN 202- 025 -1, 4, 7, 8, 1 ?, 13, b 14 I. 2ACKGROUND: The applicant requested a General Plan Amendment from o -oPed um Density Residential (4 -8 du /ac) to Medium Density Residential (4 -14 du /ac) for a 5.3 acre site in order to develop a 66 -unit townhouse project on the property with a proposed density of approximately 12 units per acre The attached Planning Commission report provides more detailed information relative to this item II. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTi0U: The major issues which the Planning ommiss on cons ered at the September 25, 1985 hearing were land use compatibility and consistency with General Plan goals and policies. The Planning Commission determined that the proposed increase in density would create tittle impact upon nearby single family residential areas to the east and south, due to the site's relative isolation by the flood control channel to the east and Base Line Road to the south, Additionally, the Commission stated that the proposed change would be a more appropriate land use in relation to the multi- family project currently approved in the City of Upland on the site's western boundary. The General Plan Amendment was determined by the Commission to be consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan in terms Of siting of Medium Density projects along major thoroughfares and near shopping and activity areas and integration with existing land us,;s such as the new development presently occurring to the west. The Commission stated that the proposed amendment meets the General Plan criteria for transition of density between uses. 1417 3 1. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT GPA 85 -04E - DALY November 6, 1985 Page 2 The September 25, 1985 Planning Commission minutes relative to this item are attached for your review lit. RECONMENDATIOU: The Planning Commission recommends approval of the General Ian amendment. If the City Council concurs, issuance of a Negative Declaration and adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval ould be appropriate. Res ectjul l'>1 lubmit ed, 404 an A Coity D m un avelopment Director JL:LN:ko Attachments: Planning Commission Staff Report, September 25, 1985 Planning Commission Minutes, September 25, 1985 Resolution of Approval / q .. 0 0 0 i c CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: September 25, 1985 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director BY: Lisa Nlninger, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 85 -04E or A Genera Pan from Lox- Medium�Density LResicential (4 -8 du /acre) to Medium Density Residential (4 -14 du /acre) for 5.3 acres of land located on the north side of Base Line Road, west of Topaz. APH 202- 025 -01, 04, 07, 08, 12, 13, 14 I. ABSTRACT: A General Plan Amendment iS requested from Low Medium ensity esldentlal to Medium Density Residential for a 5.3 acre site located on Base Line Road at the City's western limits. At the August 26, 1985, Planning Commission meeting, it was determined that a traffic study would be required prior to evaluation of the General Plan Amendment. The applicant has submitted the study in accordance with the City Traffic Engineer's specifications At this meeting, the C0 isslan will determine the extent of traffic impacts and make an environmental determinati)n. After hearing public input, the Commission will then consider the General Plan Amendment. il. BACKGROUND: The applicant wishes to develop a 66 unit townhome project on the site. The proposed project would have a density of aproxemately 12 units /acre. The current General Plan and Development District designations do not permit the proposed density. Consequently, the pros. • applicant, Daly Construction, has requested a General Plan Amendment from Low- Medium Density Residential (4 -8 du /ac) to Medium Density Residential (4 -14 du /ac). The Planning Commission will determine If that proposed change 1s appropriate in terms of land use compatibility, General Plan consistency and environmental impact. 111. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Reg nested: Amend the General Plan Land Use 4ap from Low- ed um e6ensi[y Residential (4 -8 du /acre) to Medium Density Residential (4 -14 du /acre). ��s- ITEM L PLANNING COMMISSION St- F REPORT General Plan Amendment 85 -04E - Daly September 25, 1985 Page !2 c� B Location: North side of Base Line Road at the City's western im C, ust west of the Cucamonga Creek flood control channel C Parcel Size: 5.3 acres 0. Existing Zoninn: Low Medium Residential (4 -8 du /ac). E. Existing Land Use: Three single family dwellings and vacant a F. Surrounding Land Uses: North - Vacant land, City of Upland. South - Single family subdivision, designated Low Residential (2 -4 du /ac). East - Vacant with approved multi - family project at 12 du /ac), City of Upland Nest - Flood control channel, Amy Corps of Engineers office trailer, designated Flaid Control. G. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Low Medium Density Residential North - Open Space (City of Upland) South - Low Density Residential East - Flood Control (Upland) and Low Density Residential West - Multi- family Residential (Upland) M. Site Characteristics: The site is located on a small knoll With tree s ng a amity dwellings and associated structures occupying approximately half of the arch. Mature landscaping includes 2 mature cedars, cypress, and several other trees and shrubs. The site is accessed by an unpaved driveway from Base Line Road. Other vegetation includes a mw of cypress trees and a large oak tree along Base Line. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: In accordance with the Co-mission's recc or on gust 8, 1985, the applicant has submitted a traffic study pursuant to the requirements of the Cit) Traffic Enatneer. The report states that the proposed density will gerierate approximately 660 trips per day, allowing an excellent level of service to right turning vehicles exiting the site. Left turning vehicles will experience dolaas and a decreased level of service. However, the report states that mitigation measures are available which could minimize delay, and maximize safety at the intersection of the project driveway with Base Line Road. These measures include street restriping and driveway design and would be lncorpn -ated at the project design level. • • PLANNING CO+IMISSIo:I ( STAFF REPORT General Plan Amendment 85 -04E - Daly September 25, 1985 Page 83 The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the traffic study and determined that it ie complete and addresses all outlined in the scone. of the issues He has stated that at this level of review, the mitigation measures proposed In the study could adequately address circulation impact: caused by the proposed land use change. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT ANALYSIS: The two major issues which exist in re at on to the proposed eneral Plan Amendment are land use com;,at)b111ty and consistent with P Genera, Plan goals and of for the tedium Density Residential designation. ivies A. Land Use Compatibility- The only area to which the project site s cons guous s the undeveloped land to the north and west in the City of Upland. Currently, a Conditional Use Permit has been approved by Upland for a 123 unit apartment project with a density of 12 units /acre for the land Immediately west of the subject site. To the north lies open space dedicated to flood control purposes. Within Rancho Cucamonga, the Closest development is the single family tracts south of Base Line and east of the channel which lie in the Low Density Residential development district. The major impact upon these residences would be visual since the from single increase In ta family de chedy o mvltiafamil y eattachedt at units ranging the higher end of the range. Si9Ce the Low - Medium range of 4- 8 Gu /acre could currently be developed, new development would probabiv occur in the 8 -14 acre density range if the General Plan Gmendment were approved Although visual impact is emphasized Since the site Is located on a knoll, none of the impacnearby on residential homes. However. backyard views tfromminizin on the south side of Base Line will be affected. the homes B. Consistent with General Plan Goals and Policies: The General an has severs ob ect ves regard ng or organization of land uses In the City. These policies serve to encnurage diversity while ensuring that compatibility •etween uses 1s achieved. In addition, siting criteria for low - Medium and Medium Density Resioential are discussed as follows: Low- Medlun density would be appropriate within Low Censlty .ras as a way t, encoura-e greater housing diversity without changing the single family character or the surrounding neighborhood. In contrast, the Medium Density designation at the low end of the range would be appropriate adjacent to Low Density Residential development, while building intensity at the higher end of the range would be appropriataly located adjacent to parks and open spaces, along transit routes and major thoroughfares, and near activity centers such as shopping centers and entertainment areas. a (e 2 P`- ANNtNG COVIISSION `t .FF REPORT C ` General Plan Amendment 05 -04E - Daly September 25, 1985 Page e4 In analyzing the project site, it appears that the site is not - a part of either of the established neighuorhoods to the south_ or east. The site is highly visible from Base Line Road, but relates more directly to the undeveloped land in Upland than to Rancho Cucamonga. Development of the site In the Medium density range may be consistent with some of the siting criteria of the General Plan. However, at the higher end of the range, the visual transition between the site and the single family dwellings to t:o east and south may be somewhat abrupt. Vi. FACTS FOR FINO,4GS: Should the Commission, upon examination of e General Plan ti endment, decide that the charge from Low Medium Density Residential to Medium Density Residential would promote the land use goals and policies of the General Plan, would not be materially detrimental to the adjacent properties or would not cause significant adverse environreentaI impacts, the following are the findings that are necessary upon approval: a. The amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan, and; b. The Amendment does promote goals of the land use element, and; c. The Amendment would not be materially Injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties. VII. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in Tfi Re o�rt newspaper and notices werA sent to 411 proper y owner:, within 300 feet of the Ioundary or the pproposed project. In addition, a 4 fool. x 8 foot Supplenental notification sign has been erected on the site. VIII. RECO.k4ENDATION: Should the Commission determine that the required acs or findings have been eat, adoption. of the attached resolution recoisaending approval cf the 'General Plan Amendment and issuance of a Ilegative Declaration to the City Council would be - appropriate. If,the Cenraission cannot make the required findings, denial or the Ginerat Plan-Amendment would be in order. ly submitted, Development 01rector JL:LW:cv Attachmeorts: Exhibit 'A" - Vicinity Map Irital Study - Part II i Resolutlihi of Approval Risolutii;n of Denial a�4 •r�.,s� *I a a 5 �I •a w C MTE PLAN N il " Nmni - CITY Cf, ITG11, 6P,4 rx_.� RANCHO CLX'AIYlaNGA TITLE,-TX/7r- p_, W i er nrR INU DvIM C11E,— a514i4Sfi� ".i`�i�3�C�y ?"r�+.w.,;Ts`�P., . .{'Jta a a.:s. _ n,1d +•., "wr{'rin���d� l \es•.i1 TA. . Sa � SP w C MTE PLAN N il " Nmni - CITY Cf, ITG11, 6P,4 rx_.� RANCHO CLX'AIYlaNGA TITLE,-TX/7r- p_, W i er nrR INU DvIM C11E,— a514i4Sfi� ".i`�i�3�C�y ?"r�+.w.,;Ts`�P., . .{'Jta a a.:s. _ n,1d +•., "wr{'rin���d� l \es•.i1 TA. r '• .r CITY OF RAYCHO CJCA`:O%C,t PART II - INITIAL STUDY _ + MVIROMMNFAL CRECt:I.IST DATE: Ml *'?'S e / /Ob APFL=rl y '/L/ ii?il� —Ilr' (7�Ml —. FILIM DATE• LOC NUMER: i n. PROJECT LOCATIONt _ AX) , ::?9.1) ! `r e7 I. ENl'IRO`:>LrNTAL IHPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets). YES NAYEE NO s r" ( . s. 1. Soils and Cools v. Will the proposal have aignlficant results in: A- Unstable ground condition, or in changes in Raologlc relationships? b. Disruptions, displacemenca, compaction c: burial of chs aoi17 c. Change in topography or ground surface contour intervals? d. The destruction, covering o: modification } _ of any unique geologic or physical features? 1• a. Any potential increase in wind or water it erosion of soils, affecting sithr,r on or off 11 cite conditons? r f. Changan in erosion siltation, or deposition? Wg. Exposure of people or property to geologic �. "{!q,(� hazards such as earchquakee, landslides, mud - slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? h. An increase in the rata of extraction and /or ,''• use of any mineral ravurea? ei'y�Xs�•� ': 1. Will she proposal hvva significant result results int 9C },°- x ,,, \yyy }'�gtAq ?�y,�;�IC; "` "�c� n-%::7 , . • ,1,'L:.� • " ! Al�� :'�.:•,;Ijr.�•�'rc��,4.s..._a YES NAYEE NO s r" ( . s. _ L i Page �2 YES MAYBE %0 ' a• Changes In currants, or the course of direction of flcwing streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream ' ;! channels? b. Changes In absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the taco and amount of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change In the amount of surface water in any body of water? e. Discharge into surface waters, or any alteration of surface water quality? f• Alteration of groundvatar characteristics? 1 S' Changc in the quantity of groundwaters, wither through dirctt additions or with - dravals, or through Interference with an Aquifer? Quality? Quantity? h. The reduction i+ the amount of water other- wise available for public water supplies? / I, Exposure of people or property to water relacod hazards such as flooding or asiches? _ ✓ 3. Air 0 unlit . Will the proposal have significant re"lte in: ■. Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile or indirect sourres? / Stationary sources? t/ b. Detarloration of ambient air quality end /or Interference with the atcnlnment of sand /table air quality standard:? e• Alteration of IOCal or regio+sl climatic V renditions, affoctln5 air movement, coistura or temperature? ✓ } 4. B!_ o_ta f. kr Flora. Will the proposal have significant results }� r rn ^• ,Et a. Change In the eha: ucerlstles of apetlee, ' � including diversity,, distribution, or number •'F`' E, IV of any species of plants? / 'y a� ', ' • Jr. , b, "14duction of the numbers of Any S , or eadange ed species of p- 1'z11ts7 °Sque, tars tiriP�"ir. G�� �_!', )�i'.�. �� , .,Fns, �%o {•. 1.. d� {i+ 1'.•• „i�,alay, .,.�•`- >�i:`��f7�F :����i�i •'Y :i {: a�t.."�,P ?42. ^.�,ri•.: : °a. - r :y.x,..1 A C A,L yA �{l , r Page YES y„yBF _o C. Introduction of new or disruptive species of Plants Into an area? d, Reduction In the potential for agricultural •= production? / Fauna, Will lne proposal have significant results In: A. Change in the characteristics of species, includlug diversity, diacributian, or numbers of any species of animals? —_ / b. Reduction of the numbozs of anw unique, rare -.a, or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new or disruptive apacias of animal& into an area, or result In a barrier to the migration or movement of at,imals? d, Deterioration or removal of existing fish or wildlife habitat? —_ S. Povulatlon. Will the proposal have sigrificant results ins A, Will the proposal altar the location, dtutri- bucion, density, diversity, or growth rate of the human population of an area? b. Will r proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 6, SOCio- Economic Factors, Will this proposal bays aignificanc results ins A, Change in local or raglopal eocio�aconomic ebaracteris ties, Including neonomic or commercial diversity, tax rate, and property values? b. Will project costs be equitably distributed among project beneficiarice, S,e., buyers, tax payers or project users? / ?, Land Use and Planning Considerations. Will the Proposal have signif S�anc results Sn? A. A substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? b. A conflict with any designations, objectives, _- . policies, or adopted plans of any governmental ' antitiee? c. An Impact upon the qulaity or quantity of existing 'consumptive or non - consumptive y racreAtlonal opportunities? 'se,�FV} S � s::u,..'SJ •c _.�,, - k �. e.' -,'. f.a'fe,:_p •. - r kr•q,�!.^ - -K -7„ -r :�.n .-- �b.', -«:z -. •Zee r�C - .,, Pagel p it g, Tranaoorta •ion, Al11 YES "•AYM No =!; / resulw in She proposal have significant 5 a, Ca <rselon of substantial additional vehicular - ` movement? D, Effects on axia,ing Streets, or demand for new street :enstrncci•n? c, Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for now Parking? d. Substantial impact upon existing transports- a- tion Sys ceauT a• Alterations to present patterns of c1rcula- clon or movement of peopla and /or goods? f. D7tcratlons to or effects on present and JL air tra!l va ter -borne, rail, zone transit or air traftieT C, Increases In traffic bazards to motor vaii.led, bicyclists or padsat,ians? y. Cultural raUie¢s, Hill the proposal have -L significant rasa( -te 1 n7 a• A disturbance ro the integrity of archaeolugical, Paleontological, and /or historical rraourc¢a' lu. Health Safety and ltulaanca Faetore. Nill the proposal Gave significant results int a• Crest'" of Any health hazard or potential health hszardt • '�•- -w! b• Exposure o• people to potential health hazards? C. A risk of explosion or r aa of hazardous of �+ substances in the avant of an ucldencT ' d. An increase In the number of Individuals ' or ep¢eier of vector or pathanogenic organisms or the ax poaurs of people to such e organisms? ,• .t !' s. Intraaoe in cxluti 4- ng moles lavals7 ` ITRii • f. Exposure of peopla to Potentially danoise levels? ngaroua -k?, 8• The creation of obi actionable odors? ` yu•;,,x i An ltcresse ! n light or glare? 1 -- l:°t, ,i?ry+�'t °$r'.?,d'lti�i l�nli'7�,hF •1?�`•j;i':U.: -\ "i �'��`. '.n'�"'li�� m .t- ,4:• e a 11. Aesthetics. Will On pro•osrnl have significant results let - a. The obstruction or degradation of any sce,te vista or vlew7 t b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive vita? e. A Conflict with the objective of desigaatod , or potential acetic corridors? �- 17. Utilltias end Public Services. Will the proposal haws a aignlficant mats for nr., syttems, or s alterations to the f:1ImIng: A j�� a. Electric Dover? b. Natural or packaged Las? / e. Communications systems? -- d. Water supply? 1 e. Wastewater facilitias? / _. f. Flood control stsueturet? _^ g. Solid waste facilities? �1 is h. Fire protection? _ ti . SI. Police protection? J. Schools? �• k. Parks or other recreational facilities? �'•" Maintenance of public facilities, including roads and flood control facilities? S •. m. Other governmental sirvieas? v/ 13. Enerav and Seeman Resources. Will the proposal have aignlficant results int a. Use of substantial or excessivo fuel or energy? .Y/ b. Substaictal Increase in demand upon existing sources of energy? / .s • C. An Increase in the dewnd for development of new sources of energy? g'`•, -•�+ d. An,3nereasa or perpetuation of the consumption °' •� �'yMy: of non - renewable fots+s of energy, when feasible r enewable sources w�1" _ of'snar g are available? •�' /I��it.s d A j�� ?. /Fag% S YES KAYyE NO '' • t a. Substantial depletion of my nonrenewable or scarce natural resource? 14 Mandate" Findi Sicailicanee. a• Docs the project have the potential to degrade ' the quality of the environment, aubstancially reduce No habitat of finh or vi1w111u epacie�, y cause a fish or wildlife papal ie drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to elininnta a plant or animal cc=unity, reduce ` the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of ' California history or prehistory? / b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short -term, to the disadvantage of loop -corn, environmental goals? (A short -term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of •ima while Iona - term ...pactn will endure veil into the future). .._ c. Loss the project have impacts which are Individually linitad, but cuculativel/ conuidurable? (CUnulatively eoaaiderabla . seen that the incremental effects of an Individual project era considerable when viewed In eonnoction with the effects of past projects, and probable future d. Docs the project have environmental effects which will cause aubstant!.al adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? II. DISCUSS"" OF EYMROM'MTAL EVALUATION? ' Go above yues t!.one plus a discussion of (proposed eiti�ianemeasures). ' II rs4 5• p� y Y, hM1l1S X 1 " ♦ryA�•'r ' its i`', r r �•�y Y,.�''. r, �'•��'� 1 1 \" x .atilt: Ay ✓,1 xl •ti,P.`.i taRn .�..:. r +t:..... + �� ._ -,.. ,...�,3::•�- iV'.S:�wi"i'.'.31�u • :�J ",1sO; 4 =. +s r I find that although .ne proposed project could have a sig- afSeant effect on the anvico,uent. there i� ? vill not be a significant effect ? ge I t' attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEOATI %T �Pa III. DZTMMINATIO:I nIl?�t/�1C7� tJU.?✓1 ?(w!� /l i. (i CY'(��•�^!%�Yf.'�lL . -. ..�. r fled the proposed project MAY have a significant effect or. the i ,Y �. On the hails of this !alcial ovalua:lont O I find the proposed protvct COW NOT have a significant effect t; :1 A-6i hf¢Y n o the envlronaent, and a NECATIPE DE,LIR.ITION will be prepared. • :�J ",1sO; 4 =. +s r I find that although .ne proposed project could have a sig- afSeant effect on the anvico,uent. there i� ? vill not be a significant effect ? in this ease because the nicigation eeacures described on a.. attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEOATI %T DECL UTI04 WILL DE PREPARED. . -. QI fled the proposed project MAY have a significant effect or. the envlrtcant, and an E.WIRO.O�YT LVACT P.FPOP.T is required. Date_ „�— Slgoaturei� A-6i hf¢Y Title • :�J ",1sO; 4 =. +s r W 14, a ,M ATTACHMENT TO INITIAL STUDY vpRT 11 _ GPA 85 -04E ,^ Transuortaton: • The proposed ;ncrease in density could create a substantial traffic vo to ncrease in umes the area, especi•,lly when considered in conjunction with approved projects in the area. At a minimum, a new access to Bhse Line Road would be required to addition to 1 Provements for pedes• ^tan and bicycle circulation. The C "y Lngir.snr required a traffic study to be pr,pared dis,..s.1ng the Poll, Ing itesfs: I ' 1. Existing traffic volumes. 2. Potential volumes including iow develegment in Upland 3. Impact on intersection of Base Line /Tanglewood 6 Base Line /Alta Cuesta. • 4. Access from the site to Base Line Road. 5. Mitigation measures. In addition, the following areas are identified as potential impacts in the Environmental Checklist. However, they do not appear to be significant to warrant additional environmental study. - Hydrology: An increase in the potential number of dwelling units could cause an Increase in the total amount of paved area utilized This �• areatoncritasand cstreets, s higlernvolumes Pop ILA tiun: T. Should the site be developed at the Medium Density range, on site, structures woutd,probably be removed. Land Use and Planning: the request for a General Plan Amendment represents a change in the planned land use and policies regarding the site. rr,��l�..:A,?y,�i ��,� +..,, 7•l ;�S,yei:s�' �• : >�, >�"c•.a.;lA�•�� -� W 14, a ,M 7. {� AFFIDAVIT or MAILING I. :R-A V _ 7G , mail clerk for the City of Rancho Cucamoaga, do hereby &wear that on G ' , 1985 at - approximately 0 o'clock _ (a.r.. or p.m.), I deposited in the Cucamonga Branch of the United States Fast Office located at 9607 Business Center Drive, a letter addressed to and regarding PUBLIC HEARING COUNCIL MEETING 11/6/05 7:30 PH e ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN MENDMENT 05 -04E - DALY CONSTRUCIT01 SEE ATTACHED LABELS --Signed: �� k / _ Datei /0 a3 f5S7- ; (return to C ■f sl in ) ! ' PInN!•t!�1'i1�7� �t'?�7'. er � to g r,. °t I: t a ,r �i c },7 S,t+VU7- i51_Dg Dlr tench. Molvin H. 882S Magonette St. ;Alta Loma. CA 91701 -APSP 207- 351 -09 Ounce. Lois C. 1360 Via Ladera Aanchu Cucamonga. CA 91730 AP80 207 - 351 -10 9utrJ..10hn J. Jr. 6 Constance 7352 Via Ladera Rancho Cucamong,, CA 01730 APNP 207 - 351 -11 Scar,- Artnur 6 Cladys ,1733' Va. Serena Rancho Cucamonga, CA 917:,0 .AP-40 207.351 -12 `8080. Robott 6 Alice 7340 Via Serene Rancho Cucam raga, CA 91730 APNP 207 - 351 -13 Lockia, Peter 6 Karen 7354 Via Serena Rancho Cucamonga, CA 9173) 207 - 351 -14 n. Tony 6 Debbie Via Serena o Cucamonga. CA 91730 rrankcnhergIor, Oleter 6 Joetf. 929 Foothill Upland, CA 91786 APNO 207- 352 -07 Casparrelli, Da•,lal V. 7383 Via Paralco Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 APNO 207 - 352 -09 Rovalakl, Alfred C. 7373 Via Parolee Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 APNP- 207 - 352 -09 - Pmppa, Eugene 6 Virginia 8432 Via Arross Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 AW 207- 352 -10 Morgan, Darvay 6 Adeline 8424 Via Aires, Rancho Cucamoaga. CA 91730 APNO 207- 352 -11 . Carreon, Carlos otal 8410 V14 Airosa Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 AM 207- 352 -12 Doyle, 11 -r, 6 Anna 8400 Via A: Rancho Cut" CA 917_ AM 207- 352 -13 Winter; Thomas 6 Nancy 8386 Via Airoe Rancho CuremanAa, .,A 91730 r Jones, parry L Susan. 8378 Via Airosa Rancho Cucamonga, CA 9173( APNO 207 - 352 -15 Lev, Thomas 6 Darbara 7359 Via Serena Rancho Cucawnga, CA 91730 i APNO 207 - 352 -16 Do Lace, Doonicia 7349 Via Serena Rancho Cucamonga, CA , APHP 207- 357 -1.7 Oswald, Harry 6 Mary 7339 Via Serena Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 4PN0 207- 352 -18 •\ Menard, Charlea 6 Corn 8377 Via Ladera Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 APNO 207 - 352 -19 Ziemer, Caorga 6 Dorothy 0387 Via Ladera I .t Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 s A APNO 207 - 352 -20 Mawall, Leonard 6 Virginiay� 8399 Via Ladera Rmmho Cucamonga. CA '91730 APNP 207 - 352 -21 Caaaldy, Hovard-, 8409 Via Warc Rancho Cucaman{ SAS GABRIEL VALLEY •yC.Y1CIPAL RATER DISTRICT P. 0. Box 1299 Arusa. CA 91702 NO 202 -02i -09.12 ' SAS ERIIARDINO CUUNTY FLOOD COSYR DISTRICT (no add ea shown) i APNO 202- 02b -11 Clina, Ja.,ts H. dr. 6 Lomita 8484 Lomita Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, ;A 91701 AP, \'d 202- 026 -13 Michael, Lloyd 6 Marian 6320 Haven Alta Lama, CA 91701 0 AP?IO 202 - 361 -03 Thompson, Quinton A Donna 7199 Jasper St. Alta Loma, CA 91701 APNO 202 - 361 -04 Lay, Myron 6 Catherine 7191 Jasper St. Alta Loma, CA 91701 202 - 366-01 . Blancha E. Sierra Vista Loma, CA 91701 i Carolyn AV.-I# 202-- ,71 -07 rergusgn, Phillip 6 Nancy 715P Jaaper St. Alca LOW- CA 91701 APNO 202 - 401 -24, :07- 022 -58 ERNAAD SAN BINO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT (no addroen shown) APNO 202 -401 -31,35 SAN ANTONIO LAN:^ .:0, P, 0. Box 877 Upland. CA 91786 APNO 202 -401 -33,34 Hstroyck. Bill d Mary P. 0. Box 1410 Upland. CA 91786 APHO 202 - 701 -02 UPLAND HILLS COUNTRY CLUB ASSOCIATION LTD. 655 N. Mountain Ave. Upland. CA 91786 APNO 202 - 701 -07' M41REYEX HOMES INC. P. 0. Box 1410 Upland, CA 91785 C CUCA.NOSCA CCUNTY•HATER DLS7 (no addrosa shown) - APNO 207- 351 -01 - �S Rubio, Raul C. Janice 108 Bardadale Ave. Oxnird, CA 93030 APNO 207 - 351 -02 •) Oecha.•er. Jaffrey E. 3442 Via Ladara Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91720 APNO 207 - 35143 Wens, h'trio P. 0. Box B B Cucamonga, CA 91730 APNO 207 - 351 -04 Campos, Gabriel 8420 Via Loder, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 t APNO 207 - 351 -05 Smith, Paul 6 Marylon P. 0. Box 87 Ra..cho Cucamonga, CA 917:t0Y APNO 202 - 711 -03 A APNO 207- 351 -06 PACIFIC INDU- sT•IAL PROPERTIES D D Arcadia, ia, CA 91006 R 8398 Via Laderr, 917 APNO 202 - 711 -04.05 F Fr••= APNO 207- 351 -07 •_ UPLAND HILL:, COUNTRY CLUB Burks, Durlu 6 Fern 8423 Via Ladern • Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 "3 + APNO 207- 3:2 -23 Woleki, Edmund b Julica r 1 8431 Vin Ladera :• Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 r•R AP \O 207 - 352 -24 :.� Hol4ridixe. Ronald 6 Judy ` 8441 Ilia Ladera Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 APNO 207 - 352 -25 Gibson, James M. -Y. 7344 Alta Cuasta Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 r i a APN9 207 - 352 -26 Scholl, Steven P. 7354 Alta Cuests Ave. Rancho Cucamonga CA 91730 APNO 207- 352 -27 Wilhelm, Robert 6 Dorothy 7364 Alta Cuesta Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 APNO 207 - 352 -28 M-1-htnne3, A.wid C. 8371 Via 4lroaa Rancho Cucumr.go, CA 91730 APNO 207 - 353 -20 Hanover, Stanley a FWsacary 8385 Via Airosa Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 APNO 207 - 353 -21 Brookhart, Patsy K. P. 0. Bcx 583 Mt. Baldy. CA 91755 AFNC 207- 353 -22 - Murphy, Paula o Laurence 8407 Via Airess Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 APNO 70- 353 -23 Rote, Dorothy A. 7386 Via Alroua Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 APNO 207 -482- 02,02.05 .UPLAND HILLS COUNTRY CLUB �nSSOCIATION LTD. 655 N. Mountain Ave. Upland. CA 91786 Phi111Pson, Francis 6 Ramona 7378 Alta Cucsta Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 0'0O 207- 353 -18 Phanauf, Daoiae*C. „ 1363`,VSa,Aicosa tbriCho�Caeaenne. L reC of ] im i . _ _ • ;tf•;' �c�dfr�} - r aY it - y ;r , A. )f: 1l. L. Residential (4 -14 du /ac) for 5.3 of Base Line Road west of Topaz - OALT -U (ju /ac) to Medium Dens land located on the north s ?5 -1, 4, 7, 8, 12, 13, & 14. Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Dave Vaughn, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the project. Dan Richards, representing the applicant, concurred with the findings of the staff report and urged adoption of the Resolution. Myron Lay, 7191 Jasper, Rancho Cucamonga, opposed the amendment and was concerned tha` the surrounding area was being developed wltn too many high density projects. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner McNiel stated that he had no problem with the density due to the iso'Ation of this piece Of property, but was concerned wKh traffic impacts. Cr,nmIssioner Chitiea stated that due to the isolation of this property and its location adjacent to the project in Upland which has 12 units per acre, she felt the proposed amendment would be acceptable if traffic issues could be 4ltigated along with density transition on the site at thr time or project tetunitta1. Corissioner Rempel concurred that this request would lra appropriate and felt that the developrent of this project would eliminate some of the drainage problems. Commission Barker stated that it wasn't very often he could be convinced to density isolated as far asi Write CCucamongaavis�o c hernedtendsisubuffered from single family housing to the south and east. Further, that this amendment would be an advantage to the conrunity because the 600 feet of frontage could provide a l maintain. �Re statedithattif thevdeeiopernwashwwillingrto take ona600ffeetaof landscape rontage and be conditioned to restrict density at 12 units to the acre, he Mid vote in favor Chairman Stout concurred and stated that this proposal fits the criteria in that transition of density is no problem, the adjacent property in Upland is similarly zoned, there are a number of protective areas around it such as the flood control area, and the Imber density to the south faces south away from Base Line. Further, that he was not in favor of increasing the density, but this makes good land use sense especially sense the adjacent project in Upland is developed with 12 units to the acre. Planning Commission Minutes -13- September 25, 1985 is N Motion: Moved by 'Stout, seconded by McN1el, to adopt the Resolutibn �+ 88 04E nd0alyaCo stiuctionntoothetCityssCouncil . :id Notionalcarlrie mthe "• following vote: AYES: COK4iSSIONSRS: STOUT, MCNIEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, REMPEL NOES: COPIMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COK41SSIONERS: NONE - carried + + a * * 9:50 p.m. - elar, „ling Commission Recessed 10:00 P.m. - Planning Zomaission Reconvened f t + R Chairman Stout announced that the following Items were related and would be heard concurrently by the Commission. M. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSFSSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENOMENT 85 -04F - Rnr11FSTFR ....... a - A request to amend the General an an eavy n ustr a to General Industrial on 32.17 acres of la the southeast corner of Arrow Highway and Rochester Avenue - 19, 23, 24, 25, A 26. N ••- „a: w >VVIXIL� - A request to amend the fndustrfai3peCWC Industrial (Subarea 13)Pont47.6 acresd of rland,(located at�theosoutheast corner of Arrow Highway and Rochester Avenue - APH 229 - 121 -01, 14, 19, 21. 28 and APN 229- 271 -44. Curt Johnstcn, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Larry Nelson, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the proposed amendment and site plan. Jeff Schlosser, Schlosser Forge Company, objected to the change based on its was ea concernpthatrexistingsheavy loco trtal9 huslnesseslbeli,r tectedIs, He advised that his cnivany is a heavy industrial user which generates noise, vibration and exits humidity, which he thought might be objec':innable to a eneral industrial user. Planning Commission Minutes -14- Septen0er 25, 19854 w; D g 3 -, • 17 ('�Y` RESOLUTION N0. P4-06-828 vs -a�9 A - �. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO - CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT , N0. 85 -O4E - DALY. AMENDING THE LAND USE ELEMENT GF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN FROM LOW MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (4 -8 DU /AC) TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (4- 14 DU /AC) FOR 5.3 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON T11E NORTH SIDE OF BASE LINE ROAD WEST OF TOPAZ WHEREAS, the City Council has held a ouly advertised public hearing to consider all cements on the proposed General Plan Amendment 85 -O4E; SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga City Council hereby makes the following —Mnd ngs: A. Th.. h.11ctes of t the with the Land Use he General conflict B. The Amendment promotes goals of the Land Use Element. C Amendment to the adjacent properties injurious or detrimental _• SECTION 2: The General Plan Land Use Map sha1T be amended as follows: ` Assessor's Pdreel Number 202 - 025 -1, 4, 7, 8, 12, 13, & 14, approximately 5.3 acres in size and located north of Base Line Road and west of Topaz shall be changed from Low Medium Density l (Re Residential (4 -8 du /ac) to Medium Density Residentia SECTION 3: A Negative Declaration is herby adopted based upon the completion aTn—dings of the Initial,Study. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Rancho Cucamonga City :•• Council does hereby approve General. Plan Amendment 85 -04E. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of November, 1985. 6- � AYES: P. r: NOES: n ABSENT: ,on D. Mikels, Mayor I k- 0 n u DATE- TO: FRM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT IQk C 0 f� O November 6, 1985 un Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director Curt Johnston, Associate Planner ENVIROMMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 85 -04F 0 R NU C request to amend the U eneral Plan Land Use Map from Heavy Industrial tc General Industrial on 45.6 acres of land, located at the southeast corner of Arrow Highway and Rochester Avenue - APN 229- 121-01, 14, 19, 21 through 28. ENVIR0IL4ENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN NOM NT - CCH AV NU C A - A request to amen the n ustr a pec 1 c an rom Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial (Subarea 9) to General Industrial (Subarea 13) on 45.6 acres of land, located at the southeast corner of Arrow Highway and Rochester Avenue - APN 229 - 121 -01, 14, 19, 21 through 28. RELATED ITEM: INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 85-04 I. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on ept�e�5, 1985, to consider the above- described items and recommended approval of the General Plan Amendment and Industrial Specific Plan Amendment. In addition, the Commission directed Staff to prepare a related Industrial Specific Plan Amendment (ISPA 85 -D4) which was recommended for' approval on October 9, 1985, and is also on this agenda for your consideration. In summary, the proposed land-use am0ndments would redesignate 45.6 acres of land bounded by Rochester Avenue, Arrow Highway, the Devore Freeway, and the AT & SF railroad tracks at 8th Street from Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial to General Industrial. According to the applicant, market studies show that the demand for heavy industrial property is diminishing as the area grows and land Industrial rca egory,vSubareao13, are5erareesen sensitive oethe fact that the property has one half mile of freeway frontage directly- scuth of the future regional mall. ass ��i ' CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ti GPA 85 -04F = Rochester Ave. Assoc. November 6, 1985 r Page 2 s II. PLANNING CO.K4ISSION ACTION: The Planning Commission stated the pr nary just f cation for recumnending approval of the Amendments is that future development along the Gevore Freeway must provide an attractive image for Rancho Cucamonga and gateway to the n:gional mall. With the subarea revision, technical and design standards would be more stringent. Also, uses in the Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial category such as steel fabrication and milling facilities, forge shops, plastic plants, and petroleum storage would not be allowed in the General Industrial Category (Subarea 13) adjacent to the elevated I -1S freeway. The major concern at the Planning Commission hearing regarded the impact of the land use change on existing businesses, such as Schlosser Forge. & allowed in the Industrial Specific Plan, Heavy Industrial uses may typically produce noise, vibration, odor, air contaminants, or glare. If uses sensitive to these conditions, such as precision manufacturing or office projects, locate on nearby General Industrial property, pressures to adjust operating characteristics of the Heavy Industrial uses may arise. Considering this, the Commission directed Staff to add a statement to the Special Considerations for Subareas 8 and 13 (General Industrial) acknowledging the Performance Standards applicable to Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial uses. A complete description of this revision is provided in the following Staff Report (Item H) for ISPA 85 -04. III. RECO`CIENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends approval of the Genera an and Industrial Specific Plan Amendment as pr^.sented. If the City Council concurs, issuance of a Negative Declaration and adoption of the attached Resolution and Ordinance would be appropriate. lespec%fully spbiq}tted, Jack Lam, AICP Community Development Director JL:CJ:ns Attachments: Exhibit "A• - Location Map Planning Commission Staff Report, September 25, 1985 Planning Commission Resolutions of Approval Planning Cnmaisslon Minutes, September 25, 1985 General Plan Resolution of Approval _ Ordinance Approving the Industrial Specific Plan Amendment . +t n i :'y'CV4Y�.r_ c.c"'•C"1 r ..�. .;ItO u k/. �..� I � r r - ' :Q y�•`J'I��i ti�f2�,1. Ihr�f},� >I ° s.)eK •'10I3 U 25 f /I w � :��: ........ .�4:'t+t•?: >:$: >:i: F qp IL ,� I � <: ::•, :;.;:.;:•,:;:�:•,:;..•.::'•' is i::;:•i: ii:�m' / v �_ a�:: � 5:: .. •> : •:::• 'P�•� -EYE /dry I � �:�:�::•:•:�:�:•:•i:•::'•ii �; :• •.a: • .1 /i9 Q I n .................. •• .: (• Y t .uiK wt 95 )LLI� I T o I s 31 >n K 35 I � •- •' j.., rl 1 ' •,n,at � i ',�,ti nl,� rl.: riwo riw.la I - �1"� � I ;�• 3_F'.9� 2;.:,,�;.ri .. {.F ;i _fi.i..� ";..a ..ter.-, -- i r ti N- wr ±�rrrt w,�,rw untr/n fr - 1� w Q I • nr..n. `:M s• •�,. �::i_i1.r,'1 r °, a:n.. .w.r:ru:..L "' V `I *OSAC 14 I AL,�N STRIA L •.. ( Y ( CIMM, 1 V!RANCHO CU/ Ma TiTLEr l�r.�77dJ M.A>o �i; PLANNING DIVEM ID(HiBIT, SCALE - v r ��.b):9'i•. {S `. PiY;'M. 1, yl'��..Ts� -ti SA /�-`+y'. CITY OF 11UNCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: Septenber 25, 1985 TO: Chairman and Msmbers of t;s Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, AfCP, Community Oevelop,cfnt Director BY: Curt Johnston, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL KAN AMENDMENT 85 -04F t' request to amen the enera an Lan Use Map ru 'Heavy Industrial to General .r.dustrlal, ;v 47.6 acres of land, located at the southeast corner of Arrow Highway and .Rochester Avenue - APN 21-9- 121 -01, 14, 19, 21 -28, and APN 229- 211 -44. I. i p•,, II. �i F, ENVIRONMENTAL <SSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN tl AVENUE ue5t to amen the Industrial pec c an 7'rom Minimum (Subarea 13) industrial 47.6 acesreof) land, General locVedndattrthe southeast corner of Arrow Highway and Rochester Avenue - APH 229 - 121 -01, la, 19, 21 -28, and APN 229 - 271 -4•1. ABSTRACT: A General Plan Amendment and Industria.l Specific Plan mdment from Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial to General Industrial was requested on 32 acres of land. in addition. Staff reamnded that the area of the amendment be expanded - (additional 15: acres), to include a planning area bounded by Arrow Highi-ay, Rohester, the Devore Freeway, and Subarea 13 to the south. At the August 28, 1985, Planning Commission meeting, the Commission determined that no additional environmental assessment was necessary to process the amendment. This report provides analysis of the amendments as they relate to the General Plan, Industrial Specific Plan, Subarea Regulations, and the 1n+pact on existir3 structures for Commission consideration of the proposals. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION• A. Action R vested: General Plan and Industrial Specific Plan an Use endments from Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial to General Industrial (Subarea 13). B. Location: Southeast corner of rochester and Arrow. riot i7f'4j `s t t PLANN'NG CO"MI GPA 85 -04F and September 19, Page d2 REPORT C. Parcel Size: 47.6 acres D. Existin u area Zoning: ISP, Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial E. Existing Land Use: Vacant, Vineyard, Manufacturing Building F. Surround l-9 Land Use and Zoning_ North - Industrial Machine Service, Vacant Property, Landscape Nursery, Da yy Creek, designated General Industrial (Subarea 8); vacant land to the northeast, designated Regional Related Office /Commercial (Victoria Planned Community) South - Manufacturing building, vacant property, designated General Industrial (Subarea 13) East - I -15 Freeway, designated Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial (Subarea 9) Nast - 2 large scale rail serviced warehouse buildings, Schlosser Forge manufacturing plant, vacant property, designated Minimum Impacts /Heavy Industrial (Subarea 9) G. General Plan Designations: r•oJect Site - Heavy Industrial Nr,rth - General Industrial, Utility Corridor, Commercial to northeast South - General Industrial East - Freeway, Heavy Industrial,. General Industrial Nest - Heavy Industrial' I, Site Characteristics: Approximately 40 acres of the site is vacant. M t e souN end of the property near 8th Street, ar AT it SF railroad line exists, and a 32,000 square foot manufacturing building was recently constructed. One addlticnal 35,000 square foot manufacturing building is approved, but net constructed on the east side of Rochester, south of the railroad tracts. (See C- .hibit °G-.) At the northeast corner of the subject property, a brickyard exists within the Edison right -of -way. Vegetation an tLe vacant portion of the s i consists chrubs and weeds. Also,app oximatelyi40ytrees and eiscattered mostly along the street frontages of Rochester and Arrow. No significant topographical features exist on the site. 'x .iF -. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPOPT - ,i. GPA 85 -04F and ISP 85 -03 September 19, 1985 - - Page 13 III. ANALYSIS: A. General Plan Policies: The General Plan states that the City s aT, encourage areas designated for general industrial uses along the Devore Freeway to provide highway dependent uc.,s, such GeneralfIndustrialccaltegoryhissappropriateoas9en buffer .1 between non - industrial uses and heavy industrial land uses. Regarding heavy industrial, the General Plan states tnat uses ` are generally large scale developments such ae forge „fops, steel milling facilities, plastic plants, and steel amendment would not sbeeinco statements, inconsistent withtheGeneral PIanPOSed B. Industrial S ecific Plan Provisions: ObJectives of the Tri ustr a pee c an state tat t e Industrial Area should - Promote an attractive, high quality design in developments which upgrade the City's natural environment and identity. Also, the Industrial Area Plan should establish a specific, well - defined pattern of Industrial activities, while nroviding flexibility to raspond to changing future conditions. Of the 4,700 acres in the Industrial Specific / Plan, approximately 537 acres (11%), are designated Minimum linpact /Heavy Industrial, and approximately 1,570 acres (33%). are designated General Industrial. The General Industrial category provides for the widest possible range of Light and Medium Industrial type activity, including manufacturing, assembling, fabrication, wholesaling, heavy Comercial and Office Uses. The Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial category is designed to provide for heavy industrial uses dhich will not significantly impact the surrounding area. Uses may typically include forge *hops, steel milling facilities, plastic plants, and steel fabrication. •However, not permitted within this category are uses which require massive structures outside of buildings, or unscreened open air storage of largsr quantities of raw, semi - refined, or unfinished products - According to the applicant, market studies show t4at the demand for Heavy Industrial property is diminishing as the , grows and land becomes more expensive. Pressures for upgraded development on the site are also created by the proximity of Conine cialaland(directly to thin northeast, and the fact that the site has a half mile of freeway frontage . ,so near the future mall., In addition, the City Standards'for - ,4 C� PLANNING COM41SSION STAFF REPORT GPA 85 -04F and ISP 85 -03 September 19, 1985 Page /, architecturai quality and screening from the freeway, even further reduce the probability of tha Heavy *Industrial development on the site. C. Sub -Area Re utations: The sub -area regulations in the n ustr a .rea pee is Plan establish the land uses, minimum parcel size, landscape coverage and performance requirements o n o (noise, With heat the ch angefromM ioimumImpact /Heav Industrial to)�General Industrial, the minimum parcel size would be reduced from 2 acres to 1/2 acre; the landscape coverage increased to 12% from 10% (5% - 1000 feet south of Arrow); and the performance requirements made more stringent. Regarding land use, with approval of the amendments, a subarea must be selected. Subarea 8 to the north and Subarea 13 to the south are both designated General Industrial and could accommodate the site. Subarea 13 seems most aopropriate, since It Includes property along the Oevore Freeway and is written to provide for up- graded development ocnsitive to views along the freeway approaching • the regional mall. Land uses have been ddjusted to exclude unattractive development, such as fleet storage, automotive rental, building supplies and sales, rental yards, and petroleum storage (all allowable in Subarea C). In 23 addition, Subarea requires outdoor storage to be :omnletely screened from the public view the on Devore Freeway. The current provisions on the property only require screening within 600 feet of the freeway. D. I acs on Existin Strdctures Doundar of Amendments: As shotm on x t a square oot n ustr a u lding was recently constructed south of 8th Street. The building was constructed specifically for VUna Tool, which does heavy duty mauhlning for airdraft ' engines. The activity generates substantial noise, and the mare stringent performance • requirements (from 85 L to 75 Ldn), may categorize the use ` as non - conforming. A substantial sound wall has already been constructed along the south property line to buffer an adjacent building. Although this property was included in the advertisM amendment, considering that the building was -the recommended that southerlyp boundary of the namendment be the AT 8 SF railroad tracts. ? E. Environmental As.ersment: Staff has completed the env ronmenta c hecklist and found no potential significant environmental impacts as a result of the land use change. The, )r, r. e 5 PLANNING CMMISSION 'STAFF REPORT GPA 05 -04F and ISP 85 -03 September 19, 1985 Page 85 uses permitted in the General Industrial category are less intensive in ter1rs of performance - equlrements and the aesthetic quality along the Devore Freeway will be improved. If the Commission concurs with these findings, issuance of a Negative Declaration would be ap; opriate. IV. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: To approve the amendments, the Commission must a emine that-the following findings can be met: a) That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and aompatiblity with existing land use in the surrounding area; b) The hmendments do not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan or Industrial Specific Plan, and c) The Areendments promote goals of the Lnad Use Element, and d) The Amendments would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties. V. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in _e a e ort newspaper, the property posted, and notices were sent to a subject property owners and owners within 3DO feet of the site. VI. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission a opt a attached Resolutions recommending apprf,ial to the City Council of the General Plan Amendment and Industrial Specific Plan Amendment to General Industrial (Subarea 13), and issuance of Negative Declarations for the subject property north of the AT L -S railroad tracks. Respect ally submitted, b6x-� Jack Lam, AICP Comiinity Developmat Director JL:CJ:cv 4> t 'I I PLANNING CDMlIISSIDN s GPA 85 -04F and ISP 85 September 19, 1985 Page /6'. ' Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "8" - ISP Subareas Exhibit "C" - Land Uses by Subarea Exhibit "D" - Subarea 9 Exhibit "E" - Subarea 13 Exhibit "F" - Revised Subarea 13 Exhibit "G" - Existing /approved buildings Correspondeice from Applicant Initial Stuoy - Part II, General Plan Auendment Resolution of Approval ISP Anendment Resolution of Approval 1 t N; , 'd p 15 ry a F•� µ1 L5�XX •Y { J 0 'o 1 ') 25 !. 27 rJ .fry )! t 7 - t ..f e 14 •U <wt Uyrtl V WPM 5 ol fit . � 0 • ( _ .,..,...;. i;;.B ��f Vii'::. »•„ , � 34 14 t r' ; _ ✓ V 4 ' - �' AQNd STRIA 95 NGRTH tY�. aT.S.rV n ' 1 •; }Jn CITY or .st 1 J'i i '• ITE\t' �Pf}asep� RANCHO CucAt N)GA TrrLc, ,a„ r PLANNINU Divbgo,N F- miuuT, �4 -._S tLD — qq��tltl F 1 •rnt I � t Y' >, OO I ' S Ir), C AeLC _s°. ! Z r WPM 5 ol fit . � 0 • ( _ .,..,...;. i;;.B ��f Vii'::. »•„ , � 34 14 t r' ; _ ✓ V 4 ' - �' AQNd STRIA 95 NGRTH tY�. aT.S.rV n ' 1 •; }Jn CITY or .st 1 J'i i '• ITE\t' �Pf}asep� RANCHO CucAt N)GA TrrLc, ,a„ r PLANNINU Divbgo,N F- miuuT, �4 -._S tLD — qq��tltl F Y' ut t Kt�K V1 i Iq _s°. ! Z r II ki , 14 � L•MY a I WPM 5 ol fit . � 0 • ( _ .,..,...;. i;;.B ��f Vii'::. »•„ , � 34 14 t r' ; _ ✓ V 4 ' - �' AQNd STRIA 95 NGRTH tY�. aT.S.rV n ' 1 •; }Jn CITY or .st 1 J'i i '• ITE\t' �Pf}asep� RANCHO CucAt N)GA TrrLc, ,a„ r PLANNINU Divbgo,N F- miuuT, �4 -._S tLD — qq��tltl F y `t t n � • _S_ O _ r 15 I LIL 191 f%5 I' �r U:,. .`ter ni.n I � •y!__ I. I R m-1 C COMMERCIAL gUTe -1 j SUBAREAS INDUSTRIAL PARK 1„ MY OF WNERAL INDU9THIAL •. RMSTRIAL AARfA A RAIL SERVEDINDUSTRUL/ M MWUM IMPACT HEAVY *MLWRUI e, • ��w`-_y�`w� —`^ ' COMMUNTfY CENTER ���•w»�•�-- +..... Q FU171RE PIPESTATION' S POLICE /SFERFF 1✓• r PARK' N0,lr(7i ' CITY CHP rrE�i, o as /spy r�s o I A =I' -RANCHO .aTCAMaNGA TrrLE, PI ANN4VG ,D VISEO%i EYHIDT! J'z_" SG%LEt ���, i�'C:iN,�.•ht�aW t: Y�° Xc� •3.F.142�1�;7.- ii \`�.c�_'finx i. �. \�:' ;•J��.J r •, 11 ttattlli .. µt SUMMARY HAND USE TYPE BY SUBAREA w•.uua .a C OONDMONALLY FUNITTED USE $LPaRPfi USETYFES e B tJ MANUFACTURIN Dutonl UGtd • • MaOarn n KirYrriwi hPW Hwy • "W WHOIr:sALE STORAGE DISI RIBUTION LVI • NOW n•c COMMCHCIAL Ai•lloalm w •nd-N7t5011 D Ag iaelml &lpPras and Sw&m • AII•W Cy. O D iWwWm Rw Pomp 73 A .. ,l• i D Av imN LVV Tnmk pc Ma ! a A •A44 R Pus -'- Myer e a A W , we Sala AWN, eol 0 0 on &wy aratr•cto's Office e s CenY•cSU Y rds it Wj iants S"wuis I swesed Say e • D AIria Sales ene S.mcea a l • wkwo & yvk s •D• Carymal,ditl, Smkm t' D cxwwmnv Sam" Gwr.im O D D EwvV" DmHrg Establ ervients • • Eibnalromilt D L l FaumM Ir.-pact CON""" Fag Feat Finar" InaeorKe old Real atol• SeMcm .+ Food ale Bmwne Sate n n n Funny arse trmlatory -IMM t%M EZ,* •it Sates a Srltats O C Hotauk"el umo Services • HmIN Cam Sw*ts - = Fananl SerAces D D PNrNdm Auck a Storage SWAM C C I'Mee4>r•I Roamt" Fealty • C R•pri•SuNom a • • Sae , Owation mic AdmAralfi"RAOSv • • =WW y eft n lve ellpecl UOty Facade• D Asaw ni W*wwySWAM a p o sk* AssertdN - - NOTE NawTa+Ad uses not paMeed $UALyyrstq$ S /c�I = G6N6T 1L /N045Ti 4t- r = M /N /Mt4N H1.°3iCT /fi6AVY /NtRf+/7WilZ CITY OF ITE,II RANCHO C`C-;CAMONCA TITLE. ItAMI„C DIVISION EXHIWTr SC1.'.= r fIKM OWNS NORTH -CAIMONGA EXHIMT- SCALE,- J1 0 000 OWNS NORTH -CAIMONGA EXHIMT- SCALE,- J1 Fla IV -10 1t nn t v 1 a P AV�yy��rryy��VL� r CITY Or ITE•N11.6,026S-r� nr-e RANCHO CUCAMO GA nr E, /s .4t p! i l,i>Nmr.tt u oiaN LXHIMTt aX.: SCALE, CIRCULATION �:�ai11,.rca.:.�F /ril -. i�:;'}fn '_`:y;•L4 �•. V. 1200 R.O.W. .,o .`i`�':� ltisil�t� 100' R.O.W. 88' or Moo R.C.W. ' RAIL SERVICE -i-1 -1 ExletMp l++t ++ Proposed TRAILS /ROUTES O O C O Pedestrlun 0000 Bicycle ReO:onal 61u1tF -lLo • o Special Strestscspe/ .mo..o..,d, Landscaping .,,,..,,••,,,.._,,. Powe• Line/ Utility Easement Access Pointe v 1 a P AV�yy��rryy��VL� r CITY Or ITE•N11.6,026S-r� nr-e RANCHO CUCAMO GA nr E, /s .4t p! i l,i>Nmr.tt u oiaN LXHIMTt aX.: SCALE, �:�ai11,.rca.:.�F /ril -. i�:;'}fn '_`:y;•L4 �•. V. .a �'J,.._,. .,o .`i`�':� , t- I'M n-13 SUDSOMEaS 93 emcu AyoR 12W FLO.W. 100' R.O.W. 08'w Use R.O.W. RAIL SERVICE :. -ri-7• 4b11nY - f++ + }4 R000a.0 TRAILSIROOTES 0 0 0 0 P.oaatrlm 0^~0 • • ekycle CZ(M Reg lonal �VV+ l6twil IM It + ^.w. special StnchcaP./ URO.cmpNj Pewb. LIW oPGty ha.h.ot aAccess Pocrta O IL o 0 +w• sea, we No. Prc.l m.a uW Ict coMo+aOo " ahem as aypaomimato oc CITY OP RANCHO CTUGAMONGA n nNNINO DIVISION 1TGAD �iliBS o�' i A 8S r7'S T MEt �K� SuR�r�F,o- r3 �staP� EXHIBIT, ' SCALE, — — 5 I 1. l I-ri I T i] -- y I �., At 111.1 I 1 _r 7� 1 u to PHASE It PHASE 1 i u � a •.+ LL 5107. DATA: Y PHASE 11 S74OO IIa. PT. Mra. 16100 $TOR. 15300 1� PHASE II: 55300 SO.PT. •~ Yr0. 17.705 STa11. 17.105 L 1 •` �a PARKING: 70TAL 101 CITY OF TIE1I, /- Fagso`t�- , /�sr•, ePS os R,t 1NCHO CL'CAMO \GA TITUIIE9ZZZAA 5 KI!l ° s�•s . _ E\HIPAT, _SCALD pLAMj,*N,- DIVISIQV t HESTER AV-WVP ASSOCIA -ES 1151 Airw,y AV,nue state,. -1 Costa He, s, CA 92675 714.545 -0180 August 9, 1985 Hr Otto Kroutil Senior pianner 3320 Basel4.i Road Box 007 Rancho Cu:+aonga, CA 91730 f Re, General Plan Amendrant for eothoator Avenue tcsociatcs aA�FC' �8 &'9GC �qy4 -FO\ wd lg 'r��r G�f'a ;yes o, Dear Otto, your advise and assiz teoce wag extremely aim racintal during our meaOrp on August 1, 1985. Fs have rsviewad the differences between Sub Aria B end 13, and sound that there is li.tlw difference batwaW.' tbo If you foe.' sub Area 1] is More, due to the handling of "10 add Uavore Fraaway, this will Lv setistactory for us. I would like V one of the catagorie5 undo Conditional Uses for Sub Area 3 - •ttna.uint in -rears And Taal estate services" and include this in Conditional U-es on Sub Area 13 Wditionally, I am prnparing an rxtended ownership list to include the property due South at our protect, down to the border of Sub Aron 9 and 13 This will be f.,r public 74CPOSOB to baad the entire area that herders the Davoro Fzwavay and Rochester Avenue, from Arrow Route to the border of Sub Area 9 and 13 Too :zek of August 12, 1961j, we should have our site plan finalized. Our discusar,ln with you and Jim Barton 8/1165 wil, railed changing the lots that abut the Dsvore Freeway, re- orienting the build.ngs to minimize line of site to the overhead moors, and screening the multi- tenant industrial buildings with the free standing tndustrial building alo, :, the Devoe Prosway. Once this site plan is comploted•I will be'eontact:ng you for the appropriate rev,ew to be sure that it meats with your thoughts As + previously 9lsouesed. If any other requests ,mme to mind, please don't hesitate to call, as we are anxious to continua a very smooth relationship with tha City of Rancho Cuca,aonga Thank you for your help. Sincoro /y, ER AvruU ASSOCIATES Tarry E Nolnun N mom - Wnaral partner - 5Nsii.rt v. :i C C WRITTEN JUSTIFICATION FOR DEVELOPED DISTRICT IJMMMNT ( ZONE CvANCE ) There has been a great deal of study put into the background work required to determine the moat approTrate product for the property referred to in this Dietri,• Amendment Request. This research all n,s us to determine the beat %arket for a successful projac' for the local miaf•apelity, as well as the developer. Much of the justification surrounding this request is re- iarad to the fact Rancho Cucamonga is such a dynamic area in Southern Calif- ornia muinb tremendous headway within the business ari residnntial community. This phanomen tl 6t wth leads to veatly accole, Reed change, re.p firing alter - ations to ioi JA plans .•rented by the loccI agencies. Some of the rwro specific reasons ,•-j: our request for thin sons change Lee items the City Is greatly aware of a .1 involve -1 in. Justiftention No. 1: The regional shopping .-iter In the William Lyon Company Vletoria planned community will ere, to the historical sphere of 4p- gradod cnmma,clal office and indvstrial tea. As can be seen by studies in that .:Ills through -out Southern Califoldia this otfect is farily ev- ident. Juatificatia, No. 2: :n,erstate 15 will continuo to receive greater and grcatai una.ge due to the proposed regloral shopping conter, Increased business .ra :fIc and additional residentirl developrrnnt. Uar property hat appro)amatoly 1,000 ft. of frantage an the Devo••e Freeway and our market studies indicate that a =to appropriate utilization for this vis- ibility is to up -grade the nature of the industrial zoning to antiefy a mnre appropriate market with batter archltoctu, 1 and landscape treatment. This up -grade is indigenous to the business park plan fir this locution and woulu not be an appropriate architectural landueap,i treatment for a heavy industrial zone. Justification No. 3: Our sarka� studies Indic, to that theta is an appres- Smately 92+ percentage vacancy of the light indu ^trial business park within tLc City. This absorp rise, plus the lack of many new prujoets indicates the market requirement for a beneficial absorption of additional space. Inventory within the medium and heavy industrial market seem to show a significantly higher jecancy, vhjcb Is also true within the neighboring Ontario industrial areas. luatlflcatten No. 4, Th. City of Rancho Cucamonga a written intent within the rte trlction far Sub -area 9 shows tbo high regard for revoaning and con- cern over the industrial out -growth of outside storage a,ui that visibility to the freeway. Wichin our industrial park designation we will be coati - .j n 0 a i� 'Y l� t� As � r y' i � t Justification for Zone Change Page 7. . we Just Lf£cation No. 41 continue minimizing this even more with a district a_^endment change to the Industrial park, over the heavy industrial zoning currently in placa. In 81ary, theme four Justifications will allow us to up -grade the Industrial zoning to satisfy both the city and our requiremi.its to respo.d to the location and rapid industrial sophist!catlon of the area. �^.($+:�C; nor, ";„�t%Y`•';w ^ =. `4�? y •. t.v^i2 F-1 \J ,S t. t '•rl ♦ j� � -Yip •� Yr i CITY Or P"CHO CDCAXOHGA - a PART II - INITIAL STUDY ENMRON: -TAL CHECKLIST DATE:�u�. /sfy /92S PILING DAIE: sRr G "�1 d'f O F rccwe -.+cfL 74.+.v u.v G h'MER: /:. //1 BS -'3 PAOJECT:� µp N. 7T .cry KC A.wr ..vova7+a��h:. F4�'v h.ua✓ ✓,uE,a.ryf PRO. °CT LOCATION:_��{y I. L\'V'RO`:`Q:HT,�y nPArTS (shcer :-?ion of all "yaa" end "maybe" answers are required cn attached sheets', a' 1. Soils and Geoloay. 9111 the proposal have YP5 ?U�YBE NO r� significant ca�uiu In: P P a Unstable ground ccndit ions or in change. In s geologic relstionships? b. Di.".:ptiom, dlaplscements, compaction or curial of the coil? _ c• Change in topography or contour intervals? around surfaci 1 d. The destruction, covering or modification" Of any unljua geologic or physical features? e. Any potential Increase in wind or water .L + :Ionics do :oils, affecting either on or off site condicona? f. Changes in erosion siltation, or de ti e position? S g. Exposure o[ " - Y people or earthquakes, cl to geologic hazarda such as earthquakes, landalidec, mud_ slide., ground failure, or similar hazard. ? An increase in the rata of extraction end /or •G4tJ w. use Of any mineral resource? •Y +'r`� Hydr210ny;.9i11 the proposal' have eigni[its results Sts; nt C]Ca �?f�}nYFV.'1 C . t>, :ktbti��irl�i: +''q::.Jf'::.r'.• ,i ;f € „r:%r.f I I a b.: Reduction of the numbs of any unique, rare or endangered species o. lants? .r, P821.2 11 u MU \0 ,x a. Changes in eurroncs, or the course of direction Of flowing air,,=, rivers, " - r� o r ephemeral strec. channels? . ',: — -- b• Changes Sn absorption races, dvainag- pwtterrs, or the rata And amouuc of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood vatera? _ -- d Change in the mount of surface water in any body of water? — c. Mschargo , to surface waters, or any slteration of surface water quality? f. Alteration of groundwater characaorlstics? _ S change In the quantity of groundwaters, either through direct additions or with - dravals, or through lnterterenca with aquifer? an Qual. -JI (Wanrity? h. The reduction In the amount of water c ^her- visa available for publl water -- • suppllis? 1s Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such floodin G as or Belches? 3. ASrOunlitL Will the ;:oposol have significant ' results In: e. Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile or Indirect sources? ' Stationary sources? a b. Deterioration of ambient air ,quality and /or Interference with the attainment of applicable _ ' ' air quality standards? -- C' Altdration of local or regional climatic conditions, affecting air movement, moisture or temperature? -- 4. Biota Flora, Will the proposal have significant results Sni a. Change in the characteristics of species, Including diversity, diacrlbution, or number V .of any apacles of pl. t3 7 �a� b.: Reduction of the numbs of any unique, rare or endangered species o. lants? .r, i Page 7 " YES 4A�BE %0 ® C. Introduction of new cr disruptive species of Plants into an ared? ' d. Reduction In the potential for agrieuleutal Production? — -- -� - — Fa_ una, Will the proposal have significant results Ln: a Change in rho characteristics of species, Including diversity, distribution, or numbers If any species of animals? r- b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? c, Introduction of new or disruptive apeties of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migrarior, or Mavernent of animals? d. Deterioration ar removal of axiscing fish or vililife habitat? — -- S, ?ovulation. Will the proposal have significant results ins . s, 1IL11 the proposal site: the location, distrl- bucion, density, diversity, or grouch rate of the human population of an area? b. Will the proposal affect catering housing, or L create a demand for additional housing? _ L 6. Soclo -E� conomic Factors. W111 the proposal have sign lfleenc i, results Sat 0' Change in Iocal or regional socio- economic characteristics, including economic or _ commercial diversity, tax race, and .' values? property `.` b, Will project eoeto be equitably diatributod among project beneficlarles, Le , buyers, tax payers or project users? 7. Land Use and Planninc Considerations Will the �— 1„ propas� BLgnrficanW la7 n a. A substantial alteration of the present or planned land .4 use of an area? b. A conflict with designations, �[ any obj eecivea, ""'" C. ,eon Policies, cr adopted plans of any governmental entities? tip• - - � � d"�, tl�C i' +• r C- An Impact t on the ulaic or P ro 4 Y quantity of �� �L�J + exlncing etnsumptiva or non-consumptive reel. !oval opportunities? •� •� ;: `,+ T+. bn�!♦j�::wl�i.�.hl Zlt: ' It ^n i,�. �� v..�'E„.' �ayf :a', i_� Page., y ` Iransoortatfo n W n. ill the YE1 lIAY9E N0 art proposal have significant resu n; a. Canoration of cubacantial additional vehicular mvement? - • b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for new street construction? • , e. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for na•l parking? d. Subatantial i pact upon existing cransporta- clan -- syateta7 — s• Alterations to present ps tterns of circula- tion or ooveeant a. people and /or goods? f. Alterations to or effects on praaant and L potential water - horse, rail. Hasa transit or air traffic? — —_ 9, Increases in traffic huzards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrian,? 9, Cultural Will the proposal have significaoc _ _- result's in: A- A disturbance to the Integrity of archneologicul, paleontological, and /or historical rasources? 10. Health Safe:v end Nuisenco Fee tore. Will the �- proposal have signllieane result', in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health — b. Exposure of people to potantia! health hazards? C, A rick of explosion or•role..•s of hazardous substances in - �( the event of an accident? _ ' d. An increase in the number of individuals 't or epeeica of vector or pathenogenic 1'. organism, or the organisut "'Post "O of pe0p le to such —_ / t a. Increase in ;xisting nois levels? .�L / �- 'A f° Exposure of people to Potentially dangerous 40190 levels? L `y� -- ---,:� }n ` f• The creation of obJeeclonable odors? L/ t �• ��•� h. An Increase sa in light or glare? '.-''. ' t t' ;- {}.r';y,,Y1J.'i'Jit ; f r Page r' C Aesthetics, Will the y =5 :NY8E NO + proposal have s1 raoulca Sat - significant - Yv a• The obstruction or degradation of - v13tq or view} any scenic ' ' b. The creation Of an aesthetically offensive site} -- ,', A ccnfllct with the objective of designated or �- t potential scenic corridors} 12. Utilities and Public Services. WI31 the propmd -have a s3gniflcant need for new systems, or alterations to the following: a• Electric power} b. Nstural or packaged g a} c, Cocunicatlons systems} 'C d, Water supply} ` s. Wastevator fac111tles1 —� OI1' f• Flood control structures} ' S• Solid waste facilities} S. Fire protection} 1. Police protection} � J. Schools} —� k, Parks or other recreationdl facilities} 1• _.- "�' t Haincananco of public facilfclee, Including roads and flood , control facllltles} m. Other governmental services} a —_ ' j�- 13. Ener¢v and Scare, R a urcea. Will the have t nif proposal sigicant results In a. Use of substantial or xeeanive fuel j or energy? b. < Substantial increase In demand upon existing sources of energy} - i'•jY `/ 11, c. An Increase f 11 the demand for development new } of sources of energy} ty •:.« .�"t3 d• An increase or perperuation of the ¢orsumption of non - renewable foras �� +•,' y •. .; •, / of energy, when feasible renewable eources.oS ,i: ; e},, r.r• ;, energy are available} avc n,i� :.n •�.�,,., inn is ':u+vt 'di -cfr. �L�Y°r�;; =,�y:. i, y� LWi � 1' I S Pace S IE3 %ayes No e. Substsntlal depletjon of any 'I,nrCr.tV4JlO or scarce natural resource? Mand 14. atory Plndl nea of Sieniflca nee, a, Does tea project have the potential CO degradn the quality of the environment, aubntanela177 reduce .he habitat of fish or wiidlife species, cause a fish or vlldliie population to drop below sei, sustaining levels, threaten to ellufaace A plant or anitul roounicy, reduce the numbsr or restrict the range of a -are or endangered plant or aaiml or elL�inste leportant eaaeples of the =Sor periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve shorn. -tem, --•C to the disadvantage of long -tern, environmental 91als? (A short -term impact an the environment is one which occurs In a relatively brlil, definitive period of tice while long - torr+ lapaccs will endure well into the future). / c, Does the project have impacts which are individually linited, y� but cutalntively .onsiderabla? (Cuaulatively considerable means that the incremental sffecta of an individual project are considerable .Then viewed ii connection with the affect* of past prcjaccs, and probable future p,cjects) d, Doe.t the project have anvirorcencal effects which will tauua substantial adverse effects on htman bairgs, either directly or indirectly? / II. DISCUSSION 1M'IRO \9E4TAL EVALUATION (1. a., of dffiraative Cha above r_ uo answers e4 quei dons plus ;discussion o! proposed aicitation AI"VE measures), f -elf" I-1 lJ i C•��Y _ `J0. s • r. ! . _ i`.i 3's L..=� ;• \ "`� �� (Z��✓ =fW �.yi _may — 'J� T 4. .xi•> ... �2' ' i . x if. Y ,'[ r . `i �'.�. >r._1 vY +T._ . ",'.`LTA 'Uli 4j �d�y: • �Y •�Page�7 a{ On the basis of this Snit1a1, cvaluaelon: I find the prerosed ry project COULD NOT have a - an the covlxOne� a +iFnlflcont effect nq and a - MATII'E DEGLARATICB -ill be prepared. ` I fend that, althor�gh the proposed protect could have a a2•;nificant effect on the eaviroment, there will not be a aIgnificanc effect in this ease because the eicigaticn oeaaurea daacrebad on an _ attached sheet have Item added to the pro e•. T DECLARATION WILL BE A NEGATIS_ ' Phi•PAREO. t an L_ I envir=ent, and and an E MPCt�TTLfPACTa significant effect ontthe E.:POgr is ryuired. , Date Sigaa r , ores `1 YA ilffYr •'& LJ 0 s4. n.,F: •\^"., =,t..' tw• �+.'4Ary ',,:�c •y:.1 y,•.rs ':s:.r F, .,, :.: 'e: V' • lam. � � - � �,. Sr �4�i RESOLUTION NO. 85 -143 GEA RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING C0.IHISSION OF THE CITY OF _ G APPROVAL OF NERAL PLAN AMENCMENTINO. 8 04FCOO-HENOI1G TPC LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE PMICHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN - EREAS, the Planning Commission. has held a duly advertised public L he to L " consider all;comnents on the proposed ,General Plan Amendment 85- ' 04F. SEMI Off 1• The Rancho Cucamonga Planning CO=Ission hereby makes the Follow n -g-7Tn {AgS: A. The Amendment does not conflict with the Land Use 1 Policies of the Aeneril Plan. 8. The Amendment promotes goals of theLand Use Element. �. The Amendment would not be materially injurious cr ' detrimental to the adjacent properties. SECTION 2: The General Plan Land Use Hap shall be amended as follows: ace %Nofvlanddlocated on theeeastlside of1Rochester on oAvenue,ySouth side of Arrow Highway, ;lest side of the Oevore Freeway, north of the AT & SF railroad tracks - APN: 229- 121 -U1, 14, 19, 21 -28. SECTION 3: A Negative Declaration is hereby recommended for : s adoption bE� Y Council for this General Plan Amendment, ba- SWLpon the '> and findings of the Initial Study. KI CanmissionNdoes THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Rancho Cucamonga`Planntng . �Z the City Council y recommend approval o General Plan Amendaeat'85 -.,4F to N• n' :r° •"-.uy�r t(r ... ..2,.2-i _q j ^rY511-•F1: � �: -. V -'n g� ��4`�.:r..• PLA7INING•CWMI5SIWIf - GLUTION - General Plan ')aendmo. 85 -04F ( :, September 25, 1985 Page 82 •;a, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1985. 1 PLAN IG COMM[SSI011 O' THE CITY Or RANCHO CUCA:40NGA ` i 8Y: /oL tntt i, Jack Lam, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that tha foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adapted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 25th day of September, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, CHITIEA, BARKER, MCNIEL, REI4PEL (40 NOES: COMMISS!0HERS: NONE ABSENT: CCMMISSIO+IERS: NONE ' � M ���' Fi °a.FT�`:`��5'�` ^�t•2t��"''?'Fy i'i'�..yt J � ..,i i'�' �','�k'F Y t� , I ' m A OF I SIDE RESOLUTION N0. 85 -144 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMOYJA PLANNING COXHISSION APPROVAL OF I14CUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN 85 -03, REQUESTING A CHANGE IN THE LAND DEFIGIIATIOU FROM MINIMUM IMPACTMEAVY 18AREA 9) TC GENERA). INDUSTRIAL (SUBAREA 13) [ELY 45.6 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE EAST STER AVENUE. SOU711 SIDE OF ARROW HIGHWAY, THE OEVOpE FREEWAY, NORTH OF THE AT L SF ;S - APN: 229 - 121 -01, 14, 19, 21 -28. . WHEREAS, on the 15th day of July, 1985, an application was filed and accepted on th3 above - described project; and WHEREAS, on the 25th day of September, 1985, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Secticn 65954 of the California Government Code. SECTI0N 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the fol lowing Mingsi 1. That the subject property is suitable for the uses porrsitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; and 2. That the proposed land use change would not have significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties; ar.d 3. Thrt the proposed land use change is in conformance With the General Plan. this pro3ect wON 2: noticreate Plannino impact son tlhe; environment and recommends Issuance of a Negative Declaration on September, 1985. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That pursuant to Section 65850 to 55855 of this California Covernment Code, that the Planning Camm'ssicn.af the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recomends approval on the 25th day of September, 1985, Industrial Specific Plan Amendmrrt ;;o. 85 -03. 2. The Planning Commissson hereby recommends that the Industrial City Council approve tnd rdopt Specific Plan Amendment No. 85 -03. �Y;u r'r t PLAWlING COMMISSIOII i 'OLUT.tON Industrial Specific `-.an 85 -03 l September 19, 1985 Page 32 3. That a Certified Copy of this Resolution and related material hereby adopted by the Planning Cammission shall be forwarded to the City Council. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1985. 4 I. Jack Lam, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 10 kereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly .Ateoduced, bassed, and adopted by the Planning Coraatssion of the City of rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held an the 25th day u. September, 1985, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, REWEL HOES: COMMISSIONERS: 11011E ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE 1 °s ri If t i 4 t �/ / 3 �M? `'` -rt "�•. , - "' ^ � ,. q ly{ {�y- .e•^.. •4r'.��.v T, Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by MtNiel, to adopt the Resolution recommending approval of Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment - 85-04E, Daly Construction to the City Council. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COIMISSIONERS: STOUT, MCNIEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, REMPEL NOES: COI4MISi10NERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE - carried •a It kw 9:50 p.m. - Planning Commission Recessed 10:00 p.m. - Planning Commission Reconvened :♦ r,tr Chairman Stout announced that the following items were related and would be heard concurrently by the 'amnission. H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDFiENT 85 -04F - ROCHESTER AVENUE request to amen a enera an an use map from L•� x eavy n ustr a to General Industrial on 32.17 acres of land located at the southeast corner of Arrow Highway and Rochester Avenue - APH 229 -121- 19, 23, 24, 25, & 26. N. NU6Mtb1tw RYCnUt IOZiULINIC� - 11 TCUWU31. W uncles c u •.• -r - -•• - an f rom n mum Wa-ct /Heavy industrial (Subarea 9) to Genaral Industrial (Subarea 13) on 47.6 acres of land, located at the southeast corner of Arrow Highway and Rochester Avenue - APH 229 - 121 -0,, 14, 19, 21- 28 and APN 229 - 27144. Curt Johnston, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report: Chairman Stout opened the public haaring. Lary Nelson, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the proposed amendment and site plan. Jeff Schlosser, Schlosser Forge Company, objected to the change based on its affect on his property. He stated that during the General Plan hearings, it was a concern that existing heavy industrial businesses be protected. He advised that his company is ■ heavy industrial user which generates noise, vibration and emits humidity, which he thoeght might be objectionable to a general industrial user. Planning Commission Minutes -14- September 25 , 1985 'r I a Gary Mitchell, 133 Spring, Claremont, advised that he was o member of the " Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Committee and that the concern of the Committea was not with the type of uses but with the view of motorist on Devore Freeway. Further, that the concern was with the upgrading in terms of f aesthetics and design characteristics of both existing and new projects. Mr. Nelson stated that the impacts caused by Schlosser Forge would be the some as impacts on heavy industrial uses. Further, general Industrial would be a more appropriate category for this location due to Its proximity to the freeway because It is much easier to landscape that type of use as opposed to heavy industrial.`I There were no further cements, therefore thi public hearing was closed. Commissioner Barker stated that he understood the concern that Mr. Schlosser had regarding the incompatib111ty of the two uses; however, if a heavy Industrial user was located on this site, it would he very difficult to adequately screen it from the freeway. Commissioner Rempet stated that if the Commission ducides to make this land use change, it should be noted that this type of use is adjacent to it and a commitment needs to be made to insure Schlosser Forge the full use and expansion of its sit-i. Chairman Stout stated that no matter what is developed on thet site it has to consistent with the existing development across the street. He advised that the City commlted to the forge many years age, but that there was no question • that the City has made another commitment towarls quality and upgrading its Image wherever possible. Further, that the corridor along the freeway is one of the business community's most important assets and :his general industrial use could provide an aes'hetic barrier to the heavy industrial uses on the other side of Rochester. Commissioner McNiel stated that he understood Mr. Schlosser's concern and agreed that some sort of commitment should he made to Insure that heavy industrial uses are allowed to continue operation. Cc issioner Chitiea stated that this desi §n is what the City,ts looking for to upgrade this area which 1s a window to the City. Further, she agreed,-that a commitment. should be made to protect existing heavy manufacturing uses and with this protection she did not think that the forge should be concerned with being forced out of the area. Chairman Stout asked how :he Industrial Specific Plan could be amended to avoid future conflicts which may arise between existing heavy industrial uses and firms locating in the surrounding area designated for General Industrial development. Curt Johnston, Associate Planner, replied that a section could be added under Special Considerations in Subareas 8 and 13 of the Industrial Specific Plan. Phoning Commission Minutes -15- September 25, 1985 3/(o ru E Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Chitiea- to adopt the Resolution 6' recommending approval to the City, Council of Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment 85 -04F, Rochester Avenue Associates. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: CQ'L`IISSIONERS: STOUT, CHITICA, BARKER, MCNIEL, REMPEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE 48SENT: COK41SSIONERS: NONE - carried reciomnendtago apDrovalStto tthe eCityaCounciBaoferEnvironmental Asse smenttand Industrial Specific Plan Amendment 85 -03, Rochester Avenue Associates. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, BARKER, CIIITIEA, KCNIEL, REMPEL HOES: COV..NISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COK41SSIONERS: NONE tarried Additionally, staff was directed to prepare an amendment to the Industrial Specific Plan Subareas 8 and 13 for the Co=ission's consideration at the second meeting in October. : ter 0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN ;.MENOMENT 85 -04G GEROLD - A FT Residential (4 -14 du /ac) nona3.67aacres ndof s a land located on i t the northwest corner of 19th Street and Archibald Avenue - Portion of APH 202 - 1091 -21. Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Gary Mitchell, 133 Spring, Claremont, gave an overview of the project. i Joe Hanna, 6715 Jadeite, Rancho Cucamonga, supported the change from office to advised residential He area residents applicant, similar to what was done with the Lincoln o with the Properties Project. 4 There were no further comments, therefore the publlc hearing was closed. Commissioner McNiel stated that he assumed the same position on this amendment '+ that he had on other office amendments in the past in that he was concerned y {; that the time would come when office sites would be needed and they will have s1. all been amended to residential. He additionally supported keeping the entire I+i site designated for office. N • ; Planning Conmissien Minutes -16- September 25, 1985 " 4 YKw .=f,_ ,,�.�r . �:i •i5w;s E �.11� a •iY��' ; -.� •, },Li 9,}`l+,'ty'.v • �•� - -. . .r.1`w�` APFIDAVII OF NAILING _ I• l/ t 1 /Nr , mail clerk for the City Rancho Cucamonga, do heraby swear that on Piro a3 , 1981 it - approximately "1,Q_ o'clock (a. or p.m.), I deposited in the Cucamonga branch of the United state* Post Office located at 9607 Su4ness , Center Drive, a letter addressed to and regarding PUBLIC NEARING COUNCIL MEETING 1116105 7.30 PH Sy ' ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSKNT d GEIIERAL PLAN AMENDMIT 84 -04F - ROCHESTER AVENUE ASSOCIATES SEE ATTACHED LABELS • Signed: y`) � ,�o Date: — (return to City-Ctwyr','q:fs* alter signing) - :i. P)4 NN.�Ja Q1J i3l�•1 j. t .• ,ti t feet:,. J ' F CIS _ :•h � •�. -- •AgBazzotti, Carlo M., Tr. t Aggazzotti Soucharn California .loan V. Tr. , a. 11929 Footh:111 Blvd. Edison Co. P.O. Eox 513 Mr. g�ll Len Cucamonga, (:A. 91730 I Ontario, G, 91761 711n:and Company ' 0229- 011 -27 0229- 021 -24 337 N. Viaeyard Ave., SO40f Ontario, CA. 91764 Southern California Edison Co. P.O. San Bernardino 0229 - 021 -36 ' Box 517 Ontario G. 91761 Cooney Transportation 6 Flood Concral Footnill Associates 19 825 E. Third Street Corporate Plaza 0229- 021 -47 Bernadi San Bernardino, G. 92415 -00875 P.O. BOX 7520 Newport Beach. CA 92660 Sehalesser 0029-121-=Z 229-021 -28 6 Forge Co. • Arrow Routs Schlosser Phillip D., Etal Devora Rochester Roche • �1171- Cucamonga, G. 91730 r7T 0229 SbhZosscr Elaine M. Blvd• i III, Ltd. X Occa Land 11, Ltd. - 111.18 Cucmanra, . G. 91730 I 22672 H. Colder Spring: Dr. .• 0229 - 111 -05 1 Diarnnd Bar, /3i G. 91765 Davoro Rochester III, Ltd. I I 0229 - 111 -06, ol, X Occidental Land Research Eric Nenaen r ,-22632 E. Golden Spring. Dr if300 1 Lincoln MacArthur Blvd 1 19752 MacArthur Blvd., 11n9ner insulation _- Diamond gar, G4, 91765 0225 Irv1na. G. 92715 110 I'arhot Strout `. 0229- 111 -07 ' Fast Poleatinc, Ohio 44• ?S 0229 - 111 -08, i I 0229 - 111 -09 I 229- 251- (9 -12, 22, 27 20L10) I Jay Viana Parton Devor KH 9061 Cottonviod Nay $670 Wilshire Blvd Stu US Flywheels, �o Alta Lor.,a, CA 91701 2200 ins Angeles, CA ' '• 229 - 251 -13. 29 9eo3ty San Jun✓ Capistrano, CA 9269 S,F 229- 261 -75 229- 271 -34 _ z -4 l`A+ II ( iytii, •fdw n�jy!,yJ°� { \ray _ °,�/��"i1/.'f`'a� YS'�.`'l,•1�..Y�k.'f i�`ai � "iaM1.i9 f "'`V.it ' ' y • J�fWyp�- '1V4��i. r„ i' i L+ r is M ,e AFFIDAVIT OF HAILING mail clerk for the City Vf Rancho Cr"monga, do hereby ovear that on , 198! at approramately _�_ o'clock a.>, or p.m.), I deposited in tte Cucamonga Branch of the United Btttes post Office located at 9607 Bu;ineu Center Drive, a letter sAdressed to and regarding PUBLIC HEARING CITY COUNCIL MEETING 1116/85 7 :30 PH EIPlIRONMEIIIAL ASSESSHEUT AID INDUSTRU SPECIFIC PLAN AMEN DHE:rt 85_03 i ROCHESTER AVENUE ASSOCIATES SEE ATTACHED LA-OEL-S1 (return to Ctt1rClTrk4 -yiy� after signing) PInAN,.aJdlJrif�/� .. 'A.aiil•'�I. �S w �iry N r Aggazzotti, Carlo N., Tr. ACCazzottl Joan V. Tr. Southern California Edison Co. 11929 Foothill Blvd, P•0• Box 313 Hr, Bill Lee Cucamonga, CA. 91770 Ontario, G. 91761 x Upland Company 0229- 011 -23 0229 -021 -24 377 N. Vineyard Ave., SO40 Ontario, G, 91764 Southern California Edison 0229- 021 -36 Co, Box O Onta nta rio, G. CA. San Leraardlno County Trannportatlon F Flood Foothill Associate 91761 i Control 825 E. Third Street 19 Corporate Plazas 0229- 021 -47 , San Bernardino, G, 92415 -00875 P.O. BOX 7520 Newport Beach, CA 92660. 1 0029 - 121 -2Z 2'L9- 021 -28 Schllosaer Forge Co. 11711 Arrow Route Cucamonga. Schlosser Phillip D„ Eta, -Schlosser Elaine Devote Rochester III, Ltd. G, 91730 t H. 11711 Arrow Blvd, _ S Occidental Land Research 0229 - 111 -18 - 1 Cucamonga, G. 91730 22632 E,-Golden Springs Dr. 0129- 111- OS 03 "Dlacond Bar, G, 91765 , Devote Rochester III, Ltd, X Eric Hansen ' 022? -111 -06 Occidental Land Research 22632 E. Golden Springs Dr Z Properties Wagner Insulation X300 Diamond Bar, G. 91765 752eoln Irvin Ha CA. 9 7 Blvd. 0225 Irvine, G. 92715 110 Market Street • 0229 - 111 -07 East P91estlne, Ohio 44413 0229 - 111 -08, 0229 - 111 -09 229 - 251- (9 -12, 22, 27 28630)1 Jay V1ana Horton Devor 9061 Cottonwood Nay 5670 Wilshire Blvd, Sta 2200 US Flywheels, Inc Alta Loma, CA 91701 Los Angeles, G 1.0. Bas 147 229 - 251 -13, 29 9exm3io chpistrano, CA 9269 229 - 261 -75 1 229 -27" I : I I � 7' ANi I ,.cCr4� f'x� a �1.o , Y : I n AYFIDAVIT 07 MAILING Al =il clerk for the City of "t Rancbo Cucamorga# do bereby "car that on /()n= 1985 at Cucaxionga Braneb of the United States goat Office located at 9607 Suiiness Center Drivet z letter addressed to and regarding PUBLIC HEARMIG CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/6/85 7:30 PH ENVIRDIVIENTAL. ASSESSNE11T A110 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 85-OW- E ' + ROCHESTER A;ENUE ASSOCIATES SEE ATTACHED LABELS Signed: Datet AD (return to C" after signing) E ' + 2, Rochester Avenue Associates 3151 Ai—ay Southern California Edls�j Co. Costs Huge. CA. Ave., t j P.O. Box R3 San Bernardino County 92676 Ontario, m. 91761 TranSportatiOn & FlQcd c6nt'l 0229-121-19. 23, 24, 25, 26 825 E. Thl •I Street 0229-121-27 Sar. gernardinci, CA 92415 -'O( 229-121-14 MS 0avelopment Company 5821 E. Udshington Boulevard Rochester Developmer.t company Jay Vioni '.1ty Of COMmerce, CA 90041 I G441-Roland SL—et viona Tool Plartin StIverman , 13881 Fight street 1-22 RaIchoo- Cucamonga, CA 239-271-44, 229-7,51-:1. LJ YTr OVA,; A -77 u5, - ,,AYTIDATIT OF MAILIAG be CI cy off mil clerk for t 1989 at Ranebo Cuewacuga d berpb7 Ivear that on p.m.) I deposited In I t1ii apprmims tely o'clock* jr locted at 9607 Busiorad Cuc"ong =,h of the United States post Office Center Drive. & letter addrevssd to and regarding , 1 PUBLIC uARVIG CITY COUNCIL MEEIING 11/6/85 7•30 I'M_--� ENVIRONVE11TAL ASSESS112HT AND Itj Dk rTRI , AL SPECIFIC P411 V 85-03 ROCHESTER AVENUE ASSOCIATES SEE ATTACHED LABELS Date: Signed. (return to Chl ftflh-"WF altar 1, 1z XZ I • .1 Ap F ROCAelter Avenue Maaej. 3151, Alma tes S,,,Ut, • y L-1 Costa Ifasa, cA• 92626 ern California Edison C,, B P.O. 0-1 513 San �ernardinO 1. 02Z9-lzl-l9, 23, 24, 25, 26 Ontario, CA, 91761. Count; TranSportatiOn & Flood Control 825 7. 0229-121-27 E. Third Street Sall Bernardino, CA 92415-00841 I- DWS DeVelopmnt COrpany 6827 r 229-121-14 11ashfn9tOn Boulevard City Of COnerce. CA Rochester DevelOPT-ent Company 6441 Roland Jay vi�& CIO 14,rtin Silvercan 90041 Street Buena Park, CA 00621 Viana 3.18 T-1 Might 229-121-22 Street "ho, Luca—n-3a' CA 229-271-44, I • i'� .� r •. .. ^'j :.s±�M.[; c;,�.1.y d(y a� ^s ,. � �,....m ., -3 • :�[. `", „is vii �r to RESOLUTION NO. P31- 0d=0SR A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO _- CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT kID GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 8S -OAF, ROCHESTER AVENUE ASSOCIATES, AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FROM HEAVY IP:Nmrii. TD GENERAL INDUSTRIAL ON 45.6 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ARROW HIGHWAY AND ROCHESTER AVENUE - APM 229 - 121 -01, 14, 19, 21 -28. 1 WHEREAS, the City Council has helo a duly advertised public hearing to consider all comments on the proposed General Plan Amendment 85 -04F; SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga City Council hereby makes the following 7Tn—dings: A. The Amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan. 8. The Amendment promotes goals of the Land Use Element. AC The Amu -dment would not be materially injurious or ,,.trlmental to the adjacent properties. fol lops: SECTION 2: The General Plan Land Use Map shall be amended as From Heavy Industrial to General Industrial on .proximately 45.5 acres of land located on the east side of Rochester Avenue, south side of Arrow Highway, west side of the Devore Freeway, north of the AT b SF railroad tracks - APN: 229 - 121.01, �4, 19, 21 -28. SECTION 3: A Negative Declaration is hereby adopted based upon the completion an T7i n ngs of the Initial Study. NOW, THEREFORE, DE IT RESOLVED, that the Rancho Cucamonga City Council does hereby approve General Plan Amendment ES -04F. 50P i .h .r 1 44 vt I _"• ORDINANCE NO. �RlL.CE' =7=•C• 01.7 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITE OF RANCHO = CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ENVIRONMEh1AL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 85 -03, CHANGING THE LAND USE /SUBAREA DESIGNATION FROM MINIMUM IMPACT/HEAVY INDUSTRIAL (SUBAREA 9) TO GENERAL INDUSTRIAL (SUBAREA 13) FOR APPROXIMATELY 45.6 ACRES OF LAND LOCTED ON THE EAST SIDE OF ROCHESTER AVENUE, SOUTH S1DE OF ARROW HIGHWAY, WEST SIDE OF THE DEVORE FREEWAY, NORTH OF THE AT & SF RAILROAD TRACKS - APN 229 - 121 -01, 14, 19, 21 -28. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does ordain as °allows: SECTION 1: The City Council hereby finds and determines the following: A That the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, fallowing 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, and duly neard and considered said recommendation. B That this rezoning is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. C That this rezoning is consistent with the objectives of the Industrial Specific Plan of the City or Rancho Cucamonga. D. rezoning will have no significant environmental 1.yact as provided in the Negative Declaration filed herein. SECTION 2: The following described real property is hereby rezoned In the nner sta mated, and the Industrial *Specific Plan is hereby amended accordingly. 9� From Minlnum Impact /Heavy Induitrial (Subarea 9) to General Industrial (Subs -ea .3; on approximately 45.6 racres of land located on the Past side of Rochester Avenue, south side of Arrow Highway, west side of the Oevore Freeway, north of the AT & SF railroad tracks - :., APN 229 - 1,21 -01, 11, 19, 21 -28. '?.. SECTION 3: A Negative Declaration is hereby adoptEd based upon the cowletioniindings of the Initial Study. l4 V _. F:�_ J u' „s CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: November 6, 1985 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director BY: Curt Johnston, Associate Planner ral SUBJECT: ENVIRONVENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 85 -04 —.UTiY— RAIL NO UCAMOx - An amendment to t e n ustr a pee c an text for Subareas 8 and 13 (General Industrial), adding land use considerations related to performance requireme.MS of the adjoining Minimum Impact/Heavy Industrial Category (Subarea 9), and existing businesses. RELATED ITEMS: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 85 -04F and INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 95 -03 BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission directed Staff to prepare the land use ove escribed amendment to be processed conrurrently vith the Industrialchange o roperty at thewsoutheast cornernofsArrow Highway and Rochester Avenue (General Plan Anendment 85 -04F, Industrial Specific Plan Amendment 85 -03). In brief, this Amendment adds language to the Special Considerations for Subareas 8 and 13 stating that Performance Standards of adjoining Minimum IMPact /Heavy Industrial land may impact nearby General Industrial uses sensitive to conditions such as noise, air_ contaminants. vibration, odor, humidity, heat, or glare. Uses-such as precision manufacturing or offices, rhoutd consider these implications prior to locating in the vicirlty of Minim= impact /Heavy Industrial property. ecommended appro'vatnaf gthe Amendment held on October Public hearing and The attached Planning Commission Staff Report describes the revision in greater detail. II. PLANNING COhLM"II0N ACi20N: The Planning Commission reeonmended n s amen meat as a m t gation measure to lessen future conflicts •esulting from the proposed land use change, or fut•me development in the General Industrial area currently on the north side of Arrow HigIrway. The major concern is that a proliferation of uses cexsitive to Heavy Industrial Performance Standards would create pressure to adjust operating characteristics of existing and future uses in Subarea 9 (south side of Arrow Highway). Please refer to the St!f: Report for GPA 85 -04F and ISPA 85 -03, for additional background information. 3� � Im CITY GPA Page :IL STAFFfREPORT'.. - City Fof.Rancho Cucamonga err i' `t:' •�.t.r °-t`a" III. RECOMENDATION• The Planning Commission recomr_nd. c,proval of the nT �tri-aT$peclfic Plan Amendment as presented. If the City Council concurs, issuance of a Negative Declaration and adoption of the attached Ordinance would be appropriate. Respe.IL Lful ly /b f fitted, j 1 ICP Community Development Director JL:CJ:ns Attachments: Planning Commission Staff Report, October 9, 1585 Planning Commission Resolution of Approval Ordinance Approving the Industrial Specific Plan Amendment T! 3a 9 1 t °A • s., �J CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REIQI�T v DATE: October 9, 1585 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Canaunity Development Director BY: Curt Johnston, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIROhMEKfAL. ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN 7�Ep6AErrt �_b� ZITY 01 RR7I}i U t. A - An amendment to the industrial opecific Plan Text for ubareas 8 and 13 (General Industrials, adding land use considerations related to performance requirements of the adjoining Minim.im Impact /Heavy Industrial category (Subarea 9), and existing businesses. I. ABSTRACT: At the previous meeting, Planniag Commission directed Tt-aff —to prepare an amenument as described above to be processed concurrently with the land use change from Minim Lin Impact /Heavy Industria. to General Industrial, on the property at the southeast corner of Ar•ow Highway and Rochester Avenue. The intent of the amendment is to avoid future conflicts which may arise between existin3 heavy Industrial uses and firms locating in the surrounding area designated for Genera'. Industrial development. 1I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Within the text of various subareas in the '1n-Tu-sTrrh1�; a section is provided for Special Consideration s. inc in the current Special Considerations for Subarea 8 are potential conflicts between General Industrial uses and Industrial Park use: to the north (Subarea 7), as well as screening outdoor storage within 6DO feet of the Devore Freeway. Subarea 13 lists Special Considerations Such as abandonment of a portion of the Rochester right -of -way, and completely screening any outdoor storage areas visible from public view on the Devore Freeway. The language to be added for both Subareas 8 and i3 is proposed as follows: Class C Performance Standards of the adjoining Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial area (Subarea 9), allow existing busiresses and future Industrial uses which produce noise. particulate matter and air contaminants, vibration, odar, humidity, heat, glare or high intensity. Uses sensitive to these conditions, such as precision manufacturing or office projects, should consider I Industrial property. the vicinity ty. ITEM R v s. i it J, a, PLANNING COMISSION STAFF REPORI'1 Industrial Specific Plan Amendoent'85 -04 October 9, 1985 Page 02 III. ENVIROMMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Staff has completed the Environmental Check st and ound no potential significant environmental impacts situation�t of the Comm isslcnguconcursc��withrithese� findings, recommendation for issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. IV. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: To approve the text amendments, the Commission must determine that the following findings can be made: •1. The amendments do not conflict with the land use policies of the General Plan or the Industrial Specific Plan. 8 The amendments promote the goals of the Land Use Element. C. The amendments would not be materially injurious or detrimdntal to adjacent properties. V. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing n _ d Oa v Report newspaper. VI. RECOMTtENOATTON: A Resolution is provided reconnending approval to the ty ouncll of the Industrial Specific Plan Amendment and issuance of a Negative Declaration. Respectfully s pitted, -Jack Lam, AICP 4`;, Community Development Director JL:CJ:cv • 5 a S. i� `E fiii ti ak • a s 1 iL ''f.. v •II 3 i t yy� �Y b y =Y��r I i Yf Y, 1. . ' ..v • Ci rl •' �' ^Y�Sw "`i' .v • • tt �- >li a���1'rpys� r% SUBAREA 8 General P1-- Designation General Industrial Primary Function Subarea 6 extends north of Arrow approximately 1000' cast of Cleveland to the east Plan boundary ? Including a portion south of Arrow along the eastern y:an boundary. fie area functions to provide for Central Industrial activities and to assure for a transition area from the Heavy Industrial category !ocated north of tots subarea. North of Arrow And west of htllikcn, the Industrial uses should be allowed to continue and expand with all service •� according to the development standards of the plan. ^ Permitted Uses Custom Manufacturing Light Manufacturing L!eht Wholesale, Storage, and Distribution Agricultural Supplies and Services Automotive /Light Truck Repair -Minor Automotive/Truck Repair -Major Building Contractor's Offices and Yards Building Maintenance Services Building Supplies and Sales Business Supply Retail Sales and Services Business Support Sarvices d Communicatlen Services Eating and Drinking Establishments Laundry Services Recreation Facilities Repair Services Administrative Civic Services Conditional Uses Medium Manufacturing -Heavy Wholesale, Store egel and Alstribution Administrative and Office Animal Care - Automotive Fleet Storage ''Automotive Rental Automotive Service Station Convenience Sales and Services ` Entertainment _ Fast Foot Financial, Insurance and Real Estate Services < .. '0 tc Food and Beverage Sales Heavy Equipment Sales and Rentals Medical /Health Care Services Personal Scrvieas Petroleum Products Storage o� Public Assembly Public Safety and Utility Sarvices Religious Assembly IV- 1 �_,;;ri ay - •y,y..:ry'4`.�Ct,�x` a Access and Circulation SUBAREA 8 (Continued) Right -Of -Way - Day Creek Boulevard Ml l l iken Right -Of -Nay - Arrow E[Iwanda Rochester s �Ve - Right -Of -Nay - Arrow E[Iwanda Rochester • u Landscaping Requirements 122 of net lot area ; 'w •`Y _ r� 54, Rlght -Of -Way - All other Local Streets v• Minimum Parcel size One -half ( }) acra Setback Requirements (Measurad -f om ulti- Average rage ' mate face of curb) Day Creek 8oule~4 Ln 45' Parklu g Milliken �5, n Arrow Rochester 4 Etiwanda „ All Other Local 25' TS' Streets • u Landscaping Requirements 122 of net lot area ; 'w •`Y _ r� f x a ,1 A "t SUBAREA 1; (Continued) Performance Requirements No •e: The maximum allowable noise level of any uscsshall not exceed 75`dn as measured at the lot line of the lot containing the use. Where a use occupies a lot abutting residentially zoned land, the noise level shall not exceed 65tdn as measured at the common lot Iine Noise caused by motor vehicles and trains are excepted from this standard. Special Consideration Vibration: All uses shall be operated so as not to generate vibration discernible without Instruments by the average persans beyono the lot upon which the source Is located Vibration caused by motor vehicles, trains, and temporary construction or demolition is exempted from this standard. Par tl cu la ce Matter end Alr Con wminants: In addi- t on co comp once w to the •QMO standards, all uses shall be operated so as nut to emit particu- late matter or air contaminants which sre readily detectible without Instr mcnts by the average parson beyn,,d an, lot s of the lot containing such uses. Odor: All uses shall be operated so as not to emit matter causing unpleasant o.lors which are percepti- ble to the average person beyond eny lot lire of the lot containing such uses. Huni 6l ty, Heat, and Glare: All uses shall be oper- ated so as not to produce humidity, heat, glare or high-intensity Illumination which is perceptible without instruments by the average person beyond the lot line of any lot containing such use. All development In this area shall bo required to completely screen from pub Ile view on the Devore Freeway any outdoor storage areas Future consider- • ations w11i be made for abandonment of a portion of Rochester right -of -way. Future development between Old Rochester right- of-way and Devore Freeway will be Iimltad because of the inherently saylt lo[ depth of parcels within this area. IV -69 339 .a �,1 X41. ' j'�t�11. e Ste. �� � ��. ... r • a � Nf. • K �A � �� RESOLUTION NO. 85 -158 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAPIONGA PLANNIf4 COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 85 -04 REVISING THE SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS " FOR SUBAREAS 8 AND 13 CONCCRNING PERFORMANCE REOUIhEMENTS +° OF ADJOINING MINIMUM IMPACTJNEAVY I14OUSTRIAL PROPERTY WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a duly advertised public hearing to consider all torments on the proposed Industrial Specific Plan :Vnendment 85 -04; ' SECTION 1: The Ran, ho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the following fildings b V A. 'he Amei.dm'ent is consistent with Policies of the G+.neral Plan and Industrial Specific Plan. B. Thc Amendment promotes goals of the land Jse Element and Industrial Specific Plan. C. The Fmcendment would not bo materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has found that this plro ect w not create a significant adverse impact on the environment and recomsrends issuanct cf a Negative Declaration co Octobor 9, 1985. NJ'i, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the California Tovermment Code, that the mlanning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval on .the 9th day of October, 19C5, Industrial Specific Plan Amendment 85 -04. 2. The Planning Cammission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt Industrial Specific Plan Amendment No. 85 -04. 3 That a Certified Carry of this Resolution and related material hereby adcoted by the Planning Commission shall be forwarded to the City Council. r. 12 As' Resolutlon1No.,. ial %S Industr. p`e'dfic:Pi October 9, 1985 - �; Page 2•; Y` e. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1985. PLANNING !ON kea Y OF RANCHO LUCAHONGA BY: 9 E. David ar er man 'c + ack am, 5ecrerary i, dart; Lam. Secretary of the Planning Camisston of the City of Rancho ?r Cucamonga, do hereby cartify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the �. City Cucamonga, replar of the Planning Commission heid onile9th day of October, 1985. by the folloging vote -to -wit: AYES: C014ISSIONERS: RE9PEL, CHITIEA, BARKER S: st NOES: COMMISS,ONERS: NONE i ABSENT: COMMUSSIONERS: 4C CIEL, STOUT rh ^L(T'Ylj.','��':•E`tie^,',�e7iY yt.;:C'.:C e r ORDINANCE No. Pia -06-" a7 g AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RcVISI'IG THE INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC - PLAN TEXT FOR SUBAREAS 8 AND 13 (GENERAL INDUSTRIAL) ADDING LAND USE C043IOERATIONS RELATED 10 PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENIS OF THE ADJOINING MINIMUM IMPACT/HEAVY !NOUSTRIAL CATEGORY ,SUBAREA 9), AND EXISTING BUSINESSES WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly advertised publ4c hearing to consider all comments an the proposed Industrial Specific Plan Amendment 85 -04; SECTION 3: A Negative Declaration is hereby adopted based upon the cc- gletior an�fin t,gs of t-r Ini +ial Study. NOW, THEREFORE, BE Ir :1ESOLVED, that the Rancho Cucamonga City Council does hereby recommend aaproltsl of Industrial Specific clan 85 -04. ,•'a '„ � L. Q4 4 • SR S 'i ':, sI I � a �/ / =,c. i 1•d:�iz6,�.ui y 4i ;, hn�naJ.!'} s` Fi%! 3�?i�L'1i:..'�r:;v�•>?:r.+ii.�. ..i`Y'� SECTION 1. The Rancho Cucamonga City Council hereby makes the following n -U ngs + A. The Amendment does not conflict with Policies of the General Plan and Industrial Specific Plan. B. The Amendment promotes goals of the Lana Use Element and Industrial Specific Plan. C. The Amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties. t SECTION 2: The following Special Consideration :hall be added to the lndusrrf&i p—e-c- is Plan Tex for Subareas 8 and 13: Class C Performance Standards of the adjoining Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial area (Subarea 9), allow existing businesses and future Industrial uses wnirh produce noise, particulate matter and air contaminants, vibration, odor, humidity, heat, glare - or high ' intensity. Uses sensltiva t8 these conditions, such as ?3 precision manufacturing or office projects, should consider these factors prior to locating to the vicinity of Minimum Impact /Heavy Industrial property. SECTION 3: A Negative Declaration is hereby adopted based upon the cc- gletior an�fin t,gs of t-r Ini +ial Study. NOW, THEREFORE, BE Ir :1ESOLVED, that the Rancho Cucamonga City Council does hereby recommend aaproltsl of Industrial Specific clan 85 -04. ,•'a '„ � L. Q4 4 • SR S 'i ':, sI I � a �/ / =,c. i 1•d:�iz6,�.ui y 4i ;, hn�naJ.!'} s` Fi%! 3�?i�L'1i:..'�r:;v�•>?:r.+ii.�. ..i`Y'� k + 'r. .r. CITY OF RANCHO CUCANONGA STAFF REP0RT 'OI f • Z" o > �vrr 1 DATE: November 6, 1985 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director BY: Rubin Yu, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 85 -04G rcquest to amend a enera an awn —Use 3.6F 7 arFccrres fete land, Mlocated eandthe northwestdcorner of 19th Street ono Archibald Avenue - APN 202 - 1091 -21 I. j*cUND• The applicant requested a General Plan Amendment from + e to edlum Residential (4 -14 du /ac) for 3.67 acrus of land located on the northwest corner of 19th Street and Archibald Avenue. The site is the southern portion of a legal parcel of record which consists of a total of 6.03 acres. The northern Portion contains approximately 3.16 acres. The entire parcel is under a single ownership, but with two different land use designations. The northern portion is designated as Medium Residential (4 -14 du/ac) with part of the land (less than one acre) lying within the pr000sed Foothill Freeway (Route 30) right -of- way. A detailed Planning Commission report is attached for your II. PLANNING COWISSION ACTION- • The Planning Commission, at its meet n9 o ep er M_5, held a public hearing to consider the request and found that there is no need demonstrated for the proposed amendmentcwould reduce the amount also of landcavetlable for office and consequently, it may create a long -term shortage of land +� for office use in the project area in the future. Therefore, "he Commission Minutestaresattach edeforayourarev ewdmrrot. The Plaanlng NOr? Iii i��S_R_...�`i<�'�Y�Ytef It v. R.. •,.1�. 1'S1A L) \i`3^. t. !h��±': z CITY COUNCIL STAFF P•EPORT - {;. GOA 85 -OIG - Gerald' November 6, 1985 Page 12 t• N {. 111. RECOMMENDATION: ThA Planning Cocnnlssion recomwnds that the City Council deny the apilicant's requested General Plan w- endment. If the Council concurs, adoption of the attached Resolution of Denial .p would be appropriate. {+ Res ectfully sv aitted, t •� t • • Jack Lam, AILP ~'- Community Development Director JI.:RY:cv Attachments: Planning Commission Staff Report - September 25, 1985 Draft Planning Commission Minutes - September 25, 1905 Resolution of Denial :F .fit 0 r� u 'I E r 'J a3 ■ I r • Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution recommending approval to the .City Council of Environmental Assessment and General P,en Amendment 85 -04F, Rochester Avenue Associates. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT_ CHITtFa_ aaovra ururn nrunn NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE - carried Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Barker, to adopt the Resolution recommending approval to the City Council of Environmental Assessment and Industrial Specific Plan Amendment 05 -03, Rochester Avenue Associates. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, REMPEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE - carried Additionally, staff was directed to prepare an amendment to the Industrial Specific Plan Subareas 8 and 13 for the Commi ;don's consideration et the second meeting in October. 0. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 85 -04G - GEROLD _ A request :o amend the uenerAl Plan an Use a9 Tom ce to odium Residential (4 -14 du /ac) on 3.67 acres of land located on tie northwest corner of 19th Street and Archibald Avenue - Portion of APN 202 - 1091 -21, Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. ; Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. `A Gary Mitchell, 133 Spring, Claremont, gave an overview of the project. Joe Hanna, 6715 Jadeite, *Rancho Cocamonga,'supported the change from office to residential. He advised that the area residents would like to work with the c applicant, similar to what was done with the Lincoln Properties project. 55 There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. at Commissioner McNiel stated that he assumed the same position on this amendment that he had on other office amendments in the past in that he'was'concerned that the time would come when office sites would be needed and they will have all been amended to residential. He additionally supported keeping the entire at. site designated for office. i v� 1,}y„ Planning Canmission Minutes -16- September },' ; ember 25, 1985 +:.�.••w( Aiit"'(zf �a� i�v,�•� �T J y� '� � t �.'+�!��•T,c� - ^r•[ti;S�i:.:•5�:. -f, :d•W �i�. +P ' `i •��4`.�Fbi1T Commissioner Chltiea agreed in the long term office sites will be needed above 19th Street, therefore felt the- designation of office needed to be retained on • this site for future use. Further, that the entire site should -he consolidated into one land use. Co- missioner Barker agreed that the entire site should be combined into one use and that he could not see an advantage to the community In changing the density and felt that an office designation might be more appropriate in the long term Chairman Stout stated that he did not have an objection to residential at this location and was of the opinion that the office designation was originally misplaced. Further, that at attempt has been made to keep the northern area Of the city residential and by putting offices at that location basically detracts from the character. He agreed that the site should be combined into one land use. Cemnissioner Rempel agreed that the site should be residential and combined Into one land use. Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution recommending denial to the City Council of Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment 85 -04G, Gerold. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, CHITIEA, BPRKER NOES COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, sTOuT ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE - carried Commissioners Rempei and Stout felt the Vandment request was appropriate. • s � P. Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. that Figure Y -19 should also be amended and presented Commission. Mr. Cook advised exhibits to the Chairman Stout advised that a letter had been received from Mr. Clark indicating that he is the landowner who owns land affected by the and that he objected to the amendment amendment , Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore the puollc Waring was closed. Planning Commission Minutes -17- September 25, 1985 311( 0 CITY OF RANCHO QUCAMONGA A STAFF REPORT wn DATE: Septeirber 25, 1985 TO: Chairman and Members of •he Planning Coxnission FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Comiunity Develo'rment Director BY: Rubin Yu, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENT ASSESSMENT A)L1 GENERAL PLAN A'1ENDMCNT 85 -D4G - =6LbTequGSt to AM-67 -fFie' e� neral an an se ap ri cm Office to Medium Residential (4 -14 du /ac), on 3.67 acres of land, located on the northwes•. -orn3r of 19th Street and Archibald Avenue - APR 20:4091 -21 ITEM q'L r n I. ABSTRACT: A General Plan Amendment is requested from Office to ERTu-m—bensity Residential for a 3.67 acres site located on the northwest corner of 19th Street and Archibald Avenue At the August 28, 1965 Planning Coaeaission meeting, it was deterained that no additional environmental study Gould be required prior to consideration of the General Plan Amendment. At this meting, after public input, the Coraeission will determiae the livel of environmental effects and make a determination relarring the General Plan Amendment. 11. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Change General Plan Land Use Map fc- subject site from Office to Medium Residtttial (4 -14 Wise), B. Location: Northwest corner of 19th Street and Archibald �•, veenue.— ii C. Parcel Size: 3.67 acres.' v' 0. Existing Zoning: Office /Professional (OP). r' E. Existing Land -)se : Vacant, undeveloped. qqs• F. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Vacant land, designated Medium Residential (8- .. v 14 du /ac); Foothill Freeway Corridor, designated Low Residential (2 -4 du /ac). " t• South - -Single family <uLCtvision, designated Low dot Residential (2 -4 du,4c)r small subdivision to southeast, designated Lox - Medium Residential c (4 -8 du /ac). l ITEM q'L r n PLANNIh9 C"ISSION .STAFF REPORT GPA 85 -:4G - GEROLD September 25, 1985 Page 2 East - Neighborhood shopping center, 4Pslgnated - Neighborhood Commercial. Nest - Single family residence, vacant land, designated Medium Residential (8 -14 du /ac). G. General Plan Desianations: Project Site - Medium Residential (8 -14 du /ac). North - Me lum Residential (8 -14 du /ac), Foothill Freeway Corridor. South - Low Residential (2 -4 du/ec), Medium Residential (0.14 du /ac) to southeast. East - Neighborhood Curtmerclal. West - Medium Residential (8 -14 du /ac). H. Site Characteristics: Generally flat, no structures, low irow n5 grass any weeds. III. ANALYSIS: A. HistmrL Prior to adoption of the General Plan in 1981, ' property owners requested that the property be given a ., coimer-lal lend use designation, partly because of the existing shopping center across the street. The decision was to provide for an office desi ,,nation instead. This was consistent with City policy of providing major street intersecttnns, such as the subject location with adequate support services. In March, 19,14, a request f.• a General Plan Amendment for tho subject site from Office to Medium -High Residential (14 -24 du /ac) was riled with the City and subsequently withdrawn. B. R_ason for Re vested Chan!14_ Attached to this report is a Tir ter ipl.:a,u ran tic reacesting the change to Hedlum RP identiol. The °;'rwing main reasons were indicated by the appli(cnt: 1. The existing .amm rrial uses at the northeast corner of tni, inter.ection and the existing and proposed commercial uses at Base Line and Archibald (1,0 U yar.ls south) more than adequately serve the area ( commeriial districts permit a wide r range of offlcn usnt). PLANNING COWSSION STAFF REPORT• GPA 95 -04G - GEROLD September 25, 1985 Page 3 'Office space demand in the Rancho Cucamonga area (as well as most of Southern California) is currently very soft with vacancies here as high as 35%,(in a recent survey by Newport Ecunomics). 3. Medium density residential use will, provide a better consumer base for the existing and proposed commercial uses. 4. Existing and proposed uses and zoning in the area are primarily residential. C. General ?lan Land Use Goals and Policies: The Land Use Element of 'a.City's enera an supports the concept of urban centers of , the higher Intensity land uses at major intersections- with higher residential density, commercial areas, or office designations. The General Plan also indicates the following In relation to the office districts. "The intent of th's land use category is to p ^event the proliferation of individual isolated -,' offices. Cummercial uses permitted within the office category include administrative and professional offices; business support services; financial, insurance, and real estate services; supportive commercial uses such as a restaurant; ' +• and medical services." y. The subject site should not be considered as an isolated location for. offices. It is adjacent to an existing neighborhood shopping center which consists of support commerical uses, planned in conjunction with the subject site as a service cluster at the major intersection. In view of this, the•site appears to be an appropriate location for an office use. On the other hand, the subject site 'is (° contiguous on two sides by planned Nedium Density Residential uses. As such, the proposed change will not crea`e significant land use ' compatibility problems in the area. Furthermore, the Office designation permits some relatively intense uses, ouch as restaurants y;y> which may not be compatible with the surrounding residential uses. The applicant's request is for a M mnsidential Density (4 -14 $_ du /ac). The General Plan discusse`, Mea mn. .2sidential density in the following: .. "The Medium Density Residential classification allows a wide range of living accommodations _ ranging from conventional single -famil units and mobile homes to townhouses. Building intensity at the lower end of the density range would be i {� ° • i • � � it l' +;`,',�+(� PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 85 -04G - GEROLD September 25, 1985 Pogo 4 r h IV. �V t i. Ep ; ♦ , , ♦. • N J`e't appropriate adjacent to Low and Very Low Density Residential areas. dousing types would still be ' character "ed primarily by detachee housing units. 9u11ding intensity at the higher end of the ranga is more appropriate adjacent to parks and other open :paces, along trnnsit routes and major and secondary thoroughfares, and near activity centers such as recreational ccn:ers. libraries, shrppiog renters and entw•.ainw.rt areas. OeveIwO nt of this level c int °nsity would normally Do semi - detached or att, mad unit. Medium Density Residentiai also serves a° a buffer between Low Density Residential areas r,d areas of higher density, commercial activities ,nd areas of greater traffic and noise lovels.- ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: The Initial Study has been completed. Staff as found no s gniffcant adverse impacts attributed to the proposed amendment. While no significant environmental impacts are expected, the proposed land use change would have some marginal trryact on ',tilities, public services and transportation. I. Schools- Development of the proposed project would add approx mately 13 students to the Alta Loma School System. This amount appears insignificant. 2. Park and Recreational Facilities: The development of n s s to w add marg na y to he demand of the amount of park area. 3. _Transportation: The development of the proposed designation will likely change the effect of transportation in the area in trio ways: a. By treating change in the traffic pattern which would otherwise occur and -- office designation. The traffic pat( ,rn would bacaae more concentrated during the R I" morning and evening commute hours. b. The Plan Amendment would result in a net reduction in the potential traffic volumes from the existing Office designation. 0 J„ e ji i ray r" �i PLANNING COWIS51011 Wl+ RE1,01 "'.;r GPA 85 -04G - pret0 September 25, 1905 s Page 5 Although the trarffc volumas would be It., if the GPA was appruvedt the , `f overall street pattern woulo neea to be impru:ed by expanding the Pavement width and adding an additional traffic lane on both Archibald Avenuo and 19th Street. This is true of either land use alternative: The project area is in close proximity to the proposed Foothill Freeway (Route 30). Future dwellings would bm affected by freeway noise. This can be mitigated by the provision of adequate acoustical attenuation of T affected habitable areas at the time of development.' It should also be noted that the land located betwec;r th :-freeway and the subject site is 0= already designated for Medium Density Residential use. V. ISSUES AND ALTERNATIVES: In view of the foregoing analysis, land use compat ty oes not appear to ba the major issue ,involved in this { natter. Rather, it is the size and configuration of the subject property and the'need for the proposed change of land use designation,• 1. Site Size and Cenf1 uration: The area requested for redesignation is approx matey acies. It is the southern portion of a legal parcel of record which consists of a total of 6.83 acres. The northern portloa contains approximately - 3.16',acres.' Tim: entire parcel is under a single owrer :hip but with two different land use designations. The northern portion is designated as Medium Residential (4 -14 du(ac) with part of tna land (less than ona acre) lying within the proposed Foothill Freeway (Route 30) right- of -wuy. The northc -n portion of the site is inadequate in size for successful r residential at the given density. It wo'ild appnr. appropriate the: the whole parcel he designated for only one land use and developed as one development. This would provide adequate land area for sufficient amenities and allows for mitigation of potential noise. j 2. Need for Pro used Chan a of Land Use: The second issue involved in '•�; e nutter s e tF, r or dot there is a need -to change the land use designation from Office to Medium Residential. The.- information ;n - submitted by.the applicant shows a high vacancy rate of office space !;; in the City at the present time, but, it does not give the picture of •� the long -term market demand for office spaces in tiw: project area a3 _ ,y well as in the City. VI. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: Should tht Commission, upon examination of the Neneral Plan Amendment decide that the change from' Office designation. �; V, would promote the Land Use Goals and Purposes of the General Pldn;,this'," Amendment would not be material detrimental to the adjacent properties, ."'I or cause significant adverse impacts, as listed under Envirormntal_ Assessment, the following are Findings that are necessary on epprova-l.+, a it' Ti'Ji+C�`c'�'iitiL"�1,'tS. -v; n" ", .p'k�•I�: y:, •: fir+ } >v.: `1•. f :�.'�'�e �i4,�, -3vM UM .T.i PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA BS -040 - GEROLD September 25, 1985 Page 6 a. The Amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of- the General Plan. b. The Amendment does promote goals of the Land Use element. C. The Amendment would not be m erially, injurious, or detrimental to the adjacert properties. VII. OPTIONS: The following options may be considered by the Planning 'onm ss on• 1. Approve the proposed General Plan Amendment from Office to Medium Residential; 2. Deny the proposed General Plan Amendment due to the lack of sufficient evidence demonstrating the need for such a change based on the long -term demand; and 3. Initiate a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of the northern portion of the parcel from Medium Residential to Office. VIII. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in _The iiailr e7F —port newspaper, the property posted, and notices sent to all property owners within 300 feet of tho project site. IX. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommraded that the Planning Comnission review and cons er all materials and public input on this item. If the Commission finds an Amendment to the General Plan Map is warranted, then adoption of the attached Resolution recommending approval to the City Council of the General Plan Amendment and the issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. If the Planning Carnnission finds that the requested amendment is in conflict with the land use policies of the General Plan and does not - Promote the goals &,d objectives of the Land Use Element, then adoption of the attached Resolution of Denial would be appropriate. Resp c fully submitted, Jack am, AICP Community Development Director JL:RY:ko Attachments: Exhibit °A" - Site Plan Corresiondence from Applicant Market Study Initial Study, Part II - Resolution of Approval Resoltuion of Denial t Q (.ynw>7 LOW, (0ATANT% MEF;MV4' rtZp I,P 14 t;WiS/AC: OE1! GI,zr.m 7BJT/A� !L11 �� LOW ZW5!!77, (•yAGiWT). ,07.E ¢• /fi� Ca:Y/Ai cet! tv,�^•M• rAsr .. I GOMM4MIALI /7� y. J /7J,T"N , Subject S to i I'C'Y C1] rrE%u_�4 8s -o�� PLANNING DIVISION SCALE, k��4 �d.�2rk i "e.�?y'�%Vtr5-•.:•ir.l,!F r.n... .. � J .3�..J! _<sR'!.�.Ftiv; �� E gereld(Q D _ development inc. July 26, 1985 City of Rancho Cucamonga +• �,�,', 9320 Baseline Road Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 f Attention: Rubin Yu, Planner Refere+,ce: General Plan Amendment of 3.4 acres from Office Professional to Medium density Residential. (8 -14 d/u per acre) to bring thin parcel into conformity with the contiguous parcel to the north and provide a angle zone classification for these commonly held parcels. Dear Mr. Yu: Justification for our proposrl General Plan Amendment can be summarised as follows: I 1. The city staff recommended such use as early as November, 1958. 2. The existinq commercial uses at the northeast corner of this intersection and the existing and proposed commercial uses at Baseline and Archibald (1,000 yards south) more than adequatel; serves the area. ` 3. Office spare demand in the Rancho Cucamonga area (as well as most of Southern California) is very soft with vacancies here as high as 35% (in a recent survey by Newport Economics). 4. Medium density residential use will provide a better �.• consumer base for the existing and proposed commercial uses. S. The Jack Tarr project (Sy:amore Woods) which reserved a small commercial piece (+f the residential ;proposal has proven to be very unwieldy. ;,. 6. Existing nd 9 proposed uses and zoning in the area are Ift, primarily residential. Y- ICY..• i CC)y 2417 Artesia Boulevard • Redo n do Bea ch, California 80278 • 213/370 -2592 .,I ��i ff Y - • � _ -fYrk RQrl �:f:r'ta?S: ti'- i5f'ii=;i.�' :� •fE';r i•Q``f`��' J THE NEWPORT ZCmD IOMICS OROUp August 6. 1985 S1a1018181111111111418181L ' Mr. Ch -is Gerold 0161 71 DAV NY Gerold Development, Inc. 2417 Artesia Blvd, k"tax; oNINI1vu Redondo Beach, CA 90276 roVL%V3n' OMDNea Jc Alia uses. Scattered office developments in residential sectors typically experience stow absorption and below Dear Mr. Mr. Gerold: This letter presents our memorandum report on your planned development in Rancho Cucamonga. We understand that you are now considering a rezone from office /profes- sianal to multi- family residential for a 6.8 acre site on the northeast corner of A- ,nibald and 19th in Rancho CucaG,.onga. C.ir observations regarding the site involve locational factors, the office space market and the apartment market, suamarized as follows: 1. The Location - Archibald Avenue in the vacinity of 19th and in adjacent areas is essentially residential with some neighborhood retail facilities. For example, the southeast cornur of the site is the location of town homes by the Brock Company. The northeast corner is A small retail center anchored by Stater Brothers. The southwest corner is ll single family homes. To the south along aArchihald there is a mixture of single family homes end existing Pius planned apartment projects. All four corners at gasoline and Archibald are devoted to neighborhood retail facilities with similar outlets at the intersection of Archibald and Foothill. To the north of the site, the area is essentially residential. At present, the area is not a business location suitabie for prafes- `` aioual office The space. only change anticipated for the future . will be the completion of the proposed freeway. However, it 1s unlike- ly that this event wopld bring about a total change in the general character of the area. Simply put, office tenants prefer to locate In locations with a strong identity related to business uses. Scattered office developments in residential sectors typically experience stow absorption and below average rental rates. Tenants are generally limited to those who be •neighborhood' will satisfied with a location such As small real - tars, insurance agents, etc. In contrast, there are sectors near the Ontario Airport which are exper,encing strong market support for commercial and industrial) u• uses. The airport is, of Course, a strong attraction, plus the entire character of the area is related to business activity. '•<'ip,R x MME WW ME 425 KWPCe1 VACHCA.`266e•12w16510192 III `,#p:� 9t a ... , • m 67.`.� ir�}l.*.?•ifl?it %a4, +l .�t Fav+'. .,"'`w, . '� >. ., ..!SC..':= •ts;:r Page 2 2 The Office Space Market - Current office vacancies are relatively high throughout e t ent re region with a January 1985 average of 375. As outlined on the attached Taole 0-1 from our Inland Empire survey, the Rancho Cucamonga vacancy rate was 26.3%. followed by Ontario at 23.5%. The absorption of office space throughout San Bernardino County has been increasing in recent years, though the total of 316,000 feet I ast year was down significantly from the 1983 peak of 415,000 feet. Rancho Cucamonga has experienceJ i total of close t(' feet Y5,000 during each of the last two years, with a very low 6,5(0 feat tefeet tered In 1982. It 1s expected that office space demand till] continue to gain through- out the sector. However, the dominant share of the successful nets office development will be In the major business centers near the Ontario Airport. It is noc expocted that this degree of demand will Ltrongly influence the available market support for a location as far away as 19th Street and Archibald. 3. The A artment Market - A recent survey of 1,110 apartment units In pro ects t rougiout the area revealed 350 vacancies. However, 2c.8 of these were in one project completed in March of this year • and 85 were in a project completed in January. Among all other pro- Jccts completed up through December 1984, there was a grand total of 4 vacant units. Therefore, the current supply /demand balance for apartments in the area is very positive. There are now 313 apartment units under construction in Cucamonga and 117 in adjacent areas of Ontario. This latter figure Includes one 84 unit senior citizen project. At present, there 1s a total of approximately 2,500 units in planning phases in Rancho Cucamonga and Ontarin. This total includes 260 senior citizen apartments, Of the total In Rancho Cucamonga, only one major project (936 gnits) has been approved, The projecud demand for apartments in the region, totals 1,380 units annually through 1989 followed by a gain to 1,630 units through 1994. Based on the current inventory and the number of units under construrt,on, there 1s not expected to be a significant increase in vacancies in the near future. projects difficult completed, anticipate hough precisely beeover an extended pperiod of time. Recently, bated n thesp date, The Newport Economics Group has rsconmended to other clients that they proceed with apartment development in this sector ;.wi;4 y «1 •.tea, __�.:n. .. -e ",�� __,_.._r r. r 0 t MS" „' +.t`J�+•je3i+��"4�'b�`�S'�jll. kl~�?:� "•• 1�• F ?��.r Yir_' nip~ ���u.,^�.4 Page 3 4. Conclusion - Based on the above data, it is our recomaendation e that s p a- for the project be changed from office use to apartments. This use would be substantially more in character for the area now and in the future. Following your review of these data please call me with any requests or coaa;ents you may have. Sincerely nc I 06 rt J. Dun arj President RJD:srb Attachamt 021 5-'% „; f; S N y k 1 I. h'n`• Rj y N :Y . R a " � 3 o$$ w 'o N N 6 M 0 r n mm 0� M O v o u�• m a I` P V P •ai/. P �• O� 0 0 $$0000'000. a "� N I� J r • I` ew V .� = A • .V. i .,Vi O n �i .�. �• M I 'y�q Sal. 6 y. „ Nod Ir NL N Yrz I. h'n`• Rj y N :Y �`• CIIY OF RA.\CHO CUCAltO'.GA ` PART II - INITIAL STUDY ENVIROhIMNTAL CHECKLIST i DATE: August 28, 1985 APPLICASI: GEROLD Development Inc. FILING DATE: 7/15/85 LOG NU?MFR: GPA - 85 -04 -G PROJECT: General Plan Amendment PROJECT LOCATION: It ll. corner of 19th Street G Archibald Avenue I. EYVIRO%'MNT,1L IMPACTS ' (Explanation of all "yes" and •'maybe" answers are required on attathed Shasta) YES MAYBE NO S t� 1. Sofia and Geoloev. Nill the propcaal have aigniricant rasults ins a Unstable ground conditions or in changes in 1' geologic relationships? —_ X b. Disruption, displacements, campaetioa or burial of the soil? _ X c. Change in topography or ground surface contour intervals? X -. d. The destruction, covering or modification of any uniquo Ieologic or physical features? X e. Any potential increase in wind or water J erosion of coils, affecting eithar on or off *Ito cond.tons? X r" 1. Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? X X s� 9, Exposure of people or propdrty to geologic —_ hazards Such as earthquakes, landslides, xud- ;�y, °., slides, grannd failura, or similar hazards? g b. An increase 1p the rate of extraction and /or use of any mineral resource? X ' 2. Hydrology, Will the proposal have significant ![�.. results ins i Page 2 '?+ )' a. Changes In YES MAYBE \0 , A currents, or the course o£ direction of flowing stream, river., or channels? ephemeral strewn _ - x b. Changes in absorption �, ttan races, drainage or the rate and amount ' of surface water runoff? runoff? X c. Alteration, to the course or flow of flood waters? _ d. Change in the amount of surface water in a body of water? ny _ x j, v. Discharge into surface waters, or any al ceratien x of surface water qunlity2 f. Alteration of groundvater characteristics? _ x S. Change in the quantity of groundwaters, etcher through direct _ x ^ additions or with- s, or through Interference pvite with an cvvifert Quality? Quantity? h. The reduction to the amount of water other- wine available for x public sates supplies? X 1• Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or selchast x 3. Air quality. gill the results In: Proposal have significant _ a• Constant or periodic air ealssions from uobile or indirect `• aourcea? Stsctogary sources? X b. Deterioration of ambient alr.quality and /or Intequality rference —_ N' standards? of applicable y no Altaraoior. of local or regional climatic conditions, affecting X > air movement,, moisture or teoparaturo7 L. .iota X t•- Flora. Vill the ins proposal have significant result. It a, Change in the characteristics of r ! >� o..",., species, Including dlvarsicy, diatribution, or .�a number of a.1Y species of plants? max• Reduct.on of the numbers o, • or endangered s eeiea,nt any unlgna, rare s ' •:t Wit• ,�, °J••'y%� v�'!; {_tg+•5:'-toy'Y.Iti: - �� -r+.i1 '�.• �.r ?.',1 �. - _ �AD �� a,r� iii C t+ a' 1 �5 ti C P. YES MM 8o e. Introduction of new or disruptive species of Planes into an area? -x — d. Reduction In the potential for agricultural Production? — -- -x Fauna, Will the proposal have significant results In: a, Change t., the characteristics of species, Including diversity, distribution, or numbers Of any species of animals? % b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals} % It. Introduction of•nav or disruptive species of animals into an area, or result in r, barrier to the migration or movement of animals? % d. Deterioraticn or removal of existing fish or wildlife habitat? x 5 Population. Will the proposal have significant result, in a, Will the Pro,uosal altar the location, distri- bution, density, diversity, or growth rata of the human population of an area? % b, Will the proposal affect es sting housing, or create a demand for additional housing? % 6. Socia- Economic Factors. Will the proposal have significant results in: A. Change, in 10 cal or regional socio- economic characteristics, including economic or _ coaarcial diversity, tax rate, and property values? _ x b, Will project costs be equitably distributed _ among project beneficiaries, S.r , buyerb, tax payers o- project users? 7. Land Use and Planning Considerations. Will the Proposal have significant results in? A. A substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? b. A conflict with any desiScationn, objectives, Polities, or adopted plans of any governmental entitles? x CD An Lpact upon the qulaity or quantity of • existing consumptive or non - consumptive reereatioual opportunitt ? i i14i ".- i�:`�.x�f,c •. L'^ 4( �5 z` i c a P 8, rranso�art= will the- YES MAYBE n0 reaul cs Sn: proposal have significant - a Generation of substantial additional vehicular ,,vacant? b. Effect, on "IsElng ca, or demand for new street x construction ?e a• Effects on existing faciIltles, demand for % nev parking ?�ng or d, tion Substantial ayacems }pact upon existing transporza- _ _ x a• /ltsrntlans to tion or =vacant rofent Patterns of eircula- % _ People and /or goods? x f• Alterations to or effects on Present and Potential voter -bone. rail, ,ass air traffic} transit or 8• Iicycliss Sn traffic hazard, to motor vehicles, bicyclists _ X or ped"trians7 9. Culrura —c =s N�1 the —� z proposal significant result, Sn: p pasal have a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, paleo"ological, and /or historical res,urces7 x 10. _ Health. _ sstety and Nuisance Factor,, proposal hive slgnifieane resole, Will the lo: A. Creation of any health hazard or Potential health hazard? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? —_ x _ c. A risk of release If hazardous cube ;sate, iu the eju the X en event of an accident? d• An incr842e Sn the or number of individuals x ar sped ea Of vector or pathenogenfe 6anlr a or the e.•mosure of people re such organisms} e. Increase In existing g noise levels? f. Exposure of eo + � noise 1"31s? to co potentially dangerous � x _ g• :he Creation of objectionable odors? x ' " h• An increase in light or dlarat ,. Irk Ate¢. Page `6 • �I •C ',C.Y,�,. .. . _C ,.1,. v_.S;z :,' +P .x • 'i ' • '^r� _ .. -. .�- �;;gi -rr �r'r • te Page Aesthetics. Will the YES HAYRE ?,0 '. i ro osal have significant results in: 2 P i a. The obst%vetiun or degradation of _ and vista or view? scenic .. X b The creation of an aesthetically Offensive .. x to A conflict with the objective of designated _ _ or potential scenic corridors? x 12 Utilities and Public Services• Hill the proposal have a slgniflcant need for new systems. or sl terations to the following: a• Electric power? b. Natural or packaged gas? _ X —^ r. COIwunicatlona syatems? X d. Hater supply? _ �- - e. Wastewater facilities? - x F. Flood control structures? _ - z g. Solid waste facilities? h. PSre pro[octiont — "-- % I. Police proceetion? _ x J. School'? �-X k• Parks or ocher recreacianel'facill,iest _ X ±• NaSntenance of public faeilitler, including reads and flood erntrol•faeiliflos? s. Other goverOmencal services? __._. _ 13. . '111 Ener¢y and Scaren Resource the proposal have slgnlfit x ' ' . reeulta in: +. Van Of substantial or excessive fuel t or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand i! upon a�: sources Of energy? P existing ^4;r � I, An Increase In the demand for development new —_ of sources of energy? d• An increase or perpetuation of the connnaption x of eon - renewable fOtns of energy, when leasiblb >. w renewable eo urces of energy are avolllable? ,- -, •.. °' ` ��� �3a� :i��aK�?LbYis^': :-^_ t JCp� T :�,�. � :_ P _ —; .2..f?;tiTx• �" _ • :��� _ � �� rPaEe 6.YJ e. �t YES a. Subs :anti s: depletion of any nonrenewable v.A� =9E .- or scarce natu •sl rescurce? - ?= 14 Handatary Findin s of Significance. —_ a. Does the project have the Potential to degrade the quality of the env reduce the habitat of f + substantially Cause a fish or wildlife spopulatloa to droplas, belw self sustaining levers, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal coCunity, reduce the number or restrict the range of f a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important e:emples - of the major period, of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve abort -tem, to the X disadvantage of loa g -c eavironmental goala? (A short -tern impact On he environment is One which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time w;,ilo long- term Impacts will endure well into the s future), _ x c. Does the project have Impacts which are Individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively consideza63e _ means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed is connection with the effects of past projects, and probable future projects). d. Does _he project have envlronmantal effects -- which humanlbeiinggs, either directly On Indirectly? ore CUSSIOL OF fitil•IAON'fl'YTAL EVAIDATIDY the (proposed nbowe questions plus, Plus a�lonoof to mitlgacionemeasures ) 51 See Attachment , 4. 5 9C 0 J� 7" III DFTML%11'IATIOV K, On the basil, of thl.Illitlal evaluation: ❑I find the proposed Project COLO NOT have a significant affect F an the environment, and A NEGATIVE I)ECL%RATIO.1 will be prepared I find that although the proposed proje cc h affect On the environment, there will not be a could sigcant eave a significant In this case because the citlgltiOn measures described a Nctsched sheet have been added to the projec n an DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. t. A NEGATIVE I find the proposed Project 4Ay have a J -Sn DIPACr REPORT is required envirnzent, and an project significant effect on the Data 6A� Sig cure A N 'ey ,K ,J_ ATTACHMENT TO ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT . GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 85 -04-G 1. Soils and Geology Potential development permitted under the proposed land use within the project arcs will require some earth movement, which will involve disruption and compaction of affected soils. These effects can be mitigated by compliance with the City's grading standards. Due to the nature of the sloping terrain throughout Rancho Cucamonga, any development has the potential for changing the topographic, or ground surface contour intervals, during preparation of a development project. The slope features on the site, however, are within a 5% gradient, and future development would not likely create any significant impact on the existing topographical features. 2. Hydrology Development within the site will contribute to additional runoff due to the increase of Impervious surface areas. This will likely change the drianage pattern absorption rate, the flow, or surface water runoff. Currently now, surfaces are undeveloped in a largely natural state. Any project approval plans would require for adequate on -site drainage facilities in order to accommodate increased runoff. However, residential development will generally create less runoff than office type uses. This 40 change In the General Plan will not significantly add additional water runoff or affect significantly the drainage patterns. 5 Population The proposed land use category would provide for housing and create greater density of population to a permanent living environment than otherwise would exist under the Office designation. The proposal may generate a maxinun population of approximately 155 persons within the project area. The effect is insignificant 4n the light of the planned population capacitlas for the area and the overall city. 6. Socia- Economic Factors The proposed land use category will remove the possibility of receiving a commercial or business tax, as would occur under the Office designation However, the site Is very limited in size and the economic effect would be insignificant. 7. Land Use and Plannlrw Considerations By its very nature, the amendment represents a deparCuro from the existinq land use des .t'in of Office; however, with the exception of the property to '4c -ast, which has been developed with a neighborhood shopping cents. a project area is surrounded by horns or designated residential property. No significant environmental effects are anticipated as a result of the change. 3�� ,- 8. Transportation The development of the proposed designation will lilkely change the effect of transportation in the area In two ways: o BY creating change to the traffic pattern which would otherwise occur under an office designation. The traffic pattern would become more concent••ated during the peak morning and evening cote hours, o The General Plan Amendment would result in a net reduction in the potential traffic volume from the existing Office designation. The Office designation result ate The Mediumr sid ntialdes approximately trips per day trips per day. gna produce Although the traffic volume would 1•e less if the GPA was approved, the ovtrall street pattern would need to be improved by expanding the pavement width and adding n additional traffic lane on both Archibald 19th Street. Avenue and This is true of either land use alternative. 10. The project area is in close proximity to the proposed Foothill eeway (Route 30). Future dwellings would be affected by freeway noise. This can be mitigated by provision of adequate acoustical attenuatiL affe,:ted athe a of noted that be lands located between the freewaymnd the tsubject already designated site for Medium Density Residential use. _ 11. Aesthetics • The modification of the General Plan designation to Medium Residential Density will most likely create development which will attect the scenic office developpment tof currentlyde4mittecertain The ffect this,ihowever,ocan be mitigated by architectural design control. - 12. Utilities iesaand Public Services • 0 Schools. Development of •.he proposed pro3tct would add approximately stu nts to the Alta Lama School tnslgnificnt. System. This arwunt appears ii s o Park and Recreational Facilities. The development of this site will aTd' margiriaily to the eman or the (a amount of park area. The City currently uses the Park Development fees for nulttple residential development .1 family nt a rate of $541 per unit. This project would create the potential of approximately $27,000 in park develoDmnt tees which wtil t provide for additional park recreational facilities. and ` o Other Services_ Development of this site fur residential use will repo re a : onal public is }3fi services. Some services such at street lights nd landscape maintenance, are for y,"4 paid by homeowners through a maintenance district or association fees. Others such as road 4 k i F t rF asp., tXU maintenance and Improvements, police, etc. are paid for either by special tax, such,as the gasoline tax, or from the ^general Find. Due to the relatively saall size of the site, it is unlikely that there ti will be any significant increase in the effect of the service - requirements, over and abeve what would normally have been through the current General Plan designation of Office. .i' r? r o i a AFFIDArIT OF MAILING A". mail clzrk for th a City of Rancho Cucss,048' do berciyl ,&year that on APProximstely or p.m.). I deposited'in the Cucamonga Branch of [be United State, Post Office located at 9607 Si,sLuaas ry Center Drive, a letter redje,sed to &24 regarding PUBLIC 11EARING CITY COUNCIL MEETING 11/6/35 7:30PH1 4, ENVIR01111ERTAL ASSESSIVIT AND GENERAL PLAH AMENDIFUT 85-04G GEROLD r SEE ATTACHED LABELS Signed: 1, Datet (return to Ckf— C4*r*A9--0f21x% after signing) IN044,4b 0,040%.1 0 -.f4 Y„ .0 i5; • . CASE No. APPLICANT• LQCO �elopmrnt Inc. .y 2417 Artesia Blvd ' Redondo Be,.ch, Co. 90278 3.11,1213,14,1S,16,17.18,19 202 - 013 - 20,2153,54,55,56,57,58,59 202 - 101 -21 r�• , M rA b Sors Irc. N J Brock b Sons Inc. Bank of A%erica NJ bfA q C, r. ToolCuargh. -n do Todd. CcnnIngham C/O H G Johnson r 16. rreenorar Lem lu.224 16%Orerbl:r, lane no. 224 P.O. Box 7082 RE Mk Sec a'• Brea. Ca 92621 Brea, Ca. 92621 Pasadena, Ca. 91109 r; 202 - 111 -40 202-11.1-41 202- 111 -42 Karnavy, Vlchlen Rodgers, Paul P.Lst, Jares 6753 Jadelte Ave G743 Jadelte Ave 6733 Jadeite Ave r' Rancho CLCa:orga, fa. 01730 Alta Lama, Ca. 91701 Rmctr acwnga, Ca. 91730 ' 202- 111.43 202 - 111 -44 202 - 111 -45 Crandall, nary HanTiC Jospeh - Conlon, Timothy i 6:23 Jadelte Ave 6715 Jadeite Ave 6718 Jadelte Ave . A to Loma, Ca 91701 t. Alta Loma, Ca. 91701 Ramiro Oramnga, Ca. 91730 " 202 -111 c M- 11147 202-11!-Q swan. Bertha Chn6erlaln, Eric ETAL Olsel. Jars E. C/o ?9&..ael Knawlede 743 N. Mxada 6735 Jadlete, Ave 60 Jadaito Ave H. Cod,% Ca. 91791 Alta Lam. Ca. 91NI1 Rarrho O==93. Ca. 91730 1111- 11149 202- 17146 202- 171 -51 Patton, O•cgrxy 1St NaticnO Bank b Trust Karcher, Donald k'Y- 646 Jadelte Ave Alta lam. Ca, 51701 P.O. Box 3670 c/o Karcher Ent. Inc. 04-70 Ontario, Co. 91761 P.O. Box 4349 2e Anaheim, Ca. 92803 Y 202 - 171 -54 ,55,57 202 - 171 -56 202- 111 -62 +,Santa Anita Development Corp. "P.U. Js2slane Associates LTD Anderson; D E Eta1 y Box 1880 c/o Larry Powell 549 W I Street tlewport Beach, Ca. 92660 21700 9arton Rd. Ontario, Ca. 91762 ' Colton, Ca. 92324 I '�15,. �}� a Y1 • •�'It 4frti ,'f����L�{y, e .. d 3 ��t �Ya .iL .�pi°4.� ��Yin}'[[y,L.TM1i..i�l.~„}!a�i ,e 'ENVE p t Me iY® m b® If /LV pr n :NVE -- Y .t It- AMETHYST _ 1 STREET -t•• It T Z IMHE V eta r� d N� . I l ♦ is I L . lo�. r ^jV® • V c h _ V s• • w• t- 1 d �I •i M/Gw1.gMp GOnI ,r. LIFMI(:1 -, _3.�lR,gAy • RD Stu 1 � ... •.• , 7M.1 �1 I 0 0 �• � � � yN.Ntaaa ,IS J 201 �a)is •• r• ,•� � i tJ•' / FS, •. _ l�Fs � I Sr1PSF� - M'/rE74 EN- ' �./ • as - © > ; I i ,i �E,• � • ®,.. S=�' asyhEl_:,�>� �__""`il .co(+I• .� m��oa im' }� tix , '� • S;; ' 300 /QAVILIV. MAP '+•'Y,d3r�9T/ "a Yrd< ,.�r'i'i%1E:�".'•i';- :wyr.^�vX: Wy t • " t • p ¢ RESOLUTION NO. Pi4-96-W, ppAOw^`� 't A RESOLUTION OF THE CJTY� pCOUNCIL` OF THE CITY OF RANCHO - CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, .( GENERAL PLAN AMENUII NT NO. 85- 04G - GEROLD - RE1UESTING A.Y AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN FROM OFFICE TO MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4 -14 OU /AC), ON 3.67 ACR..S OF LAND, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 19TH STREET AND ARCHIBALD AVENUE - APN 202- 1091-21 WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly advertised public hearing- to consider all commits on the proposed General Plan Amendment GPA 85 -04G, Gerold; SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga City Council can make the following 7 n- dings:— A. The A.mendnent does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan. 8. The Amendment promotes goals of the Land Use Element. C. The Amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties. NOW, THEREFORE, BE , RESOLVED, that the Rancho Cucamonga City Council does hereby deny General Plan Amendment 85 -04G, Gerald. PASSED, APPROVE[' and ADOPTED this 6th day of November, 1985. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Jon 0. Miki.s' Mayor ATTEST: Ile; ?r Wei Ft,ii�y girt i4�1.Z4�`��f?':':w /t_'wf✓ee. `,`t`iL.!�}ta.'P�Yn3..,.1. ■ P r CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ROCA STAFF REPORT C DATE: November 6, 1985 1777 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Linda Beek, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEXATION NO. 13 FOR TRACTS 12670, 12670 -1 THRU -4, 12319, 12319 -1 THRU -8, 12830, 12672, 1021u, 11915 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1. AND ANNEXATION NO. 11 FOR TRACTS 12830 AND 10210 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 Attached for City Council approval is a resolution ordering the work In connection with Annexation No. 11 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1. _ The following are projects to be annexed: • District No. 1 District No. 2 (arterial) (local lights) Tract No. 12670, 12670 -1 thru 4 Tract No. 12830 12319, 1 2319 -1 thru 8 10210 12672 10210 11915 12830 The attached resolutions also approves the Engineer's Reports which were ' tentatively approved by Resolution No. 85 -282 and Resolution No. 85 -286 on October 2, 1985. ,7 • „ RECOMIENDATION It is recommended that City Council approve the attached resolutions ordering z >- the work in connection with Annexation No. 13 and No. 11 to Street Lightln3 ,.} Maintenance District No. 1 and No. 2 and approving the Engineer's Report. ,i J -rulI s Itted, :de ments 7V r • CITY OF 1L1NCHO CUCAMONGA Ergineer's Report for _ Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 Annexation No. 13 Tracts 11670, 12610 -t thruo -4, 12319, 12319 -1 thru 8, 12830, 11572, 10210 and 11915 SECTION 1. Authority for Reoort This 1, Division 15 lofinthem Streets with and the Highwaysr Codes State of California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972). SECTION 2, Ge__eral oescrlptton This City Council has elected to annex the tracts enumerated in Exhibit "A" into Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1. Thg City Council has determined that the street lights to be malntainod will have an effect upon all lots within said tracts as well as on the lots directly abutting the street lights. are: Work to be provided for with the assessments established by the district • The furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual o maintenance, operating and ser.tcing of street light Improvements n arterial and certain colle� or Streets. Improvement maintenance is considered aP general benefit to all areas in the District and cost shall be divided on a per lot basis. In the case of condominiums with airspace ownership only, and apartments, a dwelling unit sha be considered to benefit the same as a lot. SECTION 3. Plans and Soeciflcations The plans and specifications for street lighting have been prepared by the developers. The plans and street lights are as stipulated in the conditions of appr,ival for the development and as approved by the City Englneerinp Division. Reference is hereby made to the subject m eeect tract map or develoent plan and the as-.essment diagram for the exact location of the strt lighting areas. The plans and specifications for street lighting improvement on the individual development is hereby made a part of this report to the same extent as if said plans and specifics were attached hereto. Detailed maintenance activities on the street lighting district include: the repair, removal or replacement of all or an y part of any improvement, providing for the illumination of the subject area. SECTION 4. Estimated Costs No costs will be incurred fnr street lighting imorovement construction. All improvements will be constructed by developers. Based on available data, it is estimated that maintenance costs for assessment purposes will be -as Al: indicated below. These costs are estimated only, actual assessments will be t based on actual cost data. ` •`• The estimated total cost for Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 (including Annexation No. 13) comprised of 7133 lots and 235 9500L streeC- lights and /or 154 5800L lights is shown below: 1. S.C.E. Maintenance and Energy: Lamp Size- Quantity ---Tat—e---F _ 5800L 154 9.00 ' 22000L 1 13.50 't 9 ressore o Mum vapor Lamps Rate No's Total 235 X 10.00 X 12 • 28,200.00 154 X 9.00 X 12 • 16,632.00 M X 13.50 X 12 162.00 2. Costs per dwelling Unit: 44,994.00 Total Annual Maintenance Cost • 44 9994 . 6.31 /year /unit o. 07 is — n n str c 7133 6.31 divided by 12 • .52 /mo. /uni. Assessment shall apply to each lot as explained in Section 6. ' SECTION S. Assessment Diagram Copies of th3 proposed Assessment Diagrams are attached to this report and j labeled *Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 10, Annexation No. 13. ' t These diagrams are hereby incorporated within the text or this report. } _ SECTION 6. Assessment E ,F Improvement for the District are found to be of general benefit to all dwelling units wiihln the District .,nd that assessment shall be equal for each d` unit. Where there is more than one dwelling unit per lot or parcel of assessable land, the assessment for each lot or parcel shall be proportional to the number of dwelling units per lot or parcel. 4 It is proposed that all future development shall be annexed to the District. �a • SECTION %. Order of Events _ I. City Council adopts resolution instituting proceedings. _ r/ Y. City Council adopts Resolution of Preliminar Report. Y Approval of City Engineer's `. 3. City Council adopts Resolution of Intention to annex to District and sets public hearing date. 0. City Council conducts public hearing, considers all testimony and determines to form a District or abandon the proceedings. S. Every year in Nay, the City Engineer files a report with the City Council. „'• 6. Every year in June, the City Council conducts a public hearing and approves, or modif es and approves the ind•ovldual assessments. C r� . , n }' a'' vjJiL•1� }' !'�'3�fs' +:'7v.r:, .Y �:a'� "t. : !'• �?;Ki��r\) i■ fm .Y, S - EXHIBIT "A" Properties and improvements to be included within Annexation No. -a, 13 of Street'- Lighting Maintenance District 1: .. - i 95001 27nCOL_- i - Tract 12670, 12670 -1 thru -4 11 j Tract 12672 3 `e -, Tract 12319, 12319 -1 thru -8 13 Tract 11915 7 1 ' �5. F t s: r'r J' J vey° r F` 'S'�A %f•3�'17�'r,� r..�.'t�.,<!: ti�,t' �t�jY� { ^vy:+j.'•,q •.i: - :'4yeT,:ii3�.- .,�^!�.!'7 to ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT ANNEXATION NO. 13 Tract 12570, -1 thru -4 S✓". Y CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BIEMNARDINO A STATE OF CALIFORNIA > NLLOYD HUMS. CITY ENGINEERR R�- 1 V •t E23B89 DATE Q NO.- 1 N 1. ■ r mit -ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO._ 1 ANNEXATION NO. 13 1' I~ I` 'Tract 123192-1 thru -8 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMOZQCiA COUNTY• OF 3AN BIItNARDWO STATE OF CAIdFORNIA ••�,yLLGYP MU985. CITY ENGINEE9 RCE23B89• DATE ly A.i1 `•FT'�•TJr_c,'N,s. tide- 0 -ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 ANNEXATION NO. 13 Tract 12830 aS �A tnl ;ITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA `�r,'r �� COUNTY OF SAN BLRNARDINO ri STATE OF CALIFORNIA T E' 1V tm LLOYD HASS CITY ENGINEER ftCE 238e9 OATE .y title; -:,iy ■ N ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 ANNEXATION NO. 13 is �� ''�, ; lam`.'• � `: ., � •. /��,r -vim � ,,.��.•':� \�,..:1�'1.�r TRACT NO. 12672 _ C 1 A� CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUN'T'Y OF SAN BERNARDINO 'STATE OF_CALIFORMA jA 1V F2Ye �.. ASSESS4+AENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE (DISTRICT NO. 1 ANNEXATION NO. 13 ' TRACT 10210 S`sa� CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ��� COUNTY OF 3AN BERNARDIIQO mac: S =_ STATE OF CAI.TFORNIA ��y} 1 ` - LLOYD HU805. -CITY ENGINEFR R CE23889 FA '1:, ASSESSiMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. ANNEXATION NO. 13 TRACT N0. tivis PA a..uYi iSir�p��ow•V W....YYgI rlNrwlrl.n�.Mfw i.r.Y.• rr. f vj f CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -�6 c COU,i7TY OF SAN BERNARDINO _ 'i STATE OF CALIFORNIA N iii'• LLOYD HU9BS. CITY ENGINE y T ER RGE 23989 DATL" PaBC•s CL _ r, r, 11 1 i .= f ?IESBLi1fIDR' -NO': - Cl'1+96 -B3R BJ � •�O.Z- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEXATION _ NO. 13 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINT`4ANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 ANJ ACCEPTING THE FINAL ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR TRACT NOS. 12670, 12670 -1 thru 4, 12319, 12319 -1 thru 8, 12830, 12673, 10210, 11915 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rtnche Cucamonga did on the 2nd day of October, 1985, adopt its Resolution of Intention No. 85 -283 to order the therein described work in connection with Annexation No. 13 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1, which Resolution cf Intention No. 85 -283 was duly and legally published in the time, form and manner as required by law, shmm by the Affidavit of Publication of said Resolution of Intention on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notice of the passage of said Resolution of Intention, headed °Notice of Improvement', was duly and legally posted in the time, form, manner, location, and number as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Posting said notices, an file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoptioi thereof, notices of the adoption of the . Resolution of Intention were duly mailed to all persons owning real property proposed to be assessed for the improvements described in said Resolution of Intention No. 85 -293, according to the names and addresses of such owners as the same appears on the last mailing or as known to the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, which said copies were duly mailed in the time, form, and manner as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Mailing on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, said City Council having duly received considered evidence, oral and documentary, concerning the jurisdiction facts in this proceeding and concerning the necessity for the contemplated work add the benefits to be derived therefrom and said City Council having now acquired ,jurisdiction to order the proposed work. SECTION 1: It is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga that the public interest and convenience requires the annexation to the District and the ordering of the work, and said City Council hereby orders that the work, as set forth and described in said Resolution of Intention He. 85 -283 be done and mad (-: and SECTION 2: The Report filed by the Engineer is hereby finally approved; a —— SECTION 3: The assessments and method of assessment in the Engineer's IepF port are hereby approved. SECTION 4: The assessments shall not begin until after 60 percent of said trac s=have been occupied. ;,, rs d r vy.";.r•!• w v �:,i.A "' ,-i•. _.lgree. vt� r .SJ — .._ ,. N. .n <,��. Y„c� r vy" PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of November, 1985. •'` i AYES: NOES: ABSENT: —ion a s, ayor ATTEST: r. .cam. ever y A. Aut a et;7T ty C er 1, 8FVFRLY A. ,eLET, CITY CLEM of the City of Rancho Cucamnga, California, do ner +by tr0fy that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, - app•oved, and adopted by the City Council of L!ie City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular (s!,ecial, adjourned) meating of said City Council held on the 6th day of November, 1985. •• Executed this 6th day of November. 19e5 at Rancho Cucamonga, • California. Beverly A. Authelet, y irk 4 r 'Cyr -4 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ` • Engineer's Report for Strr.•et Lighting Maintenance District No. 2 Annexation No. 11 for Tract 12830 and 40210 SECTION 1. Authority for Report This report is in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of Ctlifornla (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972). SECTION 2. General Description This City Council has elected to annex the tracts enumerated in Exhibit W into Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2. The City Council has determined that the street lights to be maintained will have an effect upon all lots within said tracts as well as on the lots directly abutting the street lights. Worx to ve provided `cr with the assessments established by the district are: • The furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operating and servicing of street light improvements on local residential streets. Improvement maintenance is considered of general benefit to all areas in the District and cost shall be divided on a w,r lot basis. In the case of condominiums with airspice ownership only, and apartments, a dwelling unit shall be considered to benefit the same as a lot. SECTION 3 Plans and Specifications The plans and specifications for street lighting have been prepared by the developers. The plans and street lights are as stipulated in the conditions of approval for the development and as approved by the City Engineering Division. Reference is ,hereby made to the subject tract map or development plan and the assessment diagram for the eeact location of the street lighting areas. The plans and specifications for street lighting improvement on tl.e !' individual development is hereby made a part of this report to the sane extent as if said plans and specifics were ottached hereto. �v & Detailed maintenance activities on the street lighting district •a' include. the repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement, providing for the illumination of the subject area. v .r SECTION 4. Estimated Costs No cysts will be incurred for street lighting improvement construction. All improveaerits will be constructed by developers. Based on available data, It is estimated that maintenance costs for assessment purposes will be as i S j. Wo ' indicated below. These costs are estimated only, actual assessments Will be based on sctual cost data. _ The estimated total cost for Lighting Maintenance District No.- 2 (including Annexation No. 11) comprised of 1998 lots and 597 street lights) is shown below: x 1. S.L.E. Maintenance and Energy: .''p 5"U. quantity Rate- *Hieh Pressure Rate- • e Sodium Vapor "SCE Schedule LS -1. All night service per map per month, effective January 1, 1983. Ms Rate Mo's Total 597 X 8.75 X 12 - 62,685.00 2. Costs per dwelling Unit: 62,685.00 Total Annual Maintenance Cost - 62685 31.37 /year /unit o. of n s n srct 31.37 divided by 12 • 2.61 /mo. /unit Assessment shall apply to each lot as explained in Section 6. SECTION S. Assessment Diagram Copies of the proposed Assessment Diagrams a -e attached to this report and labeled •Street Lighting Maintenance District NO 2•, Annexation No. 11 There diagrams are hereby incorporated within the text of this report. SECTION 6. Assessment Improvement for the District are found to be of general benefit to all dwelling units within the District and that assessment shall be equal for each unit. Where there 1s mnre than one dwelling unit per lot or parcel of assessable land, the assessment for each lot or parcel shall ba proportional to the number of dwelling units lot per or parcel. It 1s proposed that all future development shalt M_ annexed to the District. K' SECTION 7. Order of Events r ",' 1. City Council adcpts resolution instituting proceedings. ; 2. City Council adopts Resolution of Preliminary Approval of City Engineer's- Report. 3. CitY Council adopts Resolution of Intention to annex a District and sets Public hearing date. 4. CitY Council conducts public hearing, considers all testimony and determines to form a District or abandon the proceeding.. S. Every year in May, the City Engineer files a report with the City Counci". 6. Every year in June, the City Council conducts a public hparing and approves. or modifies and approves the individual assessments. ',S, �� i. EXHIBIT W Properties and improvements to be included within Annexation Ho. 11 of Street_ Lighting Maintenance Oistl%t 2: 1800 Lumen Tract IWO 44 Tract 10210 37 • 3 3 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM .z r STREET LIGHTING MAIN s ENANCE DISTRICT NO._ 2 ° ANNEXATION NO. 11 0 Tract -12 83 0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA lick; COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDIN0 ^ 13 STATE OF CALIFORNIA / `• 'm LLOYD HUBBS CITY ENGINEER R p OATS PEE' ■ 1 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO- -2 . ANNEXATION NO. 11 M•1 I • +MAIM I ® , . ilaX N•1 M.i t+l I l I I= TRACT 10210 CITY OF RANC$O CUCAMONGA w COUNTY OF BAN BERNAItDI 10 , \ BTATE OF CALIFORNIA ,� T LLOYD MUBBS• CITY ENGINEpER RC 238E9 DATE 1�1 G RESOLUTION N0.- EH_et_= 95'303 - A RESOL TION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO - CUCAMONGA ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEXATION NO. 11 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 2 AHD ACCEPTING THE FINAL ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR TRACT NOS. 1< -830 AND 10210 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga did on the 2nd day of October, 1985, adopt its Resolution of Inteottan No. 85 -285 to order the taerein described work in connection with Annexation No. 11 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2, which Resolution of Intention No. 85 -285 was duly and legally published in the time, form and manner as required by law, shown by the Affidavit of Pabllcation of said Resolution of Intention on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the bdoption thereof, notice of the passage of said Resolution of Intention, headed *Notice of Improvement", was duly and legally Posted in the time, form, manner, location, and number as required by law, as appears froo the Affidavit of Posting said notices, on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notices of the adoption of the Resolution of Intention were duly mailed to all persons owning real property ' proposed to be assessed for the improvgaents described in said Resolution of Intention No. 85 -285 according to or names and addresses of such ownars as ofeRanchoaCucamongt ,twhich last saidicoplesrwere known duly mailed Intthe Clerk time, f the M,City manner as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Mailing on rile in the office of the (ity Clerk; and oral and documentar•a, concerning t'a jurisdictionrfactsein considered concerning the neressity for the contemplated work and -the benefits 20 to derived therefrom and sold City Council having now acquired ,Jurisdiction to order the proposed work. SECTION 1: It is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga that the public interest and convenience requires the annexation to the District Ind the ordering of the work, and said 61ty Council hereby orders that the work, as set forth and described in said Resolution of Intention No. 85 -285 be done and mada; and SECTION 2: The Report filed by the Engineer is hereby finally approved; and'"— SECTION 3: The assessments and method of assessment in the Engineer's epur arc hereby approved. SECTION 4: The assessments shall not begin until after 60 percent of said tracts ave been occupied. i_ L' PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of November, 1985 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: won . ke rs , ayor ATTEST: Bever y ut a et, ty er • h 1, BEVERLY A. AUTNELET, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby certi'y that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed; approved, and adopted by the City Conncil of the City of Ran0o Cucaoo,;,Ia, at a regular (special, adjourned) meeting of said City Council held on the 6th day of November, 1985. Executed this 6th day of Novrnber 1985 at Rancho Cucamonga, i California. , <:.,.. :3 9 Beverly A. ut a et, ty LrferTc i; is f ii ti i Attached for City Council appro• :al is a resolution- ordering the work in ' connection with Annixatien•No. 26 to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 for Tract 12010 located north c: Almond Street, west of Sapphire Street and Tract 12830 on the west Sid: of Beryl, north of Baseline. Forecast Corporation, developer of Trait i2010 aid A -M Company, developer of Tract 12830 hive been o.Hfied of the pu')lic hearing by mail. The attacnta resolution also approves the Engineer's Report which was tentatively appraved by Resolution No. 85 -286 on October 2, 1985. RECOMMENDATION It is the worxcoln nconnnction (with with mi. 26itteh Landscape iHaintenance District No. 1 and approving the Engineer's Report. ResF:de ttmy' LBH Attachments s . CITY OF RANCHO CUCAAIONGA u SV FF REPORT ;•� r DATE: November 6, 1985 s� to T0: City Council and City Manaler FROM: Lloyd S. Hubbs, City Engineer, BY: Linda Beek, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEVT.iON 110. 26 FOR TRACTS 12010, 121130 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DI.C'KICT N0. 1 ii ti i Attached for City Council appro• :al is a resolution- ordering the work in ' connection with Annixatien•No. 26 to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 for Tract 12010 located north c: Almond Street, west of Sapphire Street and Tract 12830 on the west Sid: of Beryl, north of Baseline. Forecast Corporation, developer of Trait i2010 aid A -M Company, developer of Tract 12830 hive been o.Hfied of the pu')lic hearing by mail. The attacnta resolution also approves the Engineer's Report which was tentatively appraved by Resolution No. 85 -286 on October 2, 1985. RECOMMENDATION It is the worxcoln nconnnction (with with mi. 26itteh Landscape iHaintenance District No. 1 and approving the Engineer's Report. ResF:de ttmy' LBH Attachments s . Y x r CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Engineer's Report for ANNEXATION NO. 26 to the Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 for Tracts 12010 and 12830 SECTION 1. Authority for Report This report is in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, rhapter 1. Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972). SECTION 2. General Description This City Council has elected to annex all new tracts into Landscape Maintenance District No. 1. The tlty Council has determined that the ar -as to be maintained will have an effect upon all lots within Tract; 10210 and 12630 as well as or, the lots directly abutting the landscaped areas, All landscaped areas to be maintained in the anr.e.ed tracts are shown on the Tract Map as roadway right -of -way or easement'. to be granted to the Cr.., of Rancho Cucamonga. SECTION 3. Plans and Specifications The plans and specifications for the landscaping have been prepared by the developer and have been aporoved as part of the improvement plans for Tracts 10210 and 12830. The plans and specifications for the landscaping are in conformance with the Planning Commission. Reference i. hereby made to the subject Tract Map and the assessment diagrams for the exact location of the landscapL. 3 3 ;. The plans and specifications by reference are hereby made a part -of tis report to the sane extent as if said plans and specifications were attached hereto. SECTION 4. Est;rated Costs No costs will be incurred for par.nay improvement construction. All improvements will be constj•uctpd by developers. Based on historical data, contract analysis and developed work standards, it is estirated that maintenance costs for assessment purposes will equal thirty (5.3D) per square foot per year. These cos are estimated only, actual assessment will be based on actual cost data. The estimated total cost for Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (including Annexation No. 26) comprised of 617,656 square feet of landscaped, area is shown below: 9� ■ 4. :`.; La ®o Total Annual Maintenan,:e Cost S.30 x 617,55b square feet 165,295.80 _ Per Lot Annual Assessmen. = 1852.96_80 • 33.17 ` Per Lot Monthly Assessment:, 33.17 2.76 —IZ- Assessment shall apply to each lot as enumerate) in Section 6 and the attached Assessment Diagram. Vh,,re the develcoment covered by this annexation involves frontage .Hong arterial or collector streets, which are designated for inclusion in the maintenance district but will be maintained by an active homeowner; association, these assessments shall be reduced -' SECTION 5. Assessment Diagrrm A copy of the proposed assessment diagram is attached to this report and labeled -Exhibit A•, b,/ this reference the diagram is hereby incorporated within the text of this report. SECTION 6. Assess —nnt Improvement for Annexation No. 26 is fount to be of ,ener0 benefit to all lots within the District and that assessment shall be equal for each parcel. The City Council will fold a public hearing in June 1986, to determine the actual assessments based upon She actual costs incurred by the City during the 1982/83 fiscal year which are to be recovered through assessments as required by the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. SECTIOP 7. Order of Events 1. City Council adopts resol,ition instituting proceedings. = 2. City Council adopts Resolution of Preliminary Approval of City Engineer's Report. i 3. City Council adopts Resolution of Intention to Annex to District and sets public hewing date. i. City Council conducts public hearing, considers all testimony and to Annex to the District or abandon the proceedings. ell 1 tl 5. Every year in May, the City Engineer files a rdp3rt with the City Council.' 6. Every year in &,e, the City Council conducts a public hearing and . e!, approves, or modifies and approves the individual assessments. •�- ,Y;'.a,4k 39%, 0 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. i ANNEXATION NO, 26 s u, 1 : 1 M•1 oDpv� �00P� TRACT 10210 CITY OF IIANCHO CUCAPAONGA titlrj ENGINEERING DIVISION A Y VIC:NITY MAP 1 7,1 p�� ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM ` LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 ANNEXATION NO. 26 19� St PROJECT U YMe u ar+.v.CE 52 ST t li7f W g2 � � a H446 3 4 � f.iNE � d�C, Tract 1.2830 CITY OF RANCHO ENGINEERING DIVISION VICINITY MAP I. 0 a title; ,� A N a 11 RESOLUTION NO. et -'0rzm 86'3a�1 CUCAI'ANPIORDERINTMTHEIWORKO ,. IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEXATION 1 ACCEPTING OTHEE FINALLANDSCAPE ENGIN ER'SCEREPORTRI OR NO' TRACT N D 12010, 12830 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga did on the orderathefthereinrdescriheddwdrki 1n Resolution cannectlon with Annexatioe Nos -226 to Landscape Maintenance Dist No. 1, which Resolution of Intention NO- Landscape 85 -287 law,dshown and by the Affidavit of Publication oaf said Resolution of Intention tion on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notice of the passage legally said Resolution of Intention, heeaad d ONlocatlon,Iand number^ as was requiredaby law, .ice of posted in the time. fon+. the from h Affidavit of Posh ^.; sold notices, on file in the office o adoption WHEREAS, after the adopti ailed to ,ali pe sons owning real pr op the Resolution of Intention were duly proposed to be assessed for the tiimi„e��es an ofd such oowners as del-ribed in Intention No. 85 -287 according of Ranchoappeaamonga, the last maicbptesrwas kdu y mailed in the time, form City )wn to the mariner as required e Cy by law as a dears from the Affidavit of Mailing on file in the WHEREAS, said City Council having duly received considered evidence, oral and documentary. ecsitycfornthehcontempllatedn worktand thesbenefltitoabe concerning derived therefrom and said City Council having now acquire: jurisdiction o order the proposed work. Of SECTION 1: It is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City he Ranchottoncta the th District and btie ordering of the work, eand nsaid rCityrCouncil and Ierentlorders 65-287 t the done and made; and and described in said Resolution of as set heb SECTION 2: Be it further resolved that the report filed by the Engineer s ereby finally approved; and SECTION 3: eneer'suReportrare herebyaapprovedsessments and method of esve tht the as assessment n e ng SECTION 4: Be it said tracts haveabeenioccupiedments shall not begin unt a �er 60 l f00 �s d Wm M i . .�w. C. Kl2', �tx: +�'33i�x a �irt••y.ai .y�.�'�vr .�v:?l .. ". a_" _.14� r2s yy.hiei� f PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of November, 1985. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Jon 0. MikEels. ATTEST: Beverly A. he l' City ar f, AEVEM , AIR +EUT, CITY ('n:M of the "!: V Rand+ CucA.,414. Cal forAll, 'it suareby certify that VA foregoing W.tsoluNOn was 44?X pawed, approved, .%v��� 01)ptej br the City Counctt of the C y of Rt.Cho tvs,ionga, at a remlaf l ipr " 13, 4journey.' axsting, of Sa1O Cray Co+uncyl helm or. the W. day of Novenma ja85. Execute this 60 day el lldvAZber, 198, at Rancho 4 .am& `7, C altfornia. i Iev yi-K -TGIF-, lT y Teak if- "ti r� ,1 t CITY OF RANCHO CUCAbIONGA STAFF REPORT 9 ')ATE: November 6, 1985 'Rat .aY .— SJECT:_ Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director Linda D. Daniels, Senior Redevelopment Analyst ga.Yy` �� nt „ho' ,1, tty Redevelopment Agency is the Issuing agent of the proposed yi .wilfican9 L',Partic, ration, it is necessary for the City Cowell to :ipaw rRt*R P %Wam in two ways. The first is for the City Council to transfer , -6'(W - Prn.rre,Weflvity R. n Allocation to the Redeve!opment Agency so that the Mieno A;c •d «ertf dfbcanaxv In order to sell the proposed Certificates. This C4 ortosv wMc %�'C{1y is trj7^slerrtng, is that which was designated by the State of F �pViloraia to the qty gJ W Bch,, CuMnongo for use In 1985. The City does have tho flj ovllwfP, to transfer the a,(fy?� so the Agency in order that Certificates can be sold by the Ayency. The second area of City Council participation involves the need for o public hccrioy so that the public has the opportunity to comment on the proposed finuncing. This public hearing is required by the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act a' 1982 and hs more commonly referred to as o wrEFRA” hearing. A brief memorandum from Best, Best d, Krieger Is attached to this staff report which further Identifies and explains the purpose of the TEFRA hearing. , RECOMMENDATION: qgoacy apprcval of the Transfer of Private Activity Bond oration to the edevelgment Agency, and .Authorization for the Agency to sell Certificates of Participation by odspting the attached Resolution, Respectfully submitted, Jack Lom, AICA, Director of Community Development JL:LD kcp Attachments: Resolution Memorandum from Best, Best 6 Krieger r ♦_µ'L4 �.... _. ��.. 4�1tf "' .. � 4�nae -a� :.r :a i� :r .._ .. .. _ •- 't� -'S • y }s�yw ::. w.t, t uw ornots or BEST. BEST 6 KRIEGER �. October 30, 1985 % t'D:MORANDUM - ., TO: MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER FROM: SPECIAL COUNSFL RE: PUBLIC HEARING ON HAVEN COMMERCE CENTER The Redevelopmeut Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has previously evidenced its intention to assist in financing the acquisition and construction of a commercial project (the ")roject ") pruposed to be constructed in the City by August It Reiter III, an individual (the "Developer "). The financing is being undertaken by the Agency pursuant to the t� provisions of the Community Redevelopment Law (Part 1 of Division 24 of the California Health and Safety Code), It will involve an installment sale financing arrangement including the issuance of certificates of participation, whereby the ,�. Agency will acquire the Project from A. H. Reiter Developement Co., a California general partnership, and immediately convey ? the Project to the Developer,•through two identical install- ;' men[ sale agreements. _ In order to satiety the federal tax requirements estab- lished by the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1952 with respect to the tax- exempt status of the cartifi- '� Cates to be issued in this financing, it is necessary that I _ y�p+, .. "'#.'• `:.s�:y:.z;y �zf�,.Y:xY:•'N- Agri_ °u. /4,': t�Kl. .r:' SFr" i'yyi:•iK�.:i<.oL",'_i:tr�, -y;r S'f.: ?��? (_ i u•v ornres or BEST. BEST 6 KRIEGER i . October 30, 1985 Page Two the City Council, acting as the applicable elected govern- mental body, conduct a public hearing (the "TEFRA Hearing ") i e on the Project and its proyosed financing. At this hearing, comments of interested citizens with respect to the Project and its financing should be taken. A short agenda for this w hearing is attached At the conclusion of the hearing, the a City Council would then conaider adoption of the attached Resolution indicating its aF•proval of the Project and its financing The action tc be taken by tae City Council at the conclusion of the TEFRA hearing does not nbligata the Y '= Agency to proceed with the installment sale firancing of the Project if the Agency should choose not to do so at soma fature time. Francis J. Baum Stephtnie R. Harlan • i � = i r 1' uw omrcs Ur BEST.BEST A KRIEGER MAYOR'_ S AGENDA FOR PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA (HAVEN COMMEERRCESCEENTER PROJECT) November 6, 1485 1. Mayor opens public hearing. p. Mayor calls upon Staff for a summary of the project and its proposed financing. Summary of financing by Staff. (a) Summary of project (loration, size, developer, etc.) (b) Summary of proposed financing (Installment sale financing, including the issuance of certificates of participation in an amount not to exceed $4,565,000, to be undertaken by the Agency pursuant to Community Redevolopmant Law). 4, Mayor calls for any comments or questions from the public. 5. City Council proceeds to consideration of adoption of resolution approving financing. �J .i 1. 1 P •4 RESOLUTION NO.8446 -92R ?S'boS A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF - RANCHO CUCAMONGA TRANSFERRING 1985 PRIVATE - ACTIVITY BOND LIMIT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND APPROV)NG THE ISSUANCE OF CZRTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION BY THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA FOR THE HAVEN COMMERCE CENTER PROJECT WHEREAS, August H. Reiter III, an Individual, seeks the Issuance of tax - exempt obligations (the "Obligations') by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (the "Agency ") in the principal amount of j4,S65,000 to finance the acquisition, construction and equipping of a commercial project consisting of four office buildings located at the northeast corner of Sesenth and Haven Streets in the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Project Area to be Loown as Haven Commerce Center (the "Project "); and WHEREAS, the Agency has heretorore ct!opted its Resolution No. RA85 -01, as amended by Resolutien No. RA85 -OIA (the "Inducement Resolution'), expressing its Intention to finance the Project with an issue of its tax - exempt Certificates of Participation; and WHEREAS, the Agency Is authorized, pursuant to provisions of Pa,t i of Division 24 of the California Health and Safety Code (the "Act") to issue the Obligations to finance the Project; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 103(n) of the Inrernal Revenua Code of 1954, as amended, there are authorized to be issued within the State of California In any calendar year an amount of Private Activity Bonds (as defined In said Section 103(n)) not exceeding in cg regale principal "ount the statewide limit determined as set forth In said Section 103(n); and WHEREAS, tt,, Governor of the State of California on July 19, 1984, issued a Proclamation (the "Proclamation') implementing the provisions of said Section 103(n), pursuant. to which a portion of said statewide limit Is allocated to each city based on the estimated population of such city; and WHEREAS, the portion of sold statewide limit allocated to the City for the current colendur year Is $3,203,000 (the "1985 Private Activity Bond Limit ")1 and WHEREAS, the Proclamation permits the City to assign to another local agency all or a portion of Its 1985 Private Activity Bond Limit by resolution adopted by the City Council, and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has requested the City to assign to It I" amount of 53,203,0001 and WHEREAS, this City Council desires to have the fin.ncing of the Project completed and by this Reso!ution desires to transfer Its 1985 Private Activity Bond Limit ;. to the Agency; and „t i , 7�p r, h k7- IEREAS, pursuant fo the requirements of Section 103(k) of the Internal • Revenue Code of 1954, as 'amended, this City Council has con acted a public hearLng regardi,ta the issuonce of the O611gations by the Agency for the Project, notice of which was publTsii:d in The Daily Report at least 14 days prior thereto; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows SECTION It Tonsfer of Private Activlt Bond Limit. The amount of $3,203,000 reprw—ent ng the CJtys tote r vnle cJ vity ono Imlt, is hereby transferred to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Such transfer sho,i be Jrrevm ble upon the adoption of this resolution. SECTION 21 ' Official Action. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to ri31frFthc Cali o•.n o ebt Rt Allocation Committee established by 'x the Proclamation of the assignment made pursuant to Section I within fiftem (I5) days of the adoption of this resolution SECTION 1 AAp rov�al of Project and Financing. The Project and Its tinancirg by tge Agency is here yb apprr•ed. Such approval Ineludas approval of an I,utollmmt sale financing, Including the tssvcnce of Certificates of Participation by the Agency in an amount not to exceed $4,565,000, pursuant to and subject to the requirements of the Act for the purpose of financing the Project. This approval is 'r intended to satisfy the requirements o.' Section 103(k) of the Code. SECTION 4s Effective Date. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon is c option. PASSED, APPROVED, end ADOPTED this 6th day of November, 1905. AYES: NOESs ti ABSENT: r as ATTESTS Lauren M. Wttlsermcn,' ecrctary v r` CITY OF RANCHO CUCAAIONGA nrq, STAFF REPORT DATE: November 6, 1985 — 19-7 TO: City Council FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Paul A. Rougeau, Traffic Engineer SUBJECT: ESTABLISHMENT OF SPEED LIMITS ON VICTORIA PARK LANE AND BANYAN STREET FROM NEST CITY LIMITS TO 400 FEET EAST OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE The attached ordinance amend; Section 10.020,20 by adding Victoria Park Lane at 35 MPH and Banyan Street (from the west rity limits to 400 feet east of Archibald Avenue) at 40 MPH. These two streets have been the subject of a traffic engineering speed survey. This survey has included Items such as residential frontage review, street grades, street curvature and radar •urveillance of prevailing speeds. The conp'.eted survey verifies and justifies the posting of the stated speeds. RECOMMENDATION It is recce mended that the City Council adopt the attached ordinance amending Section 10.020.20 of the Municipal Code. C�ctfulty u itted, L84• :de Attachments ORDINANCE NO. 'r'ar'- ^96-OW a r) Of AN ORDINANCE Cr' THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO - CCCAMONCA, CALIFORNIA, SECTION 10.20.020 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY CODE REGARDING PRIMA FACIE SPEED L "ZITS UPON CERTAIN CITY STREETS A. Recitals. (i) California Vehicle Code Section 22358 providss .fiat this City Council may, by ordinance, set prima facie speed limits upon any portion of any street not a state highr:y. (ii) The City Traffic Engineer ha: conducted an engineering and traffic survey, of certain streets within the 'ity of Rancho Cucamonga which streets are specified in Part 8 of this Ordinance. (iii) The determinations concerning prima facie spend limits set forth in Part B. below, are based upon the engineering and traffic survey identified in Section A (ii), above. B. Ordinance NON, THEREFORE, THE CiTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAM)NGA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section Section 10.2'1.020 hereby is amended to the Rancho Cucamonga City Code to read, in words and figures, as follows: 10.20.L20 Decrease of state law maximums eel. It is determined by City Council resa ut an an upon the basis a an engineering and traffic investigation that the speed permitted by state law is greater than Is reasonable or safe under the conditions found to exist upon such streets, and it is declared that the prima facie speed limit shall be as set forth to this section on- those streets or parts of streets designated in this section when signs are erected giving notice hereof: 1. 2. 3. 4. S. 6. 7. Name of Street or Portion Affected Arch4batd Avenue -- Fourth Street to Banyan Street Arrow Route - -Baker to Haven Haven Avenue -- Highland to Wilson Hellman Avenue -- Foothill to Alta Loma Drive Hellman Avenue- -6th to Foothill Hellman Avenue -400' north of Manzanita to Valley View Beryl Street - -800' north of Leman to Banyan n r ,i Declared Prima racie Speed Limit (MPH) 45 t W� 50 35 r* 45 40 'a 40r +l �j09 _ s _ P 8. Beryl Street -- Banyan to end 45 9. Base Line Road- -Nest city limit to Carnelian 45 10. Base Line Road -- Carnelian to Haven 40 11. Carnelian Street -- Foothill to end 45 ^ 12. Eight Street- -Grove to Haven 45 _ 13. Etiwanda Avenue -- Foothill to Highland 45 14. Highland Avenue -- Amethyst to Archibald 35 15. Grove Avenue - - Eighth to Foothill 40 16. Turner Avenue--Eighth to Foothill 45 17. Sapphire Street - -15th to Lemon 40 18. Sapphire Street -- Banyan to end 45 19. Vineyard Avenue -- Church to Base Line 40 20. lihittram Avenue-- Etfaa..da to east city limits 40 21. Victoria Park Lane 35 22. Banyan Street - -from west city limits to 400' 10 east of Archibald (Ord. 169 Section 1 (part), 1982: Ord. 39 Section 5.1, 1978;. Rancho Cucamonga 5/82 124 (i) Both sixty -five (65) miles per hour and fifty -five (55) miles per hour are speeds which are more than are reasonable or safe; ' (ii) The miles per hour as stated are the prima facie speeds which are most appropriate to facilitate the orderly movement of traffic and are speed limits which are reasonable and safe on said streets oe portions thereof; (111) The miles per hour stated are hereby declared to be the prima facie speed limits on said streets; and (iv) The Director of Maintenance Services is hereby authorized and directed to install appropriate signs upon said streets giving notice of the prima facie speed limit declared herein. Section 2. The City Clerk shall certff, to the passage of this Ordinance and shall cause the sane 'o be pwllfshed as required by taw. �.; The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall caus3 the same to ss be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage at least once in The R: 1ai__,1�j _Reppoor�. a newspaper of general circulation published in the City`oT 4; b }r o California, and cirvulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, P California. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 6th day of November, 1985. UJ - r' AYES: Y.. HOES: ABSENT: lu1":`ti.y ' .- :...;`, i. f �% //✓ r.,r •aryl: r� �'yi.��.i�cd��?.n zi cn a4'cr�r.-- .�..L�.�:•f_ _ .. .. .r�..±4rL. ,rte- 0 F' O1 0 9 n ^ y DATE: TO: FROM: BY: ?18JECT: CITY of RANCHO rVCjLAiONGA STAFF REPORT At C:*( November 6, 1985 t97 7 c: City Council and City Manager Lloyd B. Hobbs, City Engineer Bar.-ye R. Hrnson, Senior Civil Engineer ORDINANCE TO ADD A SECTION To THE CIr- SUBDIVISION OR91MANCE ESTABLISHING REGWATIONS FOR THE PROCESSING OF VESTING TENTATIVE MAPS FOR RESIDEHTINL SUBDIVISIONS The purpose of this ordinance is to establish regulations for the processing Of vesting tentative maps which are required by .:ate law to be in affect by January 1, 1986. In addition to ITC 5r3inance, attached for your reference is a list of common questions and related an ;wers aeveloped by the League of California Cities. residential subdivision tiniaccordancieawith the iCiterrequlations in effectpat the time that the vesting ce,,tative map was approved and no new or changed requirements eeto d r t the o oer. adition,hat $&mrigh a tens far one y r a errecrdation the final map. RECOMiENDAiION It is recommended that the City Council approve the ordinance establishing regulations for vesting tentative maps for residential subdivisions. l4Re ctfu lly RH:jaa Attachments i i; - •`:A:?:N,,°w M.�'_3�- ifi�y�t���F ��j��e. _ .. ! �. � 4`:`..a����Y".'�.i �aiao League of Caiitomia Cities .gKtu r t " 7cla laaoK:s..! Sav,m.nntsarn re,a,uatso _ 361RCP I I C�wi en io nlcw O � rSmnrenr , aid Co it; 2lyASaipe:&4- is o14.1 ' IMPLPMENTATION INFORMATION ON SB 1660 (Montoya) TIM 'VESTED RIGHTS" BILL, Chap, 11)3, 1984 Statutes February 1985 Senate BIII 1660 (Montova),Chal•t : r 1113 Of the 1984 Statutes, was enacted by the Legislature IZ ,and comes et a "Vesting Jan•,utry 1, 1986. The bill creates a new form of tentative + deveioper that ahe or she wil bealettotative d with heel when In acco danguarantees that approval. +'at "Wi paper addresses the most commen questions of local officlais about 53 1660. AI) 1 •Oerencei are to the Californir. Government Code unless otherwise noted. TF5 1660. t: Settloro 66924.3, 66028, 66477., 66432.6 and 66463 unless and adds Sections 66418,1 and 66098.1 Sertlon 66498.8. _y I. , STION! TO WHAT KINDS OF DEVELOPMENTS DOES THE "VESTING TENTATIVE MPPLY? ANSWER! Residential developmmp only (Government Code Sec. 66498..'). 2. UESTION1 BY WHAT DATE MUST WE COMPLY WITH THIS NEW LAW? ANSWER: YOU must comply with this law by January 1, 1986, but you may do so sooner (gc. 66498.8 and uncodifled Sec. 10 of the bill). :./ 3. UESTIONs WHAT IS M E "VESTING TENTATIVE MAP," AND DOES ONE OF THESE ANY DIFFERENT ally t AN ORDINARY TENTATIVE MAP? ANSWER: A "vesting tentative map" Is basically Is the same as an ordinary • tentative map-•"'')'t only the city o the state law requires Is that when one of these "vesting" maps is filed with the city or county, the map must have conspicuously Printed on Its face the words ' "vesting tentative map" (Sea. "424 have and 66932). cif 4. UESTION! HOW DOES THIS BILL AFFECT CITIES' AND COUNTIES' POWERS TO RE UBDIVISIONS? ANSWER: Not at Ur, up to the time the ,nap Is approved or deal,.-d. What the bill limits s the a (Illy to change conditions after that point. 5. QUESTIONi DO THE CHANCES MADE BY SB 1660 AFFECT ORDINARY TENTATIVE �'• "•f� ERs No. It is an alternative Proee are. /6,. QU�EESSTIONs IS THERE ANY DIFFERENCE IN THE PROCESSING OF THESE MAPS NU ORORT,ARY TENTATIVE MAPS? ANSWER: That depends On your local ordinances. Government Cade Section 66011, whicht�ie p,U does not amend, vests control of t4a design and Improvement 1 ( subdivisions In councils and boards of supervisors. Sec. 66452, as amended by the bail, Provides that "vesting tentative P, maps" are to be processed the ' > r same as tentative ma s exe of as otherwise provided by state law or local ordinance. ' DeV UESTIONt PRIOR TO Al'PROV'NC A "VESTING" O SUPPLY THE CITI ✓ITH MORE DETAILS ON A DEVELOPMENT NT rl` !� THAN WE DO ON AN ORDINARY MAP? ANSW[2: yp A qtr' ^' requires or Permits. , If your local ordinance so g' aFA= v , 'ql ( 1, �;;at• i� .` / /� 29 1,491+. F 3r�i�����.mir,. _,�,i� /t�:...I v;. .. r: �..X.. x•_ ti .; ��ti',`Y•�IC��R+ QUESTION REQE DEVELOPER TO SUPPLY FO: WyAT ',ETAILS MIGHT 1 CONSIDER R TO /PPROVAL OF A "VESTING" MAP? ANS`A °_ UIRING THE Because the rights ®y eonleirad by this process last for a lengthy peeled of time, and because subsegtlettt. apprrvals must be eons)stent with the map as appro tpm ved, you may wish change the discret se ing of the processing, so that most or all discretionary approvals occur before or slmultaneuusly with map spptoval. Consequently, you may wish to consider requiring the developer to supply with Lie map Information that your city or county needs to determine the Impact, of the project on your city or county over a period of years, such i7i - neight, slz -. and lucation of buildings - sewe„ water, storm drain and road details z i - kdormatlon on the uses to which the buildings will be put 1� - detailed grading plans - geological studios - ilood control information - architectural plans - any other studies your city has normally deferred to the building permit stage. 9. UESTION: WHEN SHOULD DESIGN REVIEW OCCUR, FOR A "VESTING" MAP PR—"— NSWERt You may wish to consider dning design review slmultanecusly with or prior to revies, of the ,nap. 'four city or county should probably review the order In wk ich this and other discretionary approvals occur, and change the order so that some discretionary app, ovals are processed with, or prior to, the map so that when the map Is approved, the details of the project are known. r� 10. OUESTIONt WHAT RIGHTS DOES THIS BILL GIVE A DEVELOPER THAT THE DE'WrL_Z'PEW_bOES NOT HAVE UNDER CURRENT LAW? ANSWERt Under the bill, orce the "vesting" map is approved, the developer may gen..rally proceed with d:velopnient In substantial complla%e with the ordinances, pallcles, and standards In -ftect at the time the developer flied a complete application with the city or county. e teotrhl j l , public of safety, or (b) Violate stater with aw (c (Government Cod; S C 6670.2 66493.1, 66493.6). 11. UESTIONt IF THE CITY OR COUNTY APP ROVRD A "VESTING" MAP, IN WHAT CIR UM ANCES CAN THE COUNTY JR CITY DENY 'A FINAL MAP CR A BUILDING PERMIT? ANSWERt Only when It must do so to protect public health or safety or to comply wJtK_3ta1e or federal law (Sea. 66493.1, 664 9l.6). '• i2. UESTIONt CAN A CITY OR COUNTY DENY APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE A "VES I G" P SOLELY ON THE GROUND THAT THE MAP IS A "VESTING" MAP? 1� ANSWER: Probably not. 13. PUESTIO N1 HOW LONG DOES THE'VESgTING' CONTINUE ONCE THE 1ENTATIVE Plus one to thOrce years _P TL Ilfe of therbuilding tpermlt. final m recxded, ordinances, extensions, and Processing ime this means 3_ an local during which moratoria are In effector lawsuits are ndjn� baSeed o (plus any time ache gulest pending), , an the following 26 a) All tentative maps, Including "-vesting" maps last from two to six local or finances and extensions (Sec. 66432.6)1 plus Years, depending on jl b) depending on local ordinimces, the developer has either one or two years after the final m1P is recorded to app:y for a building, Permit, .And the eo'mty or City may extend that for one more year to a iota! of three yt•ars, (Sec. 56432.6(g))1 and • jj e) if the developer has filed a complete appllcatioa for a building permit, the right 3W continues through the life of the building Permit (usual.y six months), Plus any extensions the city gives on the building Permit, plus Processing time for architectural review or grading permits, 11 the time for prones3m8 those permits exceeds 30 days (Sec. 66432.6(h)). I _ 10. UESTION: WHAT HAPPENS IF A. DEVELOPER LETS ONE OF THESE TIME PERIODS XP RE'f ANSWER, The developer !t then treated the same as If he or she I were an ordinary aopl cant wt out the rights given by the ^vesting" map (See. 6645E. N. 13. UESTION: HOW DO THE TIME PERIODS OI;5CRIBED IN QUESrm 13 APPLY TO recorded oEmmenOce onNeach Phase wnen tt�e final mirl for recorded ap Is 66432.6(8)). P, (See. 56 UESTIONt SECTION 66498.3 PROVIDES THAT A COUNCIL OR BOARD OF MAY CON0117ONALLY APPROVE A "VESTINCI" MAP THAT INCONSISTENT WITH LOCAL ZONING, AND MAKE THE MAP APPROVAL CONTINGENT UPON THE REZONING OCCURRING. HOW DOES T1fIS AFFECT OUR CURRENT PRACTICES? ANSWER, Probably not at all. A few Jurkdlctions process ' rezoning. This provision was_Insc•ted toga accommodate thou Jurisdictions. nap at a later 17. QUEST10N . JR CITY r APP, MAPS TO OUR PLANNING NG CO1414IS510NE ORSSUBDIVISION L REV REVIEW COMMITTEE), BUT ZONING ORDINANCES MUST BE APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF PROCEDU E7 OR ANSWER COUNCIL. No. WILL t1since youlLme7` bee using a differ ntl proc�du�le to' process vesting maps, you may wish to consider w)other the couneli or board wishes to not delegate approval of "vesting" maps, 13. UES i ,W HOW DO %S THIS LAW RELATE TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT " p Imarl ylor&mmatter projects. Be ause It Is n t a eottract, )oval agencies les will have le discretion to deny applications or extract concessions from developers. Also, unlike a development agreement, a ve.ting map 10 not teferenaable. 19. _QUESTION, CAN C ' REQUIRE A DEVELOPER To ENTER INTO A DEVELOPMENT AGR MEN AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL OF' A "VESTING- }� Probably not. F37ING MAP? ANStyEitt 20. UESTIONr WE HAVE HAD TO CHANGE OUR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TCS , COMP WIT' CHANGES IN STATE OR FEDERAL LAW. IF WE HAVE TO DO THIS able to reavire redesign, or you may need to stop the project (Sots. 6649E.1(e),, and 66'i98.6(b)). 27 "iH__ 21. UQ ESTIONt THIS IS A STATE•MANDATHD COST. HOW DO WE PAY FOR IT? • AN5-w -.Ti- 7ew Sec. 66498.8, and uncodified Sec. 11 of the Nll tpeedlcally autiwrite- _ e tIT es and counties to charge developers who file "vesting" maps an amount sufficient to cover the cost al enacting a local ordinance, so you mat wish to determine those costs, - and to work out reimbursement either with your local builders' assoelazwn or with %he first several builders who apply for "vesting" maps. 22. 9UESTIONi UNDER CURRENT LAW (GOVERNMENT CODE SECTIONS 63925 and, 0940 et seq.) OUR COUNTY OR r ITY MUST SI:PPLY DEVELOPERS WITH INFORMATION DESCRIBING WHAT IS NEEDED TO FILE � COMPLETE APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT, AND MUST INFORM A DEVELOPER WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER ' AN APPLICATION IS FILED WH•t,THER THAT APPLICATION 1S COMPLETE. H0W DOES THIS BILL AFFECT THAT LAW? ANSWER: It does not, but you may need to update your local lists if you require more m ornsaTion for a "vesting map." 23. QUESTION: NEW GOVERNMENT CODE SECTIONS 66432.6(g) and (h) PROVIDE ., THA OPER KEEPS THE RIGHTS CONFERRED BY A "VESTING" MAP IF HE O1 SHF. -ILES A "COMPLETE" APPLICATION FOR A BUILDING PERMIT WITHIN A ' ' CERTAIN TIME PERIOD AFTER THE FINA. MAP IS APPROVED, AND THE DEVELOPER'S RIGHTS REMAIN FIXED WHILE THAT PERMIT 1S BEING PROCESSED. HOW DO WE DETERMINE WHETHER AN APPLICATION FOR A BUILDING PERMIT 1S "COMPLETE"? ANSV /ER: State law does not usually require c suntles or cities to list what Is requiredT�a-73 permit to be complete. You may wash to review your city's or county's current building permit application requirements anJ {+r a epave list of the requirements, to be used for reference gy both your still and by applicants, • 24. UESTION: SECTIONS 66498.2 and 66498.4 AUTHORIZE A DEVELOPER TO APPLY FOR N A NDMENT TO A "VESTING" MAP BEFORE THE "VESTING" RIGHTS EXPIRE, AND AUTHORIZE A LOCAL AGENCY TO GRANT OR DENY THOSE CHANGES. WHAT CONDITIONS MAY WE ATTACH TO SUCH AN APPLICATION? ANSWER: You may wish to provide local standards and procedures for processing latch appucattons, perhaps distinguishing between substantial and Insubstantial changes, and specifying whether such changes lengthen or do not lengthen the vesting period. 23. UESTION: THE FEES WE CHARGE DEVELOPERS CHANCE FROM TIME TO TIME, BOY IN NATURE AND AMOUNT. CAN W8 APPROVE THE MAP IN A WAY THAT WILL ALLOW US TO CHANGE THE FEES IN EFFECT AT THE TIME A BUILDING PERMIT ISJSSUED, RATHER THAN WHEN THE MAP IS APPROVED? ANSWER: Th4t depends. With regard to that amount of a partic•!,, fee, the map approva'T'en Probably 1l contain a condition that the amount of the fee Is to be determined at the oailding permit • stage. However, new fees probably cannot be added at the building permit stage except ' for public health or safety reasons er to comply with state or federal law (Sacs.: • 66498.1(c) and 66498.6). 28 - 3.:.4 ?,(>�l'�tit�S(L °.:., +r •. _w sit./.': ., �� /� a r� 1' r• r ORDINANCE NO. ;? 9 7 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL Ogg THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ADDING CHAPTEI(�19 TO THE SUDD "VISION ORDINANCE, TITLE 16 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE, PERTAINING TO VESTING TENTATIVE MAPS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Y SECTION 1: Title 16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is here y amended t0 add a new Chapter 49, to be read, in words and figures, as follewa: "Sections: 16.49.010 16 49.020 16 49.030 16.49.040 16 49.050 16.49.06C 16.49.070 16.49.08C 16.49.090 16.49.100 16.49.110 "I& eo n.1 "Chapter 16.49 "VESTING TENTATIVE. MAPS Citation aid authority. Purpose and intent. Application of chapter. Definitions. Conaistancy with city regulations. Filing and processing. Foes. Expiration. Rights granted on approval of map. Inconsistency with Zoning - Conditional approval. Applications Inconsistent with current policies. This chapter is enacted 4.5 (comme0cinq with `section 66498.1) of the California Government Code (herein- after referred to as the Vesbinq Tentative Map Statute), and may be cited as the 'venting tentative map ordinance.' "16.49.020. Purpose and intent. It is the purpose of this chapter to eota s procedures nacr3sary for the implementation of the Vesting Tentative Map Statute. Except as otherwise set forth in the provisions of this chapter, the provisions of this subdivision ordinance shall apply to the vesting tentative map ordinance. ' r{ *..4 mar'.. y..':a• :; r : _�,"r -1- Y: :,;Sj b� Ordinance No. Page 2 16.49.030. A lication of the tor. ' c epter e a app y on y to residential aovelop- munts. Whenever a provision of the Subdivision `Sap Act, an implemented and supplemented by the subdivision urdinnnce, requires the filing Jt a tentative map or tentative parcel map for a rosidentia) development, a vesting tentative map may instead be filed in accordance with the provieiona herein. "(b) S£ a subdivider de,,a not seek the rigqhts conferred by this chapter, the otherwlsu applicable pzoviaione of the subdivision ordinance shall apply. "16.49.040. Definitions " a vest ng tontac va map' shall moan a 'tentative MOP' for a residential subdivision, as dofinnd in the subdivision ordinance, and which is thereafter processed in accordance with the Provisions of this chapter. "(b) Except as specifically set forth in this chapter all definitions in the subdivision ordinance will be applicnble herein. "16.99.050. Consistent with city requlatlona. No land • shall be su v rd-ea an eve oped pursuant to westing tontative map for any purpose which is inconsistent with thn general plan or any applicable specific plan or community plan and which is not permitted by the development ccdo or other applicable provisions of this code. "16.49.060. piline end rocessin . A vesting tentative map shaiS15F-JrJle-d -J the same form anUhave the sumo contents, accompanying data and reports and shall be the in the same manner as set forth in the subdivision ordinance for a tentative map except as hereinafter provided: "(a) At the time a vesting tentative map is filed it shall have printed conspicuously on its face the words ' veating tentative mup.' "(b) simultaneous with, or prior to, the time a vesting tentative map is filed, a subdivider shall supply completed applications for all discretionary use entitlements necessary for the project, including, but not limited to, uae permits, development /design review, amendments to the general plan or . y applicable specific plan or community y plan, zone changes, {j :a( -2- yy. 4//7 i ,l oaf Ordinance No. Pago 3 amendments to the devolopment code, etc., togr:hor with all complete information necessary to process, as applicable, a negative declaration or draft e.cvironemtal iopact report pursuant to the terms of the California. Environnnntal Quality Act. ' "(c) A subdivider may submit a cemplato application for a building permit at the time of filing an provided in tnis section{ however, under no circumstances shall such pe.mit, if issued, grant vesting rights at specified in th` chapter. "10.49.070. Pees. Upon filing a vasting tentative map, the subdivider sFi-I pay the foes required by that resolution of the city council for the filing and proceiming of a tentative map. "16.49.000. Expiration. The approval or conditional approval o1 a vesting�tentattive nap shall expire two (2) years from the data of its adoption by resolution. Extentions of a vesting tentative map shall be subject to those procedures in the subdivision ordinance applicable to tho extension of tentative maps. " 16.49.090. Rights ranted on .a rival of mao. "� 3 0 p �a or con tone approve o e. vesting tentative map shall confor a vested right to process a final map and procood with development in substuntlal compliance with the ordinances, policies, and standards described in Government Code Section 66474.2. "However, if Section 66474.2 of the Government Code is repealed, the approval or conditional approval of a vasting tentati•e map shall coniar a vested right to '�r�-e4s a `tnal sap and proceed W th devalopme.'it in sabstr,sttal .om{Icanco with t`.-s land use ordihdaees, polieien, o- 1 a•-dards nfiect at t)ie time the veering tentative •: p f . ..pprrved u- u.)na.;fonally approved. ; "(b) Notwithstanding subdivision. (..), , yaaut, appro"al, i extension, or entitlement may be made cone. -: ^na. or denied if any of the following are determined: "(1) A failuro to do so wi)uld p15ce the residents "? of a subdivision or the immediate community, or both, in a _ {{ - ondition dangerous to their health or safety, or both, r yk Ordinan-o No. Payo 4 "(2) The condition or denial is required, in order to comply with state or federal law. "(c) The rights referred to in this section shall accrue only if, and at the time, a final map iv approved for the project. Such rights referred to herein shall expire if final map is not approved prior to the e:riratfon of the vesting tentative map au providsd in Section 16.45.080. "(d) If the final map is approved, these rights shall rmYain vested for the following parlods of times "(1) An initial time period of twelve (12) months. Where reveral final map are ocorded on various phnsas of a p,oje,:t covered by a single vesting tentative map, this initial time period shall begin for each phase when the final map for that phase is recorded. "(2) The initial time periou sot forth in (d) (1) shah` be automatically extended by any time uced for processing a complete application for a gr -.)ing permit or for design or architectural r -v-ew, if ruch processing exceeds 30 days, from t -• date a complete appltcation is filed. "(3) A subdivider may apply to the City Council for a one -year extension at any tints before the initial time period set forth in (d)(1) expires. "(G) If the subdivider submits a complete applica- tion-for a building permit during the periods of time specified subsections d)(1) -(3), above, the rights referred to herein shall v. continue until the expiration of that ,permit, or any extension of that permit. -(a) whenever a subdivider files a vesting tentative map for a subdivision whose intended development is inconsistent with the development code in existence at that time, that Inconsistency shall be noted on the Mau. The City shall deny such t. vesting tentative map or approve it conditioned on the .-A subdivider, or his or her designee, obtaining the necessary 1'it?y'li t• 'l�i:�.'S�.�iiii_ i �..�L p�}`t. � _ .�,ri' 'j,tA it=�'r:a. �^, •{ �.y.F WSJ— .:AYr�'%..Y „� �°41'.+�.i:..� .d'. .e.:}.c ,9 :.V tiS� -•Y 4 ttr r� I Ordinance No. - Pago 5 change in the development code to elimirata the inconsistency. If the change in the development code is obtained, the approved or conditionally approved vesting tentative map ahall notwithstanding Section 16.49.090(x), confer the vestal right to process a final map and proceed with the development• in sub - atantial t-ompliance with the change in the development code and lie map, ar approved. "(b) The rights con_farred by this sectiin shall be for the time periods set forth in Section 16.49.090(d). property owner or his or he.r designee +may VSeek iappprovals� or permits fer development which depart from the ordinances, policies, and standards described in Sectinis 16.49.090(x) and 16.49 100 and local agencies may grant thesrt approvals or issue these permits to the extent that the departures are authorized under .applicable law. SECTION 21 The provielons of Chapter 49 of Title 16 .hall become operative as of January 1, 1986. SECTION 3a The City Council declares that, should any prcais oni saction, paragraph, sentence or word of this ordin;m - be rendered or declared invalid by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions, sections paragraphs, sentences, and words of this ordinance shall remain , in full force and effect'. of this OrSEna3i" SECTION 4: and Clerk torbefpublishedadoption within fifteen t15) days after its adoption at least once in The Dail Re oit, a newspaper of general cit ;ulation published n t e ty o Ontario, and circulated in too City of Rancho Cucamonga. PASSED and ADOPTED this __ da,. of , 1985., Mayor - ra_- `�#;(�'1b � eA?,.%.�'ie ii.+!::��,tt \i�5i.. �r: r� r •n •;`..hL'�.'a +i �Y'_1�.(9 ni Y` r A — C1 TY uF RA4!�Pn �•n 'A 1u r `n, q SLUT REi ,A DATE: November 6, 1985 197i� �I TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer I SUBJECT: ORDINANCE AFFORDING TO THE DEER CREEK COMPANY CREDIT TOWARDS S(STEMS DEVELOPMENT FEIS At tFu Council's October 16, 1985 meeting, tho Councii approved issuance of a GoalgSt Street Credit required the aeecondit on Co. for developmentioforf Tentative sTract 12001. At the same time, Council directed the City Attorney to prepare the necessary documentation to effect this credit. The attached ordinance is the recommended action proposed by the City Attorney. RFCONIENOATIAN Staf f recornwds approval of Ordinance Affordi•rg to the Beer Creek Company Credit Towards Systems Development Fees. Re 9etful.w "L 4ed LBH�aa Attachments iifGSi' Cw': �n. riM. idn ':��: ✓..t'•�•u�'�`�1%i`i:•; ".., ... ` ��/ r. R t.:.l S^.',',i';!'`��. J RW p - ORDINANCE NO.�0 A:' ORDINANCE OF THE CGUNCIL OF Tilt CITr OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AFFORDING TO THE DEER CREEK COM,IANY A CREDIT APPLICABIZ TO SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT FEES A. Aacitalo. (i) Chapter 3.28 cf :he Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code requires the payment of Systems Development fees in con- junction with epproval of subdivisions and in accordance with a fee schedule adopted by this Council by resolution. (i1) As a condition of approinl of Tentative Tract 12d01, the Deer Crjok Compan, has been roquire to provide a City standard cul -de -sac on GpLI Street rather _13n construct - Ing Opal Street as a througt street. (iii) in addition to the condition specified In Recital (11) above, Door Creek Company hna been required by the City's Planning Commission to provl:e pedestrian access to • Alta Loma .junior High School. This to this Council that City's a th DeerCreek Companyibe afforded aesystems Development fee credit in the amount of $16,777.00 duo to the Commission's finding that the requir.imenta referred to in Recitals (i) and (11) above were not generated by the develop- , ment of the subject tentative tract but, rather, met certain public concerns and therefore constituted an unusual condition and exaction in conjunction with approval of that tentative tract. the Deer Cree h purpose to k Companythecr ordinance t afford edit referredtoaboveinthisOrdi- nance. B. Ordinance. Cucamonga does her by fi t Rancho find, determine andordainyasffollowps I. This Council specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this ordinance are true and correct. s Y f� I; 1 . Z r a 2. It heroby is ordained that the Door Crock Comp • shall he afforded a credit against its othercaise requirod' any amount 1$16,pment too applicable to Tract No. 12801 in the amount of $16,77`! OJ. this Ord1nrncn vidCaholl lcauseh certify of the same be the passage within ;iftoo:: (15) days after its paesago at !oast once inh7hewLgl`y �2pr`, a newspaper :f general circulation published in ^,o City MY ntar:a CnJ'•oraaar, and circulated it! the City of Ran,:ho Cu ^a•aonn• t " min. 31, 1 and .110^ "i:D . in da: of Mayor — "" --• -, BEVE,o:i A. AUTRELET. City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, fro hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance was intrud:rced at a radu).nr mnetinq of the City Council of the City of R:u,cho Cucamonga held on the day of 198`, and was final!1 passnd at a reguTar' meeting o e o ty� Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hold on the 1985, bl the following vote: day of AYCS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: LACES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBER §: ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBE:iB: ATTEST: Bever y A. Aac a at, C t C er of the City of Rancho Cucamonga ;a a n �a i CITY OF RANCHO CUCA31ONCTA aia STAFF REPORT r4,% y: . L LL C DATE: November 6, 1985 1977 r0: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director BY: Dan Coleman, Senior Planner SUBJECT: APPEAL REMOVAL PERMIT 85 -39 TRACT 11626 - RAMONA apnrova o a permit to removepselectedatrees Within Tract 11626 located un the north side of Almond, at the ten .ous of Beryl. I. ADSfRACT: The Planning Division approved the selective remo%ai of certaln desires to retain all Trtreeslfor their windbreak benefit nd as ha natural habitat for migratory birds. This report analyze, the • approval pursuant to removal e criteria ofrTrees Preservation Ordinance f37 and the Conditions of Approval of the Tract. II. BACKGROUND: Tentative Tract 11626 was approved on July 27, 1987 whim ice— condition that "existing trees (except citrus trees) shall be retained wherever possible ...a The develoner. Rairnna Sanvcrn Eucalpytus,e8mfeet onnc ntereas shown onithe attachednExhibitd "Co. III. ANALYSIS: The i'ollowing criteria are the current basis for Ova ua ng a tree removal request: Criteria: Whether or not the tr -s could he preserved by pruning F-5-7-That removing. Comment- Those trees being removed are those which cannot be ppreserved because of conflict with street improvements, driveways, house pads, and grading. Criteria: Whether or not such tr ^.es constitute a significant nature resource of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. r ; )4 I 'ITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Tree Removal Peewit 85 -39 ( Tract 11626) November 6, 1985 Page 2 Comment: Staff has investigated the site on numerous occasions and eterm ned tint the trees at part of an extensive windrow network both a and off site. Replacement with the Past - growing ;potted Gum Eucalptus tree will minimize the impact on the aesthetics of removal upon the neighborhood. In addition, certain windrows are preserved wherever possible as indicated in the attached Exhibit "C'. Twanty -two acres of heavily wooded canyon are heing maintained in the project as open space. Criteria: General condition and health of the trees. Comment: Trees appear healthy, yet unmaintained. Large ,pecimen trees average 30 -35 inches in trunk diameter and over 50 feet in height. Criterla: Incidence of and health or safety hazard to persons, i,T&Ent property, or utility installations. Comment: Past incidence unknown: hcweve., the Blue Gum Eucalyq.tus +, trees are characteristically a flra haz•ird and a potential safety hazard to parsons and property .•,:•,se of blow down and branch drop, especially in proximity to - encial development. - Criteria: Proximity and number of otho,• trees in the vicinity and We - 1771ty of the soils to adequately support existing vegetation. Comrcnt: The trees are part of an extensive windrow system in the area -ea Gu¢ Eucalyptus trees are no': suited for developed areas because of the changes in the environment (e.g. watering) which is detrimental to the growth characterlt•tics of the tree and the potential hazard to persons or property the soils are adequate to support the existing vegetation. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for Tentative Tract 11026 which contained a detailed•biolonical analysis of plant and animal resources pre< t on the site (sae attached excerpts). The appellant claims that the trees are a I:nowm habitat for migratory birds such as the White Owl and certain species of hawks. Further, the appellant contends that the cutting down of these trees would be in violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Field inspection during preparation of the Environmental Impact Report did not ` detect any species of wildlife designated rare, endangered or threatened by the California Department of Fish and Game or by the p U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Wswever, certain species of wildlife, potentially occurring on the site are designated or under consideration for designation as sensitivo by various state and try. fedsral agencies and conservation groups. Additionally, a number of a n species afforded special status by the federal government," .tr state of California or National Audubon Society were observed "or an 11 ri 0 1, I BATE: TO: i FROM: BY SUP IECT: i -- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIIIONGA STAFF REPORT 1 r 4 November 6, 1985 1977 Mayer and Members of the City Co•mcil Jack Lam, AICP, Commnity Development Dirictor Jan Coleman, Senior Planner APPEAL OF TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 85-39 (TRACT 11626) - RAMONA 1 xwvlct LURPURA11UN - An appeal oy a resiaeM ofd approval o a perm t to remove selected trees within Tract 11526 lncated on the north side of Almind, at the terminus of Beryl. I. ABSTRACT: The Planning Division approved the selective reraval of certain trees within Tract 11626. The appellant, M chael :arrlsh, desires to retain all trees for their windbreak benefit and as a natural habitat for migratory birds. This report analyzes the appeal, the tree removal permit request, and the reasons for approval pursuant to the criteria of Tree Preservation Ordirance 37 and the Conditlnns of Approval of the Tract. 11. BACKGROUND: Tentative Tract 11626 was approved on July zi, 193 WFi-tte condition that 'existing trees (except citrus trees) shall be retained wherever nnssible ... • Ina dnvelaonr_ Ronne, tnrvlre agreed to rep ac ng t ese trees w t minimum 15 gallon Spatted Gum Cucalpytus, 8 feet on center, as shown on the attached Exhibit "C °. III. ANALYSIS: The following criteria -are the current basis for eva— Tuating a tree removal request: Criteria: Whether or not the trees could be preserved by pruning ra L et(�r that r?mov:ng. Comment: rose trees being removed are those which cannot be preserved because of conflict with street improvements, driveways, house pads, and grading. Criteria: Whether or not such trees constitute a significant r natnra resource of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. I c;-7 _ W jw 'r% CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT^ '' } a•t *' Tree Removal,Permit 85 -39 (Tract 11(26) November 6, 1985 Page 3 ' are expected to utilize the site. The status of these species and - EhelThe EIRoccurrence Id Identifies that the removal of ttebcitrus orchAppendix d and Eucalyptus wirdrows would represent a loss of cover, forage, and nesting sites for a variety of wildlife species, particularly birds. The mitigation measures contained in the Environmental Impact Report include the retention of the 22 acres (25X) of the site as Permanent open space in the heavily wooded channel that traverses the site, and replacement of the Blue Gum Eucalyptus trees with other Eucalyptus species which are more suitable to landscaping requirements and less prone to create a fire hazard. The EIR was certified as adequate and complete following duly noticed public hearings Wildlife Management staff person, Martha Pletcher, of the California Department of Fish and Game was contacted by staff regarding the provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The Act protects the natural habitat for migratory birds during their nesting season and overrides all City codes. The migratory birds common to this area include the Barn Owl and Red - Tailed Hawk (see attached Appendix E). The White Owl is not known to be common to this area and the EIR survey staff did not find evidence of its existence on this site. The Barn Owl and Red - Tailed Hawk commonly roost in the Eucalyptus windrows prevalent to the foothill areas. immediate area�to provlde-a nesting habitat for migratory birds. the IV. RECOMMENOATION• It is recoamended that the City Council review and consider TT_glements of the appeal and tree removal oermit _ Res�reques . ectfi. y submitted, , - .JadKLam Ccmmunity Deve opment Director JL:DC:jr Attachment: Appeal Letter Tree Removal Permit Letter Exhibit 'A' - Locaton Flap Exhibit 'B' - photographs Exhibit 'C' - Tree Pian EIR Excerpts .ti 1 J October 21, 1085 Me. Beverly Authelet City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Baseline Road Rancho LLcaawnga, Calif. 51730 Dear Ms. Auth. let, RE, TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 85 -39 (TT 11626) With regard to your letter of October 17, 1965, we are confused. In the original letter which we the residents of Caballero Drive received (copy enclosed), there is no mention of any appeal fee. Futhermore, we the residents of Caballero Drife nejd to know if each party interested in this Issue must pay the appeal foe in order to be haardT The rc, ?c.- for this question is th.lt I am responding on behalf of a number of ccncorned residentr. we will await your reply. /JRaspectfnlly yours, / Michael L. Parrish MLP /dl cc... Kohlbrand, 8utt0ra a Lnmbort Attorneys at Law Enclosures J�Sai'�fr.iPi, lilll•+. 1. cm of RANC � 9 E D /'3M)NI kgT,V ONGA OCT 22 J Y sY k ;ate ;:.�• �i`_s`: J�:,j, r�eU.» at� >, w,�r r «.. .7wi _.. .' Jti .L•• ":,':a',',i':e�h.!3��S��Ci ✓' CITY f :•-,RANCHOCUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM F4 z J 199:7 77 October 17, 1985 'f 1 Michael L. Parrish 'r 8984 rabal7aro Drive Rancho Cecswvga, CA 91701 C Dear Mr. Parrisbt The City of Rancho Cucaeungs has received your lettaL stating your desire to appeal Tree Removal Permit 85 -39. gwever, you failed to enclose a check for the appeal fee. Once 1 have received your check for $52.00 which is the amount of the appeal fee, then I will process the appeal. You will be notified once the date of the appeal has been set. If you have further questions regarding this matter, please call. Sincerely, r Au�{4z Beverly X. tbale • City Clerk, ; XV a I 4 ,r. c October 15, 1985 City Clark City' of RiSCha Cucamonga 9320 Basoline Road Raa,ho Cucamonga, Calif. 91730 RE: TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 65-39 (T: 11626) CITY OF N RANCHO CUCAMONGA ONGA ' ADMINISTR, TICIN AM OCT F 71385 191�Ill1�j1j2i3t4i6pu PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE 37, 1 AM HEBEBy FIL12:G AN APPEAL TO SUSPEND ABC. ^o REFERENCED PERMIT. THERE ARE TWO HAJOR REASONS WHY I BELIEVE THE TREES SHOULD BE LEFT STANDINGt 1• THE TRL'S AS THEY NOW STAND PROVIDE A SUBSTANTIAL WI23) BREAK FOR THE Itches IOCA:79 IN THE AREA. IF THEY ARE REMOVED A MAJOR FACTOR IN WIND CONTROT, �l FOR 771E AREA MIC.L 210 LONGER EXIST AND DAMAGE Tt, EXISTING STRUCTURES WILL OCCUR. 2. TIE TREES ARE A KNOWN HABITAT FOR MIGRATORY BIRDS SUCH AS THE WRITE OWL AND CERTAIN SPECIES OF HAWKS. IF DURING THE CUTT2210 DOWN OF THESE TREES ANY NESTS OR RUSTING AREA WOULD BE DAMAGED OR CAUSE TO DAMAGE ANY MIGRATORY BIRD, THAT WOULD PLACE NAMUR SERVICE CORPORATION AND THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA IN VIOLATION OF THE MIGRATORY BIRD TREATY ACT - TITLE 16 OF THE UNITED STASES CODE, SECTION 7R3. I WODLO APPRECIATE BEING KEPT ADVISED OF ANY ACTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA WITH REJARD TO THIS MATTER. sr= `fir YOURS, Michael L. Parrish n ^' !U3 1d1 rl , California Department of Fish and Game .T" United States Piah and Wildlife .�: YS,{°:�i =�C.Yv°` -�(i i'v ..+�hrw =:: �Y� - .r,�wl ._ `O, .u. eK���:� •.. • t� a (j P.ec:1a - Date /0_ /ro^ Meeting Prod. best. Conversation ?hone 1JO. Time Name I . /.. .11103resentin LII�iS1 ,y, 'r a >4'� � CITY OF RANCHO CUCAiMONGA L- "vl iF r 3: iP � l'1urk.J. Itm url It 16rWd 31.16h1 Jrffm, Klap V=tu J. nrirht October 7, 1985 Mr John , !roan Ramona Service Corporation 5384 E. Chapman Avenue Orange, California 92669 RE: TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 85 -39 (TT 11626) Dear Mr. Zleman: Thank you for submitting a tree removal permit for your Tract 11626. The Planning Division has reviewed your application, tree site plan, and inspected the site. Your application has been reviewed for consistency with the Tree reasons Preservation Ordinance f(,r street and a the removal, Such as alloapproval ig f your tract. sidewalk improvements as well as removing trees that would be located in potential building pad areas, are consistent with the intent of Ordinance 137. Therefore, Tree Ret�oval Permit 85 -39 has been approvnd subject to all Eucalyptus trees that are removed from the property shc1i be replaced with minimum 15- gallon Spotted Gum Eucalyptus, 8 feet on center as follows: 1. Trees shalt me planted at ti;e southerly property line of Lots 4 -14, adjacent to, but not encroaching into the equestrian trail. 2. Trees shall be planted at the westerly property line of Lots 65, 58, & 25. 3 _ but shall be aching into, the equestrian easements of Lots d62 and 17. Adjacent property owners, under the provisions of Ordinance 37, have a 10 -day period in which to appeal the approval of this permit. Any appeal must be altted in writing to the City Clerk's office within 10 calendar days be t letter. Such filing of an appeal shall a�rt;.ltically suspend the permit issued until action thereon 1s taken by the City Council. If no appeals are of received, then this permit shall become effective 10 days from the date of this Letter and shall be valid for a period of 90 days. lASELt,YC ROAD, SunZ C. POSr nF'FICE Onx D07• i,_ {�_ ,,,y f•, t Rl \CIIO CCCAUIONGA, CALIFORNIA line •,pill /Dft131t t. ?a:�L°_'J„�r ^i;'•, .t�till.�.s -3,\ 'rte -.:. c',r ,_tis.., � r =R461 4g : SERVICEi• .CORP �i't; 5 A{c Y "TREREMOVA0 PERMIT-85� - 39;; S (i �7 o c7 y, i,2,. ,172 o �a+�r ,.a'�: ' °: '"l:`• ._ `w+` - :.C'4,1=�''� � w'" 1LC'f," `.� � �, N � 11626)" October 7, 1985 Page 2 i If you should have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to `+ contact Chris Nestman at (714) 989 -1961. Sincerely, II UNITY ELOPMENT D ARTINENT e /117 G DIV 17 / n j Senior Planner OC:ko cc: Adjacent Property Owners �3a ,'rtn r�= r, 0 �r s. a ; RA140MA SERVI TREE REMOVAL October 7, 1 Page 2 3RP. 41T 85 -39 (T( 11626) Miguel Carrari, Box 33, Alta Loma, CA 91701 Gertrude Hartman, 1000 N. Paint, Apt. 801, San Francisco, CA 94109 106 -331- 13 Robert Benzian, P.O. Box 5007, Upland, CA 91786 12 Robert Combe, 8922 Caballero, Alta Loma, CA 91701 11 Wayne Geradicn, 8938 Caballero, Alta Loma, CA 91701 10 William Van Wey, -8954 Caballero, Alta Loma, CA 91701 9 George Cardin, 8968 Caballero, Alta Loma, CA 91701 8 Michael Parrish, 8984 Caballero, Alta Loma, CA 91701 7 Anthony Jaworovsky, 8998 Caballero, Alta Loma, CA 91701 6 Frank Schultz, 1882 N. Redding Way, Upland, CA 91785 5 Steven Nichols, 9024 Caballero, Alta Loma, CA 91701 4 Sammy Olguin, 9040 Caballero, Alta Loma, CA 91701 3 William Jueschke, 1334 N. Tonne, Claremont, CA 91711 2 James McBride, 9072 Caballero, Alta Loma, CA 91701 1 Terry York, 9086 Caba,lero, Alta Loma, CA 91701 1061 -791- 5 Barmakian Company, 9375 Archibald, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 1061 -771- 11 Ernest Ochoa, 9111 Almond Street, Alta Loma, CA 91701 12 David Halgren, 9125 Almond Street, Alta Loma, CA 91701 13 Beatrice Lopez, 9139 Almond Street, Alta Lama, CA 91702 14 Craig Andreiko, 9153 Almond Street, Alta Lama, CA 91701 15 Rene i:velVn- Veere, 9167 Almond Street, Alta Loma, CA 91701 16 Larry llu6hy, 9181 Almond Street, Alta Loma, CA 91701 17 Joseph Schwab, 9195 Almond Street, Alta Lorna, CA 91701 20 Rafael Zepeda, 9211 Almond Street, Alta Loma, CA 91701 '•,'�v�'_1,�„��'�`- .''.,aifi `ir Y`Y�'�`rl?ir �� .t4�i'F , + 7 � :L: ',.r. va Ai ..j ii �•' r' N - -/` {3:::t�ti(�1'�r_F'1 `.(i'r':..v�r��t~��%.� 1 's2—t li I''i �C, ILL., rl �•j^ 3J � J�v 1. I I I 1 ^�.�� .. :Y ,.�.. V��%'.c. • `v.' I �C .ICJ s I . $' C 7s..• ^a, , . o y^ s' , p qz 1• E t, fill, ' =' 11 �1 .'I Q P 11 11, !.. E: IR t n ",{�yy "'•F; i . _ _ �'C. .. �a':, p >., - ve .�=' °C., .a., _�. _ ,yy.,yf .i.. c llpA 7]', 7,7 1 T �rrE Ilium NORTH r• _ ITE,1, `ll- llGZ�o t' CITY OF RA\CHO Ci:CAv10\GA T, (Tbh1 P"NNING ixk"I N \HINT" $GU E, l �� .r�?.�'-;,iLWiF1 i�'— R."^•�S•t;�4�:V0i.�.f: -Il�4X' ^��+'s• � ♦`�, ..i�: � 3d !RV i1 l l y� i 3 r� 0 ,i l c13iro . , j M Y. • CO .= tp a. _ Q�Q C) ox 0 I- v Oti =� r it !. I k�'" \", -vii', �t+ ,��,� � ;_o qf� C�•�11 :r'•�`,. "• , 's'= ' =`., > . _ x-11( 1 -. ' � �� It j••:j ;.j,.t . Vi a. P i{i�� -fit ,�i•�• c'I Il :�i- �i I , i" Wt . . « i; C : il;iij .. ..� .n cif • � Q`ti.'I��'. �, i` I ��`f �J' �4gaf�7 L u II til .l _ 'l.. I i, .n:S =Y 41. i :t- _ '' •� , [.�^� _ . / ^ -� I'a: •, r'aL� i 1, �'-'!�' ! � -,"PA \'. � l`GC> •`, �'f'> • : _'1(I•lj:/,113[ 1' LI�� { +, •f !,� � 1 f �'',a .:SU }r eg��_I ..'''I �, �: Z.1 y t1i f i jl ���{ � �! flij7 � 1�zy1� a ,� • r- ..,-.- . I" i = += - '- ��Ifilll;!•i1t'!!'1�'I I y d I �� :, .�, , e; ,, -F �•�i� .nt •. � _' r, f h ! I,�l,I silt f, t $! W ,�i�\ �:�'l':t �1i� la \ ,. ;. klf •:il .. % • �" !1 ' s ! 1 ij Iii! I t,i j:�,lljl Lx 't� ` z�•:.�• `!- �'- I:II !t! !sJ! (11i1 ! f w � ;�'; i . .,(; �•'- _,:.v,s::- •- ✓�C �N,c tip I , �� � ! ,rim qc f; {�� !,I;b q3 7 Native oak and sycar,ore trees are considered a valuable natural tesoure._roycthe • California Department of Fish and Game and tarloL natural r management agencies. Those that occur on the site have been discussed in an ^.arlier section of this report. Wildlife: No species of wildlife designated rare, endangered or threatened by the nia Department of Fish and Game or by the D.S. Fish erd Wildlife Service was detected by the survey. However, certain species of wildlife potentially oenurring on the site are designated or under consideration for designation as sensitive by various state and federal agennies and conservation grou ps Additionally, a number of avian species afforded special status by the tedttal government, state of California or National Audubon Society were observed or are expected to utilize the site. The status of these species the site Is summarized In Table E -3 of Appeniiz E. and their occurrence on Habitats; Rlperin woodland haoltat Is generally recognized by the scientific comm—wi ty end public agencies as a valuable and &^,lining resource In southern Callfounla. This habitat serves an important role in providing cover end nesting, perching, roosting and foraging areas for wildlife. This habitat has been discussed earilet and Its location Is depleted in Exhibit 9. The - ':.mcourses giving rise to the riparian habitat oesite are del!naated on DSGS topographic maps as Intermittent streams. Any contemplated alteration of streams nt designated requires consultation with the State of Cnlltornia Department of Fish and Game. Defined as alterations are direct changes In the stream channel, in addition to site modifications which would lessen or Increase strum flow, cause sedimentatInn or deteriorate water quality. 3.3.2 lmaeets Vegetation Implementation of the Proposed project would require removal of the orchmc,, vinoyards, and certain of the accompanying eucalyptus windrows occupying the majority of the site. A Significant port on of northern ridge .the eucalypty windrow along the llne would De removedfor construction ut of this equestrian Dlstf:easement, losg the wpoland edgea�Construc0 -1001 strip ree %culvert across Fire PrineiP21 drainage iri C,e southeastern portion of the property will result In the loss c! a relatively small percentage of the sltc's riparian habitat, lne!uding a few oek and Immature Sycamore trees. Additional loss of this habitat would occur along those channel slopes requiring erosion control Improvement (e.g., grouted rip rap). ,term (25 for ultimate Of retention ms Permanent open space are , PProzimately 22 Percent) of the site, constituting the majority of the natNI! bnuhland and riparian habitat preset. It can be antic d ted that a secondary by- product of the proposed change In lend _ Opportunity for invasion of adjacent natural habitat by undesirable providing �-, contalned In the C t 9 of suCceSsional General Plan habitat a 130). aWn is discouraged by policies ' r' y (see page 130). •. g' -20- V3 -3-21- - „w y.391 wean � - Constrution activity would dE:turb all wildlife In the vIcWty and many can be ' hab!cat It is available at expected to move to adjacent areas of similar provided the onset of activity. 1vUdUfe which do emigrate are particularly vulndrablo .o for food •snd territory. mortWtry by predation and unsuccessful competition s of low and those reftrue of burrowing mammeifand outright preparation., This is Particularly most amphibians and ePtUes. Following construction, some species would return to -the developed portion of the though most would be dislodged permanently by site If suitable habitat is Present, removal of habitat sulted to their existence. Among the native members of the souhern California fauna ground known squirrel their M tiont, y coyote, to black -tailed Jackrabbit, arer the western toad, slender salamander and various species of finches, towhees and woodpeckers. To the extent that they are tolerant of the eighboring th urban environment, native ne fllowing wildlife would rerun to natural We. space and continuo to utllJze this habitat Provided it remains relatively construction unaltered and free of excessive human disturbance. Removal of the orchards and eucalyptus windrows would represent a loss of cover, The forage end nesting for significance of this Si ms is nca than would be the case for naturral habitat. The restricted variety of habitats Presented by the new urban1nec'vironmencould fauna comprising principally be expected t attract a rather simple species tolerant of human disturbance. Among those species that may be favored, environment are the Old World rat, I.,, term• of population increase, by the altered house mouse, rock don a (plScon), spotted dove, mockingbird, starling, crow, A variety of migrant songbirds could also Brewer's blackbird and ho,' sparrow. be expvetee to frequent the new habitat during certain times of the gear, are In the new particularly in areas where specimen size tees present landscaping. no establishment of an urban community adjacent to a relatively undisturbed roe to Conditions Conducive to Invasion by and ^ natural environment would give proliferation In the project vleinity of various non -native species of animals of which can be considered undesirable. Certain u„vluding domestic peC), mary species survival 1poteatial lfor to conditlora and represent the then on of, atnd mpetl tive exclusion of certain native species from, areas of natural habitat adjacent to tue proposed development. Indire AlY, wildlife populations in surronihir nffalte areas wood b0 affected of available habitat within the project area, as >: adversely by the genera! reduction wildlife from this area generally will be pressured to extend UW foraging range i Into these surrounding i e mpetition for food, water and nesting sitcs Incrsases.� wuavfe IbIW!a genera[! ntof runoff associated r with the proposed development niwould depend upon -3-21- - „w y.391 the quality if the water and Its Influence upon stream Ron velocitiol In the• natural drainage system. Properly managed urban runoff can serve as a source of water for certain species of wildlife which typically are tolerant of urban _ conditions. However, the lnttcduction of surface runoff Into'site drainages poses the possibility of onsite and dortnstrcam degradation of strea,a water quality ' through a variety of mechanisms including: 1) contamination by urban - generated pollutants (e.g., organics from roadway surfaces, etc.); 2) Incressed turbidity us a consequence of streamlank erosion and bottom scouring resulting from excessive flow velocities. Night lighting might be detrimental to animals In nearby,natural habitats for a varlaty of reasons. These Include disruption of light -dark dally rhythms and avoidance due to Increased exposure to bright lights. Some Insectivorous species benefit from lighting because It attracts and concei trates large num5ers of Insects for feeding purposesl however, the typical not effect of lighting Is that adjacent areas are utilized by wridilfe to less than their fullest extent. Although raptors as a group exhlbit a measure of capability In adapting to the activities of man in and adjacent to their habitat, they era nevertheless on balance adversely affected by urbanization and Its associated Influences. Construction activity and the Indirect effects of human habitation associated with the proposed development are all factors which 'could ba expected to exert an adverse impact upon raptors presently utilizing the site. 3.3.3 Mitlmtoe Measures r - The proposed project specifies the retention of 22 acres (25 percent) of the site as parmanont open space. Thia open space area contains the majority of natural I bubltat present on the site and will continue to function as a component of the area's natural ecology except In the Immediate vicinity, of new development. In addition to the foregaln` characterialle of the proposed project which represents an Inherently mitigative feature, certain additional measures are available to ameliorate partially the adverse Impacts Ascussed in the previous _ section. It is recommended that consideratjcn be given to Implementation of these measures. ,• 1. Efforts should be exercised to tie extent possible to avoid damage or + removal•of mature native oaks ano Sycamores from their present location on the site. it. compliance with the City of Raneho Cucamonga Tree ` Preservation C.•alnaaco, conslderahan should be given to replacement of removed trees, oy smaller boxed ape -Mmens in compatible areas. Potential new locations should be selected jt4elously by a qualified expert. Common avenues of damage to preservd oaks which must be avoided Includes I) overwatneng; 2) underwatertng; 3) soil compaction above root zone; 4) drainage dtaratlon; and 5) poisoning by weed Inhibitors used in conjunction with paving activities. 2. Flue gum eucalyptus trees should be gradually phased out and replaced S' with other eucalyptus species (e.g., E?cdtuss maculata) which are mare,,, ,"ts suitable to landsrapung requirements and less prone to create a t'Ire t hazard. Mun gum trees which are retained should be pruned and thlnned�° to promote continued good healtb and red:=s fire nozard. 3-22- ., -.• r YY' •jam•• JJyy a ry 0. Revegetation should be accomplished on all graded and cut and fill are" - where structures or Improvements are not constructed. Consideration should be given to the use of drought - adopted\ fire retardant plant materials vpeclaliy species nativo to the southern California foothills, contingent upon he ••aliabLLity of seed stocks and approval by epprjpriate ageneles actin; In the interest of fire control (the reader is referred to the dst provided to the Rancho Cucnmonga General Plan, page 100, for a Ilst of recommended species). if water - requiring Species are used for rapid growth, water injection ayatems should be considered for installatior. 4. Measures should be utilized which will mlydmize entry of sediment Into IInntroduction Of caPtd- developing oll- anchoring groundcove and strategic placement of runoff- retaining structures. S. Buffering of all natural onsite and offsita open space areas In a manner to discourage encroachm ant by the new human population should be acccmpllshM. Csulferatto�nsnh gementoofodomesticloPetnt�d� restrictions r^gnda ng With then intent of protecting the aOpenhspa�ce are" from thesaapot�antiaBY adverse influences. S. The potentially adverse effects of night lighting on surro•.mdirg open space are" should be mitigated by appropriate selectto:r among tAhe following alternativesr (a) street L'ghting only at intersections; (b) low Intensity street lamps; (c) low elevation lighting poles and (d) Th degree ytI Internal silvering of the glove or external opaque these measures are utilized should be dependent upon tire distance of the light source from the urban edge. U _3 -q0- �f�l 1 V \ H \ > � ! !!� ! | ƒ /) Aa| � � ! | . | ƒ�|t G�)|\ ! g, � ;/£j\�] | !]/ R / !\- ,• ! d | kd j | �]| � / ! d § § !' ƒ§K ,- ® - ® - - 94 ®} s , § s s s s s s 9 . .� .- - - - - \ @\ | 1 \� •` .! § § ! ! a § I° � f / 9 . .� .- - - - - \ @\ | 1 \� •` r" ry "r m s A IMIN As IN '■ '■ I■ 11 it in 'W iN II 'MIN ■ IR i IR _ a 0 N is i �t t ! a 9 E y o E �I F a � •h � �� � :� :I EI �I �I � �I � i� x� is Q 1� ft 1R x w * ■f * 1R w R w ■ /1 1R �l fll I x ryn Y I O q L :t if fit 1� �� 6! b': CIF E F �• ` Ri �r e b1 :\�� %1Y�L'I�Y•d�f `litleln wy� •� " G i�•9 fi A t ! {t Tiff lit ll 11Ei 1i 11 �i 1 1E 11111 i � t• Ifs �A1'� 3 ewt S m N V 8 ` 0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAAIONGA STAFF REPORT �z<' ir GATE: November 6, 1985 1977 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Jack Lan, AICP, Community Development Director BY: Rubin Yu, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DESIGNATION OF REGIONALLI SIGdIrICANT CONSTRUCTION URCE i LAR N -U L D D I I. ABSTRACT: This staff report provides information on the State's proposa to designate areas in the City and its 'Phere of Influence as regionally significant construction aggregate resources. Futhermore, the report recommends the City Council to adapt the wIthIntthe City limits ddSphere of Influence, off so desired. II. BACKGROUND: In September, 1915, the State of California diauosntSurface Mining Reclamation tanitw subsequelyamendedIn980 The Actauthorii s he State Mining and Geology Board to designate areas with significant construction aggregate resources. The process of the designation started e OfaInfluence were proposed ffor rthe des gnation (see Map 1 attached). The State Mining Board has scheduled a hearing for public testimony on the final designation on November 15, 1985, in Palm Springs. The local communities involved in the designation will have an opportunity to comment on the propose; designation. Therefore, the City Councils direction an no subject is requested. Tiie designation of - significant construction aggregate resources has profound implications in local land use. It means that local communities involved in the designation are to be required to amend their General Plans, adopt ordinances and issue permits in accordance with State's policies in mining operation and reclamation. ?, 111. ISSUES AND IMPLICATIONS: A. General Plan Asrendment Re uired: Once the designation process o'- a Teen cocp e e , o ate aw requires that local agencies establish mineral resource management policies In thelr general Plans that: CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CONSTRUCTION AGGREGATE RESOURCES November S, 1985 Page 2 0 1. Recognize the mineral information provided by the classification process; 2. Assist in the management of land use that affects areas of statewide and regional significance; and 3. Emphasize the conservation and development of the identified mineral deposits. The State law requires that local agencies develop and incorporate these Policies into their general plan t within 12 months of the receipt of the designation information from the State Board of Mining and Geology. Furthermore, local agencies are required to submit proposed mineral resource management policies to the Board for review and comment prior to adoption. B. Adoption of Ordinance in Accordance with State Policy Required: Once t e es gnat on process as een carp ete , the State Mining Board shall review local agency ordinances which establish permit and reclamation procedures to determine whether each such ordinance is in Ig accordance with State policy, and shall certify the ordinance as being in accordance with State policy. C. Local Permits to Mine Ma• Be A ealed: Local land use decisions on perm s to m ne n areas of reg ana significance may be appealed to the State Board of Mining and Geology once all other administrative remedies have been exhausted. Such appeals can be filed by either an operator that aas been denied a mining Permit or an Individual aggrieved by the granting of the approval of a surface mining permit. If the Board finds the local agency's decision 1s not adequately supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record of the permit proceeding, it may remind the decision back to the local agency for reconsideration at a public hearing. IV. ANALYSIS: Once the area 1s designated for the construction aggregate resources, the City will loose a certain degree of control. As mentioned, the local ordinances regulating mining activities and reclamatimi are required to bu consistent with State's policies, and the local permits to mine may be appealed. The proposed areas for aggregate resource designation include areas that have already been developed, and /or committed to development. Mining activit ^es, if approved, will create potential problems of land us incompatibility and adverse environmental effects, especially on residential neighborhoods due to potential dust, noise, odor, traffic ;.. cirulation and safety, air quality, street system, and overall scenic and. aesthetic considerations. This may create serious conflicts and problems • ' V-W 7 CITY COUNCIL S's) F REPOdT CONSTRUCT.04 AGGREGATE RESOURCES November 6, 1985 Page 3 in land use and enviroment if a mining operation is taking place in these areas which have been approved for development. Once the areas are designated for mineral resources, the anticipated developments may be < postpone ears and adversefienvlromentaltoinpact concerns of potential land mining activities. The proposed aggregate resource designation will dilute the commitments of the City's General Plan and Specific Plans. This is because the mineral resource designation dill serve as an overlov zone on too of the local and use plans and it can create uncertainties in future land use. fr. viem of the above analysis, staff believes that the areas within the City s' -ild not be designated for mineral resources and the areas in the Sphere of Influence where the land is General Planned for future development should also be excluded from the designrtion. However, all of the developable land in the sphere is ,planned for low density single f "ily residential. The State Mining and Geolo;y Board does not recogrize such current General Plan designations as justification for the exclusion from the mineral resource d•isignation. V. REC"ENOATION: Staff recommends tLat thu City Council adopt a reso ut on reauesting removal of all aggregate rt.ource designations for the areas within current City limits. if the Council wishes, the City Mal also request that the City's sphere panned for fwu. a development be excluded from the mineral resource designation. Respectfully submitted, Jar. k lam, AICP Co nit; Development 01rector JL:RY ko Attachments: Exhibit "A" Map 1 Roselution m« L LU y 01 C .. ..,?, K I a (: i t• ` b� N g � l� +f`at l 5j t` Iii ^• —�..� i 2. =Gi. t 1 All i, r•� ^� � di .Yi`' �i ^� .�`:,YT]Ei A1"f„ ,lV �y '.�.' (��'i�` � 1.:� /1 •. �G �; 7 : ?,•,r e 1 .�•, ^. �. 'r t'^_,. 7��7t it , 711 1 :�1 'Y"pry ` ` rl'1 1 .: r; Iti(�...Y "' i= •��,�ihJta w,r` +l; L ;, a,.t 'd ".141j1te' 1 K ,�;; .•�� I'1 � I % "Id�� r � •: i. '� �, i :i� • g• ix ` i r t • 5 , t _ . I'f 1 Li t II��I ts, 1 �'� [1 �. e+} ��.-: �i� x,31 ��' • ��'�' I�� it.. �}r:i .�1;` lll�l � .T��-��.,,tj- a'.ai�:t`= =.��`y � �4.; i':JC./. •'• -\ , (�.• ; ��. � ( ...:>.JF.i7: [1 ,. `•! jY iM- {l r ^�'t: M � - f Ir 1. > %- •S „`�L �+y �;i� 7),��51 1 it♦= �,;�.,t ; II \ , �a+t.Y ,j; ,�� °I y ^�:�'�, ��.. `�st1•'r.l� \\�\f`�il 1�11'1� � �h� ^I :i .Gz_ .- J 1 t~�+''N •!{ 1' �1 � t' 7 1• r' ” +�r`` ^ %' ti \(,1`c'�.'/ �jm_- i ^ nT"�• � 1 AA##y ''._,1i5� ; ^j a'' a+ •... �,.: -1 .:i:r L•��O _ a \mac• t���t•,�, %._•L`.t —_ 7L:� '450-' 1� tt.• /_ ♦'` Gn ,� �It ()t�: ��....�� -:➢�j..T ea..l I 1rL •ti—\I% +;;tI.1 t t 7 `I i! 1 +. f�:;;x� � Ist.;s �`; -, ,r--.� . ,:•,. y7- _c�:,oF4,, %;Ir I "��,i,i;�•�- �` {,it• v`'Nf,�f�� ' _ N7itihi:!}. � . ! f ,..�rfi�.. w.�!: S.w T._ i' • •i a.•Y� � ■� / —.-1. • /... `: ; %• .�'...:,..a.J..R...: ate':•^ 7p,�;; r,'';"', r ..•g •:_z -.tee• ,•✓: t It {•-�. -11 a. �.•..154`(�i^u'•i `>•�r trtr •"q.n�t 1'� `% ^;� 1 Q`..,4.1- �'yY,r WV rs, . .•,( III ?'jI 1• 1. dm � 11 I Ly'i ♦ 1mrii= 1.l1 '. F5!1 ^1 ` >.�i•�:1 1'�1 ^� i�f� �1, Yv.�'`i A.1 + •:: t! �?_I n'Y3i r .flfif 1u,� S `( .'tl,:"��; tt`"- }.•,Si�al.�, If7^"•'+e %, t {. V I .. !! I:� 4�r ! . 1 �1��'7 ��'I I �(M1 �� �>; y �ri�"• x'74 ••� T +•!,' - �"1r�.^i^ 88-^.: .. = =.pi I L�"�+�••Jt l' �' off' �.vr i' t� .i e ' �ll�.I� 1 %�(, n �„•�: •� 1�. � 1`{ t�•„ i y 1 i {T{ --- � ; ��If� � � � � � I J Ta !, r 7. • . �� t �� il� . i' E., 3 -.' 4 •tv'a�t�1E4 r�1'. ,' it CIO• •1 �f-, I Il !� N ,Np I J •4 'q1 y •` iYSI.(. •� 'r n'VI' i 40 r �i r1. RESOLUTION NO. 'P- i?-Bfi•O4R� A RESOLUIi011 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. r.ALIFORNIA, CONCERNING THE STATE'S DESIGNATION OF R£GIONA.LY SIGNIFICANT CONSTRUCTION AGGREGATE RESOURCES IN THE CLAREMONT- UPLAND, AND SAN BERNARDINO PRODUCTION- CONSIH`aTION REGIONS. WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga is located in the areas that are being considered for designation of regionally significant construction aggregate resources by the State Mining •nd Geology Board under the Authority of State Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (41ARA) of 1975; and WHEREAS, areas that are being considers: for aggregate .resource designation include land that has already been developLI and /or is committed to development; and WHEREAS, the aggregate resource designations, as proposed, are in conflict with previously approved Specific Plans, Coamn"y Plans, developaont agreements, and numerous developments; and WHEREAS, the propocnd aggregate resource designations are in conflict with the City's General P1 ^ and could dilute the City's ccemitnent to a balanced community with aiegliate employTent opportunities and sufficient supply of various types of housing for all segments .f the population. WHEREAS, the proposed aggregate resource designation will create potential land use conflicts within the City as well as in the City's sphere of influence NOW, THEREFORE, let it be resolved that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby request the State Mining and Geology Board to remove the proposed aggregate resource designations in the areas atthin the City limits of Ranrho Cucamonga and that the City's sphere of influence be modified to exclude areas planned for development, in accordance with Exhibit .A„. in PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this * day of *, 19 *. AYES: NOES,: AOSE,iT: *on D. MiFeTi—,Aajor ,.T >d v N r Y � aT • y A Pil I Pqw 1. 'r`,S�' r�- ��, ��l; - \7` IV•"�.yAr r >� 7�-7,�� �!"y �' Y. �e• -;_. ,i' L_+� , WE 41ss z` �r : 1 tl -'I'll I : � t�l{ ; •I. °! WA ,•t rff _..ate{ II < j • !� u_P��:.,f Jf 1 __;..�C If �a � N:,a. �� .� � , i.'•.•., f[c.. ,�j(�t,:��{�ii� 1a .• 11' ��r1 . r�yj�`t ._.Y.�'_1I ». ar.�. Il is_� '•�� i,yr••1,f t�� • 1ij,y',_��1.,��y YP��,�'� �J��Fi qd ,�4% I /1 IJ,� 1• r�1• 'r i 1'' ':'i is � • 1t L:.. �. r/ °i��x'�� � c:�Sj��yg�! �n.'if� ��(�i • �\ .' � I •' . � �,I y I 'ri i � . r � • i s «i y-y�► 6 y e d�,1{�•'i.4lt� �•�it 'A ((( 1 w! t V' I11 t a • -`/ i � AGE` 8� MR7 :.`. + /�t t�tf�� 1 I'� i • s i�� i� i f�� r •� � J'I �, ` 'tf � �:S �\ Ird 1`� �I�rf'a. � t' n'�.xr 1�• •r r�'F!! x . JA J w;<' �.C,�°`i •••. Y / � h: � a 1l I — (1,1_, i : i •'�fa � ( t�-',-- �h�- -+,':� , I I# .C'•= to � • r „�.✓•��;� "6; ��rV� +C. i.'V• • j•j � .11�,,.,�� ;..�y(rr. I�v i' 'r -,i�,, Y` :. _a. .fr _�i.�.. •�.t� •'G��i ' I �.�•I�t ..' t l i li I�e! \'�`l �,i' l_ +. i �' p „ r. .• L'_ 1 tr. �Y�]s r` ...-!� d_ I--- I y +p,c I � i - S�'i; I t r;`C•; a� r � �- L.'•,. -1 .r��� l' � I' ' \\ ;.aa,` � ` 1 re � 7 % ' ,y 6, • .'rF 1 `�. j�JJ--'�i\ r \� �ii -pry' gr � •/l ; ,�' •^'� •�r� �i ' I.. .r � -. + ' �a _!i, _;, i * -IF:r' � <Cl'fl��''7N� '�,q S'� r nG `'lr= ?:•�•rl 3� "j \, p./G...: �a���.. _`.-i `�"1; "f�Zf .— .._'� -• ( �; ` Ja`:��•.5 1 ` 1 ;+ •� - n• "'\ � - t�_i:� .x+15; J!•! a j\. •�.7 \'•tZ�� � � ]t 3' �,a/� ar ''�t' '�,r, 'r.�_ tit .•i.'il.t1 .: 4�{��i -Z ��4 S' n; -,-�. - } ---1_• ( Y .1. :•f.. r. °' 1:, a{ :.. rtt I;•.. r._•: •�. ,1�. i�+iZ ri'•: i'•~� '''15yy IC �L�'' ' ,i�C .= t• - ~•I{ C,•- " \�}',..' !'' 4 -5.s �t.�. it /I.1 :..te'.'. 14., .tom a �aa:%s"`li•.;y nilC�p.. .r.Yiw� • r ry .a ,. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAI TONGA c�AAf %b MEMORANDUM 3 ' z DATE: Nweab er 6, 1985 - Z- Oct i0s Mayor and members 02 U cf City t7n PROM: Patel• Wright. Councilsecber SDDJRCTs zw I have requested the City manager to place on the \ wembar 6. 1985 ageoia, under the public haarlug 'action, a reooms.•nded C.ty Council it icy regarding future eityvido assessment adistrictrouneRanchPolicy a�5 - •`ollc•iog recomcended that the City sea -emects '•8egioniug in January of 1986- it shell be the policy Of the City Council that prior to enactment of future aeagssmant districts in the community as advisory et action by tboee to be a $*as h °b� ldthettweiority the City Council rill • + ° recommendation. It is proposed the' the following esaeaaseat districts be industrial roAs,casm °et'nr creation of 1911 -1913 Act Districts; 7LduLLriel Ltodathe ,jeeLunaccity Li6hting and ,%norsatioma to the oieeiug Laudsrspe Hd.ataa'uce Dirre'"s for new doval opa ar which is apprueed in Rancho Cucaeoega." are The City Attorney has advised ea that becrusa of siting atouncilrto regarding easeuaeat pt°COiuves, It is impossible for the City abilities of the require a majcriy vote is tcvo: of the essesaaents prior to enactment• ° ottorney has clearly indicate) that the tavenue raining City as outlined in variour :retinas of the Government court Code have fur be local 'government. altered. Existing et[Ita law as veil ei a eerie of court eases hew° fort er reaffirmed tbnt basic Constitearsnthaer tbe7naatibeat altarnativs is A clear Since that is the ersa• cet Cain rs th n£ eaw'mcats as well as the advisory City Policy regatding ..ote prior to enactment. a roved It is the intent of the Propacsd Policy to msye C °oce�ptiogi tt 1y1911 -191: devclorrAat pays ito Y°y Is addition, y Assesaaeut District ACts, we are assured Chet is the event property ovaere t, put in ma3or withis the industrial 'tee wish to will atilldbe availableCe In the is teat' public it }rove ► ° °te, th °t option cr ° °ts vbo r"Joyc direct benefit from of 1911 -1913 Assessments, propert a ..@Hers 'nested. the iaproveseats ere cba only P ey pW /kep 1 � f. PROPOSED AUTO MALL " .tt A o Site Location ) - most desirable from dealer perspective due to freeway exposure. - could support 6 to 8 dealerships (56 acres gross) . have to consider 10 mile market area rudms o Property Owner - The William Lyon Company; has no Interest In developing an Auto Mall. Aye i' 2 o Developer Participation - recent discussions have been made with Doon Corporation to oct as a developer. ro - they hmie olraody approached William Lyon on acquisition of pperty - $5.22 sq. ft. - before they can go further, need 'to formalize fromework of Agency/Developer responsibilities. b�, ",' �A .•C f� �i {i r� j. .i ,} r r ti: W � 4Sr a Dev „'-ors /AgencyResp=IbllityFrnnnwmk D•velopen I. Negotiates for land 2. Provides capital for lv.d m'quiJilion 1 Frepoms plors for off -site imD., Jpecific plan, site pion, etc. v. PrrvlJes Capitol for and pure In alloff -site development and planning 5. Heip cocrdinate morketing of prr -lect 6. AsAsts In declershfp 9e jat'ation'. 9 Agency: I. Prepares OPA I. Streamlines development review and permit processing 3. Negotiates with dealers 4. Subsidizes dealers locating In Mall 5. Repays dovelorer initial Investment, carrying costs 9 20% profit at con- clusion of each dealer negotiation with a formula for cap on entire pay back. F y I r ” r: e• 0�''� yam, �}y.,'',. �. ' .. r ti °: J �'`"i•.3 M i lllllll�. , ii Y� 4 ■ :r o Cost' Associated with Project Based on Framework (Developer) Land Acquisition @ $5.22 sq. ft. $12,803,948 Site Development @ $2.50 sq. ft. $6,132,160 $18,936,108 20% Margin to Developer 13,787,221 Total Land 6 Development Cost $22,723,329+ *This does not include financing carts 6 oil amounts are in present dollars. - This amount nets out to $11.59 /not sq. ft. o Needed Subsidy by Agency - Going rates for dealer negotiations vary between $3.00 to $5.00 /3q. ft. _ Amount of Agency Total Cost Net Revenue from Sale Subsidization $22,723,329 $5,880,600 ($3.00) $16,842,729 $22,723,329 $7,84C,8P0($4.00) $14,082,529 $22,723,329 $9,801,000 ($5.00) $12,922,329 3 IT. n� a YL lb 3+, o Benefit$ of Proposed Auto Mail _ - Sales tax .1. - Realistic schedule of dealer move Ins - a a Annual ' c Sales Tax }' FY to. City _ No, of Dealers 1985/86 $ 550,000 2 r 1986/87 $ 550,000 2 1987/88 $ 825,000 3 1988189 $ 825,000 3 1989190 $1,100,000 4 1990191 $1,100,000 4 19902 $1,375,000 5 1992/93 $1,375,000 5 1993/94 $1,650,000 6 _ 1994/95 $1,650,0W 6 Cumulative Sales '= Tax for 10 yr. 11,0001000 n, (r = ° Note I. Sales Tax ore presented In current dollars. 2. Average Sales Price of Car estimated at $15,000. 1 3. Sales Tax to City is 1% of the 6% total Sales Tax. - Rate of recouping Initial Agency subsidization from sales tax revenues Is •�` estimated to be 12 to 14 years s - = R' .,..1 Wu • � J4; y1V ♦.l pry. rpi�` ^t3'�er. ^"?vnl�:'nae...'$'4�'^`! C.u+^�d $Y."4•a � `- t' W .t r'i'�t' �; � i`^�'.M� e o Agency Assets Available for Project FY 1985186 -0- (all revenues geared for Regional Center) FY 1986187 -0- (all revenues geared for Regional Center) •- FY 1987/88 $ 715,257 FY 1988/89 $1,233,577 z, FY 1989/90 $1,947,953 This would allow o bond Issue to be sold In FY 1987/88 which could produce approximately $6.5 million. a Agency Subsidy Projection Schedule Ann FY 85/86 FY 86/87 FY 87/88 FY 98/89 FY 89/90 ual Aaency Assistance $3,690,060 to $4,810,400 -0- $1,845,2n0 to $2,405,200 -0- $1,845,200 to $2,405,200 - Five years subsidy of between 7.3 million to 9.6 million - Timing problem ci when subsidies are needed due to bonds not being sold - Would require specie) nsaitiatlons with dealers (subsidize their own deals) or developer carry subsidy which would Increase total payback Difficult to estimate Agency assets beyond 1990 - Appears to be problem through life of project. ' 5 I it ♦ � a '*: t�S:.fYi4�♦'M? v' v Pw:t .'S :� - ' ..a ,�•.�'i a Rids e% - Negotiations may be hirdered due to timing of Agency funds= dealerships would__ -" have to negotiate and subsidize their own deals. Dealers may shy away from thls r: type of financing due to "sweeter" or cleaner deals which they can obtain elsewhere. ' - Timing of negotiation due to Ontario Auto Mall. K :+ 'R - Competing with Ontario for anme dealers (They already have BMW, Toyota, Suzuki Jeep, Volkswagen that are known. Staff Is also informed that they are concluding + ; negotiations which will fill up all 10 dealer points.) Ontario is able to offer "clew" d' deals to auto deatershl s - ' � p mainly sue to combination of willing property owner { and on -hand dollars. Rancho Cucamonga would be competing ugalnst this. 5 Jr ; - Should Regional Center be delayed, then Increment will be delayed. - Potential deolers and developer need to know In 30 days If project Is a "go ". ^i " :Fr Y I. M�dtt %.Y iI Tax Code ArM }=.,'� (— .- �;---- •,,..� � � � � �. •. 6709 a �. ..,ao r ..moo• Mr�.— Stanley W The William Lyon�Company i4 Liu C' �I� The William -� W14Y Lyon Ccjnpatly iEdison 1 7 }y� ill 4 19 j I 107 AC )5 0,43-16 IC31 6!61 AC S 9.51 AC.-J t PAR :•,•6 72 AC I 1010 AC 48 -36 -1111, . The William Lyon Company a AS 1767 AG r� 0 09. A56AC M1 . I a 153 A,: The William Lyon Comp y 'J %�98-36-1638 55 _ u PAR I y ^ • i 152 AC �r APPAR. I lf 3 L b'� 19.3 AC / o700 I `* Mfl. A. 'I I AfgP 1 •36 •I37A PAR ! 8.89 AC •: �. ' YO 1 ,r 4.3 AC ,' ra.-. � ' 11:x'•/ .1. 4,rii�ii'i2q ' e CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA C { MEMORANDUM -P i Date, November 1, 1985 1977 To, City Cwncil and City Manager From, Aill Salley, Director, Community Services Department Subject, approval to authorize the issuance of bond, and award sale of bonds for Park and Recreation Imprcve nt District No. S5 -pD (CON,ent Calendar Itew 'S', November G, 1985) This action is tilt east step in the sequence necessary for the construction of Heritage and Red Hill Community Parks. The requested action is for the City Council to approve two resolutions, the first of which badleally authorizes the sale of bobs and their terms, and the second one selecting Stone and Youngberg as the agent for said bonds. In addition to the two revolutions In the agenda, there in the 'Official Statement' which in attached to this stsff report. This details the projects to be addressed by the bonds, a financial portrait of the City, and general information about Rancho Cucamonga. As it says in the opening paragraph on page 3, the purpose of this don,eent is to psovide general and technical Information to prospective purchasers of the District's bonds. While the two resolutions and the Official Statement are quite a bit of information, the concept is not new to the Cou.,eil. Lach rro]ect that requires banding has used similar procedures with similar documentation. Additionally, we ask authorization to solicit construction bids for Red HS11 and Heritage Community Parks at the earliest appropriats date. Recommendation, 1. Request that Council approve the two resolution" pertaining to bonding for 85 -PD, en , accept the OtLluial Statement for filing$ t.- .Ni 2. Reauest that Counol$ authorize t`.e Community Services Department to ' solicit construction bids for Red Hill and Heritage Parks at the >� earliest appropriate data. SH /js i AGAE17lOff ItITTI RESPC.`P TD THE st CONSTROCTIOM OT CERTAIN PUBLIC IMPR.WLW M - This agreenent is entered into by and between CITY OP C CICAHONGA, a MWIC11¢ corporation (-City' hereinafter), and RAN UCAMONGA RETIREMENT VILLA, A California rimitsd Partnerahip, db Ila del Ray, (•Developer• hereinafter). N I T N E S S E T h .. A. Recitals. (L) City {assesses interests to that parcel of real property depicted on that diagram attached hereto and marked Er.)'.ibit 'A' and hereinafter r referred to as 'public Improvement area.' (11) City and Developer desire to provide 500 of the costs of providing store drain, landscaps'and sidewalk improvements ro be located in,� the public Improvement area ('said Improv.Aents' herei.naftet) in conjunction ihll' with the development of Villa del Rey Retirement Hotel. q . (iiil Said improvements are ferred to by K.J.M. Development Corp. by letter dated April 25, 1985. The ast:m tad construction cost thereof is the Sum of $50,000.00. B. Agreement. NOM, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree an follows, I* City agrees to cause said improvements to be constructed art Completed 1� accordance with City standards upon all docunante being recorded providing to City its Interests in the public improvement area, provided that _ the coo is thereof shall be borne by the parties hereto in accordance with an,t subject ttr the terms and gonditions set forth herein in the following percuntageu City - 50e1 Developer - 50%. The phrase 'project costa' as utilized hereinafter in this ogreenv uhall ba thc City's payments to its contractors for the construction of ma, lmproveaentn. � • ', �f��Ll�� >�.}„*kC- Si�'is`:(�C�,iY,a Y_ .L •>'S -2 //� v 1 , ;y 5 2. Upon its receipt for bias for said improvements, City's engineer i„ shall nil to Devaloper his estimate of the sue necessary to be deposited by Developer so tl-at Davelopor's deposit to that late will be equivalent to fifty - �; percent (50%) of the amount than estimated by said engineer for the project costa up to 025,000.00. Within ten (10) days 1f said wiling. Developer shall deposit with City by certified check the amiant spocified in said mailed uatiwte. The Money so received by City shall h• utilized to in part complete said improvements. City shall have the righ•: to reject all bids it the ' responsive low bid exceeds the oum of 060,000.00 ,. 3. Upon City's completion of add improvements City shall cause a final accounting of the project costs to be mailed to Developer. In the event , '! that the amount therefore deposited with City by Developer exceeds fifty percent (50%) of the project costa shown in said final accounting, City shall include in said wiling its warrant in such amount as will cause Developsr to ' have borne fifty percent (50%) of the project costs. In the avant that the - amount therstofor, deposited with City by Developer is leis than fifty percent s (50%) of the project costs shown in said final accounting, said wiling shall include a ststdunnt to Developer indicating the amount necessary to be paid by Developer to City to mks Developer's contribution equivalent to fifty percent project costs so to as Developer L required red to (SOS) of the long p q pay no more then 02:,000.00. Such amount .hall be due and payable to City by Developer within thirty 00) ddyc of City so wiling said accounting and statamnt. " 4. In the event that Developer fella ••• tinily make the deposit . specified in paragraph 2 hereof by cashier's checl, City shall havo the sole {� option to dam this agreement to be terminated as of the due date in question b by written notice thereof marled to Developer within five (5) business days of said due date. Upon such termination, City shall have the right to recover t from Developer as damages any and all amounts expended by City with respect to designing said improvements and implementing a bid procedure. Further, Developer shall then be deemed to have violated the ondltion of approval of the subject development with all attendant consequences thereto. S. Ar and all payments end /or notices to be wiled to City pursuant to this agreement shall be mailed to such party to the attention of Mr. Dick ."q Mayer, at 1F.0. Box 801, Rancho Cucamonga , California 91730, or to such other •;, address as is contained in a notice received by Developer specifically ' r referring Co this agreement. r S . +'a Any and all notices, statements or other documents to be mailed to - Develo;o-r pursuant to thin agreement shall be mailed to that party at 245 i ` Fisher A•v.ua, Suite D1, Coots Mesa, California 92626, or at such other , address as tidicated in a notice provided to City by Developer callinq . particular att- ntion to this agreement. -2 //� -t 6. Should City bring suit to enforce any provision or provisions of this agreement and prevail therein. City shall be entitled to recover it! reasonable attorneys' fees as fixed by the Court. _ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto enterad into this agreement as of the data act forth bald ytpoaite the name of each such FArty. Dated, CITY OF RANCHO CUCANONGA By Mayor BY City Clerk ©C.Y RANCHO CUCANOWW RETIRD04T VILA, Dated, ) CALIFORNIA RETIREMEUT VILLAS. INC. I GENERAL PARTNERS By 3. 11/--Z-3 Jr L •�� post office Box 278 '1 Upland, California 91785 ' November 6, 1985 City council - City of Rancho Cucamonga 9161 Base Line Road California 91730 Rancho Cucamonga, RE, AAgenda, ORDINANCE 4B City Council y Dear Council MO@bars: ' lanned cormitraent, I am v able to attend the Due to a long p ordinance. I -.; ' public hearing for the new true preservation of my am, the refers, submitting some '�- writing. - AI an owner ot about 300 trees 1,000 which may be I ' ve ed by covered by and advisor member of the j covered by the ordinance ns Specific plan Citizens' Advisory CommitLaa. member ) Etiwanda not writing as a Citizenswhaty is onsidri one odoubly but I do want to clarify in the Daily Heport newspaper article = inaccurate paragraph concernJng failed to obtain support idnthatr It sought hit Daily me concerning from Alta Loma and lopmontgPlanni9gtCnmmissions did not cook such support. I merely recommendation. I reported to the Cnair that tto four (4) roemboerssedoto the Etiwanda who were presppliwere dd ou Etiwanda* Ipam confident it it sect recomm9ndation as supp from the other two communities .. that had I sought would have been forthcoming. _ - vary much in fever of a now and stronger ordinance I have several r I am protecting certain of our trees. However, and the Planning concerns about the proposed now ordinance regarding removal- at- devolopmant. Ai f Commission recommendation Removal- at- devulopm¢nt was rejected by the Etiwanda Specific debate tl.o re was a - Plan. After many hours and evenings of the 8 1 us Gums should be ropleced with Nj i` strong concensus that Y'. •F s s 1 A .ii` �i N'.. }A� S,• ^4 .. - - r Y;, liJ� .X Y.'',6 Y � C City Council - - - City of Rancho Cucamonga Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 - - r , - November 6, 1985 ✓, N Page Two i the Spotted Gums as the Blue Gums dio, become diseased or threaten people or existing property. The Etiwanda Specific. Plar Citizens' Advisory Committee was strongly opposed tc the 'scorched earth" policy that produces the kind of deserts which can now be seen in rerra Vista and Victoria. i� d The - scorched earth" removal -at- devolopment policy recommended by the Planning Commission would destroy the character of Etiwanda. "Gradual removal" as used in the Etiwanda Specific Plan does not refer to removal- at- develortent and I am truly amazed that the Planning Depart= -nt could so construe Lt. d r P The proposed new ordinance is unnecessarily confusing. It was designed, in part, by multiple committees. one very logical division which would assist in simplifying the 1a ordinance would be to separate its provisions applicable :c �- d development from its provisions applicable to homeowners. These are really two different problems and treating them s, t the same or in the same sentences and paragraphs makes the .' o ordinance unnecessarily cumbersome. s •. D Definition A. 6. is not a definition. The preservation of portions of orchards is a very different problem from the preservation of windbreaks. The ordinance is weaker if it tries to apply the same standards to each situation. t D Definition A. 7. is not a uefinition. It is an exclusion. Exclusions deserve o status all their own in the ordinance. The .age of a tree should be considered by t116 City Planner under A. 5. The City Attorney should be-,iven a new opportunity to reorganize the entire structure of the ordinance. For example, all the procedural aoctions should be together and flow chronologically. All the substantive policies and rules should be together and precede the procedural 1 r sections. If you expect the courts to follow the ordinance you must make it more readable and understandable. m What is the impact oC paragraph C of the .roo Maintenance section (130)7 Does this r luire all E .. i'��• - },yj ..+. Cj, { iyiR kF.. � � 1 : - .� . r - '."� }ja r e VI 2 `.3L.' °`..: `'. r +: �� � �.�..3,... _ - - ter,.,• i s.;�y�- v`..::.y ^�,,� v ,y.» 1.. City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga Rancho Cucamonga, California 51730 '^ November 6, 1985 Page Three to be maintained as stated In D. 1. through D. 6. or does it Just require it prior to transfer by a buildec7 I regret the planning and building department processing cannot be suspended ror a few months for a multiple violation of the ordinance. I have a number of other concerns but I will refrain from listing any a.oro so as not to detract from those onumerated. Thank you fnc c ,naidering those suggestions and remarks. sincere t � � 3ames i� 4 ?t r, ,.;is:r+ya�..�r y0,»' l%—`^: 3�- :- y;v.r.,r,7- y��irv'�i }J.:` { ^. _ •. tr.� .,.y "J'�+�,vc. November 5, 1985 /City Council Rancho Cucaiaonga Dear City Council Member RP: Tree Removal Permit 85 -39 TT 11626 As you are aware for the past two years, I have been very active in "trying" to prevent the removal of any eucalyptus trees in the area. The subject mattor should speak for itself even though Mr. Michael Parrish covered St in a well defined sense. It's unfortunate that prior to meetings on the subject we have received full_ backing of council members and then once in the public's eye -a 180% change takes place. I hope this sit', tion receives the backing of Councilwoman Pam Hright, who nas b,eked us all the times in the pa and maybe just maybe- -the rest of the council will listen. Unfortunately, I must be out of town at thin time due to a business commitment or I would attend this nesting. Please do not be influenced by the dollar of the developer, nor an Arborist as you have in previous meetings for I too can pay to have an Arborlst state the other side of the coin that is the importance of these trees to the Freoervation of the area. Further the wind row protection bpeaks for itself for my home is jawt south of this area. Thank you fur your attention and the RIGHT ruling in this metier. Dineut fy y re, oy /` 8888 Hidden Parm Rea.] Alta Loma, CA 91701 cc Michael Parrish 011 ��WPWQ _r. s• ��a s p 1� 4 A S November 4, 1985 Dear Property owners on October 7, 1985 the residents of Caballero Dr. and Almond Street were a", a notice advising that a tree resoval permit had been granted to Jszw 6 Service Corporation, 5384 E. CLspean Ave, orange, CA 92669 for removal of stands of windrow rucalpytua trees just to the North of Caballero Dr. and Almond Street. Ne bellow that if these windrow Euealpytvs trees era reeoved substantial wind damage could occur not only to our hops on CabrMazo and Almond, but to other homes in the immediate area. There is a meeting of the City Council of Poncho Cucamonga Nedres 4y evening at 7130 P.M. at the Cosaeunity Center, Lions Par %, 9.51 Baseline Bead and this subject is w the agenda. Mr. Bob Combs and myself have paid the appeal fee required by the City. we would ask yor to attend the meeting and provide your support. To date we have not addressed the aeathatic value of the trees to the area with the city council. re bel /eve there are other solutions to :he problem. if you have any questions prior to the mooting please call Bob or Linda Cocbe at 987 -5130 or Mike or Linda Parrish at 987 -9433. Thank Michael L. Parrish f i f� ,. �i R October 15, 1985 City Clark City Of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 easollne Road Rancho Cucamonga, Calif. 91730 RE2 TREE REMDVAL PERMIT 85 -39 (TT 11626) CITY OF R flCHO CUCA ONGA ADMINISTF, TION AM OCT 171985 ' 7j8j91n)�)pj1�°;')416)B PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ORDINAUCE 37, I AM HEREBY PILING AN APPEAL TO SUSPEND ABOVE REFERENCED PEALYTT. THERE ARE TWO MAJOR REASONS My I BELIEVE THE TREES SHTJLD RE LEFT STANDING, 1. TTE TREES AS TICS NOW STAHD PROVIDE A SUBSTANTIAL WIND BRZAK FOR TIM HOMES LOCATED IN THE AREA. IF TBEY ARP. REMOVED A MAJOR FACTOR IN WIND CONTROL FOR THE AREA WILL NO LONGER MIST Alm DAMAGE TO EXISTING STRUCTURES WILL OCCUR. 2. THE TR= ARE A KNOWN HABITAT FOR MIGRATORY BIRDS SUCH AS THE WHITZ CUL AND CERTAIN SPECIES OF SAWR.S. IF DURING TIC CUTTING DOWN OF THESE TREES ANY NESTS OR NESTING AREA WOULD BE DAMAGED OR CAME TO DAMAGE ANY MIGRATORY BIRD, THAT WOCLD PLACE RAMOIA SERVICE CORPCRATION AND THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMDNGA IN VIOLATION OF THE MIGRATORY BIRD TREATY ACT - TITLE 16 07 THE UNITED CTATES CODE, SECTION 703. I WOULD APPRECIATE REING KEPT ADVISED OF ANY ACTION BY In CITY COUNCIL OF AMMUD CUCAMONGA WITH REGARD TO THIS HITTER. SINCE Yom, v Michael L. Parrish MLP /d1 cc , California Department of Fish and Gems United States Fish and Wildlife ♦.� + ^'YIS� }'�s� i i. Ve. Y: YYY !' : ., - S�.Q• _ .. Y Of ,r n 4. . r' ' vo� 'CITY OF RANCHO CUCAINIONGA STAFF REPORT, o L.. ;rMN%q eSse{TFR ° c MfE7 /y� NOV. 6$4- PP,,,, 4104t, PARK 9161 &Aa A� j Rci. Z . GATE: November 6, 1985 urn• TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FRQ4: Jack Lam, AICP, Community Development Director BY: Dart Coleman, Seufor planner SUBJECT: APPEAL OF TREE REMGVAL PERMIT 85 -39 TRACT 11626 _ RA40MA IERVI - appca y a res dent o t o s aDProva a a perm c to remove selected trees within Tract 11626 located on the north side of Almond, at the terminus of Beryl. t. ABSTRACi: The Planning Divisiofi approved the selective removal of trees within Tr r � l Parrish, desires t retainall tr es for their x ndbreak benefit d as natural habitat for migratory birds. This report analyzes the appeal, the tree removal permit request, and the reasons for approval pursuant to the criteria of Tree Preservation Ordinance 37 and the Conditions of Approval of the Tract. II. BACKGROUND: ientative Tract 11626 was approved on July 27, 1983 w�iTiETe condition that •extsting trees (except citrus trees) shall be retained wherever possible ...• The day.u,.» o,.,...,., Eua- ys, 10 trees m i anht°clptu �feet n center, shown on the attached Exhibit ill. ANALYSIS: The following criteria are the current basis for eva ua ng a tree removal request: Criteria: Whether or not the trees rould be preserved by pruning rat er that removing. Cannon" Those trees being removed are those which cannot be preserved because of conflict with street improvements, driveways, house pads, and grading. Criteria: Whether or not such trees constitute a significant nn ura resource of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. i,•, CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Tree Removal Permit 85 -39 (Tract 11626) November 6, 1985 Page 2 Comment* Staff has investigated the site on numerous occasions and eterm ned that the trees are part of an extensive windrow network both on and off site. Replacement with the fast - growing Spotted Gum Eucalptus tree will minimize the impact on the aesthetics of removal upon the neighborhood. In addition, certain windrows are preserved wherever possible as indicates. in the attached Exhibit 'C °. Twmty -two acres of heavily wooded canyon are being maintained in the project as open spats. Criteria: General conuition and health of the trees. Comment: Trees appear healthy, yet unr:intairvd. Large soecimen S average 30 -35 inches in trunk diameter and over 50 feet in height. Criteria: Incidence of and health or safety hazard to persons, a scent property, or utility installations. Comment: Past incidence unknown; however, the Blue Gum Eucalyptus Trees era characteristically a fire hazard and a potential safety hazard to persons and property because of blow down and branch drop, especially in proximity t, residential development. Criteria: Proximity and number of other trees in the vicinity and IFF a i ty of the soils to adequately support existing vegetation. Comment: The trees are part of an extensive windrow system in the area. ue Gum Eucalyptus trees are not suited for developed areas because of the changes in the environment (e.g. watering) which is detrimental to the growth characteristics of the tree and the potential hazard to persons or property. The soils are adequate to support the existing vegetation.. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for Tentative Tract 11626 which contained a detailed biological analysis of plant and animal resources present on the site (see attached excerpts). The appellant claims that the trees are a known habitat for migratory birds such as the White Owl and certain species of hawks. Further, the appellant contends that the cutting down of these trees would be in violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Field inspection during preparation of the Environmental Impact Report did not detect any species of wildlife designated rare, endangered or threatened by the California Department of Firh and Game or by the, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. However, certain species 'f witdlifo potentially occurring on the site are designated or und;: consideration for designation as sensitive by various state and federal agencies and conservation groups. Additionally, a number of avian species afforded special status by the federal government, state of California or National Audubon Society were observed or r M1 Ti�'sY'. ;., ' :`s• 1"': rt41iT .: �.. .v1y..,.. -•. �, i "'- CITY COUNCIL STAFF,REPGRT Pr Tree Removal'Permit 85 -39 (Tract 11626) Novenber 6, 1985 Page 3 are expected to utilize the site. The status of these species and their occurrence on the site is summarized in Table E -3 of Appendix E. The EIR identifies that the removal of the citrus orchard and Eucalyptus windrows would represent a loss of cover, forage, and nesting sites for a variety of wildlife species, particularly birds. The mitigation measures contained in the Environmental Impact report include the retention of the 22 acres (25%) of the site as permanent open space in the heavily wooded channel that traverses the site, and replacemeit of the Blue Gum Eucalyptus trees with other Eucalyptus species which are more suitable to landscaping requirements a.ld less prone to create a fire hazard. The EIR was certified as adequate and complete following duly noticed public hearings. Wildlife Nanagement staff person, Martha Pletcher, of the California Department of Fish and Game was contagted by staff regarding the provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The Act protects the natural habitat for migratory birds during thir nesting season and overrides all City codes. The migratory birds rommron to this araa include the Barn Owl and Red- Triled Hawk (sea attached Appendix E). The White Owl is not known to be common to this area and the EIR survey staff did not find evidence of its existence on this site. The Barn Owl and Red - Tailed Hawk commonly roost in the Eucalyptus windrows prevalent to the foothill areas. .. . . .. Including Eucalptus w n rows w remain on site and in the I mmediate area to provide a nesting habitat for migratory birds. Iv. RECOMIENOATION: It is recommended that the City Council review and cons er a el9ments of the appeal and tree removal permit requeRes ectf -.-_-.Ja am Community JL:OC:jr Attachment: Appeal Letter Tree Removal Permit Letter Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Photographs Exhibit "C" - Tree Plan EIR Excerpts i 1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM Dates Kcvenber t, 1985 51 bb5 Tot City Council and City Manager Front Bill Holley, Director, r.osmunity Services Department Subtects Approval ro authoriro tine issuance of bonds and award sale of bonds for ,+ark and Recreation Improvement District No. 85 -pD (COment Calendar It,, 'H•, November 6, 1985) This action is the next step in tie sequence necessary for the construction of Heritage and Red Bill Communie, Parke. The e frequested t Of which basically authorizes the ale ofrbonds; and their terns, and the second one selecting Stone and Youngberg as the agent for said bonda. In addition tO the two resolutions in the agenda, there is the 'Official Statement' which is attached to thle staff report. Thin details the projects to to addressed by toe bonds, a financial portrait of the City, and general information about Reacno Cucamonga. As it says in the opening Paragraph on page I, the purpoa.s of this document is to Provide general and technical information to prospective purchasers of the Dintrict'e bonds. While the two resolutions and the Official Statement are quite a bit of information, the concept is ni-t new to the Council. Each Project that M1 requires bonding has used simile- procedures with einilar documentztlon. _ Additionally, we ask authorization to solicit construction bids for Rad t' Hill and Heritage Community Parks at the earliest appropriate date. ± + RecoPeendations 1. Request that Council aptrove "bonding for 85 -PD, end, one ,pt the Official Statement for filing, .. Request that Council authorize the Community Services Department to solicit construction bids for Red Hill and Heritage Parks at the j earliest appropriate date. y, RH /jo I ai PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL SIATEABENT DATED NOVEMBER 6,1985 In she cyinlon of Bond Couw e4 Interest on rheHads U exnn➢s /rwn all yrnmt Fedrmllaro nelxnrs andfrom Slxeof CN(fomla pemnollnrome rain rurdn rxiningnawn, repdalom and roan dravlont, and the Bands wresemprfttvn all Ca.,/arnla tarn excepifmnehiselarm lwnen, honer, /naY brlromr /erleral/ysaxaNe upon any Bonddurfrt l anypnlod fn nhich sheBaidls onnrdby asuboamial wnoflhefwilitlnfinwxcdbythe Bondprrxtrdx orbya relaridpermw nithin the rmmming ofswilon 10J @) o/rhelnrmul Rnmu Coda $7,334,776 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MPROVEVIENT BONDS PARK AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT' NO. 85-PD (Heritklge sill Red Will Community Ps:ks) (San Bernardino County, Califon n) Dated: Septrmb" 1. 1993 Dwe: Jely 2 as sown below A llof Umimpmvemenushabeundcukenuprov idedbythe' r8opis.%andL ghtingA"af1972(Division Is,Pan2, ofhe Cebform Sumt, and Highways Code). The Bonds are (uucd ss runt I, I— goo! oththee Improvement Bond Ad of 1915(Dinsmn 10ofthe Cahfomla Slices and Hlehnys Codc). The".10ty oftee L-u ofNe Bonds has been confirmed by aludement entered In the Superior Court of the Stam ofCaldornia in sad ur the County ofSan Bemndmo on September 11. 1985 The Bonds sic Issued only as fully maincred Bonds Inde tarninflans of35,000 or any lotegal multiple thneafexcept for (other than lh: 6=1 payment ofinkrtst) is payable Mcheek oednll mailed U, the milistnof owner, theeeofeemr+nnually on January 2 and July 2 ccmmeneng January 2,IM. The Bonds are subject to redemption on any January 2 Witty 2 in advance ofmaturity, at the option of the Cal, Treasurer upon V vmg 60days prior not m. and upon run cat ofthe pdncipai and interest mclued thereon tothe dawafsedemption or enrher surrender. plus a redemption premium of6ve percent (5 %)oththhe principal mount ofnw Bonds to be Imitating The Bonds may also be subject •o refunding pursuant in law. Unde,the provisions ordw landscape and lighting Act of 1974 annual asxumenu sufficient to men annual Bond debt service sic included on the regular county tax bills to owners of property xalul which them am unpaid assessments These duty to trans(" into the Redemption Fund the amount ofe ddirpaoxy, Out ofpvaiude Thad, of tM aty. AMIlbk funds consist of the botanic, In the Retie Fund together with any surplus funds of the City not required for lawful munkipal obligations This duty ofe Cory is continuing during the period ofddinquenry, until Idmutcment, re kmption or ask ofee delinquent property. T►rre is aoassurance, imt took wen be available far this tssrimeasl ILlrlag the anew afg.+laawewq, flim are lasa8kknt available foe" a May ray atav In paywwW Ice Ike names of tk as wi. To provide funds fns payment oftbe Hoagland the interest theion us mull ofany delinquent annual auenaxnts the City win esublish a special Reserve Fund and deposit Iheein an amount equal to seven and oneluifpcicent (7 5 %) of the aggmptc pdmlpol amount of the Bonds Addsliona0y. theCity humveuntcd w initiaujudioal fomdmure in thct%mt ofs dehnquenry and to commence the procedure within 180 days following such delinquency. Nellkr the fdtk sad eNB r IM tsalag Nan altkk City, Use Soda ofCaMearla ae Pay "Itical naMl'blo , thereof Is Plelgsl to she Payment of the Bonds Tbrlefomurbo sr, frtk Is A4 Prellmimuir OlBrlal Statistical, lala flaii Iafasutfas and" the keNUg'Bo alowasse Risks" allmW be read In He eaderry. pus I"afa Iabr Ja,a Aram Par 1100 1986 1987 1938 1989 1990 1991 1992 1991 1991 199s pan Iasseal erNr 4013 Auer Wr 110 1996 S 1991 I!198 1999 2001 2111 2032 20)1 tax eons The Bowdsaren8ndwhen, Pram difluuedandde#"YNlotheU.sder i0rnnbJ�tolF.e4pyroralofF.Mac2ns:ieBronw efRawhoSawaPa Cai( fwntABardCoundwdcenainahawndlUou flBexpmedthmiheSonkindol illiafam wlllbe amllnNefwdeffrevyin LwAngrkr. Cal(fanla an aad)w A'orembtr 19, IR9J. STONE & YOUNGBERG ?""p?•Yi.ie4YF%y" -' -V i.S. �i'M1: �" w'{, :itK i�H�' +,'q'`: � I�r Y:. '.. -. _Y: ..> _ s.. '.>, +. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY OFFICIALS _ Jon D. Mikels, Mayor Richard M. Dahl, Mayor Pro Teo Pamela J. Wright Jeffrey King Charles J. Buquet, II CITY STAFF Lauren M. Wasserman, City Manager Robert A. Rizzo, Acting City Finance Director Lloyd S. Hubbs, City Engineer Beverly A. Autbelet, City Clerk Janes C. Frost, City Treasurer William L. Holley, Director of Community Services BOND COUN. °,EL F. Mackenzie Brown F. Mackenzie Brown, Inc. Rancho Santa Fe, California °r uY EKSINEER OF WORK ?� Willuan Associates P Anaheim, California �x j- " rTt, PAYING AGENT, iIEGISTGnR AND TRANSFER .,uli1T Bank of Aaerira kI.T. & S.A. 4 Los Angoles, California FINANCIAL CONSULTAYT Fieldman, Roiapp t Associates L" Irvine, California -2- e� n: t� 1 f}n• • - gel �. 4- .1 . TO NHOII IT MY CONCERN: Cti• purpose of this Preliminary Official Statement is to supply information to prospective purchasers of $7,334.776 principal amount of Sity .� of Rancho Cucamonga Improvement Bonds, Park and Recreation Improvemee't District No. 85-PD, (Heritage and Red Hill Community Parks) (`the Bonds' proposed to be issued by the City of Rancho Cucamonga (`the City') pursuant to the Improvement Bond Act of 1915 (*the Bond Law`). The information set forth herein has been furnished by the City and from certain other sources which are believed to be accurate and reliable but is not guaranteed as to accuracy or completeness. Statements contained in this Preliminary Official Statement which involve estimates, forecasts, crother matters o7 opinion, whether or not expressly so described herein, are intended y solely as such and are not to be construed as representations of fact. Further, the information and expressions of opinion contained herein are subject to completion or amendment. No dealer, broker, salesman or other person has been authorized by the Underwriters to ive any information or to make any representations other than t those contained in this Preliminary Official Statement, and, if given or made. such other information or representatives must not be relied upon as having been authorized by the Underwriters. This Preliminary Official Statement does not constitut,� an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy, nor shall there be any sale of the Bonds, by any person in any jurisdiction in which it is unlawful for such person to make such offer, solicitation or sale. �'- The summaries and references to the Bond Law, the Resolution of Issuance and to other statutes and documents referred to herein do not purport to be comprehensive or definitive, and are qualified in their entireties by reference to each such statute and document. i' The material contained in this Preliminary Official Statement has been prepared by Stone L Youngberg, Underwriters of the Bonds. The Preliminary Official Statement does not constitute a contract between v, any bondowner and the City or the Underwriters. R n -3- `.i .y Y,� t, .-L i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Summary Statement .................. ............................... 5 Location Map ....................... ............................... 8 The Bonds ........... ............. ............................... 9 The Iorrovement Project ............ ............................... 15 The District ....................... ............................... 21 Bondowners' Risks .................. ............................... 25 Legal Opinion ...................... ............................... 26 The Financial Consultant ............ ............................... 26 Tax Exemption ............................................. . 26 No Litigation ...... ........ 2T No Rating .......................... ............................... 27 Underwriting . ....... ............................... 27 Table 1 - Annual..... Se...... ...................... ..... 14 Debt Table 2 - Cos: Estimate ............. ............................... 14 Table 3 - Prior and Parity L1 en Informat ion ........................ 22 Table 4 - Major Property Owners in the District .................... 23 Appendix B Method and Formulation of Assessment Spread.......... B -1 Appendix C City Financial Information.............. Appendix D City and County General and Economic Data ............. C -1 0.1 IN CONNECTION WITH THIS OFFERING, THE IHNIERWRITERS My OVERAU.OT OR EFFECT TRANSACTIONS WHICH STABILIZE OR MAINTAIN THE MARKET PRICE OF THE BONDS AT A LEVEL ABOVE THAT WHICH MIGHT OTHERWISE PREVAIL IN THE OPEN MARKET. SUCH STABILIZING, IF COMENCED, MAY BE DISCONTINUED AT,ANY TIME. THE UNDERWRITERS MAY OFFER AND SELL THE BONDS TO CERTAIN DEALERS AND DEALER BANKS AND BANKS ACTYNG AS AGENT AT PRICES LOWER THAN THE PUBLIC OFFERING PRICES STATED ON THE COVER PAGE HEREOF AND SAID PUBLIC OFFERING PRICES MAY SE CHANGED FROM TIME TO TIME BY THE UNDERWRITERS. _ Y .4 y a d c� l SUWARY STATEMENT w ; THIS SUMMARY STATEMENT IF SUBJECT IN ALL RESPECTS TO THE MORE COMPLETE d�- INFORMATIO4 IN THIS PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT, INCLUDING THE COYER PAGE .. AND APPENDICES HERETO AND THE OFFERING OF THE BONDS TO POTENTIAL INVESTORS IS e MADE ONLY BY MEANS OF THE ENTIRE PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT, Purpose: Proceeds from the City of Rancho Cucamonga Improvement Bonds, Park an creation Improvement District No. 85 -PD, (Heritage and Red Hill t -. Community Parks), will De aed to finance the construction of two public parks c} as more fully described In the section herein entitled 'The Improvement Project", The JOrwrale used b-, the Engineer of Work to spread the assessment is contained in Appendix B. Securit fer the Bonds: The Bonds are issued upon and secured by annual assessmen s cF%gefhve with interest thereon, constitute a trust fund for the redemption and payment of the principal and lnter_st on the Bonds. All the Bonds are secured by tie monies in the Redemption cund and the Reserve Fund established by the City during the proceedings and by the annual assessments levied to reovide for paycent of said acquisitions and Improvements, and, including principal and interest, are payaLle exclusively out of the Redemption Fund, The annual assessments are collected on the tax roll on which general texes for real property are collected and are payable and become delinquent at the same time and in the same proportionate amounts and bear the so proportionate penalties and interest and are subject to the same provision fvr sale and redemption as apply to ptooertles for non- payment of general t.xes. In the event of a delinquency in the paymt t of any annual assessment appearing on the tax roll, the City shall be ob*igateG, in the absence of any Y other bidder at a foreclosure sale, to purchase such delinquent parcel at the foreclosure sale and to pay future delinquent annual assessments and interest thereon to the extent it has available surplus funds, until such parcel is resold by the City or redeemed. Under the provislorns of the Landscapipq and Llghtino -Act of 1977, annual assessments sofficlent to meet annual debt service cn the Bonds are to be included on the regular cohnty tax bills sent to owners of property against which thCre are a:sessaw:nls. These annual t3iessaents are to be paid into a redemption fund (the oRedemotlon Fund'). 'which will be held by the City Treasurer and will be used to pay Bond principal and interest as they become duo. The assessments billed against each property each year represent a pro rate share of the total principal and interest caring due thnt year, based on the percentage wh1_!i the annual assessment against that property bears to the total of annual assessments levied to repay the debt service. If a delinquency occurs in the payment of any annual assessment the City has the duty to transfer the amount of the delinquent assessment from the J- -5- �' _'x1 X57. K. ♦ -1 .,�t � is B i' 1 Reserve Fund to the RedeWl�r Fund. If there are additional delinquencies,after eahaustior. of funds n the Reserve Fund, the City has the duty, at the end of the fiscal year of delinquency, to transfer into tale - Redemption Fund the amount of the delinquency of any available funds of _ the funds consist ociul s o tohe enumberd orrestricted for lawful munipalobigatio s This the City the City continues during the period of eelinµency, until reinstatement, redemption or sale of the delinquent property. There is no assurance that funds will be available for this purpose and if, during the period of delinquency, there are insufficient available funds, a defy may occur in payments to the owners of the Bonds. To provide funds which can be advanced to the redemption Fund for paysant of the Bonds and the interest thereon as a result of any delinquent annual assessment, the City will• establish u spacial reserve fund (W "Reserve Fund') from Bond proceeds in the amount of seven and caw -half percent (1.5%1 of the aggregate principal amount of the Ponds. Additionally subject to City advances to the Reserve Fund, the City will covenant to ?nittate Superior Court foreclosure in the event of a delinquency, to comenc•t the procedure within 180 days following such delinquency and to prosecute diligently to cMletion the foreclosure of each and every delinquer annual assessment. The right of redemption under this procedure is limitexl as opposed to a fire -year period under a tax sale. For a more complete description see the section hertlo entitled "The Bonds ", subsections wSecurity for the Bonds ", "Reserve Fund' and 'Covenant to Comtence Superior Court Foreclosure'. Judicial Validation The City Connell did cause judicial proceedings to be initiated in the Superior Court in the Covnty of San Bernardino, Califotait to validate the issuance of the Bonds. 0.t September 11, 1985, judgement was entered which provided in part that: Provisions of the Act authorizing the financing of the Improvements by an assessment levied and collected over a period not to exceed thirty years are valid. Following thu issuance of the Bonds, the Clty Council will be obligated to levy annual ss .'essments pursuant to the .' t to pay debt service on the Bonds. The Bonds will, uaon 0elr sale and delivery, corstitutc legal, valid and binding obligation, of the District. Any aopeal of the validation judgement must be filed no later than November 11, 1985. Form of Bonds: The Bonds are issued only as fully registered Bondc in r• Ya 37�f``l�l%a.: lv`•: ;... .': 4j5 _. ::J� . , +'�`.'"S -� •.M t ;te.Y }: denaminattons of $5,000 each or any intug"41 multiple thereof except for one ' o Bond in an odd Haunt due in 1900. Re,1eption�: Any Bond ray be called fr, redemption prior to maturity on any g interest for the date Poofpredemptt n105TherBonds fmayraisoUebePlubjectrvto- refunding purauant to law, the District: Park and .Recreation District Ho. 85 -PD (Heritage and Red Hill 1^aanrniry Parks) ('the District ") is comprised of 19,983 assessment,ppaareels istalling 16,570 acres tweompassin9 ■ppproximattly 76 percent of the•land in the City. OwectshiP is highly eversitied. Approximately 48 percei.t of the 'I land in the District is zoned for residential uses, 27 percent is zcn- -d for industrial uses 4 percent is zcned'for ccamercial uses and approx1rAtely 21 percent is zoned for publidiwstitutional uses or open space. ' 17,004 parcels are improved with buildings; the remaining 2,979 parcels are currently unimproved. ' The total assessed. valuation of the land in the District is $666,373,273; the total assessed valuation of ioprovements is $1,360,395,974, for ,a total assessed valuation 57047(abi hiciacludes71prioriand parity tlion bonds totalling $20,176,794). A discussion of prior And parity lien bonds is contained in the section herein entitled "The District", subsection uPriority of Lien ". For more information on the District, see the section herein entitled 'The - rstrict". Bondowners' Risks: For a discussion of certain of the investment qualities of this issue, re er to the section herein entitled "Bondowners' Risks . r' V�.�?�'�'l�.' I LOCATION MAP Ssnp I� ELI MtO. kY V" / A gl l Fy � t A PASADEN '�� M4• IENDAIE :. �j -.. ....... 42,10 1 BERNARDINO RIALTO AUUMBRA 410 ` y t For kNAA 410 CO qM.. ONTA000 _L_. .'3._1 ,4 BLmiW^PPED NLy ONO SOVTH DATE In AnON„ Oa... 'y� But BMOudw VWey DOWNEY In, —� RIVER JOE .�FULLERTDN QI'� '�" i� LAKEWOOD r ~ Ru Bt IN ORONA l� ANAHEIM Long 9qh ; GARDEN GROVE SANTA T j,�ti.�•`I ?�'�,Q 6'� n 'fr s,krr.M1,T Sin L,At V9� ob�po nu so r ,y u0 Y V9 pOp WnY BuOUA T RANCHO �, r 10yBA ben lArtAr 0 411 0 104 AnB,B,,• 4 �a r,A h b � li Ben D"o i � d: 1 , .6.. � , a u • � • X . r 1` THE BONDS c t< Authority for Issuance The improvement proceedings for the City of Rancho Cucamonga Improvemedt; vmds, Park and Recreation Improvement Oistritt No. 85 -PD, (Heritage and Red Hill Community Parks), are being conducted pursuant to the Landscaping and• Lighting Act of 1972 ('the Act) and Resolution of Intention No. 86.101, " adopted by the City Council on April 10, 1985. The Beads, which represent the unpaid annual assessments levied against property in the District are issued Pursuant to the provisions of the Improvement Bond Act of 1915 ('the Bond Law') and the resolution of the City providing for issuance of the Bonds. Description of the Bonds k,X The $7,334,776 principal amount of Bonds are dated September 1, 1985. The Bonds are serial Bonds and mature in various amounts on each July 2 commrencing JuIY 2, 1986 and ending July 2 2005. Intorest is payable ' commencing un January 2, 1986, and seat - annually thereafter on January 2 and y July 2 of each fiscal year until maturity. The Bonds are issued only as fully registered Bonds in denominations m' $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof except for one Bond in an odd amount due in 1986. Principal of, interest at raturity or upon earlier redeption, as applicable, and premiums, if any, on the Bonds are payable at the prtnclptl corporate trust office of the Bank of America N.T. A S.A., San Francisco, California, Paying Agent, Registrar and Transfer Agent ('the Paying Agent'). Interest (other than at maturity or upon ; earlier redemption) shall be paid by check or draft of -the Paying Agent mailed to the registered owners (as shorn on the registration books kept by the Paying Agent) as of the preceding December 15 or June 15, as applicable. The Bonds mature in the amounts and on the dates as shown in the following maturity schedile. Due Amount Due Amount gg July 2 Maturing July 2 Maturing 1986 $ 1996 f 198' 1997 1988 1998 a" 1989 1999 1990 2000 �L 1991 2001 i ck' 1992 2002 1993 2003 `t 1993 2004 1995 2005 }..' 4� „�,�s�Y3`4�P"..trd'�.a%���f.:• f ` f r• 3i,1,rt�:.�:� ;•`. `1>�J1 a,:i.i.. c ^_.•51 �itNwcl, = 7:.'- 'C�1x4,•t�,;$q._i- v , � s li 1 Redwntion of Bonds ";- Any Bond my be called for redemption prior to maturity on any January 2 or July 2 upon paMnt of iDS patent of par value, plus accrued into -est to the date of surrender or the da a of redemption, whichever is earlier, ko ; interest will accrue un a Bond beyond the January 2 or July 2 on which said Bon• is called for rc.Seeptiec. Notice of redemption must be given by " publication, personal service or registered mail at least 60 days prior to the redemption date. The determination as to which Bond or Bonds are to be tailed will be made by Oe City or the Paying Agent. The Bonds may also be subject to refunding pursuant to lay. i� Purpose of the Bonds Proceeds from the sale of the conds will be used to financt the construction of certain public :r.provements as described in the section herein entitled 'The Improvement Projtct'. Disposition of Surplus frog On Improvement Fund The uaount of Sri), surplus remaining in the Improvement Fund after completion of the improvement and payment of all claims shall be applied as a credit on the assessment as provided in the Act. Security for the Bonds The Bonds are issued upon and secured by annual assessments which, together with interest thereon constitute a tr•ost fund for the redemption and payment of the principal and interest on the Bonds. All the Bonds are secured g the menies n the Redearption Fund and the Reserve Fund established by the ty during the proceedings and by the annual aisessmants levied to provide for payment of said acquisitions and improvements, and including principal and interest, are payable exclusively out of said Redemption Fund. The annual assessments are collected on the tax roll on which general taxes for real property are collected and are payable and become delinquent at the some Liam aid in the some proportionate amounts and pear the same proportionate penalties and interest and are subject to the same provisions ! for sale and redemption as apply to propertlas for non - payment of general taxes. In the event of a delinquency in the payment of any annual assessment ; ag:aring on the tax roll, the City shall be obligated, in the absence of any 1 other bidder at a foreclosure sale, to purchase such delinquent parcel at the foreclosure sale and to pay future delinquent annual assesments and interest •.heruon to the extent it has available surplus funds until such parcrl is r resold by the City or redeemed. Under the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, annual assessments sufficient to smet annual debt service on the Bonds are to be .1D- .ol,✓',y. y7v i )5 q i r'i) i3 )r 71 vA,,• xk. a��ril +4Y+:N�'!..1y,:�t�-ifi7UiTFs S.�h.:1. �< ! .�, •t':c'�: ��a�''�L v' 1 included on the regular County tax bills sent to owners of property agaInst A which there are assessments. These annual assesssrmts are to be paid into a redemption fund (the "Redemption_ Fund"), which will be held by the City Treasurer and u111 be'ussd to pay Bond principal and interest as they becomedue. The assessments billed a ;.Inst each property each year represent•a > pro rate share of the total principal and interest coming due that year, plus any required maintenance on the improvements, based on the percentage which " the annual assessment against that property bears to the total of annual assessments levied to repay the debt service. ; Obligation of the City Upon Delinquency If a delinquency occurs in the payment of any annual assessment, t he City has the duty to transfer the amount of the Ialinquent assessment from the Reserve Fond to the Redemption Fund. If there are additional delinquencies, .,,) after exhaustion of funds in the Reserve Fund, the Pity has the duty, at the end of the fiscal year of delinquency, to transfer into the Redemption Fund the amount of the delinquency out of any available funds of the City. Available funds consist of sly iurrppias funds of the City not encumbered or restricted fat, lawful municipal obligations. This duty of the City continues during the perlod of delinquency until reinstatement, redeeytlon or sale of the delinquent pro,serty. There 1s no assurance that funds will be available for this purpose und, it during the period of delinquency there are insufficient availeble funds, a delay may occur in payments to tine owners of the Bonds. For information of City finances, see Appendix C herein. Reserve Fund The resolution of the City providing for issuance of the Bonds will cause Vie creation of a special reserve fund (the 'Reserve Fund ") to provide available funds, from which the City shall advance the amount of any delinquent installment on unpaid assessments levied in the proceedings, and interest thereon, into the Redemption Fund for the Bonds issued In the proceedings in which such Reserve Fund is created. The Reserve Fund shall be hold and maintained as a saparate trust account, distinct from all other funds. To fund the Reserve Fund, the City shall deposit into the Reserve Fund from Bond proceeds an amount•nqual to seven and one -half percent (7.5%) of the par amount' of the Bonds issued. Manias in the Reserve Fund shall be paid and transferred in the following amounts and at the following times and under the following clrcastances: F ! (a) Whenever there are insufficient funds in the Redemption Fund to the next maturing installment of Grincipal of or lnterast on the Bonds, in amount necessary to crake up such deficiency shall be transferred from the Reserve Fund to the Redemption Fund. •Y (b) On July' 15 of each year, conmencing My 15, 1986, the amount of Y !r interest earned to the preceding June 30 by the investment of monies in the Reserve Fund in permitted lnvesto,nts, Ord not previously '> . , i ,. transferred, shall be transferred from the Reserve Fund to the City. In no event, however, ally any interest transfer be permitted which would cause the Reserve Fund to fall below ar, amount equal to sevenand one half (7.55) of thu original principal amount less any Bonds called. (e) All sums remaining in tM, Reserve Fund following the date on wMch the last installemnts of the assessments became due and payable, shall revert beck to the City. Covenant to Commence Superior Court Foreclosure The Bond Lsr provides that in the event any annual assessnt is not paid when due, the City may order Via institution of an + me ctlon in the Suoerior Court of the State of Californit to foreclose the lien of the unpaid assessment. In such action, idea ,real property subject to the unpaid assessment, as authorized in Part 11 of Division 10 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, may be sold at a foreclosure sale. Such court foreclosure sale procedure is not mmandatory. However, the City wlll covenant with the registered Bond owners, that court foreclosure proceedings enqueny andlthat it will be11diligent8y prosecuted to final judgment such sale. Effective July 1, 1983, a judgment debtor (property owner) has at least 110 days from the date of service of the notir of levy to redeem the property to be sold, if a property ownar facts to so radecm and the property, is sold, his or her only remedy is an action to set aside the sale which must be brought within six (6) months of the date of sale. If, as a result of such an action, a foreclosure sale is set aside, the judgment is revised and the T' judgment creditor is entitled to interest an the revised judgment as if the sale had not been made. Miction 701.680 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the State of California.) The constitutionality of the rorementioned legislation (which repeats the one -year redemption period) has not been tested and there can be no assurance that, if tested, such legislation will be upheld. b' Foreclosure proceedings may be deferred if the C)ty advances further funds to the Reserve Fund to keep said Fund continually at the level as initially funded (seven and one -half (7.5s) percent of the principal amount of the Bonds originally outstanding last any bonds called). r Priority of Lien The annual assessments and any interest and penaltm a thereon, constitute a lien against the lots and parcels of land on which they were ipwsed until the same is paid. Such a lien is subordinate to all fixed special assessment c liens previously imposed upon the some property, but has priority over all private liens and over all fixed special assessment liens which may thereafter be created against the property, Such a lien is ca -equal to and independent N, -12- tL0 vit�Sp"t' :- MS1tti° i'�'.'Y..3e ia"id n' :1..+;`Y7'7�Si •� �''? ' . �`#'i.-iw.F "yiwYi /Y N ' R i e'. Y, t Y j Ye••t i ri* 4 of the lien for general, taxes. The Bond' agqaainst approximately 93 percent Bern 'l L1ty has been advised by prior fixed special assesssent Hens fror properties in the District, and there is issued pursuant to the �Mtl besis with eaKndcd) which 1s on a ri ty Drope c4• subs.ctionll� Prlartty of eLien' prior and party liens, afundin4 BoBonds Pursuant to the "Refunding Act of 1984 for 1915 Isgrovement Act Bonds' tale city 11.5issue refunding bonds or, Je purpose of red ingCatheoE nods. Ufe City issue end sell„ nfundln0' booms w1U'aut giving dotice to and The CI b /hearing for thn owners off Droperty Sn the Dlsiriet, or giving each conducting c Council finds that (1) each Spent to notice to the owners of the`'BondS SS the ity estimatth annual insUlldanSsf/ess thanitand,clorresponding annual installment secure +f principal and interest on the original assessment, (111 the number of years than the number Of yes last marturity ofltileueonc being Srefunkde and (111) the 8"tssof ... reassessments are computed by reducing each original assessment by the sthe basis which the city--Council percentage. Upon issuing the nfundin9 bonds, the City could require that Bonds in exchanged for refundeut bon -3 ty a'UI bonds and determines is for the beneflL ear the City. 7s an alternative to exchanging the refunding bonds for the 80ds, the City could sell the refunding utilize the p coatheConis as they'becoome d e and or advance the maturity Of premium, if any. the principal of and SntcreSt and redemption premium thereon. the Bonds and pmy -13- �s 1� •4 'r J' •i?•Af.'�Ri��. n Y�. cribed heraln are a first• lien rq in the District. Rowover, ,the ; county Assassor that there are assessment districts on certain ; m for a special tax (for bonds Facilities Act of 1902, as. lion NThe Sectionr reroinonentitled a more dettiled discussion of afundin4 BoBonds Pursuant to the "Refunding Act of 1984 for 1915 Isgrovement Act Bonds' tale city 11.5issue refunding bonds or, Je purpose of red ingCatheoE nods. Ufe City issue end sell„ nfundln0' booms w1U'aut giving dotice to and The CI b /hearing for thn owners off Droperty Sn the Dlsiriet, or giving each conducting c Council finds that (1) each Spent to notice to the owners of the`'BondS SS the ity estimatth annual insUlldanSsf/ess thanitand,clorresponding annual installment secure +f principal and interest on the original assessment, (111 the number of years than the number Of yes last marturity ofltileueonc being Srefunkde and (111) the 8"tssof ... reassessments are computed by reducing each original assessment by the sthe basis which the city--Council percentage. Upon issuing the nfundin9 bonds, the City could require that Bonds in exchanged for refundeut bon -3 ty a'UI bonds and determines is for the beneflL ear the City. 7s an alternative to exchanging the refunding bonds for the 80ds, the City could sell the refunding utilize the p coatheConis as they'becoome d e and or advance the maturity Of premium, if any. the principal of and SntcreSt and redemption premium thereon. the Bonds and pmy -13- �s 1� •4 'r J' •i?•Af.'�Ri��. n 1gr>i'• `. q . c v'o, v<r, . Yi .: s'l �,'��_il�,._�. :�, .., r, ,�. ' Annual Debt Service , Trble 1 $7,704,776 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA IMPROVEMENT ADA'DS PARK AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT DISRICT NO. 85 -PO e 90 n m I `z (HERITAGE AND RED HILL CMWNIT7 PARKS) Annual Debt Service Due July 2 Principal Interest TOM) 1986 S $(11 $ 1981 It) Represents interest free Septr ter 1, 1985 to July 2, 1986. V r' ! If tP ;iJr 4. 4��1��C- h�44��f�1SN�id %tli'•�aSl ^ns3 �i� r t %: :• �.' '^t1 :nh�^�._�35Pk:;�ix«f 5 t THE 1WROVEr.EHT PROJECT Suswary -f Assessaent Procee6lnys The ASS °ssnent District proceedings arv+ being undertaken pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lightingg Act of 197. d the 1972 Act "1. The _ ' proceedings were initiated by action of tM gornrnin9 ing1 a Of the nd adopting arolot the adoption of two Resolutions: a Reso:ut on approving P 9 P map showing re areas and III iertror taillofotht District and ordarinlgtthe initiating D prep +ration of an Engineer's Report as requimd by the provisions of the 1972 Act. The Engineer's Report was prepared by 'dw firm of Engineer of s Hciates, Anaheim, California, who was retained by the ctt ed iir accordance with the ',e District. The EngiMwr s Report, prep a provisions of the 1972 Ant, contains, among other information, plans and speclfleattons far the Vr°posed irprovenents, an estimate of the cost of he improvements, a proposed diagram for the District and a proposed assessment of the estimated costs of the improvements. yD pp The fngl CouncilROno'Opr11s 10, filed 1985 with On that same darts, mthercitysCouncil the C' by Lne City p and formally approved a mtpthec}wup be files wttti the ^County ReeordeDistThetCtty ordered that a copy _ 11 Council also adopted the RtsalUtian of Intention wherein the City Council o/strict. its intenti'21 to a City Council further datteermi'edm nd declared tin the Resolution of Intent the estimated cost of the proposed stngleeannual installment, than could tiwlwat ofltfeeproposed immproovement$ $ball be raised by assessments levied over a period not to exceed twenty (201 years, Ion and goad La was the n the COSL otf�+iu proposed 111npro fmaentiowlthptha annual the assessments to be utilized to pay debt service nn O.e Bonds, Subsequent to the adoption of the Resolution of lntnnoon, notice of the i' public hearing was given by publishing the Resolution of Intention o the Daily and by iv111ny newspaper c DY of ei! a Resolution, ofit3ntan ion todalle property City, or an the last equalized County owners whose names and addresses apC assessment, roll. The notices advised t,.e pr'oppertY owneru of the date, time s beerplace protestsfixed urfor obiectionsblto the famatio of the proposedillstrict,lto the extent of the works of improvement and maintanaix;e and to the lathed and formula of ilia proposed assessment. The notices also advised the property owners of their right to pretest the formation of iheof District. estidutedlyamount ' mailed notices also advised the property owna Kies as shown 1n the pro{oeet' RaPortsaessed against their respective grope Under the provisions of tLe 1912 Act, at the time of the public hearing , -15- i .y .m all inc.rns6ed persans were afforded the opportun. , to ce.' and be heard on the formation or trti proposed District. The City Council considered all oral ,+ statements and all wricteh protests or cowunications side or filed by any intorested pors:n. Upon the Zoncluslsa of the public hearing, the City Council was required to determine whether a majority protest existed. A majority protest exists if, upon conclusion of the public hearing, written protests filed and not withdrawn represent property owners owning more than 60% of the area of assessable lands within the District. Proceedings for the formation. of the District must be abandoned if there is a majority protest, unless, by 4/S's vote of all ambers of the City Council, the protest shall be overruled. During the course of or upon the conclusion of of the public hearing, the legislative body W. also order changes in any of tle matters provided in the Engineer's Report, including changes in the improvemants, the boundaries of the proposed Dlstrict or and zones therein, and the proposed diagram or the proposed assessment. Having detemined that a majority protest had not bemn filed, and having overruled all protests, tho City Council then adopted a Resolution ordering the improvements ar., the fonnxation of the District and confining the diagram and assessments, as originally proposed by the City Ccuncil. The adoption of this Resolution constituted tha levy of an assessment fnr the fiscal year referred to in the assessment. " Each year following the fcnpation of the District, the City must undertake proceedings to levy the annual assessment for each fiscal year. The i proceedings for the levy of the annual assessment are initiated by the adoption of a Resolution by the City Council genarally descr•loing any proposed new irprovements or any substantial changes in existing improvements and ordering the Enginier to prepare and file an Engineer's Report. The Engineer's Re fort gill contain the same type of information previously described herein. The validity of the issuance to pay debt service on the Bonds the Superior Court of the State Bernardino on September 11, 1985. f� Method and Formula of Assessment of Bonds and the levy of an annual assessment has been confirmed by a ,judgement entered in of California in and for the County of San The 1972 Act provl� s that any assessment levied pursuant thereto must be based upon the benefit that the properties assessed receive from the improvements. Tho 1972 Act does not specify the formula that shnuld be used to determine benefit for the purpose of calculating assessments in any spacial assessment district proceedings conducted pursuant thereto. The 1972 Act does provide that the -et amunt to be assessed upon land within the District may be apportionned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among amon be l Assessableaeh tsot or or in proportion to the estimated y parcel from the improvements. The 1972 Act provides that the determinat n of whether or not a lot or parcel will -16- y r,. benefit frca the Improvements is to be made pursuant to the provisions of the Improvement Act of 1911. The responsibility for detarwloing benefit *tits with the Engineer of Bork who fs retained by the City for the purpose of w.king an analysis of benefit j and ostermining the correct a Porticnwnt of the aaseuament nbligation based - upon `be benaflt received by each parcel to bo assessed. For these - proceedings, the City retained the services of Willdan Associates, 144helm, California. Prior to rorwtion of the District, and anrauily thereafter Qrior to the levy of the nnnval assessment, the Engineer of Work prepares a Report" for the City which Includes, among other Information, a proposed assessment of the estimated casts of the lmprovarents fer each fiscal ear. In presenting the proposed assessment for each flscal,year, the initial Report and each annual Report thereafter, snail specify tie following: A. A net axs,urt to be assessed upon assessable lands within the District. B. A descrlptioo )f each assessable lot or parcel of land within the District. C. A proposed spreatr of the assessment of the net amount upon all assessable lots or parcels of land within the District by apportioning thrt ardunt among the several lots or parcels in propnr•tion to tha estimateo benefits to be received by each such lot or parcol frt% the tapraremants. The final authority and responsibility for approving the method and formula of annual assessment rests with the Cite. Upon con.'Islon of the public hearing (either prior to the formation of the District or prior to the levy of any annual assessment), the City mutt determine that the annual assessment to be levied has teen spread in direct proportion to the benefits received from the lmprovemeotrs. The validity of the issutnce of Bonds and the levy of an annual assessment to pay debt service on the Bonds has been confirmed by a Judgement entered in the Superior Court of the State of California to and for the County of San Bernardino on September 11, 1936. The Parks The two parks to be constructed and malntalnad with Bond proceeds are described as follows: 140ritsRS Park 1s a -1D -acre sits tAich 1s to be improved with t++syyo shared picnic areas, hardscourt and Jogging trails. equestrian portion w1111 Deg rate nedusosa wildeness area. Red Hi11 Community Park 1s a 44.6 -acre site located in the western half of 5 t V w..• Al __-- _ �� ,��1?= ��r1L.e' ' °�•e':J " r.. �if...�l{'s "h is�f:'y'� the City. Improvebents include frur lighted baseball /softball tiaeonds and two lighted soccer fields. Also in. -lueed will be + like, a peninsula concert bowl aith sloping grass asnhitheater seating, picnic areas, Jogging trails with exercise stations and p aygrvwnds. Description of work A. The proposed works of improvement are generally described as follows: I. The construction of Heritage Cammmity Park including, but not limited to, grading planting, 1 lgation, onslte roads, sidewalks, parking lots, lighting, restrcoms, equestrian facilities, playground equipment, picnic facilities, athletic facilities, and walking, Jogging and equestrian trails. 2. The construction of Red Hilt Cocanity Park including, but not limited te, gradinq, planting, irrigation, oasite roads, sidewalks parking lots, lighting, waterscape, restrwms, senior citizenst facilities, playground equipment, picnic facilities, major lighted athletic facilities, jogging trail, underground etarm drain system, and adjacent public street improvements. B. The proposed maintenance of the worts of improvement is described as follows: 1. The maintenance of Heritage Community Park including, but not limited to, lean slowing and fartillzinyy; tree and shrub trimming; irrigation system r4intanance; road, aldeval and parking lot maintenance; maintenance and overwon of lighting system; re,troom cleaning; refuse pickup; and mai,!tenanca of equestrian facilities, playground equipment, picnic facilities, and athletic facilities. 2. The maintan..xe of Red Hill Co7mminity park including, but not limited to, lawn mowing and fertiliring; tree and shrub trimming; irrigation i' system ealntenance; road, sidewalk, and parking tot malni:eoanca; maintenance and operation of lighting system; rostroon cieaning; refuse prckup; and maintenance of senior citizens" facilities, playground equipment, picnic facilities, ithtetic itcilities and water features, s� '+ Cott, Estimate , The following cost estimate is wads up of wo basic components which 4 coogrise the necessary amount of money to be spread among the properties within the District, The two cost components are the following: l k 1. The money necessary to pay back the annual debt nn the Bonds used to finance tie improvements y capital and incidental ccsts. N 2. The annual maintenance casts required to maintain both Dirks. Thu 4 �;- .; City Cour -11 may elect to utillze other available revenue sources to pay the costs of maintenance, or portion thereof. -18- •�, u3�� 4VSL'.. �tl�r kl -4' /f Yi �i,4a, n),.a'�Sti l�l��J iMtli k'anlji� :�': ± � `7. "-'i; �?T;: •� � °`$ :`�. 7 .. :7 ° . + .. t',t_; rai:a�, •t ::'4• �' 'Y! " +s`..,�1 C ' it a Table 2 ! . COST ESTIMAIE - FISCAL YEAR 1985/86 P,X,lic Works of Improvement: Red Hill Park $3,312,049 ,+ Heritage Pa,i 2,655,989 T' Construction coptingency Cost E63 741 ; Total Construction lnciacntcl Expenses: Design engineering 3045,630', Asressnent enginecring 55,011. • '` Bond counsel 32,004 _ Financial consultant 41,668 City amnistration 10,000•. ;a Printingy, advertis!ng, rol.icas 6,500 10,000 ' Bond "' liting/issuing Bond registration 5,000 :. W Incidenta continganry (6,OS) Incidentals 24 564 Su„total - Reserve Fund (7.5%) 650,108 Bond Discount (.844) 61 1112 1;TUiy?TIT Total Incidentals rind FinancU4 Costs i TOTAL CONSTRUCTION AND INCIDENTALS TO BE FINAHM BY IMPAOVEMEOT BOWS Improvement Bond Debt Service - 198S.86 Fiscal Year $391,124 r Annual Maintenance Expenses (1) n Total Improuemnt Bond Debt Service and Annual —S§9T7T� �'•F Maintenance Costs S Less Interest warned during construction (contribution)(2) (67 607) BALANCE TO A,SIISSMENT - fiscal year 1905/86 72 1 (1) No asinteaance required during 1985/86 fiscal year. (2) Earned in',xrost has been calculated alld shown as a contributica for those projects scheduled to be under construction after t1w date of delivery of the Bonds. ppyy� 1'j` •i '`'4�J r ,fit t� -19- . �1 hVYy.} .U"•'�I' -� %i aSi �y• SjWry of Pn11Alnary'Assestwnt Mounts T? Category A The estivated assessment which ai11 ue levied rreually 1s $44.65 per. 41 ? residential dlleiling wait for-those parcels in Category A. Catagory A parcels '• ' containing, wire than one residential, dwelling unit will be assessed for an amnt erual to 034.GS apes the.mnber of dwelling units. CatsgorY 8 , The assessment which oky be levied 'annuolly Ur parcels witk'n Category B shall bn according to the following schedule: Assessor's Assessment ht" S1se Range Definition Per Parcel(l) ? 0 -4 less,thar 1.5 acres i 17.32 t' 5 1.51 acres to 3.5 acres $1.99 6 3.51 acres tp 7.0 acres 121.29 7 7.01 acres to 14.0 acres 242.59 8 14.01 acres to 25.0 acres 485.16 9 :6.01 acres and larger 866.42 Category C The assessment shall be j0.00 for Category C parcels. Sce Appendix B herein entitled 'Method and Formulation of Assessment Spread" for a more detailed discussion of the various categorles of parcels. ; Tf ohm essessnents may vary from the values given suave by i.01'or S.02 either way. The coarputer spreads the aMr.1 Balance to Assessment, carries the extra pennies left over from an even spread, and odds them one at a time to the assessment roll from the first parcel downward to make the total ssses3men3 spread exactly equal the Balance to_Auossmadt. ' Source: Engineer's Report prepared by Mill•'., Associates, Anaheim, California. -20- ,. „ 1 y c C cY l 0 THE DISTRICT Doscrt ticn The District is comprisd of 19,983 assessment parcels which together, encompass epproximately 16;610 acres, or approximately 76 percent, of the land- in the n dOcommmunities of victoria nd Terrs District Vista all area the northeasterly section of the City. ownership of parcels is highly diverslflM. 17,004 parcels are improved with buildings; the remaining 2,979 parcels are currently unimproved. Approximately 48 percent of the property in the District is zoned for residential uses, 27 percent is zoned for industrial use, 4 percent is zoned for cowmrcial uses, and 21 percent 1s zoned for public /institutional uses or open space. priority of Lien The Bonds described herein are a first lien against approximately 80 percent of the land in the District. There are two 1915 Act Improvement bond issues, the liens of which have priority over portions of the lion for oite Bonds described herein. In September 1982 the City issued $e,890,616.26 principal amount of Assessment District No. 82 -1 1915 Act Improvement Bonds to finance Dublic Improvements to the Sixth Street Industrial Area. As of November 1985, -the outstanding principal amount of the lien was $8,380,000. These bonds are a first lien against approximately 1,750 acres, or 10.5 percent of the land in the District. In May 1985 the City issued $1,716.794.26 principal amount of Assessment District No. 84-2 1915 Act Improvement Bonds to finance improvements to the Alta Loma Flood Control Channel. As of November 1985 all of the original principal ae es,00ri 3 percent of the land 1n the Dfstrlctlre + first lien In August 1985 the City issued $18,000,000 principal mount of Community Facilities District No. 84-1 Special Tax -Bonds pursuant to. the Me110•ReoS Community Facilities Act of 1982, as ammnded ('the Hello-Roos bonds'). These bonds were issued to finance drainage improvements to the Day Creek Channel. The Mello-Roos district totals 3,695 acres, of which 2,062 arras are located in the District. (This represents 12.4 percent of the land in the District). Of the $18,000,000 principal amount of bonds outstandirtyy, $10,080,000 is the amount of the Mello -Roos lien against the 2,062 acres 1n the District; The lien for the Mello-Roos bonds is on a parity basis with the lien for the Bonds described herein. + -21- • ;r+�wvrf�iklJ .J v 2 t 'i `K�Y�i- °J`*,�:;Y'1 *v; JS ..F,f,f �r a r ..'•cr: ":r'�.a .... ,,�,: met }e :4r'*ki -rr� ti•,: .`,'.s Y IFY °L m •, r ...� 0 ' Y:dY ., - _ .,i R t The boundaries of f:hc. Mello -Roos district and F.D. No. 82- 1,overlaD trait 673 acres on which "there exists both a prior lien (for A.D.' No. r # -1) _ t and a parity lien (for the 11.4110 -Roos bonds). This is the only instance where , more then one lien exists in additicn to the lien for the Bonds. All prior and par'ty liens -are paid current through and inclusive of November 1985., The folioving tablt svm mrizes the prior and parity liens on land in the District. Table 3 PRIORITY AND PARITY LIEN INFORMATION Assessed Valuation The tok.l assessed valuation of the land in the District is $606,373,273; the total assessed valuation of improvements is $1,360,395,974, for a tot:0 assessed valuation of SI 966 769 247 which is 71.5 times the total outstanding assessment of ,a17;551,5y0 (which includes prior and parity lien bonds totalling $20,176,794). -22- L t i Bonds Priority of Outstanding Number of Percent of asty N of Cistrict Lien 1171/85 Acres District A.D. No. 82 -1 First Lien $8,38C,0DO.00 1,750 (1) 10.5% Alta Loma Channel First Lien 1,716,794.26 210 1.3% A.O. No. 84 -2 Community Facilities Parity 10,080,000,00 2,062 (1) 12.4% District No. 84 -1 Lien (Day Creek Drainage Systam) (1) The boundaries of A.D. No. 82 -1 and the Comixfnity Facilities District No. 84 -1 overlap to crecte 673 acres (4.0 percent of the land in the 0lntrict) or which there exists both a prior lien for A.D. No. 82 -7 and a parity lien for District No. 84 -1. Assessed Valuation The tok.l assessed valuation of the land in the District is $606,373,273; the total assessed valuation of improvements is $1,360,395,974, for a tot:0 assessed valuation of SI 966 769 247 which is 71.5 times the total outstanding assessment of ,a17;551,5y0 (which includes prior and parity lien bonds totalling $20,176,794). -22- L t i ,'i(;e:, + §� i,'4 ?- ;.;-� —ry —ai ' S�t..ii�•i '��'�F1'rl�r���5. :r`,.� } ^y�sw :e '= `,��'^ "' : : ". •a5';'i;.�:k " r,'T'�`; i•+a +'A t..a • _ _ ACS ' Major Property COwners iri+the District The following table ,shows the top 15 taxpayers in the District along id a their 1984/85 assessed valuationsi. Table 4 Pl , '• MAJOR PROPERTY ONNERS IN TH "e DISTRICT 3" 1'104/95 Assessed Namr of C2MM °aluation TAOCO (Parent Company of Ameron) $21,095,158 '? rg• Y Frito Lay General Dynamics (1) 18,369,818 17,82:,650 ' RC Industrial 17,750,539, Ne;t Coast Liquidators 15;489,370 �g AAeron 10,531,380 RC Land Co. 10,494,000 " B19 Three Industries 10 347,717 S? Etiwanda Investments 9,549,452 : Avery 8,599,452 R.C. Associates II 8,498,120 Lewis Homes 8,333,042 8,158,096 ^ OTR Jas Barton Jams 6,982,339 A. H. Reiter Development Cn, 6,707,124 ' (1) Doss not include recent purchase of 300 acres and current construction i of an office building estimated at $14 million upon completion. Source: County of San Bernardino Assessor's Office. . r '' i P• • }i4,M LI • -� :.r fsl`s"xs ��L�u;r)Y...a >•�'i• X4. L h `4 �'i! ..° • n M3ti' J ��� `ti��sr ^��it'tr�a'_'0- °x,2:.�' �� %.'`rc! :, - s �i.^ zy..yl:a�.are�• B 4 a.• i. +a� Agencies Which Provide Public' Utilities: All necessary public utilities'are' available to the land in the .' Agencies supplying,pubitc utilities "are as follows: `i Electricity: Southern California Edison Company Natural Gas: Southern California Gas Company Telephone Sorvice. General Telephone Water and Sewer: Cucamonga County Maier District Fire Protection: Foothill Fire Protection District Property Tax Status. Specific tax delinquency data for the District and City ire,unavailable. However, according to conversations with City staff, it is felt that the overall County -wide delinquency rate is representative of, the 'Ux'delinquency rate within the District and the City. The following is a sumury of UR delinquency rates for San Bernardino County for tie last five years. County -wide Year Delinquency Hate 1980 -81 8.655 1981 -82 6.295 1982 -83 E.88% 1983-84 6.S4f - 1984 -8S 5.748 .,r tp4 •- r.. _. ,...• ,*15�..'. ., a_r'� -�1y jSi ?iif� a � Fy{y�{, e.; e+ 4. ,a �' . v,' ,. � rc�• . y•SZ:''i��.,J •6»a iM:�l i7m:.'..�:�•. _'cud' -.3. it's'.. _. _ :W F-'?e �.. •, "si?'2x:._. BBKDOMKERS' RISKS General In order to PAY debt service on the Bonds, 1t 1s necessary that unpaid on,land within the I timely- installments nhould theeinstallments not be paid on tioe,icthe City has established heed s Reserve Fund in the amount of seven and one -hell percent and, pursuant f the the principal amount aF the Bond issue to corer dellnqu installments. The Available secured byta lien onsthe parcels of can land delinquent the annual assessments qor °r eotureu�pr o�disuch delinquents annual assessments in order to obtain funds to pay debt ser +ice on the Bonds. Failure by owners of the parcels to Day a^rtual assessments when due, or theleinab111ty feSihee CiutY t° cseli available which u have funds been the ubject� to foreclosure proceedings for amounts sufflcient to corer the inability annual assessments levied against such parcels may result to the inability of the City to make euld them pu be nctual PsY enaffefted. t service on the Bonds rnd Unpaid annual assessments do not constftute a personal indebtedness assurance the owners of the lots and parc ej,}iewanhual the ssessments or that ithtywill Pay esch owners will be able to pay annual ossesseents even II financially able to do so. See also e section herein on a the entitled "Pr ear Dtstricttatus' for a discussion of delinquent Availability of Ctty Funds As discussed and he se t: occurs eeinn the leY ^BbtlofaanYnannualh assessment, Delinquency', if the City, at the end of the fiscal year of de Inquency, has a duty to transfer of theeCity. Available tfundss consist of delinquency Out Of I i I municipal to ether with any surplus funds of the City not required for laww1felpnu{odipof obligations. This O ;ty of the City mate rof the delinquent delinquency, until reinstatement, property: There is no assurance that funds will be arwileble for this purpose and 1f, during the0.cerio� ya)wentsgtothve owners of LhesBmndsienin +orderbto funds, a delay may Y Feserwe a sour from eondrnproeeodss ti the amount�of�sevenCand will percent Reser) of tna principal amount of the Bond issue. It the Reserve Fund were ever depleted as a result of a major or prolonged delinquency in the payment r. to theuRedwptloo Fund to order to pay °rinciP tand/or interest onitha Bonds. -25- i> r.+ z.�`�.ty�'_ "1 _ _..�. ,Y „iJ .•tai "�ZS.o . .�._i„a: ,_, w....,h. a.��Y �. y :;y� ^. Factors Which flay Affect Land Development Ievelopment in the District may_ De affected by changes In general economic eondltions, fluctuations in The reel' ,state market and other factors. In addition, the proposed development reel' be - subject to future federal, state and l local regulations. , Approval my be required from various agencies from time to time in connection with the ,layout and de:tpn if proposed development in the District, the naturn and extant of puulfc improvemen *s, land use, zoning and other matter: LEWL OPINION All prnceedings in connection with the issuance of the Bonds are subject to the approval of F. Mackenzie Brown, Rancho Santa F0, California,' Bond Counsel for the City of Rancho Cucamonga in connection with' the Assessment District Project. The opinion of F. Mckenzie Brown approving the validity of the Bonds will be printed on each bond. The 'opinion of Bond Counsel will be qualified as to the enf=eabiII4, of certain of the proceedings _by limitations imposed by bankruptcy, insolvency, moratoria and other. similar laws affecting creditors' rights, heretofore or hereafter enacted and by the exercise of judicial discretion in accordance, with general principles of equity. F. Mackenzie Brown has been retained by the City as Bond Counsel on a contingent fee, payable solely from the proceeds of the Bond issue. THE FINANCIAL CONSULTANT Fieldmen, Rolapp A Associates is the Financial Consultant to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for the issuance of the Bonds. A California Corporation Fieldman, Rolapp i Associates is an independent municipal consulting firm with its principals having experience in this field dating back to 1954. The firm has experience In other financing tools In addition to public finance, including short term borrowing and the use of cash reserves. TAX EXEMPTION In the opinion of F. Mackenzie Brown, dencho Santa Fe, California, Bond Counsel, interest on the Bonds is exempt from all present Federal income taxes 4 and from State of California personal income taxes under existing statutes, regulations and court decisions and the bonds ire exempt from all California taxes except franchise taxes. Interest however, may become federally taxable F... upon any Bond during any period in which the Bond is held or owned by a ` substantial user of the facilities financed by the Bond proceeds, or by a related person, within the meaning of Section 103(h) of the Internal Revenue y Code. -26. S< nEb'.fiyi 1,144 NO LITIGATION There is no action, suit, or proceeding known by the City to be pending at the present time restraining or.enjoining the delivery of the Bonds or in any­_ 6 way contesting or affecting the Validity of tto tends or any procoedfrigi of the City taken' ken' with,lrespect 'to the execution or delivery thereof. A no' litigation cortificate'executid by the City Treasurer will be reNfred to be delivered to the Underwriters simultaneously with the delivery of the Bonds. NO RATING The City has not made, and does not contemplate making, application to any rating agency for the assignment of a rating to the Bonds. UNDERWRITING Stone & Youngberg, the Underwriters, have porches" the Bonds 'ram the City at an aggregate purchase price of i The public offering prices as set forth on the cover page 'of this 7—reffo-nary Official Statement my ba changed from t1Ae to time by'the Underwriters. -The Underwriters jPy offer and sell Bonds to certain doalart'and'others at a price *Iower t1jan the offering price stated an the cover page hereof. I ti X -27- o. (THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT' BLANK) fk ...ut Q SCALE ►[[ ss eti'e J(1�. .• a w.wMlale ..mw.. I I ery ,r.(\ rt,11Yr .rr eYr \Mt C"W" [M[[T t or PD xa1 • •TIIAI'. ..1 J. 1� Ir ..1 t h rA�t . r\ ..u.. ...D ..in.\ e..w.. <� ... 111..•- t.P.. . \ . 11111•t.• . M11 .I... {.tID n n .1\c. .1 ..... t., !. y 1 4.I.1. `I I .sf11I . <. •a L.n . 1.o- .um n• t tFMD � ..I YIKt P .�• t..{. �.I4t.• bfM1l .r(.0 fN.M. IYep \�M.KI Y ,M Dn. AM1 M tYl •R tU. Y ..qa tNUpD. fi��Pl:t•D.. SS yx�DAi Inp , ar.M•�rIlS S_ I Et' up.�3_r\•u M •1 � 4 W IRJ �hlgt. .tii/ ty��� A -1 �7; e tj SWEET,* OF 8 PARK AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 95 - PI) it SCALE IN FEET 8EE BWEET 3 A-2 In W Av �A SWEET•S OF 9 SHEETS If) PARK AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 85 - PD nx SEE SMELT B&SEL NE Rn, 2 T f4:0--AY Ll 14 BOOK 1077 X 4ZE Q U) t Z /-CrTY0FNN"-- w zw j CX�A*Xll:�j Of SCALE W.FES? A-3 • - , yy +4 k SN"T 4 O! 6 SNSSTS ' PARK AND RECREATION ±` IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. SS - PD SEE SHEET 1 i �J .14 1 -, F COOK 7077 JU) r- _S m .. r �z }�e �Oa— 00 YL: SOCK =i l0S i {4 — Q , °y 40CK � f }• i _ ,7 »c • 1 1 L_ — �!%a,,,�- r, t ._. sett ,.�..��� - — - •W�? tslc SCALS IN PUT -• �. ��' A -4 @Kam a OF A o"19TS PARK AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 85 PD mmXlra� • MOEN 4. tt ol mc�zl n in uj ui IF BASELINE-RD gem, Oct uj 19 60 SEE SHIET4 AL IN IT tit - ��q,)PCx^•x tX i`�1i "e y,al-'Tn'e ^�'1 ' }F` "f t�.K: "� f'{fas. _ Zr i _.. ��6� i S.± °iii: APPENDIX B I5` NETHW'AND FORMULATION OF ASSESSMENT SPREAD ra The Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972 is a bene'mt e.ses:meot act, - meaning Chat assessments are assigned to properties in pruportion will the benefit that sech ,propertier receive. Since this assessment progra, will be ;r• dealing with a large number of parcels, the benefit formula is based upon information readily Available from the San Bernardino county Assessor's computer files. Assessments mta Will be distributed in ants sufficient to meet the debt service requirements of the Bonds to be sold to construct the park park fac111ties, Such assessments should also be sufficient to provide such maintenance funds as detarrrtned by the City Council to be raised by this method. The projects proposed to be financed by this method are the construction of Peritage and Red Hill Parks. Developed residential units within the District will receive direct benefit from this construction program due to the availabitiri of the proposed park facilities to the residents therein. All land, however, will also receive_ direct hfnefit through a more attractive community once the park Improvements completed. Such benefit will not only but make asattractive fon coucting manufacturing and commercial bunesses. Thebenefitformulas, residential iproperties and with tieslnettspecifl ally excludedtlons, The assessment formula is based on actual land use information contained in the current Count. Assessor's computer files. All residential units are proposed to receive the sane assessment. Were the existing density of residential development 1s less than one unit (per acre, or where the lint 1s records). the eassesscent wmll�be levied nbased upon the parcel type andssite. Publicly -owned lands are• exempt from assessments per Section 22663 of Cie Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. Certain other parcels owned sy churchos or other nonprofit organizations that perform a public service are also ermm•,t from this assessment. To set forth the above criteria within the structure contained in the County Assessor's C(%Vutar files, three categories have been established as discussed further on. Category A: Includes parcels based an the number of existing residential units -jithin certain ranges of parcel size. Category B: Includes vacant or low density parcels of generally less than one existing residential dwelling unit per acre with the exception of all non - exempt vacant parcels of less than 1.5 acres. Also included are coesnerciot and industrial parcels. In general, Category 5 irclades all parcels not defined in Category A or Category C. Category C: Includes exempt parcels. Exceept parcels were discovered by searching the County Assessor's computar tapes for those parcels that are listed as exempt by the Assessor or which have an assessed value of less than $,SDo. In conducting this search, several parcels were included as exempt that , B -1 ^ategory A is based on the nueber of existing residential units. The actual assessment for Bonn Debt Service per existing residential dwelling unit may decrease each year as more residential units are built within the District. Maintenance costs, however, are expected to increase annually and will somewhat offset tiur anticipated decrease in assessments due to new development. Category B All parcels not defined in Category A or Category C. Cste aq ry D All exempt parcels as defined below: 1. all properties currently tax exempt; 2. all public ownerships; 3. railroad sainllne rights -of -ray; , 4. rAjor utility transmission rights -of -way; 6. mineral rights; 6. parcels so small they currently may not be built upon (bal•4 upon 4" current City land use designations). iv B -2 �0'6.. $. r ` show parr el sizes in excess of 1.5 acres These urtre and hype codes of, for example, added back into the rolls and residential or agriculture. parcels 3 assessed. The District is divided into three categories for the purpose of determining the assessment, ca follows: ' 4 Category A ., All parcels containing existl)ig residential dwelling units Ana meeting the following candltlons: sRings R¢,10 Number of Foisting Ras. Dwe`ting Uni °a P+r Parcel Size Parcel Six* 0-4 Less than 1.6 acre and 1 or more dwelling units 5 1.61 acres to 3.5 acres and 2 or more dwelling units 6 3.51 acrer to 7.13 acres and 4 or more dwelling units 7 7.01 titres to 14.0'acres and 8 or more dwelling units 8 14.01 acres to 25.0 acres and 15 ar more dwelling units 26 dwelling units g 25.01 acres and larger and or more ^ategory A is based on the nueber of existing residential units. The actual assessment for Bonn Debt Service per existing residential dwelling unit may decrease each year as more residential units are built within the District. Maintenance costs, however, are expected to increase annually and will somewhat offset tiur anticipated decrease in assessments due to new development. Category B All parcels not defined in Category A or Category C. Cste aq ry D All exempt parcels as defined below: 1. all properties currently tax exempt; 2. all public ownerships; 3. railroad sainllne rights -of -ray; , 4. rAjor utility transmission rights -of -way; 6. mineral rights; 6. parcels so small they currently may not be built upon (bal•4 upon 4" current City land use designations). iv B -2 �0'6.. 0 APPENDIX C CITY FINANCIAL INFORMATION Budget Process The fiscal year of the City begins an the first day of July of each year 9' and ends of the thirtieth day of June of the following year. At such date as the City Manager determines, each department head rust furnish to the City Manager an e3timate of revenues and expenditures for such department, for the ensuing fiscal Year, detailed in such a manner as may be prescribed by the City Manager, In proparing the proposed budget, the Cit, Manager reviews tho estimates, holds conferences thereon with the respective department heads, boards or commissions as necessary and may revise the estimates as he my deem advisable. In June of each year, the City Manager submits to the City Council the proposed budget as recommended. The City Council determines the time and ? place for the holding of o public hearing and causes to be published a notice ' thereof not less than ten days prior to the hearing date. Copies, of the proposed budget are available for inspection by the public in the office of the City Clerk at least ten days prior to the hearing. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the City Council further considers the proposed budget and makes any revisions thereof that It dears advisable and on or before June 30, ? it adopts tha budget with revisions, if any, by tl,e affirmctive vote of at least a majority of the total mashers of the Council. From the effective date of the budget, the several !mounts adopted as expenditures become appropriated to the several departments, offices and agencies for the objects and purposes neoed, provided p that the City Manager may transfer funds from one object or purpose to another within the same department, office or City; however, any revisions that alter' the total expenditures of any fund must be approvtJ by the City Council. All appropriations lapse at the end of the fiscal year to the extant that.they have not been sxpended or lawfu'.ly e.cdebared. At any public meting, after the adoption of the budget, tlw! City Council may band or suppla;ent the budget by-motion adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of the total members of the City Council. A The City Council employs, at the beginning of each fiscal yea„ an independent certified public accountin firm which, at such time or times as specified by the City Council, At least annually, examines the financial statement. As soon as practicable after the end of the fiscal year, enaccountent's report is submitted by such accounting firm to the City Council and a copy of the Annual Report as of the close of the fiscal year is published. • r CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ADOPTED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1985 -85(1) GENEPAL FUND ldopted y Fiscal Budget �? AIAILABLE FUNDS: S 1,015,659 Property Taxes 3,578,256 Other Taxes Licenses and Permits 1,(52,867 Fines and Forfeitures 10,223 Interest snd Rental Income 117,289 1,816,314 From Other Agencies 1,533,714 Charges for Current Services 33,228 ;c Other Revenue Transfers- in- Apprcpriated Reserves 3,196,683 Carryover from Previous Year 681,137 Total Available Funds $13,675,370 (2) RE)UIREMENTS: j 3484,759 General Government 3,,869,164 Public Safety Public Marks /Engineering 2,850,801 Culture and Recreation 685,806 7,542 494 Community and Economic Development .494 1,222 Non- Department - Transfers -Out Total Requirements $13,675,370 T1-rW opted by the City Council on June 27, 1985. (2) By Resolction, the City is allowtd to charge the Drainage and Beautification Fund u7 to 252 to offset expenses for overhead. Source: City of Rancho Cucamonga Ad Valorem Property Taxes ' Taxes are levied for eaph fiscal year on taxable real and personal K property which is situated in the County as of the preceding March" 1. For assessment and collection purposes, property is classified either as secured of the assessment or "unsecured', and is listed accerdingly on separate parts roll. The " secured roll" is that part of the assessment roll containing State . assessed property and reel property having a tax lien s0ich .s sufficient, in t! ' the opinion of the assessor, to secure payment of the taxes. Other oroperty [: is assessed an the "unsecured roll ". , C -2 )JI ` ;r t s Property taus • on the secured roll are due in two installments, •n November 1 and February 1 of the fiscal year.. If unpaid, such taxes became delinquent on December 10 and April l0 respectively, and a tan percent panel attaches to any delinquent paynent." In addition, property on the secured roll with respect to which taxes are dellnquent'is sold to the State on or about` - June 30 of the fiscal year. Such pro, arty my thereafter be redeemed by payment of the delinquent t%xgs and the dallnquarcy penalty, plus a redemption - Welty of one and one -half parent per month to the time of redemption. If taxes are unpaid for ► peria-6 of five years or eon, the property 1s deeded to the State and then is subject to sale by the County Tax Collector. Property taxes on the unseeund roll are due at of t,i March 1 lien date and become delinquent, if unpaid, on August 31. A six percent penalty attaches to delinquent taxes ea property on the uAwured roll and an additional penalty of one pe,ce�nt per month begins to accrue beginning t. November 1 of the fiscal year. The taxing authority has four 'ways of collecting unsecured personal'Droperty taxes: (1) a civil action against the taxpayer; (2) filing a certificate in the office of the County Clark specifying certain facts In order to obtain a ,judgment lien on certain pproperty of the taxpayer; (3) filing a certificate of dalingwncy for record 1n the County Recorder's office in order to obtain a lien on certain property of the tarpayer; and (4) seizure and sale of personal property, the improvements or possessory interests belonging or assessed to the Mosses. The following table presents a breakdown of tax revenues by source received by the City for the last five years. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA TAX'REVENUE BY SOURCE FISCAL YEAaS 1980 -81 THROUGH 1984 -85 Business General General Gross Fiscal Total Property Sales Receipts Other C -3 ��, (jj°��,,,i�y./r�'��' ,'�_{yj����•i,� - •(. a �,r � ���ir' ��STl�! e- ...�,�{� }}; >�7��•:�.a�.YE -: ;: •'� ?f�..�.n. s. � •F _- - .,f.�5r l°1 �:'en"±5t�.. 1984 -85 $4,670,738 $1,198,672 $2,563,963 $172,752 5735,351 1983 -84 3,895,775 846,152 2,062,870 255,0}3 731,710 1982 -83 3,635,831 752,871 1,918,416 288,644 675,900 1981 -82 3,558,114 1980 -81 2,895,759 669,836 2,047,202 $90,311 1,508,994 237,605 181,603 603,471 614,851 urce: ity of Rancho Cucamonga. ` F; Legislation enacted to implement Article XII18 (Statutes of 1980, Chapter 1205, adding California Government Code Section 7900 at seq.) defines certain terms used to Article n XIIIB and sets forth the methods To r determining the appropriations limits for local jurisdictions. Relying on these definitions the City has determined that its aoproprlations limit for 'proceeds of taxes' P,. C -3 ��, (jj°��,,,i�y./r�'��' ,'�_{yj����•i,� - •(. a �,r � ���ir' ��STl�! e- ...�,�{� }}; >�7��•:�.a�.YE -: ;: •'� ?f�..�.n. s. � •F _- - .,f.�5r l°1 �:'en"±5t�.. for the 1981 -82 fiscal year is approximately $6,242,878. Pursuant to tk adopted 1984 -8'V5 fiscal year budget appropriations subject to 1'mit are $9,906,069 which would be substantially h gher than the actual appropriations for proceeds if taxes for the ycar. City's Assessed Valuation Assessed valuations within the City are established by the San Bernardino County 1asessor, except for utility property w,ach is assessed by the State Board rsf Equalization. Article XIIIA of the State Constitution provides that, begin•Ang with the 1978 -79 fiscal year, property taxes in California art limited to cne per cent of full cash value, except iar +axes to pay debt service on indebtedness approved by the voters prior to July 1, 1918. Article XIIIA defines full cash value as the County Assessor': valuation of real property shown on the 1975 -76 tax bill ('base year'), except in the case of dewy constructed property or property which undergoes a change in ownership which must be valued as of the date of completion of construction or the change in ownership. Yearly assessed value increases following the base year are limited to the growth in the Consumer Price Index but may not exceed two percent annually. Prior to the 1981 -82 fiscal year, property was assessed at 25 percent of cash value end, therefore, Article XIIIA permitted a naxinm tax rate of $4.00 per $100 of assessed valuation, except for ttxes to meet debt service on indebtedness approved by the electorate prior to July 1, 1978. Beginning in 1981 -82 property is assnssed at 100 percent of cash value and property tax rates are oxpressed in terms of their ratio to such full cash value. The assessed valuations reflect homeowner's and business inventory exemptions. Tax revenues lost as a result of the homeowner's exemption is reimbursed by the State based on the total taxes which would be di,e on t'ra assessed valuation of the proppenrty qualifying for the exemption. w'thout allowance for delinquencies. The homeowner's exemption is $7,00: of the assessed valuation of an owner - occupied dwelling providing the owner files for the exemption. In 1979, the California Legislature increaied the business inventory exemption, beginning 1980 -81, from 50 to 100 percent of the -value of such property, and reimbursed property tax Menues lost as a result of" the exemption an a formula basis. The formula is based on the revenue. loss resulting from the tax rates levied for indebtedness, approved by the voters 1 prior to July 1. 1978. C -4 d- �;rt'Y�h� :M}M °�rsst�..' _n� sritrv..' >. f i• � %3•. i .�� ... . . ... Ng ) '■ ` � .^ ) _ _ , ■■ Ui \ | _v Vo c go �� g■ . 0a �k % � §§ ; k t � e a m - © b |B 'k� ! ( ■� - • , � 7 \: ) mk2( - � •- .�� ... . . ... Ng C-6 '£ r 1 7i ��1;(r ��.},���r�'L '. =- f+t.y`. .•- :'�wy tti4 r : 1' µ.. � {r/ t� H?rl��• ^.S .��%•:. �,II 4v•Y`N. i+t K.y �'+o,G�• ••4I •l�':!TF Tax Rates Article XIIIA of the Cal ifornla*Constitetion limits the cocbined tax rate for all operating levies to one percent of full cash value. The limitations- ! ,( of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution do not apply to tax levies for, voter - approved Indebtedness authorized prior to July 1, 1978. There are 71 tax rate areas in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The ; following table shows the tax rates for Tax Rata Areas 1 5001 , 15002 and 1E004 for fiscal year 1985 -66. -These 'are the three' largest tax rate areas within' i the City and constitute, in the aggregate, approximately 20 percent of the IJ City's total assessed valuation. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMINGA TAX RATC AREAS 15001, 15002 AND 16004 (Tax Pate Per ;100 of Assessed Valuation) Taxing Entity ;5001(1) 15002 15004 • County of San Bernardino $1.0000 $1.0000 51,0000 School Districts .0399 ,0399 ".0399 Hater (Various) .1269 .1269 .1311 Total 717. jiZTM 0 ) Tax Rate Area for Park and Recreation Improvement District No. 65-PO proceedings. Source. San Bernardino County Auditor /Controller. C-6 '£ r 1 7i ��1;(r ��.},���r�'L '. =- f+t.y`. .•- :'�wy tti4 r : 1' µ.. � {r/ t� H?rl��• ^.S .��%•:. �,II 4v•Y`N. i+t K.y �'+o,G�• ••4I •l�':!TF ��. StetaaM!nt of revenues and Expenditures The following table•presents a suwv ry of the City'r uudited revenues and expenditures for the ppast three fiiul years as pre red by Lance, Sall and - Lunghsrd, Certified Fublic Accountants, Whittier, Calif-:rnia. ' CITY OF RAMICNO CUCAMONGA COMBINED STATEMENT OF iEVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (All Governmental Fund Types) 198;1 -83 1983 -84 S:oa 95 GENERAL REVENUES: 312,4 7roperty Taxes $ 752,E.71 f 762,596 f 1,167.303 Proporty Tax Exemptions(l) 3,604,654 4- 2,379,012 2,563,963 Sales 5 Use Taxes -0•• 499,124 908,336 Other Taxes Special Assessments Levied 690,354 655,278 -0- 729,576 -G- 3,328,761 Licenses 6 Permit. Fines i Forfeits 132,327 9,974 85,615 9,162 Use of Money i Propvt Intergovernoental 931,40{ 3,156,781 1,188,092 R00'020 196,085 Charges for Services 2,278,338 228,408 830,729 58.108 1.96095 Other '0 her Financing Sources* - 57,245,771 /net. Source: Finance Department, 30 421 (3) $6 502 826 (2) 110,645,696 �r pa' W 9 ax t Total Re -enues 312,4 EXPENDITURES: General Government $1718,618 2:631,001 $1,589,216 3,328,162 5 2,257�9t9 3,417,999 Public Safety Community Development 9,033156 2,867,516 3,484,890 363.4774 Community Services 2,041,787 274,562 Special Projects -0- -0_ -- Total Expenditures $16,424,562 $8,059,456 29,524,292 'fT -SJH reimbursed homeowner's and business invzntcry. (3) Does not include '0 her Financing Sources* - 57,245,771 /net. Source: Finance Department, City of Rancho Cucamonga. Estimated Direct and Overlapiing Bonded Debt The following suaaary of Rancho Cucamon3a financial data includes 1984 -85 assessed valuation, direct and overlapping bonded debt, ratios to assessed and unsold bonds, and share of repayable state valuations, share of school building aid as authorized of October 1, 1985. l 0 -7 W 1 wi r 4 1 ' q.. CITY OF RANCHO CICAMONGA STATEMENT Or DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING BONDED DEB) 1985 -86 Assessed Valuation: $2,157,431,523 (After deducting $516,337,161 redevelopment tax allocation increment) - DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING BOWED DEBT: f Applicable ;1 Daht 10 /l /85 an rnar no oun u np orities �BOp� 4-V,; . (l) San Bernardino County Frat Library Authority 10.569 74,267 Metropolitan Water District 0.516 2,818,046 Chino Basin Municipal Water District 20.018 1,605,443 Chino Basin Municipal Water District Authority 20.018 32,028 Fontana Unified School District 0.490 1,837 Chaffey Jt. Union High school District 20.805 180,031 Alta Lem School District 99.334 5,046,167 central School District 98.420 2,673,683 Cucamonga School District 72.544 819,747 Upland School District 0.3x8 957 Cucamonga County Watep District (Various Issues) G3.19949.285 1,468,310 Cucamonga County Water Dis^.:ct, I.D. fl963.1 93.973 681,304 Cucamonga County Water District, I.D. f2 100. 100,000 Cucamonga County Water District, I.D. f. 04.211 6,641, 75 City of Rancho Cucamonga 100. ODO 000 18 , � City of Rancho Cucamonga 1915 Act Bonds 100. 17431570 (2) TOTAL EROSS DIRECT AND WERLAPPING BONDED DEBT 'a Less: City of San Bernardino Water System Acquisition 'S3;;D71- Certificates of Participation (1001 self- supporting) 770,640 Cucamonga County Water District, I.D. f2 100,000 City of Rancho Cucamonga 1P'S Act Bonds 1717 431 570 (2) TOTAL NET DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING BONDED DEBT iT7-Wsed on 1984 -85 ratios. (2) Includes $7,334,776 1915 Act Bonds to be sold. SHARE OF AUTHORIZED AND UNSOLD BONDS Metropolitan Water District .......... .....................$1,883,400 Alta Long School District ............ .....................$7,644,417 Cucamonga School District .. ............................... 408,668 STATE SCHOOL BUILDING AID REPAYABLE AS OF 6/30/85: $12,567,748 Source: Stone a Youngberg, based on data compiled by California Municipal Statistics, Inc. C -O {� 9 ..,y.;C �4 APPENDIX 0 CITY AND COUNTY GENERAL AND ECONOMIC DATA General The City of Rancho Cucamonga is located in the foothills of tht Los Angeles -San Bernardino Basin in the western portion of San Bernardino County, silts wtst Of approximately 40 wiles east of the City of Los Angeles and 3483 square miles the City of San Bernardino. The City covers approximately the east; to r the north areoCU a the South. Peak.and1Mount Baldy.mast, and Fontana on and is bordeed by The City of Ranchn Cucamonga was incorporated November 30, 1977 as a general law city. It is governed by A five- aeaber City Council which includes a Mayor who is elected at large for + year our ye�r�tenivdms four i Members who are elected at large for staggered The City Manager is responsible appoints the City Manager and City Attorney Council for licy and daily ad decisions. istrat on of City affairs and for implementing VV The City's General Plan provides a coordinated policy of deeeloDmant Ccordinatedb transportation planning cwwithrcthe, Southernn California xNegtonal Association of Governments and the County of San Bernardino is being provided necessary to eccocmodateitraffic won both xistingsize and future streets. Liming Population Prior to incorporation, the area generally within the car orate boundaries and 1980 the population grew approximately tely 250 p�ercent,o a rate of nnearly 25 percent per year. Since 1980, the City's population has increased at an average annual rate of 3.7 perrv♦ent. POPULATION ESTIMATES FIVE -YEAR HISTORY 1981 1982 1983 1904 1985 City of Rancho Cucamonga 57,200 59,700 59,779 61,700 65,500 San Bernardino Co. 927,600 967.900 985,860 1,021,940 1,056,900 State 24,004,400 25,460,300 24,944,700 25,414,000 25,857,500•• I Source: State Department of Finance. 9k' J 0'1 r � 1{ I may ♦1� The Ecoro,b Rancho Cucamonga is primarily a residential community. Fifty -twr percent of the City is zoned residential, siR percent is zom:d ceeseercial, twenty -two percent is zoned industrial, eleven percent is zoned for public /institutional use, and nine percent is zoned for open space. The following table is a five-year history of taxable sales in both the City 443 County. CITY AMD COUNTY TAXABLE SALES SAN BERKARDIKD COUNTY CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA axe a No, of Transactions No. of Transactions Permits (000 Dollars) Permits (000 Dollars) 1984 29,977 .$6,026,467 1,339 ,695 1983 29,398 5, ^230,622 1,230 189,350 1982 27,927 4,605,030 1,202 182,356 1981 24,637 4,591,022 1,073 155,093 1980 21,749 4,174,903 949 129,497 Source: California State Board of Equalization. Employment Located in the western portion of San Bernardino County, Rancho Cucamonga resident. benefit from a wide geographical area of employment opportunities in Los Angeles and Orange Counties, as well as local employment opportunities. Many residents commute to places of employment in both Los Angeles and Orange Counties daily. The City of Rancho Cucamonga is located within the Riverside -San Bernardino- Ontario Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area, which comprises all of San Bernardino and Riverside Counties. The following table is a four -year summary of employment by industry. D-2 " I 1= p I �'.. ? �_ t -N RIVERSIDE- BERNARD ESTIPNTED NOME , 'HO- OIRARIO KTROPOLIT ANNUAL 1G Eq� �Y�� ERS By INDUSTRY - _ (in thouss"is) T0111 All Industries ' 1187 Total Agriculture 457,6 Total Nonagrtculture 20,6 Mining 437,0 Construction Manufacturing 2.1 3.1 Hholesale lion i Public U2il9t9es 63.1 Finance Insurance ±rade 25.8 Services Real Estate 108.2 Government(,) 1915 93,6 rtc u s all civilian 101,6 state and local schools. p,oyees of federal, at, Source: State Employment Bevel 1182 1183 7984 452,0 165,0 502.6 20,8 431.2 22.6 23.6 442.4 479,0 79,6 23.1 1.3 57,8 57 a 3L' 4 60,2 25,4 25,6 109,4 12 27.7 19,0 19,8 723,6 96,5 20,9 101,8 102:0 108,2 704.7 to and local government and oPment Department. The followtn uneeployment rate overtabseveprovides eP., "Ployment, u.employment, and the od. CIVIL IANVLABORFFORCE, ENA Q)NO- SNS1 C111ARI0 Year(1) Labor YWWf AND UMEPLOYNENT 1985 —Force— __ Employment 1984 (1) 678,000 6—` Urt 10 nt �Pyment 1983 W2•300 624,00 46,400 1982 1 632;500 572,000 47,300 6,81 1979 586046; Opp 553; 77;100 10,9% 681 700 541,500 SO 700 12,2% • 543,500 44,700 0.4% Source: for month of may only, 38.200 6.6% State of Cal9fornA, Employment Development Department.• There are located within 11e, Y X) manufac.urtng p;antr COmserce, the City of Rcncho Cucsabnpa according �nfty >;Y area, with lop ty s Chamyer of D-3 " :P s'1 r .t s 1 ;1 As of December 1984, the largest manufacturing fins in the City were: MANUFACTURING FIRMS j (rner 100 Employees) Name of Company Employees Products General Dynamics Over 1,000 Ta:tical weaponry ;<< United Flag Processing Over 1,000 Recycling steel Klondike (Pacific) Corp. 600 -1,000 Mfg, iet cream products Pic 'N' Save 500 -1,000 Retail • Wheat Motor Company 500 -1,000 Recreational vehic.as Inspiron 250 -500 Medical produett Awron Steel b Wire 250 -5DO lobar, a 'i mash, wire Frito -Lay 250 -500 Snack foods National Can 266.500 Lithographed metal can components a.• Safetrans Systems 250 -500 E1+ctronic railroad signal one comunication equipment• Data Design Laboratories 250 -5000 Life support systems, scuba; Tomco 250 -500 Steel6and wire products u5 e City of Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce. As of December 1984, the lorgast non - manufacturing employers were: NON- MANUFACTURING FIRMS (Over 100 Employees) Name of Company Employees Type of Business Ontario Intl. Airport Over 1,000 Fixed base operators, airport vervices Rancho Cucamonga Schools 900 -1 000 Education Chaffey Junior College 700 -B60 Education Quality Fans 150 Egg processing Sunshine Fans 125 Egg processing Y�City of Rancho Cucamonga Over 100 Government (; ource: ncho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce. D -4 Y J, ay rJ .No :��a (1) Through and inclusive of September 1985. Source: 'California Construction Trends', Security Pacific Sant:, Public Utilities and Services Police orutection is contracted with the San 0eY'.iard1no_County Sh:riff's Department. A Sheriff's suoutation 1e loreted yitbin the City limits . r + -a protection and Cescue service 1s provided by the Foothill .!r° ly 63 square wiles. Protection District which covers on area of approximate , California yc�Sshes natura gas tfurnishes he CipKtrtclty and Southern MunicipaltrWater dDistrict. sewer while swater sis F furpnia:eddtoy Chino th.. City y ,the Cucamonga County Water District. A Telephone service is provided by General Telephone Company. x 6Y; 0-5 and °�`.�.' •: � � ,tar 3.r� a t t The following table shows crnstruction activity in the City for t the Past five i�; years. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ; DThousands o ; (In D 1981 1982 1983 1 1984 1 1905(11 Pesidentidl New single housing $ $16 $107430 27,015 $ $13,712 New multi- dwellin , ,435 3 5,792 3 3,776 Total Residential S S19.434 5 35,701 $ $140,237 5 591,633 Non - Residential commercial 1 10 4,018 4,811 2i >s23 3 33 :544 i i15, 6 '+ New c 5,443 3,535 1,244 3 3,471 3 3,673 ' Additions, alterations 9 Total non - residential 520,727 $11,431 $77,363 1 545,604_ , 152 Total Yaluatior. x x.161 126.191 5113.064 ' ' � S S1 3, C9 Public Utilities and Services Police orutection is contracted with the San 0eY'.iard1no_County Sh:riff's Department. A Sheriff's suoutation 1e loreted yitbin the City limits . r + -a protection and Cescue service 1s provided by the Foothill .!r° ly 63 square wiles. Protection District which covers on area of approximate , California yc�Sshes natura gas tfurnishes he CipKtrtclty and Southern MunicipaltrWater dDistrict. sewer while swater sis F furpnia:eddtoy Chino th.. City y ,the Cucamonga County Water District. A Telephone service is provided by General Telephone Company. x 6Y; 0-5 and °�`.�.' •: � � ,tar 3.r� Cumni Facilities Ths City provides four parks ani.two community centers for residents. Library services are provided ty the San Bernardino County Library System- at a branch library located in the City. Education Six vchool districts serve the residents of the City providing local educational opportunities from kindergarten through Junior coilege. Major colleges and universities are located' within commuting distance to the City a providingne sides profs si both public and private educational npportunities in D-6 i, Transoortatton Major highway« and railroads trarar:e the City. Ontario International is located adjacent to the Ltty's southern boundary- Several truck Airport terminals are located nearby. Two interstate highways traverse the area. Interstate to 'is•located south S - of she City's boundary cnd runs east and west. Interstate 15 JA' the astern' section of :M City runs north and south; taws, the CIV is linked, by of the State and to other states to the east. ; v interstate highwayc to all areaa Three transtontirentil railroads provide freight service to tht C1ty: ; Union Pacific Railroad, Southern Pacific Railroad, and the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad. Amtrak provides passenger service to the City. Arline service from Ontario International Airport is prtviied to approximately 50 cities in the United States. The airport has the capacity to and also has ' InternaclonaldAlrport rat ofelthe "the City. Tte Port of Los Angeles, lccatad approxi+ately 45 milos to southwest, provides mt1or intenational care •nd passenger service. Greyhound and Continental Trailways provide trsnscontinentil bus service. 5 The Souther: California Rapid Transit District and Oanitrans furnish tntercounty and local bus serVtce. D-6 j November 6. 1985 CITY CT RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES A reenter mating of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga mot on Wednesday. Nwesbcr 6, 1983, in the Lions Park Cormalty Canter. 9161 Base Line Rose. Rancho Cucamonga. The mating was called to ardor at 7:40 p.m. by Mayor Jon D. MLlels. Frames- rare Conntilrambere: Pamela J. Wright, Charles J. B,.quet II. Richard M. Dahl. Jeffrry ling, and Mayor Jon D. Mikels. Also peesott tore: City lanagar, Lauren M. Wasserman; City Clerk, 9svorly A., ' Authe'et; City Attorney. Jame Markman; Assistant City Keever. Labatt Rizzo, - Community Develapmat Director, Jack Lao; City Engineer, Lloyd Hobbs; Coe nity- Services DLrectvr, Dill Holley. Approval of Ilicutes, MOTION: Moved by Wright, seconded by Duquet to approve the minutes of September 24, 1985. Motion carried 3 -0-0 -2 (Dahl ant Ring abstaiainp dote they were absent from the mastiog). Noved by Wright, seconded ty 34quet to ep;,tave the minutes oP October 2 and October 16. Motion carried uneninuusly 3 -0 a • a a . a J. AaODNGEMLIITH /FL4L71TIda 2A. Thur Raj, d.neaoar 7, 1985, 1,00 p.s. - HISTORIC PRWRPATION COMMISSION, Lions Park Comcinity Center. 2N. Satnrda,. November 9, 1985 - III ANNUAL YOONDR9 DAY PARAZI. 2C. Wednesday. November 13, 1985, 700 p.m. - PLANNIPO COMMISSION, Lines Park Community Center. I 2D. Thuxoday. Rovenhar 21, 1983. 7:30 p.m. - PARK VIVILOPNYT COiWUSION. Lions Park Comity Center. ' 21. Thursday. December s, 1983. 700 p.m. - ADVISORY COMMISSION. Lions Park Community Center. (Coahiad November - December mating) 2P. Lauren Waseerms introduced the following mow employeas: Joe Torres. Code guforcamat Officer; Debbie Adav, Deputy City Clark; grad Buller. City Plan- ner. oaf. aaa L_ COKA=LSALN= 3A. Approval of Warrants. Bsgieter ro'$. 83 -11.06 and Payroll ending 10/27/85 for the total amount of 8710,098.69. 33. Approval to rxeive and fit# current investment Schedule as of 10/29/85. 3C. Potward Clain (CL )45 -29) gaiast the City by aowebera Cat!coreia Wises (1) Company, property dou"e. August 9. 1954, at north side of Bese Line, •oat of ` Hermes, to City Attorney and Insurance carrier for hnndling. (0704 -06 CLAIM) 3D. Alcoholic Bever • ' tg, al Application Va. M BS -1! for On-Sole tear 6 Wine ietiug ( -). Place License, Brooklyn Roar's red Deli, Inc., Lawrence P. Cusroier -, 8403 r. -. vet Avasue. (0409 -01 ALLOW ) 1 a 4 -1 • ., ` .$Novembii.6 "1985 (3) 39. Alcobtlic leverage Application go. AS 65 -20 for Off -Bale seer 6 Nina Rating Place License, Speay's Pizza Iapream, Inc., Scott Weikel, 9142 Poccbill Boulevard. (0409 -01 ALCOSOL) �- (4) (5) 37. Approval to uecept Parcel M&p 7731 street improvements, release performance •� bond and file a Notion of Completion. C1002 -09 PARCEL MAP) (0602 -01 BOND RR- Faitbful Performaoce 3ond: 9226,000.00 YRSOLOSIOM B0. 85 -291 A RESOLOTI@i OF TMS CITr COUNCIL OF TO CITY Or ]ANCBO COCAMONCA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING SRS PUBLIC IMPROVtMESES FOR PAH:RL MAP 7131 IND ADTSORIZING TN: FILM OF A NOSICS Of ' COIFLITIOI 10k TI8 NOPK 1 (6) 3G. Approval of Ispro.nacat Agre•tmest and Iaprovatesr Security for Parcel Nip 9204 locate! on the um tLaoit corner of Sixth St -tat and Haven Avenue submittef by Iensley -Aeon Propel rLsm. (0502 -01 AGILM IMPROVINYT) - RESOLUTION NO. 65 -297 A RISOMOTIOS T SES CITY COU3CIL OF TES CITE OF RANCRO CUCAXOICA, CALIP03NIA, AFFROVI7C PARCEL NAP 9204, (TRNTATIVR PARCRL MAP 9204). ri?RC'1111RNT AGRSMiT AND MPROVINRNT SE- CURITY (7) 3N. Approval rf Real Property Improvement Agreement and Lima Agreement submit- cad by Ranebo Cucawnya Partners in connection with D, R. 84-47 located on the south aide of Foothill Poulavard between Vineyard and Nmllrs Avesues. (0602 -01 AORIE I /L) : - RESOLUTION NO. 85 -293 A RRSr.f.01103 OF TO CITY COUNCIL OF TO CITY OF RANCRO ' COCAMONCA. CALIFORNIA. ACCZPTM A RIAL PIOPESTr MROVENMT ACRRRNRNT AND LINK AGRESNRNT FROM RABCNO COCAMMA PARTNERS, FOR DRVILO M AT RpIRN 84-42 AND MTSORIZING TO IYTOR AND MIT CLINK TO SIGN IRS SANE 3I. Release of Bonds 6 DeposLUS Tarr& time& })mate � Owner. Lewis Homes of California. (0602 -01 BOND ICFASR) r Swart 12]16. &true I�rera&s&e& (8) Accepts Maiatemance load (Streets) 6 10,100.00 r Release[ Faithful Performance Bond (Street) 6101,000.00 d Sraet 12316 -I. MedmL (9) Aeceptr Naistotance good (Modals) 6 51610.00 Nelson t Faithful Performance'(Modmla) 0 56.100.00 A 2r ! (2316 -1. a w LID& Bride& (10) Accepts Maictemaece load (Bridge) 6 6,300.00 Rtleaser Faithful Performance (Bridge) 6 63,000.00 jr�t 12317. ftru[ imerormr._nu h- 4 (ll) Aceeptt Nainteneace Bond (street) 0 14,600.00 Release: Faithful Performance (Street) 6141,800.00 , Trr[ 12717 f -1 __XQjjU ii - 'i y(12) Accepts Naiatesance good (Nodels) 6 10,100.00 -C Cty- Relessot Faithful Performancw (Models) 6101,000.00 r .'� i i' P Tract 121". Street Iwrovamanig Accepts Raiateesace Bond (Street) Releases Faithful Performance (Street) TtLt 12169. Strut i„rere.anu Accepts Naintaaaaea Bond (Street) Releases Faithful Performance (Street) TrgG,t 12602. Starr Drain. Inrre pier, etwr., t Chnrrb Accepts Maintenance goad (S.D.) Releasis Faithful Performance (9.D.) City Council Minutes November 6, 1985jv? Page 3 i. t� $ 14,290.00 (13) $142.900.00 i N $ 25.212.00 (14) $252.120.00 ' $ 38.964.00 (15) $389,638.00 Tract 124D2. Street Ierew �1 Accepts Maintenance Bond (Street) $ 13,578.00 Relassm Faithful Performance (Street) $135,771.75 RESOLUTION 10. 85 -294 A RESOLUTION Or THE CITY COUNCIL Of THE C31T W RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA. ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC INnWWWTB FOR TRACTS 12316, 12316 -1, (MODELS) , 12316 -I (BASE LINE 91IDOE). 12317, 12317 -1 ( MODELS), 12344, 12365, 12402 (STOW DRAIN, TERRA VISTA PAERNAy A CHURCH), AND 12402 -416) 3J. Approval of Contract with C.I.A. Engineering COOeultanca (CO 83 -113) for (17) slurry ruling an various City stre3ta. The desiga' costs will be $1,339.90 Plus IOZ contingency to be funded from 9. 325 Cu Ies foods. (0602 -01 CON- TRACT) 31. Approval of Contract with Randolph Rlabih Associates, Inc. (CO 85 -114) for (18) preparation of comaapta end final plans for the iastallatica of sadism island lendocaping on Hawn Avenue from Arras to Nineteenth Strut. Amount out to ex- ceed $19.500 to be drawn from budgeted Beautification funds. (0602 -01 CON- TRACT) 3L. Approval to autborire the City Engineer to accept facilities and *&@&meets (19) for a Flood Ccutroi District storm drain extending from Carmelite Strut to the future Red Rill Par}. (1002 -02 EASEMENT) 3M. Approval for the City Manager to attend a Les4orship Conference December (20) 5 -7. Fends are available is the City Kasager's travel account for this sapan- diture. 0507 -03 coNyraENCE) 3N. Approval of Resolution to mead fee& for bicycle license removal as allowed (21) by the State of California Vehicle Coda. (0401 -12 FEES) RESOLUTION 90. 90-4A A RESOLUTION OF To CITY COUNCIL OF TEE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMWDINr: RISOL0I ON N0. 90-4 FEId FOR THE RUN- AL Of BICYCLE LICWEW ' 30. Approval to appropriate funds in the amount of $15.000.00 to the Adaimia- (22) station Contract Services Account (01- 4122 -6029) for Vector Control Coatraer i Services. (0401 -00 FUND APPROPRIATION) 3P. Approval to Transfer $14,000.00 from the Finance Department's iarsonnal Ac- (23) count (1 -4150 -1100) to FinaaCe Department Contract services Account ti (1- 4150- 6028).(0401 -00 FORD TRANSFER) a 3Q. Approval to Authorize as Adjustment in the Crading Specialist Eai6ry Logo. (0501 -00 SALARY ADJUSTMENT) i 3R. Approval of 1985 -86 Rousing Repair /Rabobilitstion Loan Contract with the (25) , County of San Neroardino (CO 85 -115) (FOR Community Development Bloch Grant). :r b.A (0203 -04 00081110) IAN• � i)F -• 'JL • !!8 �.$Ff' �;rr.xy �P,tC�i:nvn.:':;..' .. -_ .- •itry'y' -.�.8 City.;SoaneilYMtentu •. i tow;4er 6, 1985 -, ?Aga 4 . ,. 33. Approval to authorise the issuance of bond, and ward sale of bonds for Park 6 Recreation A.D. 85 -01 (Red Bill 6 Heritage Parka). (0401 -03 AD FAIR) (26) RESOLUTION NO. 85 -295 M+ f: (27) A RESOLUTION or TIE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, ANTIORIZING AND 12O71DINC FOR TO IS- SUAUCH OF BONDS PURSUANT TO TO "IMPROVEMENT BOND ACT OF 1915" RESOLUTION 10. 85 -2% A RESOLUTION Or TIR CITY COUNCIL Of TIE CITY OF RANCRO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RUIN AWARD FOR BALE OF BONDS, AND PROVIDING FOR YEN RSTANLISEBOT OF A REDEMPTION rM (28) 3T. Approval of a lot line adjustment for California Retirement Villa, Inc., adjacent to the Red gill Community Park project and approval of a joint cost sharing agreement (CO 85 -116) between the City and Developer for the proposed store drain and landscape project (0602 -01 CONTRACT) - (29) 30. Approval to accept as complete a 6.5 zero park site dewelopMLt, 'cnam as Church Street :srk Project and authorise the Director of Community Services to file Notice of Completion. (1404 -05 PAIR) -� (30) 3V. Approval of Contract between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the City of Artesia (CO 85 -117) transferring private activity bond allocation for Gary Banter Associates. (0602 -01 CONTRACT) (31) 3W. Approval to send out bond notices of redemption to registered bond holders of Assessment District 82 -1 (6th Strut). (0401 -03 AD 6TR STREET) (32) 3E. get public hearing - November 20, 1985 - Cal -Raccbo (CSlmork) - Development Agreement. An amendment to the legal description of real property subject to t an amendment betweme the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Cal- Remcho, Incorporated, regarding a easier citlmam housing project located west of Archibald, at the terminus of Lomita Court. (0602 -01 AGREE DITILOPNYT) (33) 3Y. Set public hearing for December 4, 1985 for intent to vacate the nos- vebicle access rights as dedication on Parcel Asp 4029 located on the south side of Summit Avenue, eat of Etivaeds Avenue. (1110 -13 VACATION) RESOLUTION E0. 85-297 A EEIMMON of TEE CITY COUNCIL Or TUC CITY OF RANCID CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN SEREARDINO, SI'AYS OF CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS 112MTLOK To VACATE lop- VSMICLg ACCESS RW= ON TO BOOTS BIDE Of SUMMIT AVENUE FROM STIWAIDA AVENUE ALONG YES nosTAOS Or PARCEL MAP 4029 MOTION, Moved by ELSE, seconded by Suquet to approve the Consent Calendar. Notion carried unaimeusly S -0. �. ee *sae Si, ApyRET120 PUBLIC KnInal (Mayor Mikele polled the audience and since eo many were present for item 43, the item was heard first. The dnetas were kept in Agenda order). (34) 4A. urEAM. OF sr.amrnc COIRIUION DC^.I[I0M DoRm� lOri eT1r F Dn OrrvT v1EW ■s -IC AUUR MTYI- STem,ee - Construction of a alai -r torsge development. with office totaling 45,000 square fat me 1.17 reran +� of lad in tba Industrial Park (Subaru 6) District, located on the north side of 4th Street, gut of Turner Avenue - APE 210- 371 -03. Staff report by Dan ` Coleman, Senior Planner. (0701 -06 APPEAL). � FS. f . j ffi+ • City Council Minutes t, "�., Movemu4r 6, 1963 :; Page 3 i •.. �i�i Mayor Mikele opes*i the mantissa for public heariag. Addreeriag Conseil werec, Cheri I Wear, representing Assured Miai- Storage, requwstd Council to make a li.ding as to vbetber this would be as appropriate use and design. If ' the problem is sot use but architectural, then grant the appeal and rood it al back to the Plaaclog Coudssion and Design Uvim to man the architectural scads. c;. Maly Aresymaki, Deputy City Attorney, stated there was 'mother alternative and chat would be to deny the appeal without prejudice which meat they could reprocess the application in order to comply with Design Dewier and Planning Commission criteria.& Also Tibbsts, djaCeat load swmars addressed objectless to the projeett early architectural, height of the wall between the properti*s (wall should be appranimtely 70K higher), and lenath of wall. ray do not ob- ject to the use, but felt it was not properly desigaeo .w oled in with the surrounding area. There being so further public response, "or Mikele closed the rubl Lc hearing. !I Couneilmn Ling stated that be did rot have .ey objectless to the dui- storage concept in the industrial area. He felt that with the specific site restrsietc 4� of this parcel in terms of the lengti and width, it •,ould be basically itpoasi- I' bie to design any project that would be compatible with the iadistrial Specific Plan. MOTIOgt Moved by I%qust, seconded by Wright to deny the appeal without preju- dice and direct the applicaaq if he chooses, to go bark through the process. Mayor Mikele stated tbv: because it is a eon- eoafor.t.g use, he did not see how -;e that massive structure is going to fit into the goals of the Idustrial gp*cif- ic Plan. He did not want to mis,rege the applicant. bet be would support the matioo vith•ovt prejudict if the applicant wanted to to back through the pro- Come. P Mr. Dahl stated that b*tause of the seco.t of hours spout on the IIP and the amunt of attention that was paid to gvbarea 6 in particular, he would be iacl Laed to go &long with the Pleasing Commission's deeisioe. Y could not support anythist that was a son-conforming use in that area. Mr. King Stated it woe class, that there were at least three council Members who felt it would not be possible to mks thin compatible. Motion carried unanimously 3 -0. eeeeee p. T&KK Pgganc Hess Deeisu.� _ Proposed aandrnts to Chaptste (33) 27.Og and 19.Og of the Kancbn Cue rage Muaisipal Code paraiming to the pro@- F ervation of trees on private property. Saff report by Dam Coleman, hnior Planer. (0203 -02 ?&I=) Mr. Ring asked why is topping the trees prohibited? Mr. Coleman responded that topping an ewcal?pteo trea.resulto in diadastiag so much foliage from the tree ' that ycu are force fedist a smllor sonnet of the tree which creates eateeeive sucker grmth and fast lima gravth. This inetsares the sesame branch drop and limb brook'&* in the high winds. , Mayor Mikrls opecd the motiut for public hearing. Addressing Council ware: San Knapp, arborist, stated that be was present to answer any questicas of ' Conseil. CouSOLImaa King asked hiss if he concurred with the retca sdatioo that- if 4004000 wanted to Pe4cl1Jde a tree fro. falling on a Structure that rather the i.• topping it, the tree skoald bi reamed? Mr. Knapp responded that he did. K' 'f . 's . 2y ea•.a y�y;`^..�SrL`v'.FY,w. 1. "`:,,:Y :.�' ;k�� ' , `•-�M ;ft+'.n'�r.=,�s psi!`; i'• - .. ` `?; G i Mayor MLGL asked it the probibitios o_ topics severed just c:m on City -• property or is that private eucalyptus as wall? Mr. Raapp stated that technically is should be including all cream. Mr. Coleman stated in the draft ordinance it would apply only to the ouclapytus windrows. Councilwoman Wright asked,!f the precautions listed on pate 190 were sufficient , to protect the existing trees? Mr. Snapp rospanded very web so, yam. J. Jia Frost. Stiwsada resideer and for_• er Chairman of the Stiwanda Specific Plan Advisory OsrLttee, expressed that whomever the provisions of the - Stiweada Specific plan seers restrictive regulations than are ,imposes Loro,.ed or required; by any other lw, title, ordinance, coda, or assets- - time, the prevision.; of the gtLvaeda Specific plan shall govern. The wiodrwm cberecterisea a rural image which givea Itivaeds a sense of place and identity. It was sever tit Intent of Gay matter of the Committee to bava a vaolesale policy in the removal of the blue gum eucalyptus. an so- couraged Council to visit the project before second reading of the ordi- nance. SL1I Trevino, visitor who brought his eon to vituese the Council maetieg;- hed worked vitb trees for many years. Se stated that if you amputate a. ere* improperly, you will have results which are detrimental to the health s° at the tree as well as to the safety of people. Sharon Romero, number of the Citizens Advisory Commission, stated the Car mission suppa.ted the ordinance. f Sevin Sfglestw. 7165 Soak At., felt we should not have a wholesale removal of the blue gun. Carole Lie, Caberllo /Aland, wanted to ace the trams. Sam gneriek. 9751 Aillw wood Drive, was pro tree. Be felt van should regulate and control dnalepment in those areas of the City wkere the ` windrows still exist. Phil Teenkias, felt this was an Outstading 0_41$6244. Thera bole, so further public rospoeae. "or Mikele closed the public hearing. �. Councilman give expressed that fruit ad out trees should not be Included in :) this ordinance. Dam Coleman stated that the misting ordinance smempt fruit and nut bsaring trees from protection. This ordinance •could grant considers- ^ tion for protection an a case -by -cabs basis. Councilwoman Aright stated she felt the ordinance should zero in on soma things • and west ever the follmisg item: 1. The Stivaeds residents comments should be takes into consideration alone the aysd4 Specific Floe included than. 2. She did not feel the eucalyptus trees would be incompatible with de- valopment. o. 3. We should base the pbilsopky of soceuraglag developers to develop around the tract using tban as the theme. _ t. .. 6. Instead of focusing on removal of the trees, we should focus oa the preserving and relocation of tress. preservation should be the first priority. As 4 last resort only, the tree could be removed. C.oneLlmas Sing felt that in gone situations that topping a tree 19 more $Goal- - ble than reamal and planting of a yourgen tram. 3e felt that instead of @tat - leg flat tees toppiog is prohibited, we should add something to the effect that p; if • meose fishes to toy a tree. they should get a permit. { �` _ � i•• C.C. w +�• "ii + ^� �`'4 ' City Council 'Mieufti November 6. 1985.j �•'�. ` tqe -7 d Couecilmea Dahl ranted .ore • hasis o0 emphasis preserving the windrows rbeserves pos- sible nod retain the rorA,%S an it relater to the Etiraada Specific Plan. Al - nos when plaetiel, am trees in areas where there is a lot of turfing, methods ebaQd be used to &scare deep rooting with the method being approved by the Planting Comrirdon or the Planning Department. Mayor MLkels sr.ggested that if Council would summaries their suggested changes and get them to staff, then as ordias -cm could ccas back at the nett meeting for roneideratioa. , , t I I I F. r' F MOTIONt Moved by Dahl, seconded by Ruquet to continua first reading of the Or- dinance to November 20tb. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0. ORDINANCE 10. 275 (first reading) An OWIIANCE Or TEE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITr W RANCHO COCAMONCA, CAI•TFOMIA, AMENDIRC CUTTn 17.03 Or TEE RANCHO , COCIMO OL MUNICIPAL CUDE, NACLUTR POLICIE9. PnuivrAC TO - TEE numni0N or TEEEE ON PRIVATE PRopnTr ORDINANCE 10. 276 (first reeding) N OEDINANCS OF 799 CITY COUNCIL OF Tn CITY Of RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 19.09 OF TIN RANCHO CUCAMONGA. MUNICIPAL CODE. PERTAINING TO THE PRESENTATION Or TREES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY * * e * * a 4C. TIM EXTENSION 702 DIDIRARCI N0. 274 - 7OOTR7Z IODLIwAND NTaeIN PMT-Y14- (36)' A time extension for Ordinance No. 274 containing Interim Policies to be ap- Wd to development Projects along Foothill Boulevard prior to completion of the Foothill Boulevard Corridor Plan. (0203 -05 FOOTBILL NIVD PLAN) Mayor Miksls opened the meetiag for public bearing. There being no response. '1 the public bearing was closed. City Clerk Autbelet read the title of Ordinance No. 274 -A. ORDI•NCE 90. 274 -A (Urgency) N OWINNCE Of TEN CITY COUNCIL OF Tog CITY OF RMC2 • CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, EXTENDING TEE RFECTIFE DAIS OF 0101 - NANCE 30. 274 PRITAININC x0 TEN ENTNLISEMINT OF IlITENLf DE- VELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR T9E FOOTSILL CORRIDOR LOTION, Moved by Dahl, seconded by Soquet to approve Ordinancnca No. 274 -A and , ' waive full reading. Notion carried wnasisously 5-0. * * 4 * * * AD. MZIIMMTAL ARSISSNEI Ayo 6ANEIAL PLAN +l(ENDMENT AI-04D - HAKINS - d (37) request to amed the Land Use Nap of Chu Coastal Plan from Low Density 4sides- tial (2-4 du /ac) to Median Density Residential (4 -14 du /ac) for 13.55 acres of land located on the soutb side of Feroa Soulrvard betwean Archibald sad Tuxner - APN 209 - 055-02. 03, A 14. (0203 -03 CP AMENDMPRT) Tracy Tibbels, ettorasy for the applicant, stated they were desirous to be con - '+ tinned to the `se,aber 4th Agenda. • MOTIONs Moved by Dahl, seconded by Xing to continue item to December 40 4965. Motion carried unanimously 5 -0.,�� RESOLUTION N0. 85-296 aV '• A ISSOLUTION OF IRS CITY COUNCIL OF xiE LIT! OF RANCHO �Y � CUCAMONGA. DnYDO CSSIIAL PLAN AMaDMINT 65-04D. EANRINE, `� = •; Jan r� 1 Iry t. Pate S REQURBTIW M AMENDMENT TO THE LAND ELEMENT OF TBR RANCID COCAMONGA GpPW. PLAN FROM LOW DANBITr 1191DOTM (2-4 DU/AC) TO MEDIOM DINSITf RESIDENTIAL (4 -14 DO /AC) FOR 13.3 ACRrt Of LAND LOCATED BOOTS or FrROg SOUL1VIAtD MD EAST Of ARCRIBALO A9ONUE * * * * * * (38) 4E. jLUL=WK + - DALY Cea[T1DC- 3= - A request to anead the Land Use Map of the Central flan iron Lc[ Medium Density Residential (4-8 du /ac) to Medium Density Residential (4 -14 du /ac) for 3.3 antes of land located an the north side of Base Liao load nut of Top" - APH 202-023 -1, 4, 7. 8, 12, 13, 4 14. Staff report by Otto rroutil, Senior Planner. (0203 -03 Cf 1NEDDKRNI) Mayor Mikele opened the matins for public hearing. Addressing Council want 1 David Fought, representing Daly Constriction, encouraged Council's approv- al. There being no further public response, Mayor Mikele closed the public hearing. City Clark Autbdat read the title of Rasolutios No. 83 -299. RE8[LUIION NO. 85 -299 A RESMUTIOK Of TB[ CITY COUNCIL Of INS CITT OF RANCHO COCAMMA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 83 -04E - DALY. AKWJIW THE LAND OSX ELIKINT OF INS RANCHO CUCAMWGA C103NAL PLAN FROM LW MEDIOK DENSITY R SIDEDTIAL (4 -8 DO/AC) TO MED :UM DEDBISI RESIDENTIAL (4 -14 DU /AC) FOR 3.3 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON IRS BOOTS BIDS OF BASE LINK ROAD NEST OF TOPAZ MOTIONS Moved by Buquet, etccaded by Kikels to approved Rusolution No. 83 -299 and waive full reading. Councilman Ring stated tbaL riven the location of the pared sad the way it is elevated is term with who: is surrounding it on the net and west, and given to its relationship to the entrance and exit to the community, be talc from a y. ds:lso point of vies it was necessary to have single story strseturea. No did not feel the higher density should be allowed because it will necessitate the two story structures. Althowgh he was mot against the 4 -14 density, he felt it should be clear that this particular site basically necessitates a single -story structure. Mayor Mikele stated that the action toalgbt would simply Siva then the range of 4 -14. ,. Councilman Dugwt felt that on the month side of the street [hose bouou all face month away from Rase Line which are also on the hill. an could support this site because of the site location and that it is • less impaetir_ parcel with the flood control an the east and'oa a major traffic artery. Councilmen Dahl stated be, could go along with the density designation if it could be looked at in the mid- raage'daasity (10 -12 du /sc). ' MOTION, Carried unanimously 3 -0. ACTION, Dir.etiou to staffs (1) middle range density, and (2) single story in the front aloes late Line. * * * * * * (39) 4F. l XUW9WZTA §1UAK— in c'ne*. tv_• Ay�DwmaY 8S {31 - Recmna Aps- KO[ A1_ROCTITIS - A request to stand the Guard ]Plan Load Use Map from Heavy Indestrial to Genera% InAmstiial or 43.6 &eras of land located at the southeast corner of Arrow Righjay std Rochester Avenue - APR 229- 121 -01, 14, 19, 21 -28. Staff report by Cnrt .ohnston, Asaneiato Planner. (0203 -03 OF AMENDMENT) •�t,. � ~ i. , -man - � + .., City Council .Minutim November 6, 1985, pate 9 awostran request to stand the Industrial Spot ifie plan fret Minims) Impact /Sear! Industrial (Oubarea 9) to General Industrial (Subarea - 13) on 65.6 acres of load, located at the southeast career of Arrow B(Sbwsy and ' sechester Avenue - Alf 229- 1:1 -01, 14, 19, 21 -28. (0203 -05 I8p AMYLMUT) Mayor Mikels opened the meting for public bearing. Addressing Council were, � Larry Nelson, applicant, stated that their request for the General Plan at change sae be^_suu after mating with the City, the rpniramnta within the s7 Industrial Specific plan basically regards the location of this property to ?� the frowsy. Thera are already restrictions on this sit* for outside stor- age, the lack of rail which handicaps its ability to utilLe the bawy in- i� dustrial mature, the location of the major regional shopping teeter, and the additional traffic which is being incurred because of the City's dymau- iis growth. Phillip Schlosser, Scblosnar Forge• requested that this be denied becaust ! modus industrial was not compatible with heavy industrial uses. - J!■ Barton, Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce Romanic Developmiat :j Ccwittte, stated that tbay have looked at this sod felt perhaps the best .� thing would be to olWeato the #treat and take all the property part of the anm type of ewirommnta With the street bisecting tha major piece of property, you sad up with some poteolial undo elopable land. �1 Mark McAdam. Cushman sad Wakefield, 337 North Vineyard Ave., Ontario, ad- dressed the marketability of the prorarty. i Charles Vast stated that see of the issues in incorporation vs to protect the heavy industrial area. He felt the City should block this. There being to further public response, Mayor Main closed the public bearing. Mayor Mik*ls stated that the change which is being requested for this property is essentially for watbatie purpose to upgrade the Time, from tho frowsy. Tba iconcern of Schlosser Porte is we mare best a long time ago ad we vast to stay. What we need to do in to flgor* out ways to achieve both of those i.. goals. The planning Cotrtuiom ban suggested putties laayoita into the Policies of the plan which requires,& motificatio of intent to this property .I that you have heavy industry which ban vibration, union, ion, etc., 10 the people tl will know what they are settimd into bi'fnrt they get late a building. A a—r�d ' way to handle this which has for& potantio■ which he would like to mp'..r. •* to cone up with ■ type of dwelopmut aareemat to achieve this whit, ei chi 'j saw tim butlatsaes are moving onto the land djacemt to the frowsy ou the v pare I im question, they be notified of the impact of the name adjacent to the -, overall property with tom language added in a lease. Councilman Dahl stated that its not the City's responsibility to detoredse what the highest and bout use is for that particular paroala Our concern is what is the area designation sad noting. Se aw no Common why we should charge a des- ignation of An area that is needed in the heavy industrial ayes. Couucilvosan Wright stated the had boon told that the coat of the proparty wan too high for heavy industrial to com into the area. She vast along with Mayor Mikals to work out sometbing to entire Sehtounr Forgo'• future red to work out something for tbose who would cow it to protect them also. Cwnellw -6 Ring fair that at the present time he would be it Ivor of leaving the land use as is. Mr. grout" stated that staff is in the process of updating mom basic ta,pn- Cnsts of the I8p. It is obvious that Cwucil wants be heavy industrial. era& protected, sad yet the question to the relationship to the note ; aed lot sires to the frowsy era also important. The ISP has the flexibility to do the kiaJo� e k of things that can't be don* under sts daid naming. Se augpsted oat two ;. goals could be and* compatible with as ISp change. i• ';� ` •1 It .. •fat +`I O .��; " Y1 I fi MOTION, Moved by luqust, seconded by Dabl to dray the General Plan Amendien[ -I : 85-04T and the Industrial Specific riven Ardrat 55 -03. Motion carried a • •y} 4•' unanisously 5 -0. • ACTIONS Requested by laquet with Council concurrence to allow the applicant to , N t cone back with cL•aeses which addressee the concerns which hate haea raised. lIEOLUTION 90. 65 -300 A RESCLOTION R TO CITY COOICIL ON THS CITY OF RANC10 CUCAMONGA, CALIFOOIA, APPROVING WYIRONMCMTAL A8635SMpT - AND CESSRAL, PLAN AMRNDVIRT 85 -04►. ICCU$TR A70OS ASSOCIATES, AJWDIMC THE (jORAL PI" LAND DSL MAP FROM REAR INDUSTRIA1. TO CESIM INDUSTRIAL ON 45.6 AVRR OT LAND LOCATED AT TEt SOUTHEAST COVER ON AR10N RICNSAT AND ` IOCQMTER ATEDUA - APN 22 }121 -0I, 14. 19, 21 -28 O1bCw44C9 NO. 217 (first reading) - AN OEDINANCI Of TRI CITY COONCIL ON TO CIII OF RANCMU - COCAMONfA, CALIFORNIA. APPROVING E1►IIONMENTAL AsIISIIDDIT AND INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AMODMOT 0-03. 10CRISTR ACE - %OS ASSOCIATES. AMYDING TO IIDOSTIIAL sPED7PlC nm F1LTl MINIMUM IMPACT /NQATI INDUSTRIAL (SUBAREA 9) TO CORAL II- DOSTRIAL (SUSA3IA, 13) ON 45.6 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT TO SOUTHEAST COYQ OF 411011 NZCSWAY AND ROC&ISTER ATYOE - APE 229- 121 -01. 14, 19, 21 -26 (41) 4C.IIdYBTIT. I(OaCidT �� vDDS*nu+ armnrr, tLAN AMA .T at�a = of ulalO DDRAMIfaA - An smadenat to the Industrial Specific Plan trrt for Subareas S and 13 (Ceneral Industrial) adding lead as@ coaeidarstiout ra- latd to parforracs regrirerrts of the adjoining Misiman Impact Fa"y LYtus- trial category (Subarea 9) and enistiog businesses. (203 -05 IOF AxUSDM'T) DEDIRaCI 10. 278 (first readlis) AN ORDDFANCE OV To CITY OF EANCNO WO /MOM'•A,.CALIFOMU, 1EFININ TO ]XINUSRIAL EFECITIC PLAN TEST • FOR SOSARNS g AND 13 (C3NIRAL INDUSTRIAL). ARDING'LAND 083 CONdIDQI,TIONS RELATNU TO PIaO1MANCI RWUIR NNgTR OF THE ADJOINING MnIMOM IMPACT /VSATT INDUSTRIAL CATEGORY (SUSAUA 9). AND nISTINe }• SUSINESSIS NOTION: Maned by logest, secosdad by Dahl to deny Industrial Specific Flan Anendmat I5 -04. Notion carried ueaainnusly 3 -0. A, a A, r a a esaea Mayor Hdkels called a recess at 12:45 e.ea The rating recomaned at 12555 a. n. "i areas •. (42) 41. III nnnrerr�•... esar _ Cy as. ru IMSwsrT 1S-0A4 sT �- - SsII0.8 - A re, quest to eased the Coastal Plan Lad Die Map frw office to Medium Reoidentl al (4 -14 du /ac) on 3.67 acres of lead located an the northeast ccroer of 19tb Streat and Archibald Avenue - Portion of Aa 202- 1091 -21. No staff report siv- a. (0203 -03 CP AMENDMENT) i' Mayor Mikels opened the rating for public hearing. Addressing Council wares _ Mr. Carold, applicant, encouraged Council's approval. r $race Ann Reba felt that Mr. Gerold had shoes good faith eff2rt. All WZ ), - I^ rtr'% City Council Mim"Eei•r. ,.,I: Eovenber 6 1965 �J Pace 11 Jim Dorton felt we would be better off with residential on this property. I There being no further public response. Mnor Mikels Closed the public hearing. City Clark Autbolet read the title Of Resolution No. 05-301. RESOLUTION NO. 55 -301 " A RESOLUTION Or In CITY COUNCIL ON I6 CITY OF RANCID OUCANONGA, CALIFORNIA, A.-FYUyint; UNSEAL PLAN AMESDMOT 90. 35 -04C - ORROLD - R[QUESTnG N AMINDMINT TO In LAND UPI SMART OF TO RANCRO =CAMOMCA OLRNAL PLAN nON OrPICE TO NIDIUM RESIDINTIAL (4 -14 DOAW. ON 3.67 ACIDS OF LAND, LO- CATID ON TEE NORTWEST CORNER 07 19TI STRAIT AND AICIINALD WRNUE - APM 202 - 1091 -21 �•' MOTIONs Moved by Ring, aerooded by Ruquet to approve Resolution go. $5 -301 and waive full reading. Motion carried aaaniaeusly 5 -0. I _ * * * a (Item 41 and 4J veto harped together). 4J. QIDTPIIC TRN VOR it .rm.NtslON VITN ANIRand ■0. 26 Pen TLCT* ITOlO Arn jgA�0 70 rimes "yg rail LCt DLTRICT 10. 1, (0401 -03 LANDSCAP-4 MAINT DINT) City Clark Autbalat read tba titles of Resolution lot. 55 -302, 55 -303, and 55 -304. RESMMOM 10. 55 -302 (43) A RESOLUTION OF IRE CITr COUNCIL W TES CITY OP RANCRO OUCAM MOA, CAI•I70RNIA, MOM M.4 TES WOK IN CONSWIloM VIT[ NNEXATION NO. 13 IO STRAIT LDTRIINO MAINTRNARCE DISTRICT NO. I AND ACCEPTING TIE FINAL INGIMM''S REPORT 70R TRACT NOS. 12670, 12670 -1 1110 4, 12319, 12519 -1 TOO 8, 12530, 12673, 10210, 11915 RESOLUTION NO. 55-303 (44) A RESOLUTION ON TO CITT COUNCIL ON IES CITr ON RAMCg0 CUCAMONCA 06 -nRINO TAE VOR IN CQNECTIOM NiTR ARNE[ATION N0. 11 TO STRICT LICNFINC MA=TOANCE DISTRICT N0. 2 AND AC- C[PTING TNI VIRAL RNGIN[ES'S RIFORT 101 TRACT NOS. 12530 AND 10210 RESOLUTION 90. 55-304 (45) A RESOLUTION Of .TES CITY COUNCIL OF TO CITY 01 RANCDO CUCAMOMOA, CALIFORNIA, ORDMNO YIR WORK IN CO MMON VITA NMIIATION NO. 26 ' , LAgMCAPE MAINTYANCR DISTRICT g0. 1 S AND ACC- ,tST110 TES FINAL INGINIER'S REPORT FOR TRACT RUN. 12010 AND 12530 MOTIORt Moved by Dahl, seconded by Male to apprms Resolution Mom. 85 -302, - 85 -303, and 65 -304. Motion retrial unanimously 5-0, as *aa* 41. Qn rnR1TrON ON�rM 11,201,M L PRrFAF[ L.TIVIrr-Imb TION YD sRN RRNYIQ NM6IT AO1100 Am awsanarK ' 7Q Ile weD D• CRTtrrClTm ON -'t •' j`jjjj:r►1x0! RY Sw RRNnaOwM AUM. v IDA) r NO raft report gives. (02031 -06 (.- 4' 6 - .S+ .;Jey November' 6. 1905 -- -- " Pals 12 r�L Mayor Mikela opened the meting as a Joint City Council and Redevelopment Agen- cy for public heAring. Thera being no response, the public During was closed. City Clerk Authelet read tin title of Resolution No. 35 -305. ' r "'(46) RESOLUTION E0. 55 -305 Rv A RESOLUTION OF TO CITT COUNCIL OF TO CITY Of RANCID ' CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA. TRANRPIRRING 1935 PRIVATE ACTIVITY FORD LIMIT TO TIN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OT TIN CITY EN RANCID CUCAMONGA AND APPROVING TEE ISSUANCE Of CERTIFICATES Of PAA- TICIPATION IT TRN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Of TO CITY OF RANCHO - CUCAMONGA FOR TR BAYIN COMMERCE CENTER PIO7ICY MOTION: :awed by Wright. exceeded by lugeat to approve Resolution No. 35 -305 and waive further raiding. Notion carried unanimously 5 -0. Assistant Secretary Authelot read the title of Resolution No. RA35 -14. ( 0203 -06 1104) _ RDA RESOLUTION 30. RAS5 -14 (5) A IPSOLOTION OF THE REDCVIIAPNRNT AGENCY OF TIN CITY Of IANCIU COCAMOKA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING IOCUMgTS) APPOINTING A TRUSTEE AND BOND COWAI L AND AOTHORYZ.W TIN SALE Of CER- TIFICATES M PAITICIPA71oN MD MAEIWd C 1trArl FINDINGS IN CUOZCTION NITS TO ISSUANCE OP SAID CSR=IC&= (MVEN CONNRCE CENTER PROJECT) MOTIONS Moved by Vcigbt. seconded by Euquet to epprwa Resolution Mo. PA85-14. Notion carried unanimously 5 -0. e e► e e a +. ■a- ADVnnaEn totAelNCR (47) 5A. ee • vlmi of Rs m riz{_o• Ptcxvia rat �.arE sea RuL aiLae,r Eee� wES* C= Ljk=e TO 400 IRNT EAST Of kWII_eALD AVENUE. Lo staff report given. (1141 -10 SPP•ED LIMITS) Mayor Mikels opened the meting for public hearing. There being no response, the public hearing was closed. ,!. City Clerk Autbolet read the title of Ordinance lo. 279. OEDIIANOI 90. 279 (first reading) AN ORDINANCE OF TZ9 CITY COUNCIL Or TRN CITY Of RANCRO ' CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA. ADDING SO■RNS 21 AND 22 TO SECTION 10.20.020 TO TUB RANCRO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE RZARDING PRIMA FACIE SPIED LIMITS Oil CERTAIN CITE NTRDSTS MOTION: Moved luquot, seconded by Dahl to waive full reading of Ordinance No. 279. Motion carried uoagianualy 5 -0. Mayor Mikels rat November 20tb for saeoad reading. A, A, (48) Sg, i;zAmn_•nar g AN Oen7!t1CR TD AKL A R . oiyY anDlr ;�QS- +, Dnt[!E ReTLLI!v>±c �Dl�o.l Foa rRN F�,rnslNC n rnTrRa TEN +�mc M%.a =,QR Linn A SnALjLj S. Staff report by Laurea Westerman, City Manager. Mayor Mikels opened the meting for public bearing. Thera being no reaycass, the public besting was closed. City Clerk Autbelet read the title of Ordinance Mo. 250. I r+ a i i i i I �:jr� "'"�•in'�7ti." �'"`�`'• 4ti�''\9- .aFplw f: r: Cir, Council Minntcs November 6, 1965 'Page 13 `' ONDINAXCS 10. 260 (first rsadir) AN OIDINANCN OF TEN CITY COUNCIL OF TEN CITY OF F..ECNO COCAMONOA, CALINORNIA. ADDING CLPM 16.49 TO TIN SnDrvx- r SIOP ORDINANCE, TITLE 16 OF TEX RANCNO CUCAMONGA MMICIPAL CODS. PnTAININO TO TENTING TYTATIVN MAPd ' NOTIONf Moved by Dahl, seconded by Suqust to salve fell rsn••isg of Ordinance No. 230. Motion carried uaaaimously 5 -0. IMayer Whole sat November 20th for second reading. t r r r r r r 5C. Om rAHO[ P n•ID rC' TO Ta[ DaB C'i_�t= �WTL�^ Cj @IS 7OYLe [Ti2d! OPM11T 7[[[ (TIQe TJRLattalH f 70tl1n OOONCxx. DNr�IxON) - Ordinance to 1.Wle- wit credit approved by the City Council at its Otreber 18, 1965 Hefting. (0401 -12 799 C[mIT) Mayor Mikels opened the mating for public bearing. There helms so response, the public hearia6 was closed. City Clerk Authelet reed the title of Ordinance No. 281. ORIINANCS 30. 281 (first readleg) AN O[DINADCS 07 TE2 CITr COUNCIL O7 TE-w CITT OF RANCND C0CAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, AT70NDING TO TEN DNSS C111K COMPANY A CREDIT APPLICANLL TO SYST010 D[TSLOPKINT nNe NOTICNt Moved by nuquet, seconded by Dahl cm waive full reading of Ordinance No. 281. Notion carried untsimusly 5 -0. Mayor Mikels set second reeding for November 20th. r r r r r r e 6. CITE M1[aC0'9 N7AFN UMIX 6A. APP[AI Ot Ty[[ [NwOCAi. eNtid7 e5 - [Ardra MtU -rte- ( Ixa- An appeal by a refined,; of the approval of a permit to relieve selaetd trees within Tract 11626 located on the north aide of Aimed at the teratous of Daryl. Staff report by Dan Coleman, Senior newest. (0701 -6 ATFEiL) Mayor Mikels opened the meting for public hearing. Addressing Council worst Michael Parrish, 8984 Cabsrallo Drive, felt that ellwaseae for the windrows could be Bade is planning the development. Also, he did not vast to see the Press removed for their aesthetic value and far their windbreak value. Sob Comb, $922 Caborollo Drive, concurred with ,Y. Parrish. No pointed out tbat the trrtee being removed would iubst neidly create s hardship to his re ldeaee aloe* the trees pror8da s windbreak. Sal Nelson, representing developer, led John Ziermat representing Pmcoas Service Corporation, star" tbat • lot of time va7 takes in developing the layost of the Project and just what trees could pie moved. If they .a:t the trees, they would not be able to gat the lots net of the project. Charlotte Carrie, Alta Lome, felt the vineyards were the heritage of the _y area. She ranted to ses the windbreak on the atrem sort% ramped because p it was a fire bastard. .i Lisa Nola, $922 Caberello Drava, expressed that the trees should be sovad; r^ °,•+ for the aaimls. tiA$Y )4. Lin voted the tree. saved. Y;';M,• ti G9)1 '1_1 P e� f� F • City Council Minutes Smasher 6, 1965 Yugo 14 Jergin Surge, 9073 Citation Court, wanted the City Council take sore ties to study the proposed developsent. Did not want the trees removed. Shano Parrish, 89A4 Cabsrallo Drive, stated that the trees provided consist- arable windbreak for the area. 'here being no further public response, the public hearing was closed. Councilman Buquat expressed tb2t the City is trying to coes up with sow consistent guidelines for euosiyptus trams, windrws, and preservation of much. He fait the rawrks about the windrow near the foothills was valid and that ve should give some consideration to relocating the trees an long as it is dcoe in a =cost to crear, the windrow effect adjacent to the trail area. Couecilsan Dahl expressed that be did not like to see narrow, deep lots and felt ..s project mould be configured better. te would be willing to uphold the appeals but wanted to be auto there would be selective cutting of the trees. 1 He felt there should be a redesign. Councilvosao Wright stated she would like to save the windrows and have th3 &a- velapesat occur around the trees rather than have the viudrows rosovod. She concurred with Mr. Dahl regarding the long, deep lots. Mayor Mikels felt there was a significant preservation of existing trees, sig- uificant resaval. and significant replacesents. Re felt there was a definite amount of respoosibility shown in tares of the selective removal sad complete vindrw replacement. go did not see that this results in the wholesale reenval and disruption of the tress in the area. MOTION: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Wright to uphold the appeal. Motion failed by the following votes AYESt Wright, Dahl ROESt Euquets Mikels, King MOTIONS Moved by Kings seconded by Euquet to deny the appeal. Motion carried by the following vote: A7E3t Buquet, M!kelss King NOES$ Wright, Dahl r w e e e e (51) 63. DESIGNATION OF SMA(VI LLY SIGNIFICANT Ogexg•JPx7Z W&WA1 J=Opkcrs Ie fjRt L. L TIOa - -OSfO exIQ � -IGMA — A status M1 G report of the Rute'a designation of aggregato ruonrcea in this area and a Resolution requesting the State Mining and Geology Board to modify said desig- aation within the City limits and City's apbcre of influence. No staff report given. (1503 -01 SPBEKE OF INPLUa1C6) City Clerk Autbolet read the title of Resolution No. 55 -306. RESOLUTIOP 90. E5 -306 A RESOLUTION OF TM3 CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITr Of RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIIORMIA, OPPOC'31G THE STATS'S DESIGNATION OF REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT CONSTRUCTION AGORHCAI'�- RESOURCES IN YMH CLAREMONT- OYLARD AND SAN BESMASDIMO FRODOC- TIow- consumPTIOM RGIOHS MOTIONS Moved by Wright, seconded by Euquet to approve Resolution No. 55 -306. Motion carried ucanisously 5 -0. • * e * s r a J City Council minutes November 6, 1985 Page 15 6C. ne �wo:amnaTlo► Yak .r[Clar. N[arere- TO a -amen CITY FACT:rrlu, (0100 -00 (52) ADMINISTRATION) - - ACTION: Council set Monday. Rweaber 25tb It 6:00 p.m. in the Neighborhood Centar, 9791 Arrow Cigbway. Staff to bring in supper. A, a e e e e 7A. COUNCILWOMAN WRTG Q'[ [x[10 ar 70 Eae P - I4t !C m' ImG }OL ICY p0[ iO- IDRE L98aa`gN� nlgiliGT9, (0401 -03 A93ESSMMT DISTRICT) (51) Councilw0wr Plight presented a request that Council adopt the following pol- icy: "Beginning in dsauary 1986, it shall be the policy of the City Council that prior to eoactiment of future assessment districts in the commlaity, so a,r- •isory election by those to be accessed be bald after vbich the City Coug- cil will abide by the majority recor odatioo. "It is proposed that the fallowing assessment districts be exempt from the Council policy: 1911 -1913 Act Industrial Assessment; creation of Industri- al Landscape Maintenance Districts; mad Annexations to the existing City Lighting end '.odscaps Maiatenaoce Districts for oar development which is approved to Reecho Cucamonga ". Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public input. Addressing Cocueil vas: Michael Mahoney, Chairman of the Cucamonga Citizens Coalition, stated this was a step in the right direction, haoVer, it just didn't go far enough. There being no further public response, Mayor Mikels closed the public portion of the meting. MOTION: Moved by Wright to adept the policy as stated. Motion failed for Iaa of • second. a a e e e e 78. CoONGISL M'A.y DAM'A REQUEST TO DISCUSS 4RKrATId1 S➢lCrua d rN[ ctTY•N (54) NORTNaar EpR6ib. Mr. Dahl requested that the City look at anaering tbo proper- ty to the north of the City and for staff to come back rich a report. (0702 -02 ANS17 "JON) p NOTION: Moved ay Dahl, seconded by 8uquat for staff to iuvestigate the possibility of annexing into the City the property north of the City mad for staff to bring back a report. Motion carried unaoimusly 5 -0. e a A* s e MOTION: Moved by Buquae, seconded by Wright to adjourn the meeting. Metioa carried unanimously 5 -0. The meeting adjourned at 1 :30 a.a, ADprw+d: Decr2ber 18, 1983 Respectfully submitted, Beverly A. Authelet City Clerk N .• ,