Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986/06/04 - Agenda PacketI 01 � MC tea, COY or 0 RARCiiO C XAMOWA CtInT���'j {T{C�at�OaUPUL p AGENM Z 1971 Lions Park CeaYlniq Center 9161 base Line goad Raecbo Cucamonga. California =.ost• IM-- W2 -2-ML All items submitted for the City Council Agenda mat be in nritiug. The dwAliss mating . far The CitytCleri..'ssliceerreceives all smeb iteasP�esdry pefor to tbm 1. [ledge of Allegiance to Plsg. Z. Roll Call: Nikel■ —. buiuet —. King —� Dahl —, and Vrigbt — 7200 1. PRESERVATION COMMISSIce - Linea Pack ComaueitP RCenter,, 9161 base Line Road. 2. coKKISSICI) JunLines. Pack SC PLANNING oacnnity Canter. 9161Ba e Line Road. j <<1_ �1� City Council Meeting -2- June 4. 1985 Tke follemin3 Comment Calendar items are exPauted to be routine and acreoatroversial. They will be acted open by the Council at we time sitbonc discussiom. 1. Approval of Warrants, Register No's. 6-4 -86 and Payroll 1 ending 5 -15 -86 for the total amount of $1,799.283.07. 2. Receive Claim (CL 86 -26) against the City by Diane J. 5 LLaa for automobile damage at the intersection of Raven and Base Line. 3. Receive Claim (CL 66 -27) against the City by Patricia -0 Laoderos for autmotilo damage at the intersection of Vineyard and Foothill. 4. Apprwal to seek Did• for the improvement of Archibald 12 Avenue sidewalks from Pootbill Boulevard to Base Line Road. RESOLUTION 110. 86 -152 13 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITT COUNCIL OP TEN CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVDNG PILAUS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE 'ARCHIBALD AVENUE SIDEWALKS PEON 700TUML BOULEVARD TO BASE LINE HOLD" IN SAID CITY AND AUTHOMI3G AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS S. Approval to accept and execute the agreement between 17 the City of Rancho Cucamonga end Raul and Gloria Rosales for the installation of froutsge imprwueets by the City in exchange to Right -of -Wsy Dedication by the property owners along tbo Teach of Archibald Avenue. RESOLUTION No. 86 -161 18 A RE30LUTICB OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO COCANOUCA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING STREET FRmTA -.E INPROV81itaT AND DEDICATION AGRED ®T BNTWEES HAUL AND GLORIA ROSALES AND IRS CITY OP RASCRD CUCAMONGA 6. Approval of intent to Anger Tract Sea. 12673. 12802 and 24 12802 -1 through 6 to Street Lighting Maintenance District so. 4 (Terra Vista Planned Community) as Annexation No. 3 and net public bearing for June 18. 1986. City Council Meeting -3• June 4. 1986 RESOLUTION 110. 86 -157 27 A RESOLUTICH OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA. CIVD% ITS PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR ANNEXATION NO. 3 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 00. 4 (TERRA VISTA PLANNED CON]WHITY) RESOLUTION 90. 66 -158 28 A RESOLUTION OF THE CII'1 COUNCIL 01 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCANCNCA. CALIFORIA, DECLARING ITS INIENTION TO VkDER THE ANNEXATION TO STREET LIGSTIUG MATTENANCE DISTRICT 00. 4. AN ASSESSMENT D'_STRICTt DESIGNATING SAID ANNEXATION AS ANNEXATION 90. 3 TO STRNST LIGOT13C MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 10. 4; PORSOARY IO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND OFFERIAG A TIME AND PLACE FOR SCARING OBJECTIONS THERETO 7. Approval of intent to Annex Tract Nos. 12673. 12802 end 42 12802 -1 through 6 to Landscape Miineenanee District No. 4 (Terra Viste Planned Corm city) as Annexation No 3 and set public hearing for June 18. 1986. RESOLUTION 210. 86 -159 45 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA. OP PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR ANNEXATION NO. 3 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 90. 4 ( TERhA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY) RKOLOTION 90. 86 -160 46 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA. DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE ANNEXATION TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 10. 4 (TERM VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY). IA ASSESSMENT DISTRICTt DESIGNATING SAID ANNEXATIOr AS ANNEXATION NO. 3 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 110. 4; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR BEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO S. Approval of intention to soon Tract 12833 into Street 61 Lighting District f3 as annexation No. 1 and setting public hearing for June 18. 1986. City Council Meeting -4- June 4. 1986 RESOLUTION SO. 86 -150 62... A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAY.ONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE ANNEXATION TO STREET LICBTDNG MAINTENANCE DISTRICT $0. 1. AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICTt DESIGNATING SAID ANNEXATION AS ANNEXATION NO. 1 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 90. 3; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THEHHTO 9. Approval of Improvement Eztansion Agreement and 64 Improvement Security for Tract 9619 located on the northwest corner of Carnation and Jasper Streets, submitted by California Communities, Inc. (formerly Plaza Builders, Inc.) RESOLUTION NO. 86 -162 C8 A RESCLUTIItN OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVIBI IMPROVEMENT EXTENSION AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY YOH TRACT 9619 10. Approval oI Maps Improvement Agreement and Improvement 69 Security for Parcel Map 7912 located on the north side of 8th Street, vest of Vineyard Avenue submitted by Hahn Tenant Interiors. RESOLUTION 30. 86 -163 76 A RESOLUTION OF 783 CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA. APPRO71BG PARCEL MAP NO. 7912 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 7912). IMPROVEMENT AGREEBEST, AND IMPROVE✓11T SECURITY 11. Approval of Subordination Agreement for Parcel 1 of 77 Parcel Map 3298 located on Alarud Street, vest of Hermon Avenue, submitted by M•. /via B. Xornblatt. RESMUTIOM 30. 86 -164 82 A RESOLUTION OF TOE CITY COUNCIL OF IIE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMOlGe. CALIFORNIA. APPREMIHG A 5O802DlsATION IrREEKENT FROM KELVIN H. KODLRLAaT AND A.IHORIEING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERX TO SIGN BAMR y. City Council Meeting -5- :use 4 1 ;86 12. Approval of Improvement• Extension Agreement and 83 Improvomen; Security for Tract 12772 -1 located on Palo Alto, between Turner and Teak we, Submitted by M b S Residential Development, Inc. RESOLUTION NO. 66 -165 87 A RESOLUTION OF IRE CITY COUNCIL OF TEE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAM NGA. CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT EXTENSION ACREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 12772 -1 13. Approval of Supplemental Agreement for Legal Services 88 between the City and Janes Markman, City Attorney. 14. Approval of "Surveyor 80 Computerised Calling System 93 for the Crime Watch Program - not to "coed $68000.00. 15. Approval of a Resolution authorisirg participation in 115 an appeal of the Labor See y' decision to deny Service Delivery Area designation to the Inland Empire West Cities. RESOLUTION NO. 86 -166 121 A RENOIUI'ION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CPCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA AOTOORI2DIG PARTICIPATION IN AN A.'PEAL OF THE LABOR SECRETARY'S DECISION TO O:gY SERVICE DELIVERY AREA DESIGNATION TO THE INLAND EMPIRE WEST CITIIH 16. Approval of Map. Improvement Agreement. and Improvement 122 Security for Traut 13027. located on the southwest turner of highland and Etiwands avenues, submitted by The William Lyon Company. RESMOTICK 50. 86 -145 132 A RESOLUTION OF TDE CITY COOlIC7L OF THE clTY OF TANCHO COCAMONGA, CALIFOXIA, APPROVING IMP107EKEHT AGREEH0;, IMPROVEMENT SECURITY, AND PENAL MAP OF TRACT 13027 17. Aprroval to award contract for the improvement of Lama* 133 Avenue from Archibald Avenue to Bereoaa Avenue and Improvement of Archibald Avenue from Laws Avenue to Banyan Street to the apparent low bidder, Laird Construction Cempaq. Inc. for bid amount of $651,980.11. City Council Meeting -6- June 4. 1986 18. Approval of Improvement Extension Agreement and 138 Improvement Securities for Tracts 11781 and 11625 located en the nortbv at corner of 19th Street and Hermosa Avenue, submitt-d by Roy E. Daly and Company. PESOLUTLQ' 30. 85 -167 144 A RL3GLOTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RASCHO CUCAhJNCA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT = -JSIO1 A5REEM7NT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACTS 11781 AND 11625 19. Approval of Parcel Map 9508 located on the nortbeast 145 corner of Milliken Avenue and 7th Street subnittod by Roland and Naomi Childs. RESOLUTION 110. 86 -168 147 A RESO.OTIO9 OF THE CITY COUNCIL 04' THE CIIY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNLA, APPROVDIG PARCEL N.SP 90. 9508 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 50. 9508) 20. Approval to accept Red Property Improvement Contract 148 and Lien Agreement from Fredrick Wade for the property at 12999 Sunmit - AN 225-181-64. RESOLUTION 50. 66 -169 154 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TER CITY OF RNCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING A SEAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CCRTRAC'f AND LIVA AGRIEMINDT FROM FREDRICK WADE AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERE TO SIGN SANE 21. Approval to release cash deposit for setting final 155 monuments for Tract 12090 in the amoL t of $7,600.00. 22. Approval of Reimbursement Agreement for lmprovement of 157 Hermosa Avenue in conjunction with 'Tract Non. 11625 and 11781 located between 19th Street and Hi,,eland Assam. 23. Approval of proposed fiscal year 1986 -87 addendum to 161 the I" Enforcement service contract betwaea the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the County of San Bernardino. 24. Approval of the CAL -ID program Agreement as recommended 164 by the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department. 25 Chaffey Garcia House 174a 26. Purchase of Computer Equipment 174b City Council Meeting -+- June 4. 1986 9.Y 14 , 1. TlXr4Q "b METHOD OF COMMISSION APPOTNTM ®TS. 2. L7eQLL[_BEQ92Ct.4 V2TBIN TI:N CTR OP RANCHO COCANONGI - 175 Staff report to be presented. 3. SELECIIg BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOQ TQ! I&M CUCAMONGA COMMDEITT rODNDITIOY. ORDINANCE E0. 303 (second rr ling) 183 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA., tXENDDNG SECTION 8 OF ITS ORDINANCE NO. 30, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED, PERTADI ING TO THE FINANCING OF INTEFIM SCHOOL 2ACILITIFS 2. APP I OPAMNIN•OMMISSrON DECISIOM - Fs7IQ ®NANT1L 184 ASSESSMENT AND TENTAYIOM TNACT'12902 - Y09DLAND PACIFIC A request to appeal Planning Commission action requiring location of the comcunity equestrian a:afl and undergrounding of existing utilities &long Hermosa Avenue in conjunction with the proposed residential subdivision of 29 lots and one "remainder parcel" on 39.7 acres of lacd in the Very Low Residential DI •rict (less than 2 dwelling units per acre), located at the nouthwast corner of Hermosa Avenue and Alwad Avenue - AIR 201 -071 -5, 6, 25. 26. 35 and 56. 3. CODE AMNQDMDT 229 Bo -0S - CITY OP _j,4SCR0 CUCAMONGA - An amendment to Section 17.06.010 -t(m) pertaining to grading of custom lot subdivisions. Section 17.08.040 -J pertaining to usable Ford area, and Lection 17.02.140 pertaining to defiaitions of Development Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Ordinance Do. 211. City Council Meeting -8- June 4. 1986 ORDINANCE 80 211C (first reading) 250.- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HANCUO COCA110ECA, CALIVORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE IO REVISI: SECTIONS 17.06.010- H5(a), 17.08.040 -J. ANI 17.02.140 PERTAINING IO GRADING OF CUSTOE LOT SUBDIVISIONS, USABLE YARD AREA, AND DIFINITION3, RESPECTIVELY 4. APPROVAL TO ORDER THY WORE TN CONNECTION WITH TRP. 25? PORMITION OF STREET L.IGBMG MAINTENANCE DTSTSTCT NO. 5 (CARYN PLANNED COMI MITT) AND GIVE FINAL. APPROVAL TO THE IMGINEER'R REPORT. RESMUIION 80. 86 -170 256 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF IN CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFOIUTA, ORDERING THE WOES IN CONNECIION WIIH THE FORMATION OF STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 5- APPROVAL TO ORDER THE WORK IN CONNECTIO11--WITH T RE 263 FORMATION OF LANDqCkPS MAINTERANCK nTITtrCT No 6 (CA1: R 1. 41.1;: ., 1AT, A?PRQVAL TO THE INGINRER'R REPORT. RESOLUTION 50. E6 -171 265 A RESOLUTION 07' THE CITY COUNCM OF IRE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMIZOA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING TEE WORE IN CONNECTION WITH THE FORMATION OF LANDSCAPE MAINIENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 (GARTH PLANNED COMMUNITY) AND ACCEPTING THE IINAL ERGINEER'S HENRY RESOLUTION NO. 66 -172 284 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL Of THE CITY OF RANCHO COCAIONCA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE WORE 7N CONNECIION WITH ANNUATION 10. 15 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINIENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND ACCEPTING THE FINAL IHGINTER'8 2EPORT FOR TRACY 12833 7. ESTABLISH ANHDAL JLIS"gMnT AND APPROVAL OF n -INE D'S 292 REPORT ran LODE 32 MATNTOIICE DTSIRTCT NOR 1. x 4. ADD 4 POl 1986 -3Z. m r, m Citl Council Meeting -9- June 4. 1986 RESOLUTION 80. 86 -173 293 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITT 01 RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFOENIA TO 1,E7T AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN LANDSCAPE MAIIITQNA3CH DISTRICT N0. 1. LANDSCAPE NAINTENANCS DISTRICT N0. 'L. LANDSCAPE MAM1'ENANCU DISTRICT NO. 3. LANDSCAPE MA1NT.'NANCE DISTRICT NO. 4. AND LANDSCAPE NAZTETANCE DISTRICT 30. S YOH THE FISCAL YEPR 1986 -87 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LICH700 ACT OF 1972 IN CONNECTION WITH LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISIICT NOS. 1. 2. 3. 4 AND 3 8. Yi $TAeLl.4$�lij{Q,Ij�ir,$b95NE1T ADD APPRO7.11. I•F EIIGIIIMIS 303 jQi FO,l e?[t!RT .I DTIBC A7M"'ENARCR DISTRICT NOS, 1. 2. 3- APB. RESOLUTION 50. 86 -174 304 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL UP THE CITY OF RANCHO CCCNKOUGA, CALIFORNIA. f0 LEVI AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN SIREEr LICHTIHG MAINTENANCE D!ST111CT 60. 1. STREET LIGHTING HAINTEHANCE DISTRICT NO. 2, GREET LIGHTING N4INTENANCII DLSTRICT 30. 3. AND STREET LIGOT7AC ItAINTGALICE DISTRICT NO. 4. FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 19,16 -87 POUSOANT IO THE LANDSCAPING AND L:GETDiG ACT OF 1972 IN CONNECTION WITH STPEET LIGHTING HAnITERAMCE DISTRICT NOS. 1. 1. 3 AND 4 9. $111ELfvD ,LPP[f!YAL OF ZIOINEN[-R 316 RP.POR7 FOR Tn PLM-m [[ ^,II[a�nlR IM. IENT DISTRICT L WPRITACR A1ND RFD 1EiyJ��i� -l�l, RFSO.UTIO[ 90. 86 -175 A RESO.UTION OF TH.I CITY CCOINCTL OF TPS CITY OF RANCHO CL'CAMONCA, CALIFORNIA, C071EMDIG THE DIAGRAM ARD ASSESSMENT APl' PROVIDING FOR :8E LEPY OF THE ANNUAL ASJ,`OSSMENT IN A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ZZtSTRICT 318 City Council Meeting -10- June 4, 1986 1 7 t0A- LfAIR7Igm QlA7AGN •. 1. APr + *+ *ZINC caOr:LS ;,[r.. *.stns - LNVtewnlaTAL 336 dfyLSUM ANU DN(pBLOTATLT NL[2L:+� -53 - ANDLLSQI - A request to appeal Planoi -g Cuamission action requiring a meandering sidewalk on 6th Street and the uodergrouadiu3 of existing utilities in conjunction with the development of 3 indnatrial buildinas totaling 61,845 square feat on 4.47 acres of land in the General Indust_ial /Isil Served District (Subarea 5) located on the north side of 6th Street, 300 feet vent of Turner Avenue - ATE 209 - 211.40 2. ARPT•AL OF PLANNING EOWISSIOL DLCIUg - DMLDeNa7AL 365 ASSLSSHZET AND EEp60It10T NLtTN 35 -22 - NDVAPD9 CTNEXA - A request to appeal Planning Caaaission action during review OZ a request to nodifl the approved building elevations for a 6 -plan Pavia thnater of 25,188 square feat. vithin an approved master plus (Virginia Dare Center) located on the uorthvest corner of Foothill and Raven, in the General Casaarcial (GC) District - AM 1077 -114 -01 and 03. sN + e , ,' I 'ib .: ,.. h ',, awqm ,J, 1, _ »,' 1U. dYgNrr u Wr rYa ae -d dadet asar Vr OOY Vq °P °W YOP JJO..P -.w TNUWP +MNMWP '' 19 I.1 VY��P . -Y d- .gMaJV aYO n-.N +NOOIUPOJYJ.d dOOPVUINWl.n ly 2YM.°imTTWC^09�in'- Yan +;m P �yNnJas n((YY >S�Sw20Nf 10.=+w N.°nOrH..ny Nnli > VK9 o>r- fw<SJrr. o� emT Ow.12�n CC.0 NDOmm9 }HTZ� I`JDHfOrm '- R. zrzo aozrTTn..awomyo zmc xzzzo� s FR ] or Te>armn g!io . N nN tix- n \PISA arO2 SW_TJw NTr C. ySLTIT J n OwI12yy�T >m J�C (�> Ym or.+o n SSSY a 9 snmm aU awPm piM ONNy onn a �nszoay� nwrmzerm� �r1 y 3 yynJw oa«KO nY Omw im m-1 > Jm JrM� lip ]Y= 1. ^T I 9 -w iNym OS ' nn rm N nwJN tw �w 9iy � i� .z+��mi zF y i yz Oas°' nnoo n nroa r 1 my z ocnT zy na > Pa a N9y81i i. Y nm zN I. ZO N i Si SO9 n .i T N r n i qww �J>J T9 rTa<nat �nr 9. IZ. •a 9laa �Tm i aBi.N-- �ryT}T�C >r�zrti0 aamm� n �a(�T i w >Na gymo 9zn 1.�PJr�oe iN y.r.�y °wsi c9� «.c. OS rAaTT S.4q a}z• ' wnTT O a w > J�•� I r gT -'r�n .AT.a y in��'o.aaM yT Nam r N o poo y rwCg aZ! T_ Nn9 .1 ..1 rcz a� iYmo y n�! � SJ nyo °o a.°.y9 z 'T rnmzy a �N ar ^r z'ri a!s : Y�yi i yi n AVas �i -.-S om'ii or m n { n I.�m On' m2 K m JM KM C.nKnM nnn nn-"" n nQ n Ofl N 1 i pp n NSO N °O �S y2y �R 1 prps_y y� A D Awa.a aA 9A a 11 wA� :;a g H .iii H am m 3 iw] N N N 1 O ° °.� °esn ° °°agoePOno'o n°o°noeocsv000[en°eoc�nc gansq Iseq qq • q qa qqI° is n � T�fiSloo eeo Qao.°. P PP1�P� qq pall. +l.+ u °gr uu W °°�oneoo =qUq Y.NJ O OJgV Y N.-CybyP VwYNwOyJ ►Y }V rO +�Jqq.;� f Ny P.. I � AVMNJ.wr yOY W Mnw O Uw Pf1M+ YI.IOOM Prwry.-p <CyewgPy NN.. Y� Ny JOJ Uq YYYy j � .1°j �Oy KO pro O 1100 � Jq yONaJ °O9 l � Od�PN� MNyO!1� PUOr�g00yJJOJdOOMJM Op��. 'J ';y I OrVlOdyyllOy .glCryUPi0a111YYYJJJP OpyNOOYq..OP VNM00 N01� II I�� I i I I i I I 1 I I I I I I VA.VY WIWV VA. Y S J.y V•W .ppwNAaai rirWd�p lj.p ayQ �PWPJMPYdr J.IMVNP1a.IpN :i I � PrrOPPPJWNdYrVdNW1gPlgpWPwnaP yNVPMrPrw� - �°Si3zs °z: :rrr wa rT]I�d......,...xzeTl.aTn Pnn.•w °e TYOm YOn } >rrY >rr >OOy2iiy'�r�f +D•pTOO w.� ��x..w= A n(T( S r �°O ICVPyT002 YZtY }NS`A9tn )fM1On iPPr M� wall, I- 110. wa(x: P:O} w >�ASTwn9nOyN YN �lam000 >r/. v1z .• T a as aK »a. oroe sm •') Mn� rnn9A//�] /ITn NZ <N °i. C }� m ar Tr wT�Y )d2 ]�r"e��YT/'I=Mm� nfryTN y �y •1 o�mn. j as II�� JJII yIa ]2 ^N`'i lz.o'T ppg.2. �a9 ]zl '"E1s��yla..al °an L naO �• ii `aqI 2� s8� ^ °n - ^U'aM i{�a 'v'�yT(�i'niED 'N ^�3r.I O Oa ant x SyyxO n° t CIA UVER . .x. ^o y'"Rr N n& iaodanCT$ °z zynr° I for iw ,.`. .an � y• ^Ililn aei ��: ±N .^. � M. eer/ RE x apSi °iiny o'Mr'2 ° is N NzR�z w o00:'e• �9N nr s oe i n inv i N er I]r'w T o gYao °vY'1 IA, T �° N y e I I In n .2 mY r qyq9 lw.T.Pxz TPa MST °Fnrxn �T �°aR� +o•r °riezb ]a/'i'or'syi mYYT Z".<°•i.'i^ gn�PiaTr��TZ qe r gT'TP ��y ase]�om � rN�rfs i }dcrm °E .p7 rc+• r acr M rq To ma..r :a>-I mr� +i .4.. mn oy m Nyn.� wTrJRTx n r ry ur Tza .ea.a a'ia °L T��YZ`o �ra�i��zyzm° m 12 >A°L>o ziT mi pn O m OO ° •dy42: rNpNy9 yti�r ly2 OyTN�yeJi y ^�^ L OL L0 O !mmT a yr � C9T�T � a aC y mrdn Cn° pm N_ T of r grri• `N"T Za9 nn nr,T azi nn nn N `� n °N•1 a�s1 a yl n N 0 9°�ood Leo oe oo eoe000eoH000(ygP(y]]sOs VOSnoopyopoevoopPOp On i ON OQ�09 SoSoos:O p OY ^Y PM�V $N e0 \wM PlyN±gi PIPq ; I i �NN� YIP IVO I y--MIIP i M r I y 1 � I N�yyyiYP Nylr py NpYp I www4III� rrNNa'?1 r �pN Ny yN y �; aJYOJf•+0400 OP P! °o o9iowia$S JrIO VaOr9�P MIOT L Ipr`9J1 OpOO�ll00pO OP rO1POyYN4%OOrppOJJJOOVOVVNP I1 dJ P09 OPOO Ory Uc OOQPOYN 1 c?a..Ieo -.Sao a � I I i II I II r I Y P `f ! T ti P 1 iw li i 1 T i ^ IA 1 i i z 3 n a o O a T w N - '. I I NN t "4 yfFI�OdJW PYNpYOd VOWW VWWWWd°VWNONyrrdy ddP 1 •P OVJ�lr }O}yvJWpJ.>rMrryrrNWJ ��rV JOrV VPOy.PO V 1 OMd J.!IY W @V VOl VdV VJJYyMC� I.O PP.INPPNW}W ;� n<r <CCC- Iy�,J,NN6.INM NNNNNIw�NN�9 AyaT'1�40t.D0 IT } r• >NLL D C -1 OO°0°o OZY NO.-. 99NC 1 P ��Mi YN >� nraQw2 i�secc°cy� a ;iiry gd TNy<,a oh s a:aJJ.. o N do za r v JA �I -.o:z z�z za rs ..dnN asi iTr�o 0 r3° N oa>TT Ty s O9Ny}n I:,H! i I9�•'- �° 1aw �N=O�iz 22 T> „�� IM TiY�� P11 0D�i�JT��V�VVV�1111111w� cation nn zpagy �w�ypl i'z” raw$ i MH �V T 1raiT >rrl"yY ON Or ITO �t N� ; L na,yy°� ° '1$N r Zx i � z I �' 1'11�i i�►> INTn " r " .;q . A 1 N n I :TgTT1�. z�zr I °1zw1Yn °ON.0. 1°y n. ae° GrG NqM Ntth� .+O I' � 2aiYal wn YO°$on rJI 'T TT r JP J4'P r Y p a plan 1 V 1110 w. TT� A NWy°r C �MNrT �a �T�.IT II �'h aiaa aT + e gg'.�, Vr �e o ° i i l y�i�t jjjjll1.i a�ai .°.�$� °� a�r iY.°.z i:n ap. ai +'I"2.°. 1 n MYO�`; >� YOP{N i� Sn�n �N7Jr mTN.1 i°V 'i >n YO 4 � ° ^•n Yi<y fD >V, Ntil n N✓1 C- V or w nz. � a 1h1z c z �o ae iT gg.y� � n„ a�ryT s>lrlifA "y}Or y try 1��'e 11 I .YN., i�aJ�e£` NS IIZ} I ITn za �r Nd Z Ii 11> T V M n n npnn n n� non ern h n l i °9ME OR erAor o i n7 a s � zmz '..I� � z i I Isn III w� Isn 1sn s .s. w uz. i s a s N 1 le0 o0eeodo0doo 0o nodeo �e eo eo�n0 0o ii °L+ vv ^MMrv, vv Fv�s� s� vv�Y�vv vs�Yr > '«vy�oa"�yp �.Wi i�.ro aNigvlw i£ sal�uu -n. -1U I?£ 4 NW i. > r !pM 4 I w IP^! dO�JO I O O! OP V�}YRJ1 ie-J1 •� eby s.t ;U019, ovt o °: i{ ► °o��.°.. I I I I i } d' Ow OP Oe • O I 0 a Jt �rV�1IC I io we�Tnr I: M 1 ' o3 »iijir. : a I I I I I �o° ' ei�S I F �.. P� ) i s 0 n 5 Y T ) O ) S A Y y � If � i1 I I ) I I I i I I I I I I I I I i P� ) i s 0 n 5 Y T ) O ) S A Y y � If � i1 I I I I I I I I I I P� ) i s 0 n 5 Y T ) O ) S A Y y � If � i1 FDRM5:0704.01:CLAIM FOR DA.YAGS OR IIIJCRY (2 & —a6 CTA(M FOR DAMACm OR ItJOl2 1. Llaims for death, injury t0 paraoa, or to personal property must be filed no later than 100 days after the occurrence (Gov. Code, Sec. 911.2). I. Claims for damages to real praperty =at be filed no later tbao 1 year the occurrence (Gov. Code, See. 911.2). IOC CIIT OF WCIIO COCAItOf" C ") 3,,, r, _ W Wfi %�IL�i3 Marne of Claimant Addres Zip phone Age Address to which Clamant wishes notices sent. / ME did damage or injury occur? 1Mij L In i r7 z((J VIUR did damage or iujur:r occur? 3OW and under what circumstances did ds -_,;c or injury ocurcf Cti(atI t A CIc.r1( /))( /)h__ VW particular action by the City, or its employees, caused the alleged damage or injury? (Include causes of employvea, if km,,,). likat am ,m you claim? Include the estimates amount of say prospective lose, insofar es it may be know at the time of the praseetatl on of this claim, together with the basis of computation of the amount claimed. (Attach estimates or bills, if possible). S Total Am can t Claimsit F Flag and addressee\ of w`Lt`cusas, doctors, sad hospitals. Date Ztgn cure of Claimant o '1 in no RSrm tilrm 1"(O p"rt m rtyrS00 M po.. o rtm~O riH rim m yS O'm Sm 7iltn am rCO myOL L < nv° 670 rm rRrt �Pm 0 tO t` yy,, ppppw mm m0 m r mg r p0.00 ydc9•4 rt= Rmm p.i00HN�7 SCw'iRO m9rtP00rmm? 8 mr� .. qQ mPm M00 p HB W p0 RPw 0'm �m rt a. tr}00 Agx°0,,. ~w0 0 gym on m p 0ItS mO NP m n in m mamK C3 0 m oK iKt�+fm mgt iOm O7r� ., GOQ. 0."O mm00<p H9 ?aOw mR 047 oPC)90 p.S 70 PW N'Sa9it R1 CO 7Sb emt MY07n Ro mm� m 7Rrt�..77 p r{ N9 P 0' 0 n imt• rrt 7mm m 7 lb 7m Rrim rRtmt i�N rt60 rr o a o :07K Nm �� .p rr..,7 m O mm�CR0 060'm 1wO M00 w C1 WN p.7 1! 0'K tOt �0 KMymm rt� Ori00'.J'Mri m HO mr SM,^.0 0 0'r MRRm Om Sm aH�Hw 6.O Riw p �fmf <m0 d m a bLo H�m.mi rt m mw o•mm a R mon�wo Rr p o v p C. NO O P Rw HO CA.p C m 0 `n <00 pomM yPmR 0.rt0mP Rm rH'1'3ri 0'm PF'y ro m o �. mKrrr�rOO{{{{ wm0 O•RWrt m p.tio'tlRPO'Rmggamr�ymmRMmPt7W N p 7C, 10 NA Nm S ~RO m 7riC0 m0 F'6i Hmh 7'A ?`t 70'0100 f r+ m m H WO m L m Rm m Tar ^m 0'H� 0. m~aa pISD rtri pOCa0 0.0•ri HVp0 ~0'p.H 7~rt 0.0 m a LLrm �n0Rm ° Y,RmVi0t1SOR�p 0'` °' y� �' S p.RO ryRmlw d0O Op Rw n' p F RmO m m O0 n0mR': :3 1 E m rt R m p I~+7C 0 pmR HrR R RGO•yri 00tt rt 0 1 0 O H6m 0 m w W w rm �tlMH ppgmOH``H O INDM riHO.ri m M xb mm m m~ m 0 Hpp 7 A R P N rry O STOP am0 w `< ppp y m .00h mPm Mp<�+ C Ana' 000o .m0 m 1 0 m 'me mR 0 WR Impma.LCO(p'' b H "14 0 OL 0 m co S 0 00, OC m 0 < 0 o.? Co A O- P p ' O Y rtR 0.0 o0L7N 0 0 `< r p0 mm 7 m on 00.0 P o '0' m c. ri01 �mR rt q Y. o.RC R� it' ft b o 7tro OD 0M0 M t n R I OUAID INTERNATIONAL AUTO EXPO wxv. raal..il.u.W 01411. WY.N . YM'. IRILLLIIW . IC.WI..r[nsa anal . YAlOi1RY . tw 8000 INDIANA AVE, NNEASIDE CA 92504 (714) 688.9420 o.no.aou- NAYE L U.v.0 r-n .mgvi q _. CITY- W II{ /�..iRa YMI ..aY a.Y�aa LIA. A) l Pl' 0 /..r.-a A/ C _Ui ralar. euw. [ 9STIMATE OF REPAIRS MLIAaa Tel. iI>•/ W.- �...�_._wrtil • DESCRIPTION ma�yy 'JC aV Y+Y M..Y r.I.r rY. M wYl.nw r rw r I.rX..s! N WOtO r MOYII..r•wwY ..0 u r1 Y N.. orr .Y.n rrYr.r ✓ra.. Y wwYY... Y MlY.N1. YM..4lw w rr.r w.o! VYIYY..�M.41.wIrIWM WY.r.1.M /.II11 w.Ytr wwl..i.rY rwN YI1L.Y1n Y.Y '��r1.WM.YNYMYOY Y.YY..Y F.r.. \YMI.w..•.Y l..1Y..rYwYr i (�� .rt r.,lawY.Y YY .ppl10M1� IYW.I. /Mr.rr iYrYI YV .�I Yr \M. YrM Y.! r.r. ,w Y�..y�I rYY .�wMr rwH•I...Ywrw.wrw. r. nls�M.l ��n Rpy W 011.Mp Wn1YY r4 M OYMWOIW .I .OM1OOM TO TW ApYt UTW . SYY.I, nI C \ i O S.b. T.. S �_'ABOVE WOPN AUTHORIZED (Crn.t at Acwt) 4 C.. T.nl en. 8 EDTIIAATE ^� D".,.b. #Alt aIgurYYw . Ct:6. 1w AOV. CMA`C6 , ' '6� R7ED 8Y // 018YB TfTH o ,.UY / 1w4 _ M10- ME �0 ME ... nn. �... Yr.r,tY+uw...w....r..uuuan�.Yrr CMHOarI111WI.011t1I,.OYr Hn. 'JC aV Y+Y M..Y r.I.r rY. M wYl.nw r rw r I.rX..s! N WOtO r MOYII..r•wwY ..0 u r1 Y N.. orr .Y.n rrYr.r ✓ra.. Y wwYY... Y MlY.N1. YM..4lw w rr.r w.o! VYIYY..�M.41.wIrIWM WY.r.1.M /.II11 w.Ytr wwl..i.rY rwN YI1L.Y1n Y.Y '��r1.WM.YNYMYOY Y.YY..Y F.r.. \YMI.w..•.Y l..1Y..rYwYr i (�� .rt r.,lawY.Y YY .ppl10M1� IYW.I. /Mr.rr iYrYI YV .�I Yr \M. YrM Y.! r.r. ,w Y�..y�I rYY .�wMr rwH•I...Ywrw.wrw. r. nls�M.l ��n Rpy W 011.Mp Wn1YY r4 M OYMWOIW .I .OM1OOM TO TW ApYt UTW . SYY.I, nI C \ i O S.b. T.. S �_'ABOVE WOPN AUTHORIZED (Crn.t at Acwt) 4 C.. T.nl en. 8 EDTIIAATE ^� D".,.b. #Alt aIgurYYw . Ct:6. 1w AOV. CMA`C6 , ' '6� R7ED 8Y // 018YB TfTH o ,.UY / 1w4 _ 1 [ UCcr IIr[CUIiIitRIUAR 'A fI0MG IR.We RLr4RAHD PIIRIIRD er's Auto Body Painting— Unitized Frame Repair SAN BERNARDINO. OA 92408 ONE, 884.6468 A.., EODYURVICL ICV�r PAINTS[RVICE PARTS a SOEL[T — �. ev _ a. rAiNTM.rznuL Wall SOOYMATERIAL_- .TY. SALEPTAX AOTM0111S[O [Y_- ESTIMAT[TOTAL X AOVANCED CNMOES KO PMTS TILL r OM[CARWO UIL[M o w l N�.r q� y OAO TOTAL �'� go, IL NOT W.....- ..___._!�PE''i HAIRY ON PAM -MK[[ [0Ll[CT To ULti1C[ `.af N 1 M1nf a irsl a `lS l�L1t±�i \�1 HeaV��IL�v7U��tB11iod es ',. 775•A E. Rialto Ave. Rialto. Co. 92376 eo1v�1 YO!/,? CARDE SEt► ESTHElEt7Ef /A /iSER►7CfA151 /LAl[E CHIEF. AMl/TSIUMINIEME Ez —LIN R • (764) 820 -4252 CMMMKMDWIMSBW C [bate Ie en W gry is tined a. h I y be w[ .td ,kaa sal cmm P17 bk Ua pelfa LMa wlte my be somddY s" wlek h�v b.vn fRikft can a dPSPplt PP[+ ue c ned w14J1 raaymlbe efkkfdan petb4tn' OeP® O vq OI tlat Ryl neOq ploy Pe TI pp/Pdaq{ IaOf•Wl0 at puts ells 6114 Ps tplenl end tUall!at Ia ehPye, f AUIIlonizA1tort 7oR REPAft Yvan Mnb7 satkalmtb q make 1110 above [apaks: I r P vasoe 1 weal r OO 1 A[f iLl- -- Torus NQ-)d -) I TOTAL FTVtiST.. `:ti %.%... s Al SJ . t t TOTALLAOp11 ................f 951. u:f TOTALRFTTIMI .............. i /w /C MIAL8llBLET .............. f TAX.........................S_ t Cnicu _•� [RVO.,K[CO NR.[[ N.M � Jac N.I F O/ C [bate Ie en W gry is tined a. h I y be w[ .td ,kaa sal cmm P17 bk Ua pelfa LMa wlte my be somddY s" wlek h�v b.vn fRikft can a dPSPplt PP[+ ue c ned w14J1 raaymlbe efkkfdan petb4tn' OeP® O vq OI tlat Ryl neOq ploy Pe TI pp/Pdaq{ IaOf•Wl0 at puts ells 6114 Ps tplenl end tUall!at Ia ehPye, f AUIIlonizA1tort 7oR REPAft Yvan Mnb7 satkalmtb q make 1110 above [apaks: I r P vasoe 1 weal r OO 1 A[f iLl- -- Torus NQ-)d -) I TOTAL FTVtiST.. `:ti %.%... s Al SJ . t t TOTALLAOp11 ................f 951. u:f TOTALRFTTIMI .............. i /w /C MIAL8llBLET .............. f TAX.........................S_ t FOMS:0704.O1:C.A1H FOR DMAGE OR I.YJCRY a -/-1- 86 _a 17 Cunt ram OAIUCH at vJOHY 6 –L/ 4 I. Claims for death, injury to perse4l or to personal property neat be filed no later than 100 ;aye after the occurrence (Gov. Code, Sec. 911.2). 2. Claims for damage@ to real property must be filed no later than 1 year the occurrence (Gov. Code, Sec. 911.2). IA: C�ICS! OF WC10 CHCAMMA Name of Claimant Address' Zip phone — C to t -a— e w . Address to vbich Claimant vishas notices sent. did damage or injury occur? _.%il,i./ Hung did damage or injury Occur? /•. NOW and under what circumstances did dange or injury occur? — / /•Nr F< //; f! /p/ IM particular action by tbo City, or its oployees, "used the alleged dam.,e or injury? (Include names of employees, if know). /I/- ,T' Fl. it P e It,0 s 1Ese Mot son do you claim? Include the estimated amount of any prospective loss, Insofar as it may be know at the time of :.be presentation of this claim, together with the basis Of computation of the amount c :eimed. (Attach estimates or bills, if possible). (�/, :r -r el 12 t'c`. T !.7/ fok& l o I C Cl .i( ( 4 Sots? Anon.t Clainds ■A•KS and addresses of vitnesses, doctors, and hospitals: /in /. ?rid 4 ✓l // �,�c- / /// E f�rt%`,2�1 /3i «� /O Y A (BAR) AL 73966 -R RETIMATV Of AIVAIRS CROWN AUTO BODY d PARUWG ..... OdO "NOR JIVFSEON OF E V P A. 7MC. y W w/r 1151 W. FOOTHILL BLVD. UPLAND, CA 91786 (714) 981 -2081 S 981 -2945 R a 4?1l I GAT- AM moonA ! /�i 1✓ .CPC- LZ t° 7�/ _ evr��� L� /7 _coo. I.$. Co. .l. .aa a01 IMOM. , w.wa ..00ar aoA. •r.La �I 9 .J A' t S , Myo �IIIMNp,.AY Ma.np wlwW. pn.n ov A m/wpMb ptltl.l Nry N un Iw bm s1 /k.. W.r. W1M1 p yry O {I.p mN.4i/a/a ov m/ICVI. ..... OdO "NOR Y 3- .ARTS L." y W w/r z - — 1 41 r 6 e T l t] IS IA u Il n - 1l — 10 n n !t a 7e AI. "k M or/ M TO 0. ApbR) alosel.laxlluyn.. bLe3 UBW un tul ur, (RI raven ec m )MOM IAAa IIKIS fW S M Wl r4wL L I" OOIANUS SObuT AOIIOC tMeN IT4t (not) PARTS tows Qap Rq Y ,W br MALI ASS, M vlN New, rtrM m IA+IS PARRT MAP L lr ll ARatO, Wp Pep Aava M Fp .M , Y MASH Abw ,IOb u b tW bllxl�. AIRYtl Ia/1,. A IAM/, N IS , pMA W p .w TISAW a WIN PlAm" WW Aw,L Em"Tt MALS ]O RATA Aml RAIL R,RSK, Sim Y k,* Sdmm ow b ob1, vowm by Slw, IM vRaM M / ae SUBIFi MET u.Aees w L w ma a IW SRa1 rwYe SALES TAX =p aw b w M% bb,s w IA,q Shot IT SASS IRSUtLKC DEDUCTIBLE MT tE ,es+lw ral M IRt ti YIL nsstlb mrra r r S.M ,IxL PAID BEFORE CAR IS RELC.ISED. �{STIVATE TOTAL IYx,RiWMtIdwl. oRFAal.rw wlAay pLLpIM y •� u.smu wn.ua nun ul a uwm .. ,u un. u....uu. w TOTAL S �—L:Er �� v v F DATE: TO: FROM: BY: CITY OF F ANCHO CUCAMONGA &uAi4 STAFF REPORT b, 0 8 June 4, 1986 City Council and City Manager 1977 Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer Luc'nda E Hackett, As3istant Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Approval to Seek Bids for the Improvement of Archibald Avenue Sidewalks from Foothill doulevard to Base Line Road The plans and specifications foi the subject project have been substantially completed, therefore, at this time the Engineering Division requests permission to seek bids for construction. It Is planned to fund this project from the Beautification Fund and Transportation Development Act (TOA), Article 3, from the San Bernardino Associated Governments-, the Engineers Estimate for this project is $103,SS3.00. RECOINENDATIOM: It is recommended that City Council grant approval to seek bids for the improvement of Archibald Avenue Sidewalks from Foothill Boulevard to Base Line Road and to fund this project from the Beautification Fund and TDA, Article 3 based on the Engineer's Estimate of $103,553 00. Respectfully submit ed, t/ LBH:LEH:bc Attachments /a .a y RESOLUTION N0. ee&-M- YR 9(, — J's a— A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY CD'JNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING PLFMS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE 'ARCHIBALD AVENDE SIOEWA -KS FROM FOgtHILI BLVD. TO BASE LINE ROAD ", IN SAID CITY AND AUT'iGRIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIOS. WHEREAt', it is the intention of •e City of Rancho Cucamonga to construct certain improvements in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. WHEREAS, the City of Rancho r,camonga has prepared plans and specifications for the construction of certain Improvements. NOW, THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED that the plans and spcifications presented by the City of Rancho Cucamonga be and are hereby approved as the plans and specifications for °Archibald Avenue Sidewalks ". BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk 1s he•eb., authorized and directed to adve ^tise as required by law for the receipt of sealed bids or proposals for coing the work specified in the aforesaid plans and specifications, which said advertisement shall be substantially in the following words end figures, to wit: '_ YOTICE INVITING SEALED BInS OP. PROPOSALS' Pursuant to a Resolution of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino Coun::y, California, directing this notice, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the said City of Rancho Cucamonga will receive at the Office of the City Clerk in the offices of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, on or before the hour of 2:00 o'clock P.N. on the 25th day of June 1986, sealed bids or proposals for the 'Archibald Avenue sidewalks' in ;a, City. Bids will be opened and publicly read immediately in the office of the City Clerk, 9320 Base Line Road, Suite C, Iancho Cucamonga, California 91730. Bids must be made on a form provided for the purpose, addressed to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, marked, "Bid for Construction of Archibald Avenue Sidewalks'. PREVAi,.ING WAGE: Notice is hereby given that in accordance with the provisions of California Labor Code, Division Z, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article" I and 2, the Contractor is required to pay not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for wore of a similar character to the locality in which the pablic work is performed, and not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for holiday and overtime work. In that regard, the Director of the Department .f Industrial Relations of the State of California is required to and has determined such general prevailing rates of per them wage:. Copies of such prevailing rates of per diem wages are on file in the office Of the City Clerk or the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 9320 Bse Line Road, Suite C. Rancho Cucamonga, California, and are available to any intere:ted party on request. The Contracting Agency also shall ca,ise a copy of such determinations to be posted at the Job site. The Contractor shall forfeit, as pen:al.y to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, twenty -five dallare 1$2.5-0') for eac � thereof, �ifn� such mechanic employed for each ca ndai day o• portion laborer, workman, or mechanic is paid less than the general prevailing rate of wages beretnbefore stipulated for any work done under the attached contract, by him or by any subcontracto^ under him, in violation of the provisions of said Labor Code. In accordance with the provisions of Section 1777.5 of the Labor Code as amended by Chapter 971, Statutes of 1939, and in accordance with the reulations of the app California rentices may be employed in they prosecution properly indentureu n of the work. Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1711.5 and 1777.6 of e Labor any sub ontractor under employment of apprentices by the Contra employingitradesmen�In any appnticeable Contractor cupationtooapplyto subcontractor the joint apprenticeship committee e c nearest the site of the public works project and which administers the apprenticeship program to that trade for a certificate of approval. The certificate will also fix the ratio of apprentices to journeymen �enttcetslt be journeymen inesuchfcasescshall not contract. The ratio of app be less than one to five except: A When exceeded an average of 15 apercent joint then 90r c days pr'.ur to the request for certificate, or B. wnen the number of app- entices in training to the area exceeds a ratio of one to five, or C. When the trade can show apprenticeship training on least annual of basis membership through apprenticeship statewide o- locally, or D. when the Contractor provides evidence that he employs registered et Journeymen. annual average of not less than one apprentice to eigh The (ontractor is requlrreenti apprenticeship CD programs if to h funds employestablished egistered the administration of app trae on sch centric other Contractors anethen public yworkse site eare emakiag such u contributions. If apprtices or The requirements tofc n under Sections 1777 5and 1777.6 o th him employment of comply pprentices. Informat,co ritative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other tt nis obtained Director Industrial exofficothe Admitratorof pprenticeshlry ,SanFra-cisro,California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. ,aa Ei3ht (R) hours o' labor shall constitute a legel day's work for all workmen employed in the execution of this contract and tho Contractor and any subcontractor under hi,e ,hall comply with and be gojeeied by the laws of the State of California hating to do with working hours as set forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Cade of the State of California as amended. The Contractor shalt forfeit, as a penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, twenty -five dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed in the execution of the contract, by him or any subcontractor under him, upon any of the work hereinbefore mentioned, for each calendar day during which said laborer, workman, or mechanic is required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours to violation of said Labor Coce. Contractor agrees 'o pay travel and subsistence pay to each workman needed to execute the work required by this contract as such travel and subsistence payments are defined in the applicable collective bargeining agreements filed In accordance with Labor Code Section 1773.8. The bidder must submit with his proposal cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bidder's bond, payable to the City of Rancho -:ucamonga for an amount equal to at Mast ten percent (10%) of the amount of said bid as a guarantee that the bidder will inter into the proposed contract if the sane is awarded to him, and in even. of failure to enter into such contract id cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bond shall become the property of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. If the City of Rancho Cucamonga awards the contract to the next lowest bidder, the amount ^f the lowest bidder's security stall be applied by the City of Rancho Cucamorga to the difference between the low bid and the socomi lowest bid, and the surplus, if any, shall be returned to the lowest bidder. The amount of the oond to be given to secure a faitiful performance of the contract for said work shall be one hundred percent (1005) of the contract pe ice thereof, and an additional bond in an amount rqual to fifty pert.ent (SLS) of the contract Price for said work shall be given to secure the payaent of claims for any materials or supplies furnished for the performance o" the worx contracted to be done by the Contractor, or any work or labor of and kind done thereon, and the Contrctor will also be required b, furnish a certificate that he carries compensation insurance covering his emiloyees upon wort to bu done under contract which may be rntered into between him and the said :1ty of Rancho Cucamonga for the construction o• said work. No proposal will be considered from a Contractor the is rat lit.ensed in accordance with the provisions of the Contractor's License Law (California Business and Professions Code, Section 7000 et. seq.) and rules and regulations adopted p,irsuant thereto or to whom a proposal form his not been Issued by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The work is to be done in accordance with the profiles, plans, and specifications of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on file in the (office of the City Clerk at 9320 Boise Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Copies of the plans and specifications will be furnished upon application to the City of Rancho Cucamonga and {ayment of $25.00, said $25.00 is nonrefunlable. /S S . 1 u P Upon written request by the bidder, copies of the plans and specifications- will be mailed when said request Is accompanied by nayment stipulated above, together with an additional nonreimbursable payment of $5.00 to cover the cost cf mailing ciiarge.i and overhead. The ruccessfui biider will be required to enter into a contract satisfactory to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. In accordance with the requirements of Section 902 of the General Provisions, as set forth to the Plans and Specifications regarding the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, the ;ontracter my. upon the Contractor's request and at the Contractor's sole cost and expense, substitute authorized securities in lieu of monies withheld (performance retention). The City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, reserves the right to reject any and all bids. By order of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. Dated this _ day of 19 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT Date: June 4, 19BG To Llty Council and City Manager From: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer By: Gideon V. Agra, Engineering Technician Subject: Approval of !mprovement Agreement for the Installation of Public lmproveaent and Dedication with Raul and Gloria Rosales for Archibald Avenue Sidewalks Attached are triplicate copies of the subject Agreement, as well as Easement Deed and plat for Right-of -Way Dedication for the City Council's approval. This Agreement calls for the dedication of en additional five -foot strip of land to accomodate the needed street improvements such as sidewalk, drive approach, ornamental pilasters and fence with landscaping to be installed by the City alon3 the subject property f- ontage. The construction of said protect will be financed from the Approvzd TDA Artic;e 3 and Beautification Fnnda. RECOMMI NDATION: It is recommended that City Council approva and adopt the attached resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute the Agreement between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Raul and Gloria Rosales for the installation of Frontage Improvements by the City in exchange to Rigbt -of -Way Dedication by the property owners for the construction of Archibald Avenue Sidewalks Project. R spec fully submit d, LBH :GVA:pam Attachments lt7 I RESOLUTION N0. - e"uT4—.M 8(m — / (P I A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF R.ULNO CUCANONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING STREET FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENT AND DEDICATION AGREEMENT CLTWEEN RAUL AND GLORIA ROSALES AND THE CITY OF R?RCHO CUCAYONGA California, has for the its consideration lan Agreementiexecuted by Raul andaGloria Rosales, husband and wife, (hereinafter referred to as Owner), for the installation of frontage improvements located along a portion of Archibald Avenue at 174 feet more or less south of Candlewood Street on the West side of Archibald Avenue. WHEREAS, the owner desires that the City construct laid frontage improvements in conjunction with the City's project for tht im,,rovement of Archibald Avenue from Foothill Boulevard to Base Line Roo /; end WHEREAS, the Owner' has executed an easemr +• °or roadwty and related purposes over said frontage to be improved; and WHEREAS,the City is agreeable to have such imprcvemerts constricted as part of the above noted City project. ROW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucrmonga, California, that said Agreement be hereby approved and authorize tie Mayor to execute the same, and direct the City Clerk to record same in tt.e office of the County Recorder of San Bernardino County, California. �l s AGREEMENT FOR INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC IMPROYEW9 AND DEDICATION This Agreement is made and entered into this day of 1986 by and hetween the City of Rancho Cucamonga, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'CITY•) and Raul P. Rosales and Gloria N. Rosales, husband and wife, as jo'nt tenants (hereinafter referred to as 'OHHER') for the Installation of certain public improvements including, but not limited to curbs, gutters, drive approaches, sidewalks, rock pilasters and metal fence, along a portion Gf Archibald Avenue at 174 feet more or less `tjuth of Candlewood Street on the West side of Archibald In the City of Rancho Cucamonga. A. Recitals (1) CITY has prepared plans and specifications for, and presently contemplates the installation rt, public improvements along Archibald Avenue from Foothill ^nulevard to Bese Line Peso (toe Archibald Avenue Sidewalks Project Plans cnd Specifications are made on integral part hereof of this Agreement). 01` OWNER owns that certain real property, identified as San Bernardino County Assessors Parcel No. 2OC- 041 -10, fronting along Archibald Avenue which property % within the limits of the Archibald Avenue Sidewalks Project (111) OWNER desires to participate in the Archibald Avenue Sidewalks Project so as to dedicate necessary Rigl.ts -of -Way related to street frontage imp- ovements along owners property at Archibald Avenue (*the Rosales Portion' hereinafter). CITY is willing to inaude the Rosales Portion within the r Archibald Avenue Sidewalks Froject upon the terms and conditiol.s hereinafter set forth. #t NOW THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between CITY and OWNER as follows: r, 5 e 1. OM.NER shall execute r Deed of Easement in favor of CITY for street right -of -way and related purposes in form and content identical to that attached hereto as Exhibit •A'. 4fi Y, 'l 2 CITY is authorized to cause OWNER's Deed of Easement to be recorded, forthwith upon execution of this Agreement and City shall furnish copy of the recorded Easement Deed to the OWNER upon recordation. 3. CITY shall include the Rosales Portion as a part of the construction of the Archibald Avenue Sidewalk Project and shall cause all necessary public improvements to M installed in accordance with CITY's plans and specifications therefor. 4. OWNER agrees to grant to CITY, its elected officials, officers, agents, employees and contractors such rights of entry and /or temporary construction easements as are deemed necessary by CITY's City Enyineer to cause the completion of the Rosales Portion. 5 This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of tie State of California. 6. In the event any legal proceeding is instituted to enforce any terms or provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party in said legal proceeding shall be entitled to recover attorneys' fees and costs from the other party to an amount determined by the Court to be reasonable. 7. This Agreement is binding upon and shall inure tc the benefits of the parties hereto and to their respective heirs, executors, ddministrators, successors or assigns, wherever the context requires or admits. i, i' 8. This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, whither oral or In writing, between the parties with respect to tlrt subject matter +} hereof. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representation by any party which is not embodied herein nor any other agreement, statement or promise not contained in this Agreement shall he valid or binding. Any y mndification of this Agreement shall be effective only If it is in a writing signed by all of the parties hereto. ` .h M IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the. day and year first above written. CITY CITY OF RANCHO CUCANONGA CALIFORNIA, a municipal corporatfan By: Jeffrey King. yor ATTEST: �f PROPERTY CWRER Rtul P. Rosales Gloria N. Roseles i APPROYEO AS TO FORM: Bever 1v A. Authlet, city Clerk , r. y/ ty(Attorney a °{ t FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which Is hereby acknowledged. Raul P. Rosales Gloria N. Rosales - — ORANC(S) to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, a Municipal Corporation, an EASEMENT for street and related purposes In, over and upon that certain real property in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, Described as FOBbws: That portion of the Parcel North 150 feat of the East 283 feet., lying Wes of the West line of Archibald Avenue, go feel wide, in the South half of Lot 8, In Section 3, Township 3 South, Range 7 West, San Bernardiro Base and Meridian, according to Map of Cucamonga Lands, as per plat recorded in Book 4 of as Records 208-041 -10. which Osaidoportion ibeingsa known rectangular- shaped parcel of land described as follows: Beginning at a paint o. the Southeast corner of the above - mentioned parcel, said point being located on the West line of Archibald Avenge, 45 feet from the centerline per Grant Deed to the County of San Bernardino on August 11. in Southern Line official thence contin Beginning-, thence- the continuing North parallel to the Western Line of Archibald Avenue to the Northern line of said Lot 150.00 feet; thence continuing East on the florthe. Line, 5.00 feet to the Northeast corner of said Lot (said Northeast corner also being 4C feet Nest from Archibald Avenue Centerline) thence continuing South on the Eastern Line of said Lot, (said Eastern Line also the Western Line of True PointcofbBeginning; containing an area coft0.0172)Acre, mo•erof less. he Exhibit "Bo is attached hereto and made a par hereof � tht r reference. Qty Dated GENERAL ACKNOWLEDOAIENT , �, California On lhl; the stay it — — 19Lbeforo me. Staleof / Counlyolsan Bernardino the undare!aned Notary Public, parsonoly apPeved 0 pamonallyimowntome proved to me on the 1311313 of s tl3fixtory evidence to be the pareonls) Who 30"Maltl ubsenbedtothe OFFICIAL. SEAL within M3trUMent. and aaknowladp3dlh11 � -L— executed IL JUDITH A ACOSTA WITN y hand and official e031 n a ae VA B=AR M eµcoler? sari RIxAloulo tx alrr i" Ufa :yam. LY ` t9A Not S ynaturo a l 4__.... SSIS 29 A GEIrERAL ACAWOWEEDGEKENT. F EASE Use PRe,?F.R ACxwO:irtU) EX Nr. I R. t JADEITE AVENUE L• ,1- u n tl' 1 O N a Q - -AVEUU txrl/H/r •s^ RAUL P. ROSALES GLORIA N ROSALES N O w v 0 N F., CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE n _ v ,- ,B,•�?,� rte• R/ON7 OF WAY DEgOAi1dY FOR 9TR[[i • yil- 02 -21 -BB ` ('/C•�CrvY7WJJyi�j q L IT/E3 PURPOSE!' i 'TT D 2 7602 RANCHO CUCAMO AVENUE A > 7602 A CUCANON AV CA. 91770 AA 1971 A N 0 0 N a a u saa•.ev. «1o.O� � I -- -- �1kftCflFBAi-0— O PORTION DEDICATED FOR RIONi -OF -WAY AREA • 0.0172 AC. L• ,1- u n tl' 1 O N a Q - -AVEUU txrl/H/r •s^ RAUL P. ROSALES GLORIA N ROSALES N O w v 0 N F., CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE n _ v ,- ,B,•�?,� rte• R/ON7 OF WAY DEgOAi1dY FOR 9TR[[i • yil- 02 -21 -BB ` ('/C•�CrvY7WJJyi�j q L IT/E3 PURPOSE!' i 'TT D 2 7602 RANCHO CUCAMO AVENUE A > 7602 A CUCANON AV CA. 91770 AA 1971 i V CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 4, 1986 Ue um TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Llovd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Laura Psomas, Landscape Designer SUBJECT: INTENT TO ANNEX TRACT NOS. 12673, 12802, AND 12802 -1 THRO 6 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 (TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY) AS ANNEXATION NO. 3 Attached for City Council approval, is a resolution declaring the City's Intent to annex Tract Nos. 12673, 12802, and 12802 -1 thru 6 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4 and setting the public hearing to June 18, 1986. Also, attached for preliminary approval is the Engineer's Report for this annexation. RECOM10MATION: It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the Engineer's Report and setting the date of public hearing for June 18, 1986. j ull bmi ed, ts B N 7E RA WSTA January 9, 1986 City Engineer City of Rancho Cucamonga Po3t Office Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga. CA 91730 Attention: Ms. Linda Beek, Engineering Technician RE: TRACT NOS. 12802, 12802 -1, 12802 -2 12802 -3, 128024, 12802 -5, 12802 -6; ANNEXATION TO MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS Dear Linda: We hereby request that Tract Nos. 12802, 12802 -1, 12802 -2, 12802 -3, 12802 -4, 12802 -5, 12802 -6 be in annexed into Landscape Maintenance District No. 4, Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4, and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 (arterial lights). Very truly yours, LEWIS HOMES OF CALIFORNIA Kaatloc' Authorized Agent XM:kr:01053(2) 1156N h0unlam A" P.O. Box 670 UpAwd. CA 81786 (714) 885.0371 _ Oawloped b/ Loris Noma 2s 0 7ERR4 WSTA January 9, 1986 City Engineer City of Rancho Cucamonga Post Office Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attention: Ms. Linda Beek, Engineering Technician RE: TRACT NO. 12673; ANNEXATION TO MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS Oear Linda: Y.a hereby request that Tract No. 12673 be in annexed into Landscape Maintenance District No. a, Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4, and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 (arterial lights). Very truly fours, LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. WESTERN PROPERTIES ha�� �o /t„2arS� It Kay dock Kay Matlock Authorized Agent Authorized Agent 94:kr:01053(1) 1156N 64u4anA,g. P.O.SU670 1lgiancLCA91166 (114) 986.0971 _ ; by Lftm Hp .�4 5 RESOLUTION NO. UPOP-M $6 - 45 A RESOLUTIOh OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAM,ON"„A, ChLIFORNIA, OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER'S kiPORT FOR ANNEXATION NO. 3 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 (TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY) WHEREAS, on June 4, 1986, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga directed the City Engineer to make and file with the City Clerk of said City a report in writing as required by the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has made and filed with the City Clerk of said City a report in writing as called for pursuant to said Act, which report has been presented to this Council tar consideration; and WHEREAS, said City Council has duly considered said report and each and every part thereof, and finds that each and every part of sold repot is sufficient, and that said report, nor any part thereof, requires or should be modified In any respect. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT REEni.VED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: SECTION 1: That the Engineer's Estimate of the itemized costs and expenses osair—work and of the incidental expenses in connection therewith, contained in said report be, and each of thew are hereby, preliminarily approved and confirmed. SECTION 2: That the diagram showing the Assessment District referred to and descri W—In said report, the boundaries of the subdivis loos of land within said Assessment District are hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed. SECTION 3i That the proposed assessment upon the subdivisions of land In said7Cssssment District in proportion to the estimated benefit to be received by said subdivision, respectively, from said work and of the incidental expenses thereof as contained in said report is hereby preliminarily approved and con rmed. SECTION 4: That said report shall stand as the City Engineer's Report for tEe purposes of all subsequent proceedings, and pursuant to the proposed district. 07 RESOLUTION N0.- E0C4B7 -W pro -IS.'? A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE ANNEXATION TO STREET LIGHTING KIINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4. AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT: DESIGNATING SAID ANNEXATION AS ANNEXATION M0. 3 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO NON, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, as follows: SECTION 1. Description of Wurk• That the public interest and convenience require anrTi ISih{nUee�ion of this City Council to form a maintenance district in the City of Rancho Cucamonga for the maintenance and operation of those street lights the boundaries of the proposed maintenance district described in Section 2 hereof. Said maintenance and operation includes the cost and supervision of any lighting and related facilities in connection with said district. SECTION 2. Location of Work: The foregoing described work is to be located witFi- nroadway r g -o -w y - enumerated in the report of the City Engineer and more particularly described on amps which are on file in the office of the City Clerk, entitled 'Annexation No. 3 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4'. SECTION 3. Description of Assessment District: That the contempla wor , n the opinion of Said City Council, Is of more thr local or •urdinary public benefit, and the said City Council hereby makes the expense of the said work chargeable upon a district, which said district is assessed ..o pay the costs and expenses thereof, and which district is described as follows; All that certain territory of the City of Rancho Cucamonga included within the exterior boundary lines shown upon that certain 'Kip of Annexation No. 3 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4' maps is on file in the office of the City Clerk of said City. SECTION 4. Report of Engineer: The City Council of said City by Resolution —Ao. "alas approveu zne report of the engineer of work which report indicates the amount of the proposed assessment, the district boundary, assessment zones, titled 'Engineer's Report, Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4' is on file in the office of the City Clerk of said City. Reference to said report is hereby made for all particulars for the amount and extent of the assessments and for the extent of tie work. l �' CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. EOS- 07 -24k Page 2 SECTION S. Coller:tion of Asressrents: The assessutent shall be collected af-{ sane —W&-i and in the sane manner as County taxes are collected. The City Engin,ter shall file a sport annually •elth the City Council of said City and said Council will annually conduct a hearing upon said report at their first regular meeting in June, at which tUse assessments for the next fiscal year wilt be determined. stG110N 6. Time and Place of Hearin : Notice is hereby given that on June I8; I98b; at a our o pm n e City Council Chimbers at 9161 Base Line, in the City of kancho Cucamonga, arty and all persois hating any objections to the ark or extent of the assessacent district, msy appear and show eeuse wiry said work !hculd not be &ne or carried nut or why said district should not be farmed in accordance with this Resolution of Intention. Protests must be in writing and crust contain a description of the property to which each signer thereof is interested, sufficient to identify the sane, and must be delivered to the City Clerk of said City prior to the time sit for the hearing, and no other protests or objections will be considered. If the signer of arty protest is not shown upon the list equalized assessment roll of San Bernardino County as the owner of the property described in the protests. Lien such protest must contain or be ,,:companied by written evidence that such signor is the owner of the property so described. SECTION 7. Landsc.uiing mad Lighting Act of 1972: ill the work herein propose s all We ne- awn carried- ihroug n pursuance of an act of the legislature of the State of California designated the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Division 1C of the Streets and Higtways Code of the State of California. SECTION 8. Publication of Resolution of Intention: Published entice shall be mae pu -rsuan o jKnOn 61951 of h e overment Coe The .lyyor shall sign this Resolution and the City Clerk shall attest to tie same, and the City Clerk shall cause the sane to be published 10 days befire the date set for the hearing, at least once in The Daily Report' a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Onai rio, Calf crnla, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. �� I CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Engineer's Report for ANNEXATION NO. 3 to STREET LIGHTING MAINTENA.9CS DISTRICT NO. 4 Terra Vista Planned Cocrm:nity Tract 12673, Westside Park (Parcel Map 9829), Tracts 12802 -1, -2, -31 -4, -5, and street rights-of-way SECTION 1. Authority for Report This report is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1982). SECTION 2. General Descrfotlon Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4 (the 'District ") provides for operation, servicing, and maintenance of street lights on local and collector streets and secondary arterials (except Church Street) in the Terra Vista Planned Community. All residential developments in Terra Vista are to be annexed to the District pursuant to Ordinance No. 190; areas to be maintained which lie outside residential developments are also to be annexed for malnte- rance purpos:s. This Annexation No. 3 annexes to the District the following areas: • Tract No. 12673 (393 multifamily dwellings) • Westside Park (Parcel Nap No. 9829) • Tract Nos. 12802 -1, 12802 -2, 12802 -3, 12602 -4, and 12802 -5 (total 149 single family dwellings) • Elm Avenue right -of -way (north half) from Spruce Avenue to eastern boundary of Tract 12673. • Street right -of -way in Tract Nos. 12802 -6 and 12.02. SECTION 3. Plans and Specifications The plans and specifications for street lighting have been prepared by the developers, The plans and specifications are as stipulated in the con- ditions of approval for the development and as approved by the City Engineering Division. Reference is hereby made t) the subject tract maps or development plans and the assess.+r_nt diagrams fo• the exact location of the street lighting areas. The plans and specifications for street lighting improvements are hereby made a part of this report to the same extent as if said plans and specifications were attached hereto. s� 3a SECTION 4. Estimated Costs No costs will be incurred for street lighting constructior. All•- - improvements will be constructed by developers. Based on available data, it 1s estimated that maintenance costs for assessment purposes will be ds set forth below. These costs are estimated only; actual assessments dill be based of actual cost date. The estimated annual maintenance cost for Annexation No..i it as follows based on high pressure so lum vapor lamps: 5,800 9,500 22,000 27,500 Lu_ mens Lumens Lumens Lumens Tract 12673 0 10 1 1 Tracts 12802 -1, -2, -3, -4, -5 50 5 0 0 Elm Avenue rigut•of -way 0 1 0 1 Westside Park (P.M. 9829) 0 2 0 0 ' Street rights -of -way in Tracts 12802 -6 and 12802 31 0 0 0 Total lights -7- SCE monthly rate, maint. and energy x $8.75 x $10.16 x $13.84 x $15.31 Months per year x 12 x 12 x 12 x 12 Totals 38.505 52,1.45 $ 166 $ 367 TOTAL ANNUAL COST 511,233 The estimated total annual maintenance cost, and estimated annual assessments, for the District after Annexation No. 3 are as follows: Existing Annexation New total District No. 3 for District Total estimated annual maintenance cost $34,008 $11,233 $45,241 Assessment units: 1 per single family dwelling unit Sd3 149 1,032 0.5 per multifamily dwelling unit 275 197 472 1.158 346 1,504 tss- ssment rate: %.,: :ost s Assessment Units - Assessment Per Assessment Unit $29.37 $30.08 Assessment shale apply to each residential duelling as enumerated in Section 6 and the attached Assessment Diagram. SECTION 5. Assessment Dtaaram A copy of the proposed assessment diagram is attached to this report and by this reference is hereby incorporated within the text of this report. SECTION 6. Assessment Maintenance costs for the entire District are found to be of specific benefit to all developed residential property within the District to accordance with the following relationship: Land Use Assessment Units Single family residential dwelling 1 unit Multifamily residential dwelling .5 unit The City Couucil will hold a public hearing in Jure 1986, to determine the actual assessments based upon the actual costs Incurred by the City during 0e 1985/06 fiscal year. SECTION 7 Order a; Events 1. City Council adopts resolution instituting proceedings. 2. City Council adnpts Resolution of Prriiminary Approval of City Engineer'e Report 3. City Council adopts Resolution of Intention to Anvex to District and sets public hearing dates. 4. City Council conducts public hearing, considers all testiariny and determines to annex to the District or abandon the proceedings. 5. Every year in May, 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 modifies and approves the individual assessments. 1 LOT 1 s 3 i is iw Nom\ &I f ?hlf]rey V' LOTH' F� U + J r � ao : L _ rl �1 ' as ttL 4.QQ >� CY Ii 31 i or.". r1.fD'1l''• I -A•yfI �• 1. ��� J `� Keee i M-eMf r. • N �i� — 9500 cuM: — 2 7D7Ac 2 P,�lRIEL P1.9P �� 9f� 6600 44W. — 12 7nTAL / 7 TRACT,t/D. /2Bo2 - -/, sr05C-r ucvrs YL =I r ww In.� rwKr Mr P{aa .Na. eVcs! .rh nnrz n. >w rd.. x- si�ivrGVN - // T %AC r /j pan. l r• M 7znc7 aa. riot -2 '- - %� a7.eASET 41,CA'Tr b r. E t S i I .w. #encs w w. nr /ro -cam X X" wh - 7 7-07.44 c 7 ST.2rE�T u6�Tr ?,} h G X X" wh - 7 7-07.44 c 7 ST.2rE�T u6�Tr ?,} ■ �r : ks I I 7' e T/C. /E9CG M.6 /1R/40�69 LOT O M,4C7' At2 /reot- £ IAM X_ sVAP wai. - /n 7v7WA = /O P as oa• aS 4� Nf I 3°1l' .• ., tv '�'�' \ •Sj'' �iii;s Cf b1 CJ to of M _ a �_ r--' -- Mr r/• r'p. /' �• Iol �Arl I '• YedlO'• .. • ,• - lD7A� � 8 �. is YA •� •�'Z�L`.,_a',d... �� Z V �•�•.� 1 •1 _ .. ��, 4.'t Y(a ", fit. , {, (• y �• .M ti tY VlN �. or •. �3 t 6_ h � aeoo� ' . �1 p ms - 4� .• t �i ° �,. , ° Z �(— S&W UJN. — /2 729M ¢ /2 sT,PT 46,%TS r, ai a •r • W, JY 9 r) ef( i m4c7 ,Vd. ",92 - - //l i CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA p%CA& q STAFF REPORT 4 DATE: June 4, 1986 UI 1977 TO: City Council and City Wager FROM: Lloyd B. llubbs, City Erginee BY: Laura Psomas, Landscape Designer SUBJECT: INTENT TO ANNEX TRACT NOS. 12673, 12802, AND 12802 -1 THRU 6 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 (TERRA VISTA PLA)DiED COMMUNITY) AS ANNEXATION NO. 3 Attached for City Council approval is a resolution declaring the City's intent to annex Tract Nos. 12673, 12802, and 12802 -1 thru 6 to Landscape Maintenance District No. 4 and setting the public hearing for June 13, 1986. Also, attached for preliminary approval is the Engineer's Report for this annexation. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached reso — ut o approving the Engineer's Report and setting the dale of public hearing for June 18, 1986. fu1 su ted 1111 � Attachments �a UTERRAWS'M . January 9, 1986 City Engineer City of Rancho Cucamonga Post Of.'tce Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attention: Ns. Linda Beek, Engineering Technician RE: TRACT NO. 12673; ANNEXATION TO MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS Dear Linda: We hereby request that Tract No. 12673 be to annexed into Landscape Maintance Street LightingtMaintenrnce DistrictiNo. 1 (arterialnlights ) rict No. 4, and Very truly yours, LEWIS DEVELOPMENT CO. WESTERN PROPERTIES Kay atlock Kay Matlock Authorized Agent Authorized Agent KM:kr:01053(1) .il 1156N Mliwuam A,T PO Boa 610 llpao0. CA 61766 (714)ga5.0971 DwabPed tr,• IewN Hotne4 ti• ti= 7FRn41/7S'TA January 9, 1986 City Engineer City of Rancho Cucamonga Post Office Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attention: Ms. Linda Beek Engineering Technician RE: TRACT NOS. 12802, 12802 -1, 12802 -2, 12602 -3, 12802 -4, 12802 -5, 12802 -6; ANNEXATION TO MAIITIENA;ICE DISTRICTS Dear Linda: He hereby request that Tract Nos. 12802, 12802 -1, 12802 -2, 12802 -3, 12802 -4, 12802 -5, 12802 -6 be in annexed into Landscape Maintenance District No 4, Street Lighting Mlintenance District No. 4, and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 (arterial lights). Very truly yours, LEWIS HOMES ,, // OFF CALIFORNIA Ka /1 c Authorized Agent KM:kr:01053(2) 1156N tlounlaiA Ave P.O. Bat 670 UPIAW. CA 91786 (714) 9aS-0071 011"100ed M Lewis Honw _ �] RESOLUTION MD. -51 86+�s9 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR ANNEXATION NO. 3 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENNANCE DISTRICT IM. 4 (TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY) WHEREAS, on June 4, 1986, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga directeA tho City Engineer to make and file with the City Clerk of said City a report in writing as required by the Landscaping and Lighting A =t OF 1972; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has made and filed with the City Clerk of said City a report in writing as called for pursuant to sstd Act, which reyort has been presented to this Count I for consideration; and WHEREAS, said City Coun ^.11 has duly considered said report and each and every part thereof, and finds that each and every part of said report is sufficient, and that said report, nor any part thereof, requires or should be modified in any respect. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: SECTION 1: That the Engineer's Estimate of the itemized costs and expenses o std —work and of the incidental expenses in connection therewith, contained in said report be, and each of then are hereby, preliminarily approved and confirmed. SECTION 2: That the diagram showing the Assessment District referred to and desc- ein said report, the boundaries of the subdivisions of land within said Assessment District are hereby prellminarily approved and confirmed. SECTION 3: That the proposed assessment upon the subdivisions of land in saTT) sesscent District in proportion to the estimated benefit to be received by said subdivision, respectively, from said work and of the incidental expenses thereof, as contained in said report is hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed. SECTION 4: That said report shall stand as the City F_^.; neer's Report for—Me—purposes of all subsequent proceedings, and la'suant to the proposed district. L}S / L, (,G• RESOLIfTIDM INI..AL:- e1 =16Tt P" A RFSDLIMCM OF THE CTIT COUNCIL OF THE CITY W RUUD CUCMCUGA, CALIFCNYIA DECLARING ITS TNT MON TO OMI ThT ANNEXATION M LANDSCAPE MIN — E MM DISTRICT NO. 4, (TESNNA VISTA PUINNED COMNITY) AN ASSES9ENf DISTRICT: DESIGNATING SAID ALUEXATIDF AS ANEXATION VD. 7 TO LMDZAPE MRINTEKMM DISTRICT W. 4; PURSUANT TO 71E LAMMING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND OFFERING A TIfE AND PLACE FOR mww osidnDUs THERETO NW. iMMYOE DE IT RESOLVED by to City Council of the Cfy of do Cucamocga, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting of 1912, being Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State California, as follows: kMON 1. Description of York: That the public interest and ee reQuTrc and- it—is_UW_T­ e1—ffon of this City Council to form a cc district in the City of Rancho Cucamonga for the maintenance and of those parkways and faciliites thereon dedicated 5m colon purposes by deed or recorded subdivision tract rap %..thin Ue s of the proposed maintenance district des. -'Md to Section 2 Said maintenance and operation includes the cost and supervision of ruler system, trees, brass, plantings, landscaping, ornamental structures, and walls in conrection with said parkways. TION 2. Location of Work: The foregoing described work is " be i dwa��y' o -way and landscaping easements of Landsape District No 4 enumerated in the report of the City Enginesr and ilarly described on maps which are m file in the office of the entitled Ofteeation No. 3 to Landscape Maintenance District No. SECTION 3. Description of Assessment District: That the taplaTewor_,_in the op n on of Said City wiE s olmore than local ordinary public benefit, and the salt: City Co.xil hereby Bakes the expense the said work chargeable upon a district, which said district 1s + •essed pay the costs and expe.,ues thereof, and which district is descri -ad as All that certain territory of to City of Par-ho Cucamonga included within the exterior boundary lines slow upon that certain *Map of Amexation No. 3 to Landscape Maintenance District No. 4' heretofore approved by the City Council of said City by Resolution No. •, indicating by said boundary lines t o extent of the territory included within the proposed assessment district and which map is on file in Use. office of the City Clerk of said City. i�� CITY COUNCIL AESOLUTION NO. EOS- 07 -26R Page 2 SECTION 4. Rsport of __Engineer: The City Council of said City by Re-alutionl%:�Tias approves otTi repar of the engineer of work which report i•Jicates the amount of the proposed assessment, the district boundary, ssessment zones, titled 'Engineer's Rapart. Annexation No. 3, Landscape Maintenance District No. 4' is on file in the office of the City Clerk of said City. Reference to said report is hereby made for all particulars for the amount and extent of 61* assessments and for the extent of tho work. SECTION S. Collection of Assessments: Tr: assessment shall be collected of t, —save time and in the saawr manner as County taxes are collected. The City Engineer shall file a report annually with the City Council of said City and said Council will annually conduct a hearing upon said report at their first regular re: :ng in June, at which time assessments for the next fiscal year will be determined. SECTION 6. 'rise and Place of Hearingq Notice is hereby giv.ln that on June at our in the City Pouncil Chaaa,ers at 9161 Base Line, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, any and all persons having any objections to the work or extent of the assessment district, may appear and show cause wily said work should not be done or c •rried out or wily slid district should not be forced to accordance with this Resolution of Intention. Protests must be in writing and sus,. contain a description of the property in which each signer thereof is interested, sufficient to identify the same, aM oust be delivered to the City Clerk of said City prior to the time set fo; the hearing, and no other protests or objections vi:. be considered. :f the signer of arty protest is not shown upon the last equalized assessment roll of San Bernardino County as the owner of the property described in the protests, then such protest oust contain cr be accompanied by written evidence that such signer is the owner of the property so describes. SECTION 7. Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972: All the work hereto proposes s�iall 'b an carry through nonce of an act of the legislature of the State of California designated the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. SECTION 8. Publication of Resolution of Intention: Published notice shall be ma- pursuan to section 61961 o e�vernmeai Coda. The Nyyor shall sign this Resolution and the City Clerk shall attest to the same, and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published 10 days before the date set for the hearinT, at least once in The Daily Re ort 3 newspaper of general circulation publishea in the City of n er o. California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. y7 CITY OF RAVC110 CUCAM04GA Engineer s Report 'or ANNEXATION NO. 3 to LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 Terra Vista Planned Comm.ntty lrart 12673, Mestside Park (Parcel Map 9829), Tracts 12802 -1, -2, -3, -4, -5, plantings adjacent to Tracts 12802 -6 and 12802, and other street plartings. SECTION 1. Authority for Report `his report 1s prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Charter 1. Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1982) SECTION 2 General Description Landscape Maintenance District No. 4 (the `District') maintains street Plantings, parks, trails, and similar areas throughout the Terra Vista Planned C*munly. All residential developments in Terra Vista are to be annexed to tke District pursuant to Ordinance No. ISO; areas to be maintafted which iie outside residential developments are also to be annexed for maintenance purposes. This Annexation No. 3 annexes to the District the following areas: • Tract No. 12673 (313 multifamily dwellings) • Ves:side Park (Parcel Map No. 9829) e Tract Nos. 12802 -1, 12802 -2, 12802 -;, 128C2 -4, and 12802 -5 (149 dingle family dwallings) • Parkway and greenway system plantings adjacent to Tract Ilos. 12802 -6 and 12802 • Median planting in Church Street from Terra Vista Parkway to Elm Avenue All landscaped areas to be maintained in the annexed tracts are shown on the tract raps (or by separate instrument) as roadway right -of -way, dedica- tions, or easements to be granted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. SECTION 3 plans and SpecifttatTon; The plans and specifications for the landscaping within residential trarts have been prepared by the developer and have been approved as part of the improvement plans for those tracts. The plans and specifications are in confor„;ance with the Planning Commission conditions of approval. Plans and specifications for landscaped areas outside residential tracts have bten separately prepared by the developer. vi? Reference is hereby made to the subject tract maps and the assessment diagrams for the exact location of the landscaped areas. The plans and specifications by reference are hereby made a part of this report to the same extent as if said plans and specifications were attached hereto. SECTION 4. Estimated Costs No costs will be incurred for construction All improvements will be constructed by developers. Based on historical data, contract analysis, and developed work standards, it is estimated that maintenance costs for assess- ment purposes will be as set forth below. These costs are estimated only; actual assessments will be based on actual cost data. The estimated annual maintenance cost for Annexation No. 3 is as follows: Trails b Street2 Parkways Greenways Iiediansl Trees Tract 12673 11,432 15,910 0 0 Nestside Park (P.M. 9829) 6,867 7,089 0 0 Tracts 12802 -1, -2, -3, -4, and -5 18,870 16,240 0 225 Plantings adjacent to Tracts 12802 -6 and 12802 7,999 21,237 0 144 Church Street median 0 0 6,336 0 Total areas (square feet) 4E1G8 60,476 6.3 ?6 369 Unit cost (annual) 35t per 35t per 15t per $5 per sq. fit. sq. ft. sq. ft. tree Totals 515.809 $21.167 S 950 S1y845 TOTAL ANNUAL COST $39.771 lFull width median in Church Street Median In Terra Vista Parkway previously annexed. 2Local street trees only. , �1 r: P'u?�r�j • 2 yi e I The estimated total annual maintenance cost, and estimated annual assess- ments, for the District after Annexation No. 3 are as follows: Existing Annexation New total District No. 3 for District Total estimated annual maintenance cost $348,670 $39,771 Slea,441 Assessmen• units: I per single family dwelling unit 883 149 1,032 0.5 per au �tifamily dwelling unit 27.58 2 1975 i472< T. Assessment Rate. Total Cost r Assessment Units - Assessment per Assessment Unit 2128.3? $175.29 Assessment shall apply to ea,.h residential dwelling as enumerated in Section 6 and the attached Assessment Diagram. SECTION 5. Assessment Diaaram A copy of the proposed assessment diagram is attached to this report. By this reference the diagram is hereby incorporated within the text of this repor.. SECTION 6 Assessment Maintenance costs for the entire District are found to be of specific benefit to -11 developed residential property within the District in accor- dance with i. c,lowing relationship: Land Use Assessment Units So-gTe family residential dwelling 1 u�— Multifamity residential dwelling .5 unit The City Council will hold a public hearing in June 1986, to determine the actual assessments based upon the actual costs incurred by the City during the 19x5/86 fiscal year SECTION 7 Order of Events I. City Council adopts resolution instituting proceedings 2 City Council adopts Resolution of Prel4minary Approval of City Engineer's Report. 3. City Council adopts Resolution of Intention to Annex to District and sets public hearing dates -3 -SU 4. City Council conducts public hearing, considers all testimony and deter- mines to annex to the District or abandon the proceedings. __ S. Every year in May, 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 modifies and approves the individual assessments. 917LM .9 -4 -5/ LEGEND: GROUND AND TREE MAINTENANCE �- TREE MAINTENANCE ONLY _ &'Pe r. 4"W4,c- © 45S'Yrd ,- .,&w fF 'sWr><.w9Yf�GOx /8 � — /Oi0 rF s�xra�Y��x3, /• -zoo rF �D1A� _ ¢740 sF , Irs fkaYUs, ® 82rX41 - :°/3l/ .F- C7' WN1W ( i7 ZIZ7 , FW WRY ; 00 . seer vwcy; nr; catr/T,e�c _ s7�s rf 9e�G /6/ SdI = 92/6 SF Go7 /l %regit .�csemi�� LECiENp: F9 /�V!S a. GROUND AND TREE r €9` �F MAINTENANCE W rf TREE MAINTENANCE 1f LAN �c�' oesS ONLY F� R/O, /2002 /fi' v r _Z,2.9CT .rr E ,r r iR t ' f LOT a ��Ti4 /G/ .VaR:r RNE P.utegr/ 6[M AbE'VG�S �FALrrt?lY '�ti �� • �N r� - aalx(i /' -4 tic�r�r(� icc3sF. LEGEND: I -eav gv ce <u GROUND AND TREE ar,sx Py - itIele acrd Ar4c MAINTENANCE f'QfX /a piss! ? sa TREE MAINTENANCE s.-,ea c ONLY 775e' fZ -4 s/raart / KW sic A919- i C T I , �rwl� � u• aJ a t'1 . r a a. a a C e y��a_dCf- ; 1 7 ,f � �T 71.x_1. '�_. �_ �_.'�__'s, � ,t : •' �_ :�.� - °IIUIIFIFtVI[M Uf1V[: �• _��• t— - �.,1„�'1:••- •t_st-t—rie -.a^ �J'°• —r n 1 .. ) .. .. �...1. •q ; �ri I � -'-� �FI .rub �:w,{�° { g• al 1 � ' F: ' • a 7 +Gr `J a> La a. 1 a• i n Ll n 9 n `i u i fa rf �T 7 1 �Ii as !l �K••:0 .a •nom i �rf ry1:\ t�a'.i LIWk r 9 e +� a _ ..l]• }l..n.+. ��y mss• y� w� So _ l ...a) �.fre• VCNUC R jw^ ^ ,�� •� `T ,r11 / • Ila. M•• fir ••: �.rqw real '��w, Y NJ•)v LEGEND: °.. "- GROUND AND TREE MAINTE ANCE TREZ MAIMENANCE ONLY K 4n �s+< (HJ�taieY/ r3G:Y(i /- F�inrwxc� = 9J8 s.=' cor r9 r- 7xaa sr�arvci 9nS sF ., W9e;r c,0 i28az -2 tp. I[DaJ M.O. RS /eb -54 •or a I -or. t -. ..r-. t a •••..4aw a aer • � uaa -l-g; =•q as i a, i °'i,w. �.: a .• eti wve n.r. I I I•tn.�,s� I ' Iii r w r C't LEGEND: wCR. L •r.a. +Vf�•1�A lC 1�A lC�. r S s e�rx i= oaaxmct� - �05i s� f 7frs: x JR �-lao �sl+ +nw/ E75 sF 2 imp f, ✓ GROUND AND TREE MAINTENANCE TREE MAINTENANCE ONLY 7 ;cr Ald. izeos -sva. izeo�.s S7 .,- , =: rR. Mac,, M -0. /T�60�67 LCr p O 1 TF i /P .9 m Af I , P I 7116 rmwcG h(Z /y.CLfP -P , I• /. -- L-L_ K �Ka m r� n rc n Z'cs_mLHI&J fOAfL�/.w.erwrr/ _ 770 3 r (i /'- Q'IWLCl . iwo f ;OC WW JF n V 0 Fn af. 4� if Ff LEW:ND: GROUND AND TREE MAINTENANCE ��. TREE MAMREMO CE ONLY ref --r iW iaeoz ,: � JY L� �✓ R 1N 4 I •• 11 a io b. I I wee � D i 7 � � L �. •� ` I L.EGFMD: M GROUND -AND TREE MAINTENANCE TREE MAINTENANCE ONLY M , 2G8 tom✓ S/ TfP.00T_,VO. 1 � �� ♦ f7 ier'•�„ �m w•t • N'v:aii'�AILn`?xN6Mi M GROUND -AND TREE MAINTENANCE TREE MAINTENANCE ONLY M , 2G8 tom✓ S/ TfP.00T_,VO. 1 � C 8= nt revf tr mno// LEGEND: XIF GROUND AND TREE [OT- (:troe nrsnici_ MANTENANCE MAINTENANCE zar- (i�iJ2 RAP1/fJ ONLY LcjT�iR�F'c P�,tPe2i CITY OF R42"9(1-HO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: June 4, 1985 TO: bayor and Mentors of the City Council PROM: Lloyd B. Hobbs, City Eogineer Laura Psoms, Landscape Designer The attached resolution sets the data of the Public Hearing for June 18. 1986 to sao= Tract 12833 to the City's Breast Lighting °.datecaa:e District Ho. 3. It is recumaended that City Council adopt the attached resolution setting the date of Public Hearing for June 18. 1986. Respectfully subadtted, Lloyd B. Rabb@ City eagineer Lfl:LP:da Attachmat: Resolution Ho. 86 -150 61 RESOLUTION NO. 36 -150 A RESOLUTIO11 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RMCBO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE ANNEYATION TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 3, AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS DESIGNATING SAID MNETATICM M ANBEfATION NO. 1 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING MD LIGHTING ACT OF 19-,2 00 OFFERING A TI113 AND MACE FOR BEAR OBJECTIONS THERETO FOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Coctcil of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, pvrsaant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Div:.sion 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, as follows: D.EMOI 1: DeaeTfetioe of Work. That the public interest and convenience require and it is the intention of this City Council to fora a maintenance district in the City of Reecho Cucamonga for the maintenance and operation of those street lights the boundaries of the proposed maintenance district described in Section 2 bereof. Said maintenance and operation includes the cost and supervision of any lighting and related facilities in connection with said district. SCGTION 2: Location of Work. The foregoing described work in to be located within roadway rigbt- of -voy enumerated in the report of the City Engineer and more particularly described oa maps which are on file in the office of the City Clerk, entitled "Annexation No. 1 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 3 ". SECTION 3: Descrfatl, eP ARsesssvret Df,erler. That the contemplated cork, in the opinion of said City Council, :a of more than local or ordinary public benefit. and the said City Council hereby makes the expense of the said work chargeable upon a district, which said district is assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof, and which district is described as follows: All that certain territory of the City of Rancho Cucamonga included within the exterior boundary lines above upon that certain "Map of Annexation No. 1 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 3" maps is on file in the office of the City Clerk of said City. SCMOK 4: leeert of Eeeieeer. The City Council of Reid City by Resolution No. 86 -149 has approved the report of the engineer of work which report indicates the amount of the proposed assessment, the district boundary, assessment zones. titled "Engineei s Report, Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 3" is on file in the office of the City Clerk of said City. Reference to said report is hereby mtde for all particulars for the amount and natant of the assessments and for the extent of the work. /a SICTIQt it Collection of As.nu et The assessment shall be collected at the sane time 'and in the same soccer as County cases are _ collected. The City Engineer shall file a report annually with the City Council of said City and s►id Council will annually conduct a hearing upon said report at their second regular meeting in June, at which time aaseassouts for the nest fiscal year will Ito detentined. SrCTICK At lace of Rearing. Notice is hereby given that Oft June 18. 1986, at the hour of 7130 pa in the City Council Chambers at 9161 Base Line, in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, any and all peuons having any objections to the work or extent of the assessment district, soy appear and show cause why said work should not be done or carried out or why said district should not be formed in accordance with this Resolution of Intention. Protests must �e in writing and mast contain a description of the property in which each signor thereof is interested, sufficient to identify the same, and must be delivered to the City Clark of said City prior to the ti ms set for the bearing, and no other protests or objoetioos will be considered. If the signer of any protest is not shown upon the last equalised assessment roll of goo Bernardino County as the Owner of the property described in the protests, then such Protest must contain or be accompanied by vritteu evidence that such signer is the Owner of the property so described. SECTIDM 7, Landscaofeg anal .l gh ti eg, Lt of 1972. All the work herein proposed shall be done and carried through in pursuance of an act of the legislature of the State of California designated tbo Landscaping and Lighting Act of 19720 being Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. SECTION Its PubliestEen of Resolution of Intention. Published notice shall be made pursuant to Section 61961 of the Cwernmeut Code. The Mayor shalt. sign this Resolution and the City Clerk shall attest to the as" , and the City Clark shall cause the ssso to bo published 10 days before the date met for the hearings at least once in The Dsil,y R+eerts a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario. California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. PASSED. APPROVED. and ADOPTED this 4th day of June, 1986. ATESt 4: SOESt ` i ABSENTs Jeffrey King, Mayor Z .a•^ y 7,c` _ ��y. T'}1� 1 µS y{. 1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 4, 1986 .0 TO City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. ilrbbs, City Engineer BY: Linda Beek, Engineering TLchnician SU3JECT: Approval of Improvement Extension Agrevnent and Improvement Security for Tract 9619 located on the northwest corner of Carnelian and Jasper Streets, submitted by California Communities Incorporated (formerly Plaza Builder's Incorporated) Tract 9619 was approved by the City Council on December S. 1984. The Developer, California Communities Incorporated, submitted an agreement and security to guarantee the construction o.` the off -site improvements in the following amounts: Faithful Performance Bond: $813,500 Labor and Material Bond: $406,750 At this time, the developer is requesting approval of a twelve month extension on said improvement agreement. RECOMNElMTION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution accepting said extension agreement and security and authorizing the Mayor a-,d City Clerk to sign said agreement. w lly sumi led, Attac!ments 0 wm 06 a CITY OF RANCHO CUC PROJECT. T a c A6 / R ' l AMONGA TITLE: -� ENGINEERING DIVISION EXHIBIT:_ A " ' ImpExtggmt CITY OF RANCHO CUCAN006A i WR0YEME1fi EXTENSION AGREEMENT FOR KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That this agreement is made and entered into, in conformance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, a municipal torpor ion, by and tween the said City, hereinafter referred to as the City, and , y„W��mES /AIC . referred to as the Developer. WITNESSETH: THAT, WHEREAS said Developer entered into an improvement agreement with the City as a requisite to issuance of buildings parmits, and WHEREAS, said Developer desires an extension )f time to complete the terms of the said improvement agreement. NOW. THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by the City and by said Developer as follows: 1. The completion date of the terms of the said improvement agreement is hereby extended by a period of 12 months from the date of City Council approval of said agreement. 2. Increase in improvement securities to reflect current improvement costs shall be furnished by the developer with this agreement and shall be approved by the City Atterney. 3. The required bend and the additional principal amounts thereof are set forth or, the attached sheet. 4. All other terms and conditions of the said saorovement agreement shall remain the same. As evidence of understanding the provisions contained herain, and of intent to cGaply with same, the Developer has submitted the below described improvement security, and has affixed his signature hereto: 3/17/86 To be posted prior to acceptance of the project by the City. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA OE' /ELOPER CALIFORNIA, a municipal corporation By: FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND Description: Surety: Additional Principal Amount: P/11 Address: MATERIAL AND LABOR BOND Description: Surety Additional Principal Amount: 1/d Address: TO 219" CA n —ax) T CASH DEPOSIT MOKLIMATION BOND Additional Cash Deposit: S.ATEOFCALIFOMIA — MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BOND COUNTY OF DrHttQO A Principal Amount: To be posted prior to acceptance of the project by the City. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA OE' /ELOPER CALIFORNIA, a municipal corporation By: Jef f rey K i ng, a ayor Attest: ever y , ut a et, t ty er CAT. VO NNpW3T TO 219" CA n —ax) T TI AW S.ATEOFCALIFOMIA — COUNTY OF DrHttQO A A On Ma It 1986 b —.� y P a pmona8y kno,vn to me or proved to me on the haw of utufattory "MCC to be the ppmmoon who executed the within Wonmieet u the VleO x Pmdent, and_ le T Wnllr pe CA11y known to me or PWVCd to mean the bun of uti:factory evidence to be "C person who C"C"'ed the wldt111 WINIntn[ U 111! f Y_ce Preeiden )IOWACJC of the Corpuntion that C "Cuted the within imXCkW It and admowiedgcd W me that "Ch eorpontion exCCUUd the within inmru• mrat board fo nlAnt to Its bydawt or • mrdution Rf (u e. WITNESS my b Wd and ofrdd Cent. if s4zature f p.n. One.) A ri V.R COR TITLE INSURANCE I i [ti underap7ned, a Notuy Public m and for -.ard i OFFICIAL SEAL Oi RptEEN SUE BEAR• n ROTARY pUbIIC�CNJrOF�M H. OPN1? COM N' Wpm trytp Wf I9, 0950 7 anti aw for oefkW ACWW" V.R COR TITLE INSURANCE I i [ti underap7ned, a Notuy Public m and for -.ard i OFFICIAL SEAL Oi RptEEN SUE BEAR• n ROTARY pUbIIC�CNJrOF�M H. OPN1? COM N' Wpm trytp Wf I9, 0950 7 anti aw for oefkW ACWW" 4 RESOLUTION 40. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT EXTENSION AGREEMENT A.1D IMPROVENENf SECURIrf FOR IRACT 9619 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its consideration an Improvement Extension Agreement executed on May 1, 1986, by California Communities Incorporated as developer, for the improvement of public right -of -way adjacent to the real property specifically described therein, and generally located an the northwest corner of Carnelian and Jasper Streets and WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of said Tract 9619 and WHEREAS, said Improvement Extension Agreement is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient Improvement Security, which is identified in said Improvement Extension Agreement. NOW, THEREFG.rE. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Improvement Extension Agreement and said improvement Security be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Extension Agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest thereto. r. d� CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: Ju•:e 4, 1981 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Linda Beek, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: Approval of Map, Improvement Agreement and Improvement Security for Parcel Map 7912 located on the north side of Eighth Street, west of Vineyard Avenue, submitted by Hahn Tenant Interiors Parcel Map 7912 was approved by the Planning Commission on March 23, 1983, for the division of 1.57 acres into 3 parcels to the Industrial Specific Plan Development District located on the north side of Eighth Street, west of Vineyard Avenue. The Developer, Hahn Tenant interiors, is submitting an agreement and security to guarantee the construction of the off -site improvements in the following unounts: Faithful Performance Bond: $58,000 Labor and Material Bond: $29,000 A Letter of approval has been received from Cucamonga County Water District. C.C.&R.s have been approved by the City Attorney. RECOVOIDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving Parcel Map 7912, accepting said agreement and security and authorising the Mayor and City Clerk to sign said agreement and to cause said map to record. Resp ctful'. y su tied, L :dlw ' Attachments 41? a, PARCEL MAP NO. 7912 n rx[ nn or xum Wn tYi tCYYl1'1�CMry. C ops 1q )LClw4 WLpWfI NnOY.t W' 11RDN1(q w rxllC(l Wr l]H 43 4[Ci a 14 tW[ {) rIL!) t.. W rucn Wn acotos w !x[ town w w twa)x:m Lwwn[. erari � _ I ai•1 Mb a +.rn IyJJ' :I J w.0 !r i! • Yws r) ^�., �:1� CITY OF PROJECT; RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: _, ENGINEERING DIVISION- 7o EXHIBIT;_ �a'r• ; �y 11 1 t / �V fi r PH. 791L +, t 'iJ " , • Ar CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONG% IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR PARCEL MAP 7912/0.2. 113 -02 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That this ayyreteeat Is made Ind entered Into, In conformaner with the praris O S of the Municipal Code and Rrgulations of the City of Rancho Cucaaen96• State of Caiifcrr.ia, a municipal corporation. 1ereinafter referr- ed to as the City, by APO batween aid City and Hahn Tenant Interiors hereinafter referred to a the 0 retoDer. THAI, WHEREAS, said Developer desires to develop certsin real property in said City located on Nth Street, vast of Vineyard Avenue; and UHEAEAS, said City has established crrtain requirements to be eat by said Developer as prerequisite to granting of final approrat; and WHEREAS, the execution of this a raenent and posting of Improvement sacn.ity as hereinafter Cited aid approved by the City Attorney, ors dammed to be equivalent to to )r completion of said requ l repents for the purpose of securlr said approval. NOW, THEREFORE, st Is hereby agreed by and between the City and the Gereloper as follows: 1. The Developer hereby agrees to construct at devegPer'1 expanse all Improvements descrlbol on page d hereof wit bin 12 months from the date hereof. 2. This agreemant shall be effective an the data of the resolution of the Council of said City proving this agreement. This agrearent shall he In default w she day follow- ing the first anniversary date of said approrsl unless an exten- sion of time has been granted by said City as hereinafter provid- ed. 7. The Developer may request additional time in which to complete the provisions of this agretment. In writing not less them SO days prior to the default data, and in:ludinyy a statement of circumstances of necessity for additional time. In considera- tion of such request, the City reserves the right to review the pro, lslees hereof• including construction standards, cost estimate, and snffictency of the Improvement recur ay end to rho., uire ad3uxtae3ts thereto when warranted by ivbsteat laj changes tr a. If the Cevuloper falls or negle .-ts to comply with the provisions of this agreement, the City shall have the right at SAY time to calls* said provisions to be coavlated by spy law- ful means, and thereupon to recover from said Developer and /or his Surety the full cost and expanse Incurred in so doing• S. Construction permits shalt be obt ilned by the Devel- ape• from the office of the City Engineer prior to start of any wort within the public right -of -way, and the developer shall conduct such work In full compliance with the regulations contained therein Non - compliance may result In stopping of the wort by the City, end assessment of the panels as provided. 6. Pab He rlyyht -cf -way fePravement cork rsgvirad shall be constructed In con cements with approved improvement plans Standard Specifications, and Standard Cravings and any spealai Indyurem Other Incidental work tdeemed a necessary* fort' drainage or public safety. Errors or omissions discovered during construc- tion shalt be Caerected Upon the direction of., the City IM22 ARROW NODTE. STE 102 1 . RANCHO cuckoo. CA 91730 C Wl 0 Engineer, Rev Led work due to said plan eodlficatioas shall be covered by the provisions of this agreement and secured by the surety covering the original planned works ` T. York done within existing struts %hall be dlligaot- ly pursued to completion; the CIA, shall have the right to complete any and all work in the .rant of unjustified delay In completion, and to recover all cost and expense incurred free the Oeva leD ar and /or his contractor by any lawful means S. (he Developer shall be rasponsit !or replutuent. relocations, or removal of any component of an. Irrfysat ion rater s %ten In conflict with the required wort to the aatifhction of tie City Englnear and the owner of the rater system. 9. The gavaloper shall he responsible for removal of all loose rock and other debris from the public right-of-way. 10. The Developer shall plant no Maintain partway trees as directed by the Community Developeeu% Dl•ector. 11. The Improvement security to be furnished by the Develogr to guarantee completion of the terms of this agreennt shall be subject to the approval of the City Attorney. The grtn- Opal Amnon' of said improvement security shall not be last than the amount shown: Ar •. �n :tk �>♦Cd 1n _ re eJ ia�.r� °y� :. FAITHFUL PERFORNANCC. Typei Principal Amount: SSe,F00.00 Name and address of surety: L MATERIAL AND LABOR Type: Prh.cipil Amount: $21,000.00 Name and address of surety: CASH DEPOSIT MORUPcMTATI011 Type: Principal Amount: i 1,a00.OG Name and AdJress of WOW TO BE POSTED PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE BY TAE CITI IN NITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto hive caused these presents to be duly executed and acknowledge with all formalities required by Is" On the d+ s set ff in o Dosfte their siSnatures Date s /u16 _ by ` ler.locer gnu ure teem c. ery.nc - enxideac n e Data srA/tl6 b _, Developer • �n Lyle J. oarmK - Vice enaidmt r n C ACCeptedi city Nuo Cucamonga. California iciPAI Corporation A e By: Hpor West:�� ay er Approved:_ y t Ornay i rtenarrrwY.2 _,,,i„e J cd�rrn or ._ _�exg wave we, r wr+i+aa rrr r,..rYrr W YN,v ie, 0.11 M.r wy Yr�YYVlr.re Y r.�r tl r Yrr Mr4eYnr�1 rYMY Mr�,IOe�.IMOYw� �� viCLyyJdatFS.,wcrYrr- a pr, CY,.umrtim tw. w Ynrrw,er,.Y r.ra r.awrr..Y�r nr wr OwrYrYdYrn.YYwr,Y,rMrrrY 0 E rorwr+wrrc r""OOm'= i q.Yw r,wrww. ' rYiassa.rtWr .r �r� Cm W PAMM CUCA•OA01, EUG16EERIRG DIVIS103 EAERDiMMXT PUZIT FEE SCBDAAC Flr Ispravvmnt: Street date: 8/13185 aryn[ y, tsot as 3.neers File 0.aerence:�T� City Drawing ��. &17 NWE: Does net Include enre)I fee for writing permit or putsent d:paits QUANTITY MIT TTEN _MCE AMUNT L.F. " - P.C.C. curb . li' C.F 24' gutter 7.25 L.F. P.C.C. curb - 8' C.F. N' gutter Me i950- L.F P. C. C. curb anly 5.50 - -- L.F. A.C. ben 4.50 447; .F -T7 4- P.C.C. slceaOt 1.75 TfiT -- RI- S.F. Drive 4ponach 2.50 iTSr- $.a. B' P.C.C. cross gutter (Inc. curb) 3.40 C.Y Street excavation 1.50 -217 -- C.Y Forted eebankeent MO __ _ S.F. Preparat -on of sub�r#do 0.15 S.F Crushed 499, base (per hch thick) 0.01 -- TCA A.C. aver 1700 tgntl 27.00 TON A.C. 900 to IICO tons) 15.00 _ TOR A.C. 500 to 900 tons) 45.00 TOR A.C. under SOO tons) 60.00 11W - S.F A.C. 1' thick) 0.55 S.F pitch (tre,,,) 1.74 S.F. 1• t)dck A.C. ovarlir 0.30 -i2a- EA. :djest saver maMOla to grade 250.00 _ EA. Adjust sMr clean cut to grade 150.13 -5- EA. Adjust ester wal vu to grace 75 00 EA. Strut IlChts IOra.00 s '.F Barricades takers". 5500 min) 1.00 L.F. 2 a a- redwood headtr _ 1.75 S.F. Remnl of A.C. pavement 0.35 L.F. Removal of P.C.C. curb 3.30 L.F Revisal of A.C. ben 1.00 - - EA. Strut signs MOO _E- EA. Reflectors and posts 35.00 L.F. Concrete block wall 25.00 -- S.F. Retaining Nall 20.00 -- TOY A9g•egste base ;.00 - -- L.T. Concrete structures 425.00 - -' L.F 18' PCP 2000 0 29.00 t.F. 24• PCP 1500 0 35.00 L.F. 36• PCP 2000 D 49.00 -iC1L- LF 48' PCP .' m D 76.0: _ EA. Catch b.' in g • 4- 2003 00 EA. Catch ta.ir f • 8' 2900.01 T U. Catch bum V • 22' 4500.00 -7R4- EA. Local depression '. -1- EA. total depression .2- IOOOt.W - TpLRt' T U. Junction structure 5000.00 --sQ8- EA. Outlet structure. Std 0506 1500.00 G. ltlal structure, SIA 0501 500.00 EA. lard posts 40.00 LF. -_ Ward pan•.1 (wud) 25.03 L.F Sawcut 2.03 -- EA. -1b7- Hudwell (48• winrj 4000.00 L.F. Redwood header 1.75 --7w- S.F. L.F Landscapingq t :rri9stfon Roll 2.75 cure `P.C.C.) 7.50 ENGIRIEPIIG INSPECTION FEE 42735.00 SUS TOTAL $53,051.00 RES10RATION /DELIREATIQI CASH - M.M= C TINGAY COSTS DmSfT (Rgava LM) FAI M PERFOWAR M BOND (IOC) -MVM- RDIWAV011 SiRM IW1.Cl LAM AND INTERIM. BOO) (505) aMfuet to City of Geche Cuuram9a IWIC1Pa1 Lade• Title T• OaPter 1.08, adwlrB Sm j 1110101rdioe county Cole Tttles. Ck4►ters 1-5, a ush restoratfon/dalimatim 646uit riail be Ode prior to ttnaea of a rnir in Cambractla Permlt. i" Pulsed 3184 7V SUSOI9ISIOM GUARARTEE MO PERFORMANCE (SETTING OF FINAL MONUMENTS) Citr CA uncll City of Rancho CJCamenga P. 0. boa 607 Rancho Cucamonga. Callsornta 91770 Oentlaeanl Pursuant to Chapter e. Article q9a Section 66491 of the Governunt tht'Inal not of °FOrcal hereby 791210.R, B7 -02 or:u too t)) be'setoand real that furnished by the Subdividers engineer • or Ipecifor on n the Oalo:t l en no to thereon to rceiplete all engineering requiremn fu speclf's= In Section 66491. of the Government Code. The undersigned hands you herewith the sum cf S 1-4"0 10 " A cash deposit, said deposit to guarantee that the menovvrts will be set and the notes furnished as above p- ovided on or Go ore the date sctfled and that the engineer or surveyor wilt bt paid by the uono rslgned. It is further understood and agreed that In the vent the the undesigned timer sp cified.2ithe City Of R ncho above Cucamonga is requirements the asthorlted to complete said requirements or cause then to be completed evd the cost thereof Is to he a charge a9alast said cash deposit, and the the n0c Cit of transfer fro hasidu cash deposit too the credit for the Oroper'c1a fund It is further agreed that If the undersign:d does not present evidence to Let City Council that he has paid the engineer or surveyor for tht setting of the final monuments, and if the en 1near or surveyor given the notices prescribed in SOttlon 7 of 561 eerreyor� the usdnd peel[ her inroad sil pay to said englnetr If the cost of completing said requirements atteeds the worm Of the cash deposit, the undersigned agrees to pay the ails hrnca within thirty p0) days after receiving written statement from the City of Rnchv Cucamonga 'PtcifI the the amount o1 ol• difference betnn the Cash deposit an the eeteel Cost of sold requirements. Cordially, M Count,uw,tion, Ina. Subdivider tom nrrew Aat. boat. tm Address A.mro tvr.ma a oarro Date A.y s. IM The depositer of record (foe return of any portion of the cash / - deposit) SNAIL bt • 10122 Arm Amt• sta. to; eu" COv.vcwq., `Ymff a. sib s.enup- tr.a.or'7 0 BE $ UIMITJED FULLY FILLED OUT AND SIGNED ROTES i RESOLUTION NO. O � 'J(p 3 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 7912 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 7912)IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map No. 7912 submitted by Hahn Tenant Interiors, and consisting of 3 panels, located on the north side of Eighth Street, west of Vineyard Avenue, beinq a �e '.vision of Parcel Map 6316 as recorded in Book 62 Pages 6 and 7 of Parcel Maps, Records of the County of San Bernardino, California was approved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on March 23, 1983; and WHEREAS, Parcel Map No. 7912 is the final map of the division of land approved as shown on said Tentative Parcel Map; and WHEREAS, all of the requirements established as prerequisite to approval of the final map by the City Council of said City have now been met by entry into an Imprcvement Agreement guaranteed by acceptable Improvement Security by Hahn Tenant Interiors as developer. NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rauho Cucamonga, California that said Improvement Aqreement and said Improvement Security submltted by said developer be and ire same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest; ano that said Parcel Map No. 7912 be and the same is hereby approved and the City Ergineer is authorized to present same to the County Recorder to be filed for record. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 4, 1986 TO: Mayor and Members ;` the City Council FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Linda Beek, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF A SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT FOR PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP .3298 LOCATED-ON AL1W 1-1111, RW AVENUE. SU HME5 BI A Lien Agreement was approved by City Council on August 19, 1981, for the constru tion of missing off -site improvements. In order to secure financing, the lender requires that the Lien Agreement be subordinate to liens in favor of the lender. The owner, Melvin 8. Kornblatt, has submitted the attached Subordination Agreement for City Council approval. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached eso uTt ution approving said Subordination Agreement and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign same. Respectfully submitt9d, Lloyd Hubbs City Engineer LBH:LB:cv Attachments 7;� T' SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT NOTICE: THIS SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT RESULTS IN YOUR SECURITY INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY BECOMING SUBJECT TO AND LCMER PRIORITY THAN THE LIEN OF SOME OTHER OR LATER SECURITY ?NSTRUMENT. THIS AGREEMENT, made this 19th day of August,1981, by Melvin B. Kornblatt, owner of the land hereinafter described and hereinafter referred to as "Owner" and the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereinafter referred to as "City`, or ner and holder of the certain Real Property and Lien Agreement hereinafter referred to as 'Lien Agreement". THAT WHEREAS, a Real Improvement Contract and Lein Agreement dated August 19, 1986 cov:,ing: (see) Exhibit "A" to secure the northerly one -half (1/2) of the extension of Almond Street adjacent to Developers project which was recorded October 29, 1981 (81- 239269) in the Official Records of said County; and WHEREAS, owner has executed a deed of trust and note in the sua of nnr A++ndrnA irinn *y Ci_ x Thoti°n dated of In favor ere na er referred to es en er , pays e n eres an upon a arms and conditions ISO "IN described therein, which deed of trust 1s to be recorded concurrently herewith; and WHEREAS, it is a condition precedent to raking said loan that said deed of trust last above mentioned shall urconditonally be and remain at all times a lien or charge upon the land hereinbefore described, prior and superior to the lien or charge of the Lien Agreement; and WHEREAS, Lender is willing to make said loan provided the need of trust securing the same is a lien or charge upon the above described property prior to superior to the lien or charge of the Lien Agreement and provided that City will specifically and unconditionally subordinate the lien or charge of the Lien Amretoent to the lien or charge of the deed of trust in favor of Lender; and WHEREAS, it is the mitual benefit of the parties hereto that Lender modify said loan to Owner; and City is willing that the deed of trust securing the same shall constitute a lien or charge upon said land which is unconditionally prior to superior to the Hen or charga an the Lien Agreement. i NON, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits accuring to the parties hereto and other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which consideration is hereby acknowledged, and in order to induce Lender to modify the loan above referred to, it is hereby declared, understood and agreed as follows: (1) That said deed of trust securiny paid note in favor of Lender and any renewals or extensions them*f, shall unconditionally be and remain at all times a lien or charge on the property therein described prior and superior to the lien or charge of the Lien Agreement. (2) That Lender would nut make its loan above described without this subordination agreement. (3) Th at this agreement shall be the whole and only agreement with regard to the subordnation of the lien or charge of the Lien Agreement to the lien or charge of the deed of trust in favor of Lender above referred to and shall supersede and cancel, but only insofar as would affect the priority between the deed of trust and Lien Agreement any prior agreements as to such subordination inc.uding, but not limited to, those provisions, if any, contained in the Lien Agreement which provide for the subordination of the lien or charge thereof to another deed or deeds of trust or to another mortgage or mortgages. The City declares, agrees and acknowledges that: (a) He consents to and approves all provisions of the note and deed of trust in favor of Lender above referred to by that certain modification agreement by and between Owner and Lender, dated _,Tuna 27. 19n6 np rrnvimnl-ely (b) He intentionally and unconditionally waives, relinquishes and subordinates the lien or charge of the Lien Agreement in favor of the lien or charge upon said land of the deed of trust in favor of Lender above referred to and understands that in reliance upon, and in consideration of this waiver, relinquishment and subordination specific loans and advances are being and will be made and as a part and parcel thereof, specific monetary and other obligations are being and will be entered into which would not be made or entered into but for said reliance upon this waiver, relinquishment and subordination; and (c) An endorsement has been placed upon the Lien Agreement that said Lien Agreement has by this instrument been subordinated to the lien or charoe of the deed of trust in favor of Lender above referred to. 7i NOTICE: THIS SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT CONTAINS A PROVISION WHICH ALLOWS THE PERSON OBLIGATED ON YOUR REM. PROPERTY SECURITY TO OBTAIN A LOAN, A PORTION OF WHICH WAY BE EXPENDED FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN IMPROVEMENT OF THE LAND. UmUt ALL SIONAPIRFS MUST BE NOTMIZED STATE OF CALIFORNIA, On this 23rd day of May 1986, cefore ve, the undersigned, a rotary Peblic for said state, Personally appeared Melvin Bernard Xornblatt MD Personally kmm to me (or proved ttst ry evidence) to be the person(s) whose Name(s) is subscribed to the foregoing instruvent and acknowledged that he executed the same. WITNESS my hand and official seal. AW'P�. EXHIBIT 'A' PARCEL A: Parcel 01 of Parcel Map 03298, as per asap recorded in on , Pages 79 and 80 of Parcel Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said County. PARCEL 8: A non - exclusive easement for road and utility purposes over :Cross across the South 30 feet of Parcel Numbers 1, 3, and 4 ar3 over and across the west 30 feet of Parcel Numbers 1 and 2 of Parcel Map 03298 as per map recorded in Book 30 Pages 79 and 80 of Parcel Maps it the Office of the County Recorder of said County. Except therefrom any portion lying within Parcel A above. PARCEL C: A non - exclusive easement for road and utility purposes over anT— across the following described property: The East 30 feet of the Hest 220 feet of the East 1100 feet of the North 495 feet of the Northwest one - quarter of Section 23, Township 1 North, Range 7 Vest, San Bernardino Meridian, according to the official plat thereof. 4 "t RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, APPROVING A SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT FROM KELVIN B. KORNBLATT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN SAME WHEREAS, a Real Property Ienrovement Contract and Lien Agreement for the installation of street improvements along Armond Street was approved by City Council on August 19, 1981, and recorded in in Bernardino County on October 29, 1981, Instrument No. 81- 239269; and WHEREAS, for the developer to secure financing for the project, the lender requires that the above- mentioned lien be subordinate to the lien in favor of the lender; and WHEREAS, the developer has submitted a Subordinate Agreement to that effect for the City's approval and execution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Subordinate Agreement be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Subordfnation Agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk attest thereto. �F a Ar 1 Y� CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 4, 1986 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Mubbs, City Engineer BY: Lince Beek, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: Approval of Improvement Extension Agreement and Irprovement Security for Tract 12772 -1 located on Palo Alto, between Turner and Teak Nay, submitted by M & S Residential Development, Incorporated Tract 12772 -1 was approved by the City Council on March 21, 1985. The Developer, M & S Residential Development, Incorporated, submittcd an agreement and security to guarantee the construction of the off -site Improvements in the following amounts: Faithful Performance Bond: $81,000 Labor and Material Bond: $40,500 At this time, the developer is requesting approval of a twelve month extension on said improvement agreement. RECOMNMTION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution accepting said extension agreement and security and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign said agreement. L Respectfully su fittedI , jw Attachment; u ._. 14 0 � O it . . • T / , .• a �� _a r � 0 N I � I/ r 0 0 �V CITY OF PROJECT: - Traci' lx77z -j RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE. ENGINEERING DIVISION g Z EXHIBIT;_- A� ® r . . • T / . a �� _a r � N I � I/ r 0 0 �V CITY OF PROJECT: - Traci' lx77z -j RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE. ENGINEERING DIVISION g Z EXHIBIT;_- A� ImpExt);.: CITY OF RAKW C11CAMOIKA IWOYEMERT EXTENSION AGREESEKT FOR TRACT 12772 -1 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That this agreement is made and erterk into, in conformance with the provisions of the Subdivision Nap Act of the City of Cityiohereinafter referred ito as�thecCity ,candoHaaiSnResldentialtDevelopment. Inc. referred to as the Developer. WITNESSETN: THAT, WHEREAS said Developer entered into an improvement agreement with the City as a requisite to issuance of buildings permits, and WHEREAS, said Developer desires an extension of tied to complete the terms of the said improvement agreement. NOW. THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by the City and by said Developer as follows: 1. The completion date of the tarns (f the said improvement agreement is hereby extended by a period of 12 months from the date of City Council approval of said agreement. 2. Increase in improvement securities to reflect current improvement costs shall be furnished by the develoPxr with thiv agreement and shall be approved by the City Attorney. 3. The required bond and the additional principal amounts thereof are set forth on the attached sheet. 4. All other terms and conditions of the said iieprovement agreement shall remain the same. As evidence of understanding the provisions contained herein, and of intent to comply with same, the Developer has submitted the belor described Improvement security, and has affixed his signature hereto: 3 /17/86 k"M : s�trtirsrtr�cwrt�f »ro-ea*frtitl..v��►r� rnt :� Rfiitf�mfo�+rtr�a�s��rrrtrr�t«ie CITY OF RANCHO CUCA`tONOA DEVELOPER CALIFORNIA, a municipal corporation Ny,6 Residential Dey4 onmentr Inc. Attest: every A. Authelet,7ft-y-Clerk GI FAViTA STAN 01 �Imlnm FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND Description: Additional Frincipal Amount: Surety: Address: .�Yj��a�vi MATERIAL AND LABOR BOND Lescription: Additional Principal Amount: Surety: rd .r w re w ro b M pnm, .N r.rapd M .uN. Address: WMlnrwl an bwl al rN ro-pwnron MrM wwrd, rd M CASH DEPOSIT MONM TATION BOND Additional Cash Deposit: •¢a W^•"+^r wr+^r r. mr M.« e . rr,eyrlon al le Eord MIINnE ANCE DUARAMTEE BOIA Principal Amount: To be posted prior to acceptance of the project by the City. : s�trtirsrtr�cwrt�f »ro-ea*frtitl..v��►r� rnt :� Rfiitf�mfo�+rtr�a�s��rrrtrr�t«ie CITY OF RANCHO CUCA`tONOA DEVELOPER CALIFORNIA, a municipal corporation Ny,6 Residential Dey4 onmentr Inc. Attest: every A. Authelet,7ft-y-Clerk GI FAViTA STAN 01 �Imlnm �� ^brsr w, vN .ndwJphd . HYr. F,pOS N Md le ud sur., v..Mrn, Mo.r.d T=D AM _ 4i .�Yj��a�vi 1w.n ro w rs M M�C :IYi _�.verr, d M rvprb. Mr rrrarM rN .iMn Wevrnriv. rd .r w re w ro b M pnm, .N r.rapd M .uN. WMlnrwl an bwl al rN ro-pwnron MrM wwrd, rd M z k—w rd r. w Mr ,wh m0>.nan r.MnM M w9MM •¢a W^•"+^r wr+^r r. mr M.« e . rr,eyrlon al le Eord 6 dinoon =aV vnlw[u n NM rN .r m .a E loo. �J2k1/6 Nrr V.l7 0p d.wWrd! ,1W rw brrwwMdrrrtl RESOLUTION :10, g(p —/4, S A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT EXTENSION AGREEMEdT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 12772 -1 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its consid- ration an Improvement Extension Agreement executed on May 8, 1986, by M 6 S Residential Development, Incorporated as developer, for the improvement of public right -of -way adjacent to the real property specifically described therein, and generally located on Palo Alto, between Turner and Teak Way; and WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of said Tract 12772 -1; and WHEREAS, said Improvement Extension Agreement is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient Improvement Security, which is identified in said Improvement Extension Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Improvement Extension Agreement and said Improvement Security be and the sate are hereby approved and the Mayer is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Extension Agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest thereto. M Lauren Wasserman City Manager City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Re: Fees for Retainer Services Dear Lauren: I have calculated the amount of general services rendered under the retainer to the City of Rancho Cucamonga by this firm over the past fourteen months. As I indicated to you, I felt that such a calculation most likely would lead to a request for the Council's approval of a supple- mental agreement raising the amount of fees paid to this firm for retainer services. Following is an explanation of the analysis which was generated by my calculations. I also am enclosing a proposed Supplemental Agreement to raise th, retainer in two phases over the next two fiscal years to bring the hourly rate represented by the retainer into approximate conformance with fees earned frcm other clients of this firm. Following are the basic facts generated by my calculations: 1. As you know, the retainer presently is set at $3,500.00 per month and cannot be modified until the commence- ment of the 13d6 -87 fiscal year. 2. During agreement with the C e first l ityofRanchoLacamonga� ,othis firm has averaged over 115 hours of service per month. Of those 115 hours, 49.8 hours were delivered by the underr.gned personallv on an a!•erage basis. 6 NON[[P ON[ cmc Ct"C[ CINCLe JNNL[ l MARPNIN ROVRTM [[001, N NOR[W V APC LVNp PI • O. LOA 10 [R R[�RN O N1N [O OIICA GII[ORM IA OI[) -109 0 0 CN NO IOS � IM1Y 0YO -0901 ��1 NNR INN JO ![ICRNOM[ )[11 May 2, 1986 Lauren Wasserman City Manager City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Re: Fees for Retainer Services Dear Lauren: I have calculated the amount of general services rendered under the retainer to the City of Rancho Cucamonga by this firm over the past fourteen months. As I indicated to you, I felt that such a calculation most likely would lead to a request for the Council's approval of a supple- mental agreement raising the amount of fees paid to this firm for retainer services. Following is an explanation of the analysis which was generated by my calculations. I also am enclosing a proposed Supplemental Agreement to raise th, retainer in two phases over the next two fiscal years to bring the hourly rate represented by the retainer into approximate conformance with fees earned frcm other clients of this firm. Following are the basic facts generated by my calculations: 1. As you know, the retainer presently is set at $3,500.00 per month and cannot be modified until the commence- ment of the 13d6 -87 fiscal year. 2. During agreement with the C e first l ityofRanchoLacamonga� ,othis firm has averaged over 115 hours of service per month. Of those 115 hours, 49.8 hours were delivered by the underr.gned personallv on an a!•erage basis. 6 Lauren Wasserman May 2, 1986 Page Two 3. Over the fourteen months of services delivered through April, 1986, this firm has averaged the provision of 112 hours per month to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, of which 48 8 hours, on the average was my time. 4. On the basis of 112 hours per month, this firm has earned the very low rate of $31.25 per hour for services delivered under the retainer. As indicated above, approxi- mately one -half of that service was delivered by me personally wh!le my billing rate to the City for litigation is $90.00 per hour, almost three times the amount earned on the retainer. 5. Over the past three months, the average amount of our retainer services delivered has decreased to approxi- mately 91 hours per month. This is a trend which should con- tinue since when we commenced retainer cervices there was a large backlog of staff work to be accomplished. We now are in a position of delivering services concurrent with the request for those services. In other words, we expect the 90 hours or so per month to be a fairly constant figure for the foreseeable future As we discussed prior to commencing uLr services to the rity of Rancho Cucamonga, we always hope to earn an average of $80 00 per hour cn the retainer but are willing to deliver •ne services if we can earn approximately $60 00 per hour which is low but is the type of rate wlrich city attorneys expect to achieve on retainer services so long as other ervrces delivered to a city are at more standard rates. I,. accordance with the above facts and analysis, we are requesting that the retainer be raised for fiscal year 1986 -87 to $4,500.00 per month. This would mean that for the 1986 -87 fiscal year this firm wuuld hopefully average approxi- mately $50 00 per hour for retainer services We also are requesting that commencing with fiscal year 1987 -88 the retainer be raised to $5,000.00 per month which, on a 90 hour per month basis, will return to this firm a rate of approximately $55.55 per hour. If you and the Council ar in accord with the requests contained in this letter, i. would be a simple matter to process the enclosed Supplemental Agreement on the Council consent calendar, thereby effecting the changes Lauren Wasserman May 2, 1986 Page Three requested in this letter. Of course, we will be more than happy to meet with you and the Council at your convenience to personally discuss this request with you. JLM:sjk . . Your attention to this matter is appreciated. a Very truly yours, James L. Markman City Attorney City of Rancho Cucamonga SUPPLEMENTAL AGEEEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES That Agreement for Legal Services entered into on March 21, 1985 by and between the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a maricipal corporation, and LAW OFFICES OF JAMES L. MARKMAN, • Professional Corporation, hereby Js amended as follows: 1 All references to LAW OFFICES OF JAMES L. MARKMAN, • Professional Corporation, in the above - references Agreement hereby are modified to be references to LAW OFFICES OF MARKMAN a ARCZYNSKI, A Professional Corporation. 2. Subparagraph 4.A. of the above - referenced Agree- ment hereby is modified to read as follows: "A. Commencing July 1, 1986, ATTORNEY shall be compensnted for the basic services described in para- graph 2 hereof to be performed by ATTORNEY in an amount of $4,500.00 per month prorated for any par- tial month on a thirty -day basis and commencing July 1, 1987, ATTORNEY shall be compensated for the basic services described in paragraph 2 hereof to be performed by ATTORNEY in an amount of $5,000.00 rer month prorated for any partial month on a thirty - day month basis: and . . . 1. Other than as expressly amended, the above- referenced agreement for Legal Services and each and every term and provision thereof shall remain in full force and effect. -1- 9/ WHEREFORE, the parties have executed this Supple- mental Agreement as of the dates set forth below opposite the name of each such party. Dated: CITY OF RANCHO COCAMONCA A Municipal Corporation By Mayor By City Clerk LAW OFFICES OF MARKMAN i ARCZYNSRI A Professional Corporation DATES MAY 23, 1486 FROM+ John A. Futscher T0, Lauren Wasserman, City Manager City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBJECT, UNANTICIPATED BUDGET REQUEST - 95MYOR 8 We have bkVn trying for %ever nassecommunity establish Theb ME intent "as WATCH program within our �t was aid us in our crime pre' two -fold, The business caemun Y in vention efforts by reporting suspicious persOr+nd wec»mul dyafd the sue manx as Neighborhood bti�ycthen*, �to crime trends that the business cpamunitYar! of the busisses within the city• affected all, or any P was to be The backbone of the 'business al ThY aspectr of Commerce has pyramid communications network. Orly recently Put their computers on -line and have notbefore [Depleted their data entry, pyramid. Oncw that w could consider the devel opm uld depend on the occurs, the success of the pyramid midi oyeesl taking an active individual business owners_ contacts. This would be asking rota in aaki.g leewno art busy and, as we continue to gro,, a lot from "lop for break -down increases. the probability I recently learned about a coePUterl"d calling 4ystem that is in use at a including Mtu.LLebano,f Penns YlvanfatandtMehe ass California., Pal ice and which the San BernarThts system Wouldpprecludep the need arm eeaklng to squire. far a Pyramid calling system to accomplish the "Give Alert &%VDcts of both the Business Watch Andcost approx lmatsdyNatch Programs within the city - s6000 llcludtng hard 8 software to interface with our present PC1 The possible applications of this vevion arm really as as our and include many in the Crime Prevention area as wall as our General Law Enforc could be aPPliadeby the Otheracittyyb D+Ptf. ways that the system Some of the most obvious applications are listed bel a », but they are by no means all- inclusive& 1. Weekly calls to sulhe SurveYDrn »alit intaface With capped Persons late printout of our Printer and give us am after esp those who were not reached after several attts. g3 I .. 2. SWAT or IRT call -cuts - The nature of the call -out, the ptaging area, and the equipment needed would be part of the recorded message. 3. S L R call -outs - Same as above. 4. Disaster call -outs - Same as above. 3. Reserve call -cuts - Same as above. 6. Business Crime Alarts - As soon as we detect a crime Pattern, such as check offenses, till taps, clothing store burglaries, convenience store robberies, etc., we could Immediately alert all businesses, or ,lust those most likely to be involved. .. NOIShbort.uod Watch Crime Alerts - When we receive lnrormatlon on suspect drscriptirns, suspect vehicle descriptions, MD's, cr crime concentrations, we would immediately alert all o• Just certain parts of our neighborhood watch members. S. Notification of Coaliton Meetings - Would curve as a day before rseindur of M Coalition Meetings Includ- Ing agendas me infprmatlan de the speakers. 9. Missing children - Alecst immediate alert of every block captain and business in the city Of the description of mis•In9 children. 10. CQnRIssI= or Comsitter Meeting notifications. Although this item was not Inclutld in our current bud9st, th! funds are available through a budget transfer from our Overtime Budget, which has a sufficient amount to cover the costs of the unit. i� 915_ ,`i PURPOSE OF EQUIPMENT 1. Automatic notification by telephone for various applications. 2. The SURVEYOR 8 stores up to 1000 7 -digit numbers in memory. Up to 44 digits can be enured per phone and message number. Optional memory expansion increases memory from 1000 7 -digit numbers to 3000 7 -digit numbers. 3. The SURVEYOR 8 sequentially calls these numbers or re- orders telephone numbers to message number sequence to minimize time required for total dialing session. 4. The recorded message will either be an announcement and /or a series of questions. TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS 5. The SURVEYOR 8 is FCC approved. Its FCC registration number is AU 492X- 69442 -DP -E. The SURVEYOR 8 complies with the limits for a Class 8 computing device in accordcnce with specification ^ in Subpart J of Part 15 of FCC Rules. 6. It fa compatible with electronic, touchtone or rotary dial in installations. It is adaptable to telephone reselling services such as CATS, MCI. SPRINT, etc. 7. The SURVEYOR 8 is capable of working automatically on direct trunks • or on. systems aueh as Dimension, Centrix, or PBX. The system, when dialing an access code such as 9 or 8 betor a phone number, waits for a dial tone rather than Lr s fixed time length before dialing the phone number. PHYSICAL 8. The SURVEYOR 8 is compatible in size with general office equipment utilizing 18 x 12 inches of table space. A SUMMARY OF OA OOFUMON SYSTEMS. INC. r, 7f MICROLOP CORpRIT( OlMr � MG!(SSR7NK ORN(• JWIF fA CA 1MU5lUFG • MRRV(µOMIA v rnrnroNEizua.nml C O R P O R A T I O N ENGINEERING AND MANUl /Cn+UM UMMOGREYOMYE GArwraluRG.weRytZo: A rnrMfaW (X1) 2W.#M SPECIFICATIONS FOR MICROLOG CORPORATION'S SURVEYOR 8 PURPOSE OF EQUIPMENT 1. Automatic notification by telephone for various applications. 2. The SURVEYOR 8 stores up to 1000 7 -digit numbers in memory. Up to 44 digits can be enured per phone and message number. Optional memory expansion increases memory from 1000 7 -digit numbers to 3000 7 -digit numbers. 3. The SURVEYOR 8 sequentially calls these numbers or re- orders telephone numbers to message number sequence to minimize time required for total dialing session. 4. The recorded message will either be an announcement and /or a series of questions. TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS 5. The SURVEYOR 8 is FCC approved. Its FCC registration number is AU 492X- 69442 -DP -E. The SURVEYOR 8 complies with the limits for a Class 8 computing device in accordcnce with specification ^ in Subpart J of Part 15 of FCC Rules. 6. It fa compatible with electronic, touchtone or rotary dial in installations. It is adaptable to telephone reselling services such as CATS, MCI. SPRINT, etc. 7. The SURVEYOR 8 is capable of working automatically on direct trunks • or on. systems aueh as Dimension, Centrix, or PBX. The system, when dialing an access code such as 9 or 8 betor a phone number, waits for a dial tone rather than Lr s fixed time length before dialing the phone number. PHYSICAL 8. The SURVEYOR 8 is compatible in size with general office equipment utilizing 18 x 12 inches of table space. A SUMMARY OF OA OOFUMON SYSTEMS. INC. r, 7f Nodular packaging of electronics, power supply and tape decks are standard for ease of installation and maintenance. POWER REQUIREMENTS 10. It operates from 115 volts AC, 60Hz and requires less than 100 watts total. 11. The SURVEYOR 8 uses a U.L. approved (WP664024CC) wall outlet transformer to isolate zed lower the volts gge power line presented to the equipment from 115 VAC to 2S VAC. PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS 12. multiple message mode: The SURVEYOR 8 is capable of recording and delivering up to ninety -nine different announcements, all of different lengths, to each parson that it calls. In this mode th• equipment can be used to elicit and record a series of responses for each message. 13. Single message mode: In this mode the SURVEYOR 8 can be used to deliver one message without entering a message number and record a series of reaponaas. Voice activation waits for human response before beginning the message. 14. Additional messages may be added to the end of a completed multiple message cape at any time. 15. If the operator making the tape makes a mistake in the script when creating one of multiple messages, he may stop at this message and re- create the message. 16. When operating with the response feature, the SURVEYOR 8 records the phone number of the patty called on the response tape at the completion o! the recorded responses. The system displays these numbers while an operator is listening to the responses. 17. The SURVEYOR 8 allows the user to listen to both outgoing messages and responses during a calling session. 18. High quality, remace controlled, commercial grade, stereo tape decks are used for both the announcement tope and tha response tape. Prior to dialing a phone number, the SURVEYOR 8 searches for the appropriate message segment corresponding co the message number in memory. The search occurs at high speeds using fast rewind and fa> forward, enabling the operation to be performed within seconds, rather than having to go to the beginning of the tape and make a sequential search. 19. Numbers may be entered via a touchtono type keypad, cassette tape, or computer. 20. An integral, two -way. RS -232, asynchronous interface to download phone and message numbers and opperational set -ups from a computer to the SURVEYOR 8 is standard. The baud rate is keypad programmable (306, 600, 1200, 1800, 2400, 3600, 4800 snd 7200 baud are standard). Optional 9600 baud is also available. Customer programmable LOG -ON and LOG -OFF protocols are provided for assy and convenient computer access. LOO -ON message may be up to eighty characters in length. LOG-oFF measages may be up to ten characters in length. 21. An optional cable can be provided to link the SURVEYOR 8 to a printer to receive information that is simultaneously down line loaded from a computer. The SURVEYOR 8 will only load the phone numbers that are In •pacified columns of the printout. This is an alternative to reformatin g the file according to Microlog's protocols. 22. Optional protocol converters are available to interface IBM. Honeywell, Burroughs and othir mainfrims computers to the SURVEYOR 8. 23. Optional equipment Includes software and hardware for entering numbers from Apple o: IBM personal computers. 24. Capability to intermix local and long distance numbers is standard on the SURVEYOR 8. 25. Capability to add, delete, or review numbers is standard. A simple keystroke command deletes all numbers which have been completed and /or intercepted br a telephone company signal such as "out of order'. 26. The "locate" editing feature allows the SURVEYOR 8 to autcratiCally search through memory to locate • particular number for editing. 27. Message numbers residing to the SURVEYOR 8's memory may be universally changed. Example: All massages numbered 12 could be changed to message number 25. This allows for a change without having to ce -enter both the message and telephone number. 28. Specific messaga and phone numbers residing in memory in the SURVEYOR 8 may be deleted universally from the active call list. Example: All phone numbers associated with message number 10 could be removed fora the active call list without having to be deleted individually. 29. SPacific message numbers can be associated with a list of phone numbers by entering the message number only once. 30. Numbers stored In memory may be recorded on a standard cassette tape. It takes one minute to record one hundred and fifty, aevan digit-numbers. 31. Once stored on tape, all numbers may be loaded Into the dialer in the bame amount of ;Ime as It took to record them. 32. Multiple sets of numbers may be loaded from different cassettes. 33. Error codes are shown on the LED display to assist in diagnosing any system problems. 34. While operating, the SURVEYOR 8 system displays the number when it is entered, dialed, edited, or when the corresponding response is being played bock on the LED display. 35. The SURVEYOR 8 attempts all busy and no answer calls up to five times lefore releasing the number from the active call list. This is a programmable option. At the start of the dial sequence the operator may specify how many times the system should radial. Recalls are not Initiated until after Initial attempts have bean completed for all stored numbers. 36. An optional high quality printer utilizing paper readily available from ag computer or Office supply store may be attached to the SURVEYOR B. 37. The SURVEYOR 8 will at programmable Intervals or on demand, print those calls which are: I. completed it. bury iii. did not answer Iv. telephone company intercept V. Lung up before completion of message Vi. print all numbers stored in the system 38. The SURVEYOR 8 will retain phone and message numbers, start, stop, and current time periods, set up options, and status information in storage and maintain its internal clock for a minimum of two weeks in the event of AC power failure. The system will restart itself without error in the event of poser failures for power outage times not to exceed two weeks. When power Is restored, the SURVEYOR 8 will continue to operate in Ica previous mode, i.e, dialing, etc. 39. .4 digital timer clock foe automatic dialing times is standard. Three separate time periods--per day are provided. These time periods may be set up for seven days in advance and require no further attendance. It is not necessary to program all of the twenty - one- availabl6 Me periods in order for the system to dial. 40. The SURVEYOR 8 recognizes most phone company intercepts and automatically disconnects without playing the announcement. 41. The SURVEYOR 8 recognizes a hang -up and disconnects when this condition is met. 42. The SURVEYOR 8 can be programmed to disconnect after the first or second "no response" to a series of questions. 43. The SURVEYOR 8 can automatically dial every tenth telephone n=ber in an exchange with the insertion of only one telephone number. 44. The SURVEYOR 8 can operate in the "attended mode" whereby the system automatically dials the telephone number, the omator reaches tho appropriate party, and the system plays the appropriate message. 45. The SURVEYOR V can be used as an answering machine that answers the phone, delivers a prerecorded message and retords anyy responses. It may prompt the taller for �esponsea by asking a series of questions. 46. The SURVEYOR 8 records responses on a voice - activated basis. 47. The SURVEYOR 8 can be programmed either to wait for voice- activation or a phone company generated signal before playing the massage. 48. A common prefix need be entered only once for a list of phone numbers. Only the none common digits must be entered after the prefix. Up to forty digits may be entered in the common prefix code. 49. Up to fifteen SURVEYOR 6 systems can be linked together to a computer to expedite down -line loading of phone and message numbers and operational set -ups when multiple -lines are required. 50. An optional touchcone recognition feature is available on the SURVEYOR 8. This allows callers to respond to questions by pressing a digit on their phone set, such as /O! Voice. A r All touchtoneresp responses answering be. vi-wed on the LED display or printed on the optional printer. The touchcone recognition feature also allows incoming callers to bear a user - selectable message. Tho callers, select the number of a particular measnge chat they want to hear by pressing two digits on their phone sera. The SURVEYOR 8 positions the Message tape to the chosen message and plays it for the caller. 51. A microphone is provided with the SURVEYOR 8 for the purpose of creating messages ,live,, or caps, 52. A cable is provided with the SURVEYOR 8 for the purpose of loading pre- recorded messsgea from e Player to the SURVEYOR 8's :spa der: when n auxiliary five" pu tape pu recordi -g is net preferred, 53. Parts and labor warranty for one year is standard. O,rtional extended wsrranty is available. 54. The SURVEYOR 8 ie eapablo of beinE operated by clerical Personnel withrOt extensive training; however, training and an opararicaa manual are included. 55. Instructions for operating the SURVEYOR 8 reside referntoteither therUsers ManuallorNthe„ "Help Mode" for written instructions. 56. Current user references are included for your review. 57. Microlog company history and audited financial statements a e available upon request. 40a COAIOAArE conCI MICROLOG-. C o R i O a A' Y' l e' it / INOINEIAIND AND j Y.WUfAMNINO IOADIISSIONAL O&Nj. YAre,,j r NEASOUAG. AUAnANO AVIS yf1 fYAANE L7ol, fAFS]W /E)IjA{pnyly OAf GUJNINSSUAO. A/AAnAND.tyn raft/ rlvfl I]—,V KD c -Y MICPOLGG'S SURVEYOR 7 AUTO TELEDIALER FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT The SURVEYOR 7 for Law Enforcement, an automatic phone dialing and message delivery computer, is now available to law enforcement agencies ehtoughout the United States and Canada. This system has been designed for use in the followin; areas: o NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH PROGRAMS Utilize the SURVEYOR 7 to become the extra "ayes and ears" of your community. Alert neighborhoods of recenpC birglaries break- ing, auto thefts, a4sA ts, etc. 41 the SURVEYOE 7 residents can bar 'prodsd Information about recent crimes, build community support and decrease crime. o LAST CHILDREN The SURVEYOR 7 can contact all hoses in the vicinity of the lost child - auto- matically. Have the neighbors check their property and the surrounding area along with police officers. Ramember that many pecple can cover a large area in a shorter amount of time than o few officers by themselves. o CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS Use the SURVEYOR 7 to phone residents in cha arer. that a crime lips been commited. A message with multiple questions may be tcanamitted. These with information may give their rasponso to the SURVEYOR 7. Thin franc yD.,r investigating officers to follow up al these leads. This system re- duces the need of manually knocking on doors to docermine if residents may havo any poctinent information. A SUIRDIARy of OLD ooMSNIom SYSTEMS. INr 103 Copyright 1964 Mlcrolog Corp., Maryland THU SEP l9 19P5 SYSTEM PHONE LIST PREFI% TIME MSG PHONE NUMBER ANSWERED COMPLETED QUESTIONS 11316 AM 2558400 NO 0 11316 AM 4326950 NO 0 11316 AM 3218301 NO 0 t 11316 AM 6616792 NO 0 11316 AM 4263170 NO 0 11316 AM 948S20O NO 0 , 11316 AM 6682295 NO 0 r" x The Multi -Line SURVEYOR 7 operates in the some manner but also offers the capability of reaching a larger audience. The Multi -Line SURVEYOR 7 allows for the connection of up 'to 99 SURVEYOR 7 units connected to an Apple computer system. The stand -alone SURVEYOR 1 sypstem will transmit an average of 40 -50 calla per hour (depending upon the length of message and response) with features sucl as: • Saving numbers for later use ' Click Disconnect (System automatically dis- connects if hung up on or reaches telephone Company intercept, i.e. busy, out of order sig- nal). ' Long Distance Dialing (MCI, Sprint) * Unattendrd Ofeling (Set the system early and then leave. The System automatically starts and stops dialing according to your pre- programmed times). • Answer machine capability * Record your own messages • Optional printer for hard copy report He feel the SURVEYOR 7 Auto Teledialer for Law Enforcement will be a valuable communications ease: for today's law enforcement agencies. The list of uses for the SURVEYOR 7 Law Enforcement System is endless. This system will become an asset to your officers which will result in bettet public relations end increased community involvement. For more information about the SURVEYOR : Law Enforcement System CORPORA- TION at please (301)c 948 -5307 the manufacturer. write 4rofessio al ODriive. Suite 116, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20879. r o INTERNAL MESSAGE SNITCHING Use the SURVEYOd 7 as an answering machine. Leave the crim: report from the previous shift or day on the SURVEYOR 7. Let your officers call in to find out what has been reported in targeted areas. Utilize the system to switcb. messages from department to department. This allows greater input from ali PERSONAL PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Not4jy,,,F,as44sqts in s: specific neighbor- hood that your officers will be available to engrave their possaasions...on a,parti- cular daiA_ ESC engraving their Stara you make it more difficult for ihievas to fence. stolen property.' Take a bite out of burglaries. ,^ I. HANDICAPPED OUT REACH All Utilize the SURVEYOR 7- In contiel the handicapped PPeopPle In your jyrisjictlon. Call pariodically to „444rarmini their aafaty situation. This community service helps those whn feel isolated. �2 Let the SURVEYOR 7 contact residents to notify these of upconing community meet - p ings. Increase the turnout and partici- pation. Remember that the larger number of residents aware of law enforcement pro - peceleipatlanewillareas the larger their The ntand -alone SURVEYOR 7 allows for entry of up to 1.000 telephone numbers. The local law enforcement agency then makes the appropriate message which they want to trans- mit. The SURVEYOR 7 will then automatically call those numbers and transmit the message. This may be done either attended or unattended. The system also records any com- mtnts or information from each called party if such is desired. r Q uRIS r O OO L Al...�..... � _. . F;lw� kk it.rT jW: ... _ w ,, ill.iVA Allej; too- Surveyor 8 calls your customers and prospects for you -- automatically • Eliminates cold calling, prospecting and canvassing • Saves you time, effort and money • Fast and easy to use for outgoing and incoming calls New and easy to use Stop wasting tune, effort and many on cold calling. handle any axtanstve telephone caging pro,`ecb Ntro- Now there s a faster and taller way for you to search fee during Surveyor8 —the new. automatic dialing/ coke new business prospects. conduct customer surveys, or de0vcry syrterIL=m makes thew UM a taus lm you Here's how Surveyor 8ivorks: You record a message mitt the phone numbers Sur -not S: that you want called set it t times that Surveyor 8 is *to start and stop calling and then just walk away. a Takes the drudgery out of prospecting Surveyor 8 does everything else for you. a Fakes calf consistently with the same pleasant voKe It dials each number automatically. When the called a Works every day—doesn t get skit. take coffee parry answers the phone. Surveyor 8 canter on a two- breaks or get depressed by rejections ✓ y way convenatbn. asks quesdorn. and records the responses Once the conversation h over. h dials the next ,works weekends and aF.n boon. targeting both y�C arg g number. automatically and unattended. Surveyor 8 can buunen and consumer markets even reenve incoming calf, too a Dacm't ask for pay muss One Surveyor 8 system can make up to 100 calla each hour, and can be programmed for up to 1000 • Make you money while It says you time and effort phone numbm at a timel Put Surveyor 8 to work for you In a wide range of business onnortunities_ " Insurance Real Euate Heme Improvements Energy Saving Secunry Carpet Cleanup Stocks and Bonds Community Health Carom Estate Planning Fund Raising Political Campaigns Ticket information wate Softening Dating Services Prospecting — Surveyor 8 can make cold cabs for you Save the cost tit your time making phone calf, and you get more time to Clow sees Public Relations — Tel your customers about sales. $Pe W offers. new merchandise service deadline An• nounce new business hours or procedures Market Research — Conduct surveys and polls. Now. in much ten lma. collect information that would normally take you hours. Let Surveyor 8 ask questiom, record responses. and quickly tab :*U4ta. y. T /A J Order recorder — Take ordm from incoming tales and contact customers when their orders arrive. Surveyor 8 records namn. addresses and speo8cs for each order ,mlom" "tyke — Take Incoming CABs for sake Aber the service call. use Surveyor 8 to ask your cus• tome d he or she was pleased with the quality of smite Collections — Include a cal from Sunrym 8 In your standard collection procedures. The urgency of a phone cal can help those you call settle much faster. Company Communications — Quickly and economt• tally, a!m your odser offices and disabi o s to pace changes, appoinanmb or inventory problems. Current Uses: Surveyor 8 is now being used in ogar rations and In• dustries acrou the country. incluaing these multi:"vl sales organuatlo" Amway.Shakln. Ofd worlds, . Abe Vsv. Meadow Fresh How to use the Surveyor 3 Programming the-sWem is easy _ Surveyor 8 bqukkk programmedbyunnga single touch. tone style You want the keyboard to call Take a look phone t seme of them useful programming feahaes insert exchanges automatically — For disWg many numbers wah the same ?-dirt exchange. lust enter the Cost number on your list For all aasequent numbers. You need to enter only the Ian lout .ligtts Surveyor, 8 automatically uses th same exchange. Easy number entry — Vou simply eatar phone and message numbers through a aucluone type keypad or coneme tape. or bad them directly from a computer. Entry up m 1000 phone numbers — Surveyor 8 to.". UP to 1000 numbers In memo y at a it" 8 needed. the aptpnal expanson memory will btvecse O.e storage to 3000 phone number Died sequences automatically — Reduce the time you spew on phone number entry For example. d you emer SSSfi000. SUTW!Vr 8 can dial every tenth number 1555.0010. 555.0020, ew Reduce minter envy mSwkes duagh dkytai dishy — To help you avoid three arrant. the Surveyor 8 LED dgkal display shows the number when entered. edited. dialed and when you play back the response tape. Make outgoing calls °. Once the sweet u loaded wuh phone numbers. Surveyor 8,s ready to make your calls — sutomautagy Cali local and lorry distance number — Surveyor 8 dials local ano long distance, numbers in any comblb• tbn It also vasty interfaces with WATS. MCI. Sprint. and sunder networks Reach the persor. you want to contact — You can cast the system in the amended mode. d you Eke Surveyor 8 N. dial; a mber When the parry answers. you ask to speak to a spratk person When that person picks up the phone. Surveyor 8 delivers your message Dftim muldple messages — Surveyor 8 can deliver arty sequence of up to 99d ffe t messages to each per. fart that it calls and record responses to axis menage ta the sequence (Mon other Vivant can only deliver caw of eight messages to each caller) You can create inn• sages of any length. from a few seconds to 60 mmutes Ask many questions — Surveyor 8 can ask multiple questions to each person that it calls and record all responses Recognize touchione responses ham the called parry — No wher system comes wdh thr valuable surveying tool The optonal toucloone recognition feature speeds up poling. Called penes signify their responses to ques- tors by prey" a dgd on theft phone sets. Surveyor 8 team the responses in memory. tabulates them. and da, plays them on the LED dm In or optbnal printer Record responses automatically — Surveyor 8 auo- maticagy records the phone number of every respondent on the rereonm tape When you play bock the tape the No need for number re -entry, — Saw tine. You can state numbers from tta system on standard cuenes or computer disks Surveyor 8 dumps 1000 numbers to cassette In approximately eight ranum. and bads 1000 numbers from catsetta in the same time. Seen•daY digital than dock — Set the clock so that the system automatically dish for up to three emended periods each day for seven days. You can repeal the same clock cycle each week. or change h as will. Update your list of ealhd numbers any time — You can add. delete and review phone numbers at any time One laymoke elminates all reached numbers from memory as wig as disconnected or otharwse invalid nurser. Remote control stereo tspe decks — the high quality cremate control Arco cape decks ate made for long-term. heavy use. You can play messages In any order. regard• hen of their position an the tape Survryor 8 can acoen a bane menage up to several hundred emu Dauer than units using millers loop ttpe decks Make yore nett prohfsbnal tapes — You cart record your awn stud"uabty tapes 9 cat a tape elsewhere. If You'd bke a speufk sound affect or musk In the background LED display show the corresponding phone number Response tape deck — Record o,Jy the responses to your menages. This way. the results ham hours of dlel. sag can be heard in minutes. The response tape deck records names. ddresms and phone number Retry bury or rummi verring lines — If Surveyor 8 can• it not reach acaged perry because the kne Is busy or no one answers. it rsUies that phone number later You can pro• gram the retry sequence for up to five times Diswnnect on hang up and telephone company inter- cept. roc no response — IF someone hangs up before Surveyor 8 debvm an of its message. the system auto• matica1y disconnects that kne and goes on to the next phone number It also disconnects it it reaches most tale. phone company intercepts; Computer Interface — Surveyor 8 came, with a two. way RS-232 asynchronous interface to Pink the system with practically any computer You can bad phone end message ambers and operational set ups from a cam. puter directly into Surveyor 8. Multiple lines for really big Jobs — R you need :o call man people than one system can handle (mare than about 100 calls par hour). you can Puck together up to 15 Surveyor 8 systems and haw a compute control them Unk Surveyor 8 to an IBMoc PC or Applenr Ile — Nerdwm /wftw= applications p.OAgrs for the IBM PC end Apple 8e ate available Thee packages help you Create and control a permanent computer data base of phone numbers and other c,stomer inform soon /0 Take incoming calls . Surveyor 8 recervts cans put as study u it nudes out. gang calls Many of the same features are at wctk. such as asking multiple questions and automatic response recording Create an information ser lee byplaying useradectable messages for Licoming calls — Callen tried the number More superior features Uu Surveyor 8 with any phone system — Surveyor 8 Is FCC approved You can use It with any phone system or One. including Canute. Horizon. touchrone or rotary The system meets EMI requirements for Class A (in. Kdustria0 equipment In accordance wait pmt IS of FCC re lUnements Optional printer — It supplie a report that Includes time of day. telephone number. numbers answeed and nor answered. plus the number of times a phone number was dialed It also prints the saws of all numbers dialed and to be dialed Of a Parikular Irs"s they want to hear by pressing two digltt on that phone sets with the optional muchtone recognakn feature. Surveyor 8 plays the churn n• ..aga Use Surveyor 8 as N answering service — Let Surveyor 8 oaks your ens. ask queabm arty record response. 4 woks unattended and automatcally. Two-week battery backup — Rest assured that no War. matfon will be toss d power failure occurs The two -week badsri backup saves phony numbers. set -up options and dgud amer clods semngt in memuy When pwww n restored.St ,eyor 8 automatically continuesm whatever mode It was opeamg. I e.. dialing. ensue mode. etc Voltage — Conventional 117 V AC. 60 Hs One voltage Low in Intenan,ce— Surveyor 8 requaes only a penadic cleating of tape Mods and roller Reliability Insured — Each Surveyor 8 unit is completely tested prior to shipping. Standard Surveyor 8 features and equipment • surveyor 8 control unit • Transmitter ups deck • Recerver tape deck • Power pack — for safe connection to regular electrical outlet • High quality microphone — to make your own tape • Sevendaydigual clock with duet time windows par day • Teo -week battery backup • Touchrone style keypad for easy number entry Optional features �j • Pnnter — provides a mr-4 that mchude time of day. telephone number. number answered aid not answered and number of times a phone number was dialed V • Touchione recognition — offers scorekerpmg to track responses to questions (Polling applications) and plays message of utcommg callers choke Apple He or IBM PC hardware /sofr,are applications �r.s -7f Packages _• 1 1 • Sunk manage /multiple response • Multiple mtsasgt/ multiple response • Two-way RS -232 asynchronous interface to a host compute — data rate 300 to 7200 baud • One transmit tape • One reserve tape • Easy-to-follow users guide • One-year warranty on pans and labor • Ecpawbn memory — triples memory from 1000 7dga numbers to 3000 7dgu umben • Deskop uood cabinet • PC -I portable tampon can T- adapter — allows sycemand telephone robe phgged into same One • 9600 baud dam rate — for the RS -232 Interface to a host computer TWrFadary Wtrauldti O fate hild'" comorauan Yaw•enwne. uaeweM«.w.n. n.......... u....... t•- 33! C� 16AwwP,bk,w wv&ri :"mtJ wm w; ftUvS 1Md tnlAt nN ffwns 'M1h?T AYMnItCYty � � dMb PtHtM 1ituc s h tccn n odavalkwn Ztw ~" t+vDwOn an kqwr 01" I.. w it Neighborhooc: Crime Watch A Communication Problem neighborhoodwatchip program Is communication �' OFFICER JAMES H. HOWELL Own. gn ndm Stcom A%%n 0108* vv LQ L#"n % PA De Im i tt -d AD r r7r ter&ftw aired TW ML lemon roan. 0aprt- mrM barn as formal wwm pevw. tkn popcn in 1979 Iran aw astaP M wa of e odgfwwfned Dino weawt ptgrwn TM need for ttw" of phoram was waned by a rsah of raardwtsal bugwm and suitor roan eaeea TW Iaiw and wcom of M ors ewybodnood worm wd aw twslawn for 9w aataDWsmn of a ha*m eftrw www*m oat and 27 ataarwl Irate+ WMJPL Ina air. boyhood aatrh Wp* phorws boon. *%*V to war, and by 1963. M oatrys * M be eOVwW by ve ae ML Lsbarwn w s raaldwt9al own. rmnay brdwtrp 9+o oay of Pltt knK m%* over 6 awed nave in sea am a PofsMam of ab*A 73.000. iX L*barsn's nwen Un* Iwcvii is W 979.000. rtidl w MWW16 WVI/ above tlw Mrs" for Me 0eo: rWhtd area. As In Most d&MvL Was eeeartve mrmevbe4 rw pNrry ehfw w WL" AWA K Proem of rase hoom a we roe. d&%& VhV6h m is also an awoytq pro0lwn WadL in vcke . wpaeM awry ~ oOwlee that omC'n W L M owrramr/. !stow dw NpwbM of M wtee awd progran a wodaow reatwon N "" and v:nds6m he ea oared in 1070. w dwenftwm eree- pgatad 1M bwrwws. WoCh de• weaned 10 129 N 1062. At dw same W". the buVwy owwance raw rod nom 21 arum to N pwcwd A4 004 v Lebamon ha, m ww and per saris pwfwrnwm of ass raw rsotton as ~ cw4mrAs ow der Past 2 or 3 Ysrs, ha p ns fed Wan atawtwated in ML Lebanon NW two been sweewnn Woew than In aw:mnhu 4 a* Kvrmmwq area. We ba4ve that tan no ftw. hood IrM Ptorsm nos been a Mwjw comlbutr lo the swot redu6 Ions N ch r The AsWrnrMY swmarM of any IMACI ehd rmrwwhoa Iratch Pro• ram is OPrfefarluaoM1 The Match 9rooP snot W bom Wormed of the •Vents as r" Pone Mdwt ifwe area and rrwst W awe lo mtmfncate srrpowrs and obwvM* to tW Pofca. Wham the ptoram is ema e. v&Ary wry 100.200 rHdeneei, na w ■ adngaratlrefy ass. tart At the Ptoram Wowl'. howe'/r. Pw oft W own" rwo do can. UL L"mm has cWmtd nd0bw roues to mdorm wnh Pones wpwrp on" or congmer. had roe This of- for puce is. twvw of tdorfneom parWnmp to we &-UV dial can be diseemn.ned et tfwerW w ed tlw need bsorr of w Pont JVW, d a sera/ of wants Comes. M W" Can W Nun* Yaw" noafad TM problem r now o pat M Womwson to eedt ratnM of 9s soup don wawa As N rnM na'9rson*W Irat:h Prorafrw. Ire began our Mom vurvca. bows dlrrl wen a wwpwrw pyraml nog ay WI The bane pray qW offer wmAt W ale sop oowwu• err who n sm used weer caotsns Wed ralryad 9w Mweeap to 0mw nwmbers wow the roue Thy nwdwd is edaCMa IV man coups bul dodo have Ira swwus Ira.. backs. As N mat verbal rodasagst. ewV" dery as gob m ga w Paaeed down ra &Am% " at der erne eta. ff*VM a broom] cone - Med d is asp Ora* b entwe that s. Y nremDers Of 9t Wetted w mro iaewd. W4 a M manor ehpoevtfe b make a Want Of mow q o Iwo nr barb taeched FnYy. sa 90 WWM we" n8- a0darhr wad pray$ we becomn w and Was f system ' Ion I rrcM, UL Lobst%m epwtrrod Y r awae Wehflema a aw par" r" Vow to on. M, Wr 9,000 Inowd. W nbraae and/or Nab. It was at to ems w damwad a mrbat. M: erred ov Toren\ Inlets 1942, w WCWK Y pit of ow aflnw prMr.ton program, rw Campowim less of the talephorw WA dnf np cw7 The &rwy. r 7 Is a amaa 02K mnanr Orybd with a telephone rananrfar /racrYSl and. The face of We mrhyhnr oan• Each hap aormeam rS7wa tar two simmew Orr an oath Sit* Wan k a ntebr tape Y phon MOM for anst paraadr e Weed. The tlpee We Ned by ?ay ael MOW up by DYl a o< pNr daa and a panted Sol. IaaiAd a rtiplbodtW van odoftow iaW uVa Wbrntbn b;U=d Into N fr rN Ws rwetr9 are M NO aw Suvoyr. 71* bap b Wan rreewd Will a Map We WWh b made on 9n law? Oon• al o so KnnNeer. &^+)R b woad aaa s aacaled tWone tree aro bs9ry b CON each "W fiber ~ Wo AM W QlneneM b OA When Wl telephone b arawwK ew vas tape Durpfary!n ML LMtanon 1978-19a3 1178 1979 1W0 1901 19x2 1962 Rwrted 199 22t 2037 269 190 120 Percent cl+^9e 11% 291E -6% -al% -21% tarp A tacit pad 90nilar b a tals- owle. wm several samov U7a TWOOW4 camera Wtarod Aram nwmbre Of each watch pay an 1W 8-o the CMV~ Wraugfh tsptr Cap laarOarfcm Wnwatch 9 � The fn. vawS W" emrup each W Wwo Mu a8- M" We enter code. Streeb re nl tared stphebrcaly r8- than Vmtnca9y by hM" numbw. yMan a ebsr has been rF liked. mow mmrbm w then prma. Iwnpy recorded on aw cueeRe Ape. On$ Ks tee4wn We WereCrad nwou, Cahn all a d0arnmwa an a p8-... by phorw mater. sore cYSd. W bnw some owed 9 Ws oY III not Cured. e a srwyr aft acs aree lr w M Well, of sew mmabr of age OMWK schemed. WwWwrK r t be Woad b freaod awry iS hMht s, The do " an M tf'+9rymeed ball ardl'Wyy tent" fnhrs r et ay. en&"V twt no CAMS WO a rrhm M arrh9 late r We" hart M aeded f"Wm of t8- u" aa0rq la ■ twSSOraM.arhewlt pro- Wam b be rimpmwd too t8- kvW Ca The p Vftfad tap %M ass a erwaon w W" fm ry raryahee of f8- bnhndyl bop aMO. This pno 1/3 8-h cm hands eel b three 0uutrina and a8- rb"rerw Oya We rr.ef thes"p. wail Upon" s8- li-oft Tapes wadi. re'olaw" L"*VW Mtt a i to 10 Woor. Oft of itw obrghal proetem, wrW by Wo t nprr rata is coon. 4F trap an sccvnle Wrrw est. Tm Nov cosaftes have rrtreK. aCmrrled7 V* ptobkm pha s ahlbrMbcaey A~ lap" r et sew reaanp a terhtst twwm an Wand bet, M &""W 7. and the WK is Woad Ina an &M coos. Each t%m*w is drpWyW aM W W erry deb1W r tWpad reh. OA diaseuq oWr mWtra on ew: tells. $ray bra for 9w Sweypr 7 is nrYr 1. and a bulc sbmont of cmw p^'s^tpn- �rmwrrc+Om -q u. mmparyd sKSCtnsy. aalnbly. and pmspe beat of a0. met erase. brry. The WtW irrmtitm it W Oramhsby 97.000, pros a dsdealed W+ry am hu allowed _ eW meewtvt to n�R fed reGKed�a* we Man my Its 01,11" afters to mate lrephOry cAb a d hu Inr wam a Is. waft reepone a'Om err a @" ANUSnal ho rarm W We bra We Sweyr Ms Dun ompbysd. oihr pmW&me Nike bar+ derroped When oc41a an a pwtcLAV asset rf an . We abed MW 9wsn speofc bvw.m. bon DeprDam poscy above tr rat Ouor hose r al "Since the inception of the crime watch program, a noticeable reduction in burglary and vandalism has occurred.,, Ito be pwn all waiabb ever. e,ch" wl0 h brarby eand and rnrrYly M.rMkyr.O Pareane araaabla) W bvpr and wet pOed we M ro. d.w" .bra " MW%odod c �Y. anw. date, and Any" watt edaMa. vphh .. M uM O b q Me amee. etdY anestpabrs tan tsraa wdt ft" ,fy,y f Mn MMpMaaa n dr tan. p lrar�001101 rwle CamW feYMal aanwy tld Oren4 aCerd wM dM S. aanW 7, Md r"M Mer *-Wff a to *A Man b Mir Itprttes, The Berke w'& Ole Y vevs n rnbwh rs k'N.YOr bte to 11atbmte � be uaW not"b db r d»p m the Men d M 0yswa0y hwocappy Loot Chalnn Wmn ad d#WMwR wwva a IM Of Mn q ON row% ow Sa. V"W Is bW b OOMW ae a SMOf arOW a1a area In - Nd M dwd WY tau teen 1leeden rvt w a torrolaa 0YWW desoVbm of M Chid and 4411 &sate t0 Check amurW dle pem to of Mar Moony wom a vaY ahon W4. 40 a 50 eth"Als be" aswbnp dr dpWtmerd n dw seardb reou=V dfe mW for PA erh . na11w11rmnts ken rad0 tai elalaa opwaff m A DauOJem PeftlgbOM Open aeon was really Mttwarea rhpM kV rNaM is wtw W W W b be rs= y deotasea W. som. The suspect would tY a bes doctor stebnp Ow M was n own for Me Meal. hw M OYf Of a P&. *abed medKane, WW rued mW a PrGuMbOA b 'hOW ton ref' brM atta the k11 tf aeC♦ d M prOONtn WW O*Cbxa hart coneeM. W 10 ramp VW lewo we Mx7bers IW*d On a YtOY tape. 11 ill bra Opaatwn OCU& N doctor w m our WY W be hopfW wM inn. daL The Wee M ebb be K*MW to M &M b cv bed dWkti eer row VWN a Yll"4 ,lpe Wao1i a I tae lee Lessee,' bA 4MO Y a 140 d Powell On eml ap Wey WAMMbat WMsbaft" of "awk h M YM0 &ra 1 Mrd a 11 m tape. MWO ft babn. tlab. arm. Yep reddens Yv&w d Of w^rry aline wham warm Met pare'+, WY allba rwoO ,,4dM n, ad d' tMianta b M m. dents WrotWeon n M prppram aria hu MUM80 in ,per welch rneewlq abawawa Gnerpemy MedOceOaq Thd elf,' M ahw be use n 0d6w MMriaf L le„ owww W' L hatadpw w axwe :l « cow W«eseeabb arnrpewee WANd MY fa we eveombon d W. tan rat& h b abo U W b pr r t emergency OWWN Ce'u of pyq OMtae Of f f sPKW aduuL kx,, Y SWAT, Iota wxi"M leans M &MVWY need ft tbirs .ulm+W &ball e ma "" Wr Ve a Cnftat to On sOatas of MOY "" Of prOPams Tradbon. &I MtMDde of Peramd felephw dWAL wtwe eaeCWO la vary Vn" Prw&ns. We not wte0 to cor, n, ayw4e ehpffl The ose of a mNebng do ftug.)t to nm w 1 in py Onrate sacbr ms Poostdoeb n eMKYMb reaabff. and fror4d Of n, *W Ou bon wnh ow Moe Mren of es o aW •DM us w w . mtMAndy. adaptable b POan degnheam of as $aft it abe P*Vd" ern "Y Able unat. &rice b ad O&PWOnent t" pcbte amrpen'es and Other urdwWin erenK M CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATgi June 4, 1986 TO: Mayor and Members of City Council YROMt Robert Risen. Assistant City Manager 3BJECTi tm.leD EMPIRE Y[9T 80A DESTSATIDa The Vest Valley cities have coo {erased together since 1973 to provide locally -based job training and job placement services to our reaidents. During that period the City of Ontario has taken the lead, through its Employment Training Agency (ETA), and has acted as a broker of training and placement programs for all disadrantaded residents of the five cities. ETA exists to ensrre that the federal funds designated for the Vest Valley actually get to this area. Also, that training programs are subject to local control end effectively meet local needs. Being part of the Sao Bernardino County Service %livery Area (SDA), the Vest Valley job training program bas been operated under annual contracts warded by the County to the City of Ontario. These contracts have im the past included only certain parts of the full Vest Talley allocation, vitb the remainder administered from San Bernardino. The contract is renegotiated annually between the County and RTA, with no assurance from Year to year that the contractual relationship will be cuatieued. Due to instability of this arrangement and the desire of local Officials to derive the full benefit from the performance of Vest Valley job training programs, the City Councils of Chino, Mootclair, Ontario, Rancho Cmeamoga, and Upland each unanimously approved participation in a new Service Delivery Area. This am SDA would receive 4ts funds directly from the State and would function under the joint guidance of the five cities and a locallyvppoiated private Industry Council. The five cities acted to approve the am SDA in December, 199% with the express intent that it be operational on July 1, 1986. Federal law — the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) . sets out a vary rlear procedure for individual cities, eoouties, and consortia to apply to become a ow SDA. That procedure requires an application to the Covermor, who makes an initial decision with advice from his advisory State Job Training Coordinating Council. Federal lw also specifically pranides for to appeal to the 0. S. Secretary of Lalor (JTPA Sec. 101(a)(4)(C)) and a subsequent review petition to the U. S. Court of Appeals (JTPA See. 111- CITY COUNCIL NSETING INLAND EWEIRN WEST SDA DESIGNATION June 4, 1986 Page 2 The Inland Empire West SDI Application to date has gone through the follovi.g process: A. The Governor's Coordinating Council advised against approval. Inland Empire West SDA contention was based on federal law, which ZLIIgirms the governor to approve an SDA which *ones a "substantial part" of a labor market area. The Council ignore4 that provision, asking their recvmamndstioo based on their concern over the serious management problems to the County's progress. B. The Governor agreed with the Coordinating Council's advice, however on different grounds. gls staff acknowledged that the "substantial part" issue was the determining factor, thou claimed that the five Inland Empire West cities do not serve a substantial part of this labor market. C. The D. S. Secretary of Labor refused to overturn the Governor, but once agaiu with a different reason. Eia decision acknowledged that the Inland Empire West SDA serves a "substantial part" of the labor market, but claimed that the Coveraor bad to decide between two applications to serve the sue area (from the Inland Expire West cities and from the County) and therefore properly exercised his discretion. The Secretary's justification is highly questionable for four reasons: 1. that was not the Governor's reasoning, and nothing in the record indicates that the Governor chose between two applications; 2. the County in fact bad no application in front of the State Council or the Goveran when their 4eeisions were made; 3. the secretary's reasoning givao to every existing SIA a veto power over any new SDA application, contrary to federal law; and 4. even if the Governor had been faced with two applications, they would not have been =rosily exclusive; i.e., be could boom approved both the new five -city SDA Aid the ezistiog County SDA for the balance of the County, Such approval is reanlrod if the respective SDA's serve a "substantial part" of their labor market areas which the Secretary deterained these do. The decision to be made at this time is whether to allow the Secretary's final determination to stand or to file a "review petition" in the U. S. Court of Appeals as provided in JTEA See. 168. //b CITY cnubut. MESTIlC IbLMD EMPIRE VEST SDA DMICRATI00 June A, 1956 Page 3 A. Timing of an Appeal A "review petition" most be filed in early June (within 30 days of the Secretary'• final order). The Secretary of Labor suet then 'file tbo record upon which his final order was eatered," and the hearing on the petition is to be beard "axpeditiously, if possible within ten days of the filing of a reply brief." Given these deadlines and past experience, it is realistic to expect a decision from the Court of Appeals within 90 -120 days of filing. E. Considerations Program Performance The efficiency of the Vest valley program bag consistently erceeded that of the County prvgram. Rwever, the Vest valley is part of the County SDA, that performance is "rolled up" into County statistics and not credited back to the Vest valley. As a separate SDA, the Vest valley vould be responsible for their performance and will be credited accordingly. 2. Program Design The Vest valley program is deal2ned to met the needs of each client on an individual basis, such that training contracts are written individually. The County program writeu bulk contracts with training agencies and then tries to find clients to fill opac slots. That philosophic difference has caused disagreements betvaen County and Vest valley programs which should be resolved. If the Vest valley remains per: of the County SDA, It is unlikely that the program design in this area (which leads to better performance) will be allowed by the County to remain intact; i.e., "centralisation" seems to be a current County priority. 3. Funding The JTPA system provides financial incentives for good performance by its administrative entities. The Vest valley's performance results would bore entitled the five -city area to a 9150,000 bonus last year as a separate SDA. As part of the such larger County SDA, which bad performance well balm "stage despite the positive effect of vest Valley results, the Vest valley received to bonus money at all. Also, the County program takes more than one- fourth of Lhe available administrative money "off -t]e -top" before the Vest valley receives its regular allocation. As a separate SDA both the bonus and the full amount of administrative fonds will come ditto tly to the Vast Valley from the State. CITY COUBCIL S'EETDIG INLAND MINE WEST SD► DESIGNATION June 4, 19M Page 4 4. Liability Under its contract with the County, the City of Ontario is presently liable for aisespeaditurea of JTPA funds within its Welt Valley program. The basic theory of JTPA is that authority and liability follow the funds. That situation will not change as a separate SPA; i.e., the JTPA Grace Recipient and Administrative Entity will continue to be liable. The only way to avoid liability is to "aid involvement or, as the West Valley program bee done, run a "clean" financial operation. S. Relations with the State Although some concern has been expressed that a victory on appeal will cause difficult relations vita the State, the fact is that State staff originally recommended that the Inland Empire West SVA be apprv,ed, and bola already been reviewing the Inland Empire West SPA's 2-year plan. Relations with the State are ezcellant. built m mutual respect and unaffected by the continuation of our appeal through the entire process. The State staff have been as cooperative as possible within the contest of the He status as a part of the County SPA. Relations with the County The probaea in the contractor - subcontractor relationship between the County and Ontario were a major consideration in the initial decision to pursue SPA dociguation. Theca problem include the County's long standiag desire to "centralise" JTPA program administration in San Bernardino versus the West Valley cities' desire for local accountability; the unavoidabla competition between County and West Valley programs regarding performance and efficiency. The County's increas+ g,y verbalized solution to these problems is to absorb the Peat Valley program into the County structure. The West Valley cities' solutirs is to join together in forming a separate SPA. But this action was taken only aft" several years of fruitlessly attempting to bring positive ccaage to the County's programs, and only at the urging of several West Valley business leaders who were members of the County's Private Industry Council and thus very knowledgeable about the County's programs. It is likely that a much better relationship can be established between the County add the West Valley as a separate SPA than a■ a subcontractor. Obviously, there will be no relationship to be concerned about if the West Valley program is absorbed by the County. //9 CUT COUNCIL MEETING INLAND SMPINE VEST SDA DMIGNAT'ION June ., 1956 Pave S Cost Attorneys we bave questioned regardieg BOA designation procedures been estimated a total cost of 910,000- 20,000 to prepare and process the appeal. That cost will be initially cbargeable to JTPA. Recover, if the appeal is lost the cost may be disallowed by federal auditors, in which cote it mast be paid by the participating cities. That, each of the five cities should authorize a maximum of 84000 to pursue the appeal, to be paid out) upuo the occurrence of hash contingencies (i.e., loss of the appeal sad disallowance by federal auditors). In comparison, the annual budget of the Inland Empire Vest SDA is expected to be about 81.5 million. PIC Race was ndation The Inland Empire Vest Private Industry Council, by vote sad telephone poll of members, wembelmiogly urged the cities to strongly pursue the final step in the SDA designation process, i.e., so appeal of the Secretary of Labor's decision. Of 19 PIC maeberse 15 approved this action, one opposed iq and three could oat be reached. C. Effect of Not Appealing If the Vest Valley Cities decide not to appeal the Secretary of Labor's final decision, the Inland Empire Vest SDA is a dead issue. It is difficult to predict the future thereafter, although several possibilities exists 1. Contin -ed funding of the Vest Valley JTPA program as at preseut3 the ineressicg sentiment at the County level to centralize the program in Can Bernardino makes this possibility lea likely{ the fact that the existing Vest Valley program is getting better results than the County program makes it more likely. Absorpt) on of the Vest Valley JTPA program by the Countyi the above factors dso apply to this optica, except inversely. In either case, Vest Valley residents will continue to have access to JTPA- funded tarvices, although the types of services, their quality, and the level of local accountability will be likely to change. It may also be possible for the Vest 9ailee cities to re -apply to the Sate for SDA designation out year. But the application would be reviewed by the ease parties that recommended against the existing SDA application. The level of interest of the cities which are participating in this application also say not be sustained sufficiently to initiate the process once again. CITY COUNCIL MINXDIC INLAND EM4IRR VRRT RDA DISIGNiTION June 4. 1986 Fag* 6 RUMMMDAUM It in recommended the City Council approve the attached resolution vhich supports the Inland Empire Vest cities' {areuio of the final step in the 8DA deaigoatiOn process. Moreover, the creation of a nev NDA is the only nailahle method to ensure quality training and placement services for Vest Valley residents in the lorg term. Respectfully submitted. Robert' E Assistant Manager RAR/kep / c*=)0 RESOLUTION 20. 34 /W S A RASMOTION Or TER CITY COCECIL Or THE CITY OF IMCNO CDCAMPGA, CALIFO1rA. AOT OMIM PARTICIPATION 11 Y APPEAL Of TRZ LABOR SiCKETAWS DECISION To D®T SmICZ DEMERT AREA DISICEATION To Tic MAID EMpin WEST CIT13S EMUS. the lalad Ropire West cities of Chino. Eoutelair, Ontario. Rancho C"Mmega, and Wpind previowell indicated their intent to fora a eo,,oa Service Delivery Area (SDA) to preside job training and plument aerwices to their disadvantaged residents; ad WIMUS. the California Tautly Economic Security Act (rM) and the federal Job Training Psrtuetsbip Act (JaA) authorise fornrrioa of saeh a Service Delivery Area; and WRCRSA4, the five ralad ZsFire West cities have established a Partnership with their appointed Private industry Council and subuitted a two -year ]TPA plan to the Caveraor L accordance with State and federal law; and WR FAN. the Island MEN TO West cities serve a avbstauLfal par_ of s labor a Aet area such that FaAaral lav mandates appro►al of the as SDa; ad WEEREAO. the Secretary of Labor has issued a final deteradeatioo denying SDA designation to ibp lots" reptra West titles; aa/ MiAXUS, Federal law Fresidaa far review al t.e Labor Seerstary's decision by the W.S. Court of appeals. sal, TEERAFORE. gi IT EKOLfAD that the City of Eaggbo Csea.00sa authatises Psrtlelpation in We Appeal of th Leber Eecretarr'A /st,a�+ilpn, to be purses] vitboet delay by the City Attorney of jj! C11y of ran ts cho oaaggia; and AR It 011rER RISOLTED that the City of Raatho Cicasonga will pay its proportional absia of {Past costs lacwrreb In Canaeetlea with th N ppill, up to a &A:fawR v£ {A00. s Of ep out Ail aaah coats are not 0iiiaa�L4 to tia Job It.luiss partnership get fnade raealaad by its CI b of Ontario. PASIP. APPEOpRD. and ADGPM thin a day of *. 14*. ills, son, ARSMItt /d/ Jeffrey Zing. Rotor I'-lb CITY OF RANCHO CUCAbIONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 4, 1986 T0: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Linda Beek, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: Approval of Map, Improvement Agreement and Improvement Security for Tract located an the by southwst corner of ighland and Cemyany Tract 13027 was approved by the Planning CommiSSion on December 11, 1985, for the division of 45.5 acres into 757 lots In the Victoria Planned Community Development District, located on the southwest corner of Etlwanda and Highland Avenues. The Developer, i�nsoao. f-nI agreement secuy taranteethecotructinf the ofsitemprovemenin the following amounts: Faithful Performance Bond: $932,000 Labor and Material Bond: $466,000 Letters of approval have been received from the high school and elementary school districts and Cucamonga County Water Oistrict. RECC40O MT10H It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving Tract 13207, acceptino said agreement and security and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign said agreement and to cause said map to record. Resp5gtfulty su LBF►.L s Attachments 3ei/iSGd CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR TRACT 13027 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That this agreement is made and entered into, in conformance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California, and of the applicable Ordinances of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, a municipal corporation, by and between seid City, hereinafter referred to as the City, and The William Lyon Company hereinafter referred to as the Developer. WITNESSETH: THAT. WHEREAS, said Developer desires to develnp certain real property to said City as shown on the conditionally approved subdivision known as Tract 13027; and WHEREAS, said City has established certain requirements to be met by said Day elopsr as pre•equisite to approval of said subdivision generally located on the southwest corner of Highland and Etiwanda Avenues. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by said City and by said Developer as follows: 1. The Developer hereby agrees to construct at Developer's expense all improvements described on Page 6 here- of within twelve months from the effective date hereof. 2. This agreement shall be effective on the date of the resolution of the Council of said City approving this agreement. This agreement shall be in default on the day follow- ing the first anniversary date of said approval unless an exten- sion of time has been granted by said City as hereinafter provid- ed. 3. The Developer may request an extension of time to complete the terms hereof. Such request shall be submitted to the City in writing not less than 30 days before the expiration date hereof, and shall contain a statement of circumstances necessitating the extension of time. The City shall have the right to review the provisions of this agreement, including the ccnstructien standards, cost estimate, and improvement security, and to require adjustments therein if any substantial change has occurred during the term hereof. 4. If the Developer fails or neglects to comply with the provisions of this agreement, the City shall have the right at any time to cause said provisions to be met by any lawful -I- /a3 means, and thereupon recover from the Developer and /or his surety the full cost and expense incurred. S. The Developer shall provide metered water service to*- each lot of said development in accordance with the regulations, schedules, and fees of the Cucamonga County Water District. 6. The Developer shall be responsible for replacement, relocation, or removal of any component of any irrigation water system in conflict with construction of required improvements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the owner of such water system. 7. Improvements required to be constructed shall conform to the Standard Drawings and Standard Specifications of the City, and to the Improvement Plan approved by and on file in the office of the City Engineer. Said improvements are tabulated on the Construction and Bond Estimate, hereby incorporated on page 6 hereof, as taken from the improvement plans listed thereon by number The Developer shall also be responsible for construc- tion of any transitions or other incidental work beyond the tract boundaries as needed for safety and proper surface drainage Errors or ommissions discovered during constructin shall be corrected upon the direction of the City Engineer. Revised work due to said plan modifications shall be covered by the pr•,visions of this agreement and secured by the surety covering the original planned works. S. Construction permits shall be obtained by the Developer from the office of the City Engineer prior to start of work; all regulations listed thereon shall be observed, with attention given to safety procedures, control of dust, noise, or other nuisance to the area, and to proper notification of public utilities and City Departments Failure to comply with this section shall be subject to the penalties provided therefor. 9. The Developer shall be responsible for removal of all loose rocks and other debris from public rights -of -way within or adjoining said development resulting from work relative to said development. 10. Work done within existing streets shall be diligently pursued to completion; the City shall have the right to complate any and all work in the event of unjustified delay in comoletion, and to recover all cost end expense incurred from the Developer and /or his contractor by any lawful means. 11 Said Developer shall at all times following dedica- tion of the streets and easements in said subidivision, up to the completion and acceptance of said work or improvement by said City Council, give good and adequate warning to the traveling public of each and every dangerous condition existent in said street or easement, and will protect the traveling public from such defective or dangerous conditions. -z- /v; Until the completion of all improvements, herein incorporated on improvements shallrberu dery the charged of t saidsDeveloperQLeSaia' Developer may close all or a portion of any street subject to the conditions contained in a temporary street closure permit, issued by the City Engineer, whenever it is necessary to protect the public during the construction of the improvements herein agreed to be made. 12. Parkway trees required to be planted shall be and planted cleanu the Developer phasbeencompleted. Planting work, done ias provided by Ordinance in accordance with the planting diagram approved by the City Community Development Director. The 0eveloper shall be responsible for maintaining all trees Plante in good health until the end of the guaranteed maintenance period, or for one year after planting, whichever is later. 13. The Developer is responsible for meeting all condi- tions established by the City pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, City Ordiances, and this agreement for the development, and for the maintenance of all improvements constructed thereunder until the improvement is accepted for maintenance by the City, and no improvement security provided hereinwith shall be released before such acceptance unless other wise provided and authorized by the City Council of the City. 14. This agreement shall not terminate until the maintenance guarantee security !•ereioafter described has been released by the City, or until a new agreement together with the required improvement security has been submitted to the City by a successor to the herein named, and by resolution of the City Council same has been accepted, and t^ agreement and the Improvement security therefor has been released. The Develop erlwith thisiagreementtshall to rconsist of thenfollowl g and shall be in a form acceptable by the City Attorney: A. To secure faithful performance of this agreement. 1. A bond or bonds by one or more duly authorized . orporate sureties in the form and content specified by Government Code Section 66499.1. 2. An Improvement Security Instrument in the form and content specified by the City Attorney. 3. A deposit with the City of money or negotiable bonds of the kind approved for securing deposits of public monies. B. To secure laborers and materialmen: 1. A bond or bonds by one or more duly authorized corporate sureties in the form and content specified by Government Code Section 66499.2. -3- it 2. An Improvement Security instrument in the form and content specified by the City Attorney. 3. A deposit with City of money or negotiable - bonds of the kind approved for securing C. A cash deposit with the City to guarantee payment by the certificate appears the uponn engineer surveyor for whose the setting of all boundary, lot corner, and street centerline monuments and for furnishing centerline tie notes to the City. The amount of the deposit may be any amount certified by the engineer or surveyor as acceptable payment in full; or, if no value is submitted, the cash bond shall be as shown on the Construction and Bond Estimate contained herein Said cash deposit may be refunded as soon as proce- dure permits after receipt by the City of the centerline tie notes and written assurance of payment in full from the engineer or surveyor. a. The required bonds and the princip.l amounts thereof are set forth on page 6 of this agreement. 16. The Developer warrants that the improvements described in this agreement shall be free from defects in materials and workmanship. Any and all portions of the improve- ments found to be aefective within one (1) year following the data on which the improvements are accepted by the City shall be repaired or replaced by Developer free of all charges to the City. The Developer hall furnish a maintenance guarantee security in a sum equal to ten percent (10%) of the construction estimate or $200.10, whichever Is greater, to secure the faithful performance of Developer's obligations as described in this para- graph. The maintenance guarantee security shall also secure the faithful performance by the Developer of any obligation of the Developer to do specified work with respect to any parkw(y maintenance assessment district. Once the improvements have been accepted and a maintenance guarantee security has been accepted by the City, the other improvement security described in this agreement may be released provided that such release is otherwise authorized by the Subdivision Map Act and any applicable City Ordinance. 17. That the Developer shall take out and maintain such public liability and property damage insurance as shall protect him and any contractor or subcontractor performing work covered by this agreement from claims for property damages which may arise because of the nature of the work or from operations under this agreement, whether such operations be by himself or by any contractor or subcontractor, or anyone directly or indirectly employed by said persons, even though such damages be not caused -4- /a� by the negligence of the Developer or ar contractor or subcontractor or anyone employed by said persons. The public liability and property damage Insurance shall list the City as additonal insured and directly protect the City, its officers, agents and employees, as well as the Developer, his contractors and hii subcontractors, and all Insurance policies issued hereunder shall so state. The minimum amounts of such insurance shall be as follows: Contractor's liability insurance providing bodily injury or death liability limits of nit less than $500,000 for each person and $1,000,000 for each accident or occurrence, and property damage liabil- ity limits of not less than $250,000 for each acci- dent or occurrence with an aggregate limit of $500,000 for claims which may arise from the opera- tions of the Developer in the performance of the work herein provided. A.tomobile liability insurance covering all vehicles used in the performance of this agreement providing bodily injury liability limits of not les• than $500,000 for each person and $1,000,000 for a -h accident or occurrence, and property damage liability limits of not less than $250,000 for each accident or occurrence, with an aggregate of not less than $500,000 which may arise from the operations of the Developer or his Contractor in performing the work provided for herein. 18. Developer shall filebwith the eCity catcertift ate or r9certificates of insurance covering the specified insurance. Each such certificate shall bear an endorsement precluding the cancellations, or reduction in coverage of any policy evidences by such certificate, before the expiration of thirty (30) days after the City shall have received notification by registered mail from the insurance carrier. As evidence of understanding the provisions contained herein, and of intent to comply with same, the Subdivider has submitted the following described improvement security, and has affixed his signature hereto: -5- FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE Type: Pr1rripal Amount: $932,000 !Jame -,nd address of surety: MATERIAL AND LABOR PAYMENT Type: Principal Amount: $466,000 Name and address of surety: CASH DEPOSIT MONUMENTATION Type: Principal Amount: $9050.00 Name and address of surety: MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE Type: Principal Amount: HA Home and address of surety: TO BE POSTED PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE BY THE CITY IN WITNESS HEREOF, the partV,ds hereto/have caused these presents to be duly executed �hd ackn w 9?Cewith all formalities required by law on the dates setjr* h p b'S1te their signatures, 11 -� r6i Date may a. 19e6 _[ by // !O / /r /D� / �/�jA -Devel o er =-- �Alkb�bl �+� P -- Jevxe P.(aeLley. Vtee- Preitde t tel Date May a. 1996 by _ g�VQ—' Deve loper Steven Ford, Aeetstant Secrete Accepted: m e City of Rancho Cucamonga, a municipal corporation By: Attest: Approted: Mayor City Clerk City Attorney DEVELOPER'S SIGNATURE MUST BE NOTARIZED AND COMPLETED IN TRIPLICATE /J-8 SUBDIVISION GUARANTEE NO PERFmwME (SETTING OF FINAL MOWWWs) City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga P. 0. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Gentlemen: Pursuant to Chapter 4, Article 9, Section 66491 of the Government Code, the undersigned hereby agrees that all monuments shown on the final map of Tract 13027 are to be set and furnished by the subdivider's engineer or surveyor on or before , as specified in the Engireer's or Surveyors er ca a an agrees o urn sh the notes thereon to complete all engineering requirements specified in Section 66497, of the Government Code. The undersigned hanus you herewith the sum of S9os0.00 (Receipt No.jfLZS�) as a cash deposit, said deposit to guarantee that the monuments wiii�e set and the rotes furnished as above provided on Or before the date specified and that the engineer or surveyor will be paid by the undersigned. It is further understood and agreed that in the event the undersigned fails to complete the above requirements within the time specified, the City of Rancho Cucamonga is authorized to complete said requirements or cause them to be completed and the cost thereof is to be a charge against said cash deposit, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga is authorized to make the necessary transfer from said cash deposit to the credit for the proper city fund. It is further agreed that if the undersigned does not present evidence to the City Council that he has paid the engineer or surveyor for the setting of the final monuments, and if the engineer or surveyor gives the notices prescribed In Section 66497 of the Government Code, the City shall pay to said engineer or surveyor, the cash deposit herein made. If the cost Of Completing said requirements exceeds the amount of the cash deposit, the undersigned agrees to pay the difference within thirty (30) days after receiving written statement from the City of Rancho Cucamonga specifying the amount of the difference between the cash deposit and the actual cost of said requirements. Cordially, THE WILLIAM LYON COMPANY Subdivider 8540 Archibald Ava. Ste B Address Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Date _Nay 6, 1986 The depositer of record (for return of any portion of the cash deposit) shall be SAME AS ABOVE (Name) (Address) NOTE:. TO BE SUB ITFD FULLY FILLED Wr AND SIGNED IN TRIPLICATE 105 �I EaaEst CITY OF UNDO CIICHMIGA ENGINEERING DIVISION ENCNOAC7a1ENT PEPAIT FEE SCNEODLE ?D �qeI�R Ha e o writingptraltlorl P +resent depasltscr QUANTITY Unit ITEM PRICE AMOUNT F. L.F P.C.C. Curb -8 • C.F.A6• gutter 10.00 a o . •fY it L.F p.C.C. curb -4' C.F. 24• gutter 5.00 1.1 ��' L.F L.F. P.C.C. Curb only IV R.ek Cu.b 3.50 I' DO a n� S.F. 4• P.C.C. sidevalk 2.50 A lgmlo S.F. S.F. Drive aoo•oaa 6• F.C.C. cross gutter (Inc. Curb) 3.40 21026 21026 GIA4 C.T. Street excavation . 1.50 _ L.T. S.F. Cavorted eflantrent Crushed lag of so olper IMA tblckl(5•) agg. bate 0.15 0.07 AS.11i S.F Crushed n,er A.C. aver 1]00 tons) 27.50 TOS SE A.C. 900 to 1700 tonal A.C. q �3- & 0.49 3.E A.C. )tlq'tMl.l NI¢I." thick) 0.55 115U.4. S.F. S.F. A.C. Patch F.C. (trench) 1.7S srrrt Q�yoSa S.F U. I• thick A.C. arerlay Adjust sewer amhole to grade MO 250.00 lsle.- 'I 002 _�_ II U. Adjust ever Clean out to grade Street rater valve f to grade 1SO.00 1s0 -';- .- atER. �•_ U. L.F. Street lights Barricades $350 dn) 1000.00 1'ib -� -'� L.F. hold" redwood hold" 2 A e• fof O.7S 77 S.F. A.C. t Rmval of A.C.. 7.50 11 L.F. L.F. Curb RkCpval of P.C.C. Mb of ,tx4. Curb �� U. Strces signs Street v LntLl Pele 0.00 20•� 2050. 1002 U, L.F. Concrete to block nit S.F. RatsnL Mtefnlr wall 20.00 32.00 -_r L.F. L.. 21,Rt 10 o•O) T7' AC 100 L.P. C 18• RCP 2000 C 29.00 In 70A L.i L.F. 4• PCP 1500 D 36• RCP 2000 0 75 49.00 3qQ L.F. U. 33' RCP ITSO'D Cat -% basin w • 4' 20ODDT.00 U. Latch basin IF •'I', M 3500 7500,50 ,0592 Scot IA. U. Catch basin IF • 10 Locel depression . EA. U. Loral m structure 12' 7ancatm iure 1000,00 5500.07 ,0909 U. rust Outlet structufe. Std 1506 1500.00 J� EAR Outlet strv:tere, Std f507 600.00 1_ 34'C.]C'A' t 30of.w • EA U. L.F Ma.i..lc �{ Saxkt 5D0 50 U. + 7l•antr f,aw $ {r +a u•C 5000.W .,n L.F da ar ,e; i LYi19• {lax 12.75 2.0 - 5212 721 s.F. L.A. Ra....va Ksw TS.oD L.F. .V:•p E+ v4'R<P ENGINEERING INSFEETIoN FEE �.7PO5' SUB TOTAL 4 (WM •R[STOAAtION/OELIMUTION CASH .IOC coNTIMuUCy COSTS n9 ' DEPOSIT (RERRIOAELf) fAITNRI. PENFORNAACE LABW Alm INTEAIAL 1010 (100%) 1010 (SOY) HONINENTATION SIRETT `fASN) 4� anuatro to CodeaIi let, Chip an l.;. pa uCM restorat WNailmticis depputt�shLall be aace Friar to issuance of an Engineering Construction Jeratt. w�. . Revised 718E Nom`s 1,36 I TRACT NO. 13027 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENGINEERING DIVISION PROJECT TITLE: TRAcT ion EXHIBIT: "A" A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFOP.NIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT SECURITY, AND QHAL MAP OF TRACT NO. 13027 WHEREAS, the Tentative Map of Tract No. 13027, ccnsisting of 157 lots, submitted by The William L,on Company, Subdivider. located on the southwest earner of Etiwanda and Highland Avenues, has been submitted t� the City of Rancho Cucamonga by said Subdivider and approved by said City as provided in the Subdivisicn Map Act of the State of Califonia, and in compliance with the requirements of Ordinance No. 28 of said City; and WHEREAS, to meet the requirements established as prerequisite to approval of the Final Map of said Tract said Subdivider has offered the Improvement Agreement submitted herewith for approval and execution by said City, together with good and sufficient Improvement Security, and submits for approval said Final Map offering for dedication for public use the streets aelineated theraoa. NON, THEREFORE, BE Rancho Cucamonga, California, That said Improvement Agreement be and the sama is appreved and the Mayor is authorized to execute sane an behalf of said City and the City Clerk is authorized to attest thereto; and That Sala Improvement Security is accepted as good and sufficient, subject to approval as to fore and content thereof by the City attorney; and That the offers for dedication and the Final Map delineating ware be approved and the City Clerk is authorized to execute the certificate thereon on behalf of said City. 0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 4, 1986 el r6l � TO: City Council and City Manager �— FROM: ;loyd B. Hubbs., City Engineer BY: /bnte Prescher, Public Works Engineer SUBJECT: R,tcommendation to Award Contract for the Improvement of Lemon Avenue from Archibald Ave. to Hnrmasa l.ve. and Archibald Avenue from Lion Ave. to Banyan Street to the Apparent Low Bidder, Laird Construction Co., inc., for the Bid Amount of $691.980.11 Per previous Council act101'. the subject project has been advertised, and bids have been nicelved and opened as advertised. The three bids received were rev tend by Staff and Pound to be xaplete in accordance with the 'Instructions to Bidders -. The amoun apparent fi651,980111e(see attachednbidusuumcary).. The�Engineersbestimate was $650,000. RECOMMEM0AI NK: It is recommended that City Council accept all bids received and award the subject contract to the lowest responsibIle bidder, Laird Construction Co., Inc. for the bid amount of $651,980.1I. Res �ctTully Abn d G LBH:►IP:bc Attachments 133 I 1 ", el.< .fit 4 p U x y O H t O W_ W JN 6 N 6 O C. > h O O N O O n O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 C H O N N O O O O t0 m N O N N O O O O O O O '. • • N O O N P N" O O N O P O P P O O N 11t M N M N N n O 10 Q P O O N N N N P O P .7 .-. •� •... N N 1.1 r• t•t (•� (rt o C N N .• N V •-. N n P Q P •O � N O •-. .a .r t� N N L N N N .,• A � O N y T S a • O N 0 0 0 • O O O O O O O O O C • N O 1.1 to Q y m J� t•'1 O P 0 J P •. N !7 m N O N Q N J N Q N ttl � P [7 Oi N Q W ti � O O U N 'J O n O f•1 y O O N b 0 0 0 J. 0p O O O O O n O O N N N O O N N Q O Q O t•t O O N !� U • • Q N N OJ O (O O W It C 9 N N n .-. N •+ Q 00 Ot N O .-. P N � .ti .-. N .-. .-• A � >. N C L • 0 0 0 0 0 • O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • N O A d N N O N O m > O y � O J� O Q •� O J O r. N O O O eT O N O J ^• w. N m N n b O W N Q N C a c a9 d J C 4 H yr• O N N O .ft 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p O N N t0 N O O 10 tp •� O N N O O m O C O p n D O Y K i O• i • N m P .D 0 N N .•1 P N O L A C Q CI th •} N N iD m < •-. N N N •y .r •y f7 1.1 6 L y v ` O • N N O N O • N n 0 0 0 O C 4 ^ O N O• t7 Q N O N •O N N O O N Ip(1 b O d A V O t•i P LO Q C d > N r H Q U U y V U n J N Vt Yt U U J J L; J J N r � a�� s e� yQ m e ^• ���� 9 0 .f � N N N N {•• J rO•. •QY M C M L S C Y C O P ! Y d N C^ M d L •• � Y O. 6 C d G L L � ! .• Y U O b W 0 � N Y L J =� • a o O. O Y Of 2 N d P . • L L p( m p= O N O 2 6t 6 G^ 9 C C N N�O Y D d pNe 17 A P y' l q u C O R K O y C C M M W •• O d L O q t C U O O N N O. G m Q N N U C O C3 C S N N O •W'J 4 O 9I .-t N 17 Q N t0 n Op P O .-. cj H Q N .O •� 4p P O L J j .-1 .-. .-t ti 't .-. .-. •-t N /3/ c� C O O p b O O O O O O O 1AN O � O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MP O Q 00 00 Q 61 n 0 0 0 ^J 2 • O Vl Ot'1 Om N O b m P N ` O O• O .r C 1p O O O O N O 061 O N 0 0 N M M V) M •O N O O n O tp 10 • W N N b N tp M Q b N • Q P n 'D Q tT m N UN N r• N r• .-• M M •"� ti N Y N Y n N M N u Y J N O N 0 0 0 0 q p P 10 N O O O O N N N M • b p ti Q Q O O O O _ N N •O 9 m Q N � N O4 � O m O J J J J b 10 m M tp yl J O N ••• O O 01 N ••n N O O O O O O J O O b O O Y N O O O O O O O O O O M O N O O O O N 0 0 0 N O m O O N N U O N N C O b n O 1p O b O O O O O N O O n b N Q O N p 'J O n b •Nn N 1.1 O Q 01 V M O b m N P n Q 9 N 10 O m m Q M M N O N Q •n•• "q •••• N O V � ti ^• .-• m � h 41 N 61 n P M M N j O n N O O O O O •/1 N N N • O •Vy p p O O O O N p O n N N N O n 1p � .O •-• O� a! O O J J J J N��N J O N N O O O Q •y N M .-1 C O 1"' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 It p O O •y N Z t•� O • O O O O O O O O P O n O p ypj yOj pNj ��� U O O b� n M O O O N N O O M O •..1 O • « a N • N 10 O 1p 1J ti Q n N N 61 N M 01 b m m n •-1 01 n N N N M N O n N 01 10 C M N O 10 ti •..• '• H b • • • V Q M P P N P u N Q N Ib•1 •Mi N •'y m n P N 1/t fp N N O O O m N m tV O O O N N N N • 'f p N A O • N N O n N N 10 N b J m N •-• N O N O J J J J •„1 N •`1 N ti 1p O O Q •-1 N M p g W LL {L C C U Y J 'J LL. U. {t. LL LL {Z LL tLL t• H N N f0- 16 W W W N w N w . . . u m m m m N m N N J N N N V1 N A H p b N P N �J O, n •„• J J J J J p1 m • n bQ tT n N rnt � n N ^ lV N N L C W A � N N O > > • y6� V N m V V CI N = O b Y W A L _C L O• C C u > L 1y m u c u a � •Y !? s A > e tT o+ o « •->. S ° = S /- C N p • N ~B N p u N Y M M O •p Y L _« W W W YI X X O 9 • N . • .�' � N oof qq ` W Q U 4 6 i 4 C f z F J 1''• GI U C K w K¢ m 6 6 G Q m 6• O L •1 N M 1 6) q 0 N M N, N_ M ' 1 C f O O O N N O O O O •• N g N O O O O O O O O O O O O O 2 O O O N .r O O O O M b rr m 0 0 0 0 0 p O O C O n 0 Y O •O N O n Q O O O Q N tJ •O b O O O O O O O U O O n N L S N O O m g p O N W 10 N m O O O O �f O O O N O W Q O G O W O N W •O N N •O Q N N � n W n O N Q O Q Q r0 n N m m n m .• ..• ^ W Q q n C Yl O g N b N w m b •ti O N m N ti U dl O O • y O O O O N N N N O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C O O O N • m O O O N 10 m W n O O O O O O O O O O O r• N Q J m N 0 0 m g m q O O O O N O O O O O N N rr v Q O O O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Y Q g 0 0 ref O O O N of n N W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C1 0 0 • O N O N N O n m O N O n W m N O O O O p O O O O O O m N C CS Q W O m Q N O Q m n •-r . O . 10 O . V. . .. . . n Q N •• � b m W O� O W�� m b N N n N d •• N 9 N L O O O • O N O O O O O O O O O O O O tl O O O O O O O d O O r7 O n O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O r m W m J O ti 0 0 0 n Vf N. n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 C N r-r O N N •O rp VJ tC yf O O O O O O O O e O m m O O 10 N O •O O O m rD N W W n m N N •• •V C = N O O N O O O O O v O W W O O O O G O O O O O N O O O O N O Q n O O O m n N m g O O O O O O N O O O» O •O O D U N Q b N 0 0 U 0 0 n O O q q •I N A •O •O n m g N tp N g q m Q O N O N m N N ul .. N U NO n Q •"'ry N •"r OW q� q� W� rO O W N Yi N .r m n •-r m N e °o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o e o 0 0 0 o e o 0 0 0 0 v O N N N • O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 4 O J n m O { W N H 1p O O W g W n n O ^ O O N O O N O O m j m m W •O YNf LO N N N ti w Q N N _W C LL C LL Y Y Y LL lL u. LL LL L .0 L l' L L L L L L LL L y O p g y W W H W O fr•• W m BB n q rp m Q 1p Q N Q {p W W W W W W W W ti q j Q N .• N .• N N• m rw •J m .W-r m Or n q N 0 °'r O N N � •m-• '1 0 0 0 0 0 r• u m d N N O O O O O O N O W •-• O • m WW OL O O O O O 0 Q m m N N •y • C M • r... V •y X 0 • • tl • tl • 0 L _uJ N � C Y r q • L H X IL Oql j -J T' • • V O - ^^ Y C M M O O d G m N N p It ' 6� 4� L 6 p 6 6 6 N N N N N N MO ]� U d 6' M L • N N O N M L M V d O a% L: .r.y .r.y �..• Y U d U L L d U 0 U '[ O 9 g b O Q W N q q 9 q y q q >> d C G W W U N w K t m m m N N U U V U U U 7 7 J Y W q 0 • N ..f Q N 10 n Oj q 0 • N M N H •'+ N N N '• N N_•-r_N N N N N N N N N N m f7 m m m m � H O O G 0 0 0 0 NN 00 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ••n n N wn L 8 •G N P� U O Y\ O O ^ O O G f P N O N iD P P 40p V O N O O N f N O O O O O O O N N �-• O g 0 0 0 0 p N m N O O p O� O p 0 ,•• mi C +a b f� N O 1� n•1 O U 1� .-• N b f0 1.1 v M 6 N t• O O O O • , W O 0 0 O O N N N ,-• rw iO• O b p O O C qp yp V L f� N N P N •r y •� N N � b C Yl O O O O O N N N L O O O O J J J M N N H H J V1 Y W K G t on h J J A A N b N W W 6 6 II 1O'• O N 21 O Y P ✓ C c w 0 y it N L C M O� S L O P P N Y V 1yy.1 L m L V U M S tOj t N N V~ P P •b J� N C U ••• G A A m (►�. U N 1. CD P O • N f•1 .•1 17 (•f f f f 9 DATE: T0: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT June 4, 1986 City Council and City Wager Lloyd B. Hobbs, City Enginear Linda Beek, Engineering Technician AG Approval of Improvement Extension Agreement and Improvement Securities for Tracts 11781 and 11625 located cn the northwest corner of 19th Street and Hermosa Avenue submitted by Roy E. Daly and Com?any Tracts 11781 and 11625 was approved by the City Council on February 7, 1985. The Developer, Ray E. Daly and Company, submitted an agreement and security to guarantee the construction of the off -site impro,,ements in the following amounts: Tract 11781 Tract 17.625 Faithful Performance Bond: $92,000 $425,300 Later and Material Bond: $46,000 212,650 At this time, the developer is requesting aaproval of a twelve month extension on said improvement agreement. REC"EHDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution accepting said extension agreement and security and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign said agreement. Res ectfully su tiled, LBH. Attachments 13 U 7` I Gil Y OF PROJLCT:_._ RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: ENGINEERING DIVISION EXHIBIT ..___ H N a InpExtAgmt ` CITY OF RAXL'HO CUCAMONGA •- IMPROIEMEHT EXTENSION AGREEMENT FOP Tract No. U781 _ KNOW ALL MEN By THESE PRESENTS That this agreement is made and entered into, In conformance with the provisions of the S.ibdlvisfon Map Act of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, C111fornia, a municipal corporation, by and between the said City, hereinafter ryrierred to a.¢ the City, and ltoy E. 731y Corporation Corp referred to as the Jeveloper. WITNESSETH: THAT, WHEREAS said Developer entered Into an Improvement agreement with the City as a requisite to issuance of buildings permits, and WHEREAS, said Developer desires a.n extension of time to complete tha terms of the said improvement agreement. NOW. THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by the City and ty said Developer as follows: 1. The Completion date of the ter*4s of the said improvement age -ement is hereby exte,.dnd by a period of 12 months from the date of City Council approval of sdid agreement. 2. Increase in improvement securities to reflect current improvement costs shall be furnished by the developer with this agreement and shall be approved by the City Attorney. 3. The required bond and the additional principal amounts thereof are set forth on the attached shee•. 4 All other terms and conditions of the said improvement agreemer shall remain the same. As evidence of understanding the provisions contained herein, and of intent to comply with same, the ^a•relc;.r has stbmltted the belay described improvement security, and has afflxrd his signature hereto: r 3/17/86 .fir To be posted prior to acceptance of the project by the-City. fffR:Mff ttf ffR444H R4ftfRRRMfff NfRH RfRNRfffl4 RRff Mfif RffRRR4fAHrffR4iftfR CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CALIFORNIA, a municipal corporation By- Jeffrey rey ng, ayor Attest eleverTy W. Autne et, City Clerk S':A"" OF !.AN.q1' 0111'M' OF JOCwON r I On Hay 13, 1986 be *ore mr, the vaden ,gned, a aotar; public in and for said state, p ^rtowlly appeared Roy B Daly, Jr. and Nary Ellen Daly, 1- .tonally lmavn to ml: to be the persors vbo ereu.ted the vithin instrument. Nitreas my hand and official scat. MARTHA 0. ROBERTS f'l. ��"— roumruJUC Notary obits rTalf Oi W Nitoi. NOTE: FORM MUST BE COMPLEIEO IN TRIPLICATE AND DEVELOPER'S SIGNATURE MUST BE NOTARIZED - /q/ 0 FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND Description: Additional Principal !mount: NA Surety: Address: MATERIAL ANO LABOR BOND Description: Additional Principal Amount:N /A Surety: Address: CASH DEPOSIT MONU ENTATION BOND Additional Cash Deposit: N/A MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BOND Principal Amount: N/A To be posted prior to acceptance of the project by the-City. fffR:Mff ttf ffR444H R4ftfRRRMfff NfRH RfRNRfffl4 RRff Mfif RffRRR4fAHrffR4iftfR CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CALIFORNIA, a municipal corporation By- Jeffrey rey ng, ayor Attest eleverTy W. Autne et, City Clerk S':A"" OF !.AN.q1' 0111'M' OF JOCwON r I On Hay 13, 1986 be *ore mr, the vaden ,gned, a aotar; public in and for said state, p ^rtowlly appeared Roy B Daly, Jr. and Nary Ellen Daly, 1- .tonally lmavn to ml: to be the persors vbo ereu.ted the vithin instrument. Nitreas my hand and official scat. MARTHA 0. ROBERTS f'l. ��"— roumruJUC Notary obits rTalf Oi W Nitoi. NOTE: FORM MUST BE COMPLEIEO IN TRIPLICATE AND DEVELOPER'S SIGNATURE MUST BE NOTARIZED - /q/ 0 ImpExtAgmt, GM OF RANCHO CUCAMORM 1MPROYERENF EIITDISION AGREEMENT FOl ------- EL ct . 11625 KNOW AU MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That this agreement is made and entered into, in conformance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map pet of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, a municipal corporation, by and between the sai City, hereinafter referred to as the City, and _y E. Daly Consttuetmon Corp.- referred to as the Developer. WITIIESSETH: THAT, WHEREAS said Developer entered into an improvement agreement Sich the City as a requisite to issuance of buildings permits, and WHEREAS, said Developer desires an extension of time to complete the terms of the said improvement agreement, NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by the City and by said Developer as follows: 1. The completion date of the terms of the said improvement agreement is hereby extended by a period of 12 months from the date of City Counril approval of said agreement, 2. Increase in improvement securities to reflect current improvement costs shall be furnished by the developer with this agreement and shall be approved by the City Attorney. 3. The required bond and the additional principal amounts thereof are set fortn on the attached sheet. a. All other terms and conditions of the said improvement agreement shall remain the same. As evidence of understanding the provisions contained herein, and of intent to comply with same, the Developer has submitted the below described improvement security, and ha- affixed his signature hereto: 3/17/86 j ,yy y Principal Amount: N/A To be posted prior to acceptance of the protect by the City. }tfMiMtt1'ttl,i4tHt}tr}tN l}t}tttt}tttt Rt}HftMt}tA }t}}.y}!4f}YY1}t *'KA d &ta f! CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CALIFORNIA, a municipal corporation By: —"Te( rely King, Mayor Attest: Beverly A. Aut a et, City ClerV STATE OF KANSAS COUNTY OF JOIRISON On May 12, 1986 before me, the undersigned. E notary public aedln and for said ly. personally knownp to me to be the person; who Nary executed t Daly, p Y rxncutnd the within inatnnceo[. UStneso =Y hand and official Seal. MARTHA 0. ROBERTS 1,/f�(jg�•�. ,kit..... NOT4 ur PUBLIC " Notary YUDLIC STATE OF KANSAS M/ Art Ov NOTE; FORM MUST BE COMPLETED IN TRIPLICATE AND DEVELOPER'S SIGNATURE MUST BE NOTARIZED N-3- FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND Cescription: Additional Principal Amount NA Surety: Aadress: MATERIAL W) LABOR BOND Description: Additional Principal Amount: NA Surety Address: CASH DEPOSIT MUNUNENTATIOM BOND Additional Cash Deposit: N/A NAINTEW,CE GUARANTEE BOND Principal Amount: N/A To be posted prior to acceptance of the protect by the City. }tfMiMtt1'ttl,i4tHt}tr}tN l}t}tttt}tttt Rt}HftMt}tA }t}}.y}!4f}YY1}t *'KA d &ta f! CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CALIFORNIA, a municipal corporation By: —"Te( rely King, Mayor Attest: Beverly A. Aut a et, City ClerV STATE OF KANSAS COUNTY OF JOIRISON On May 12, 1986 before me, the undersigned. E notary public aedln and for said ly. personally knownp to me to be the person; who Nary executed t Daly, p Y rxncutnd the within inatnnceo[. UStneso =Y hand and official Seal. MARTHA 0. ROBERTS 1,/f�(jg�•�. ,kit..... NOT4 ur PUBLIC " Notary YUDLIC STATE OF KANSAS M/ Art Ov NOTE; FORM MUST BE COMPLETED IN TRIPLICATE AND DEVELOPER'S SIGNATURE MUST BE NOTARIZED N-3- RESOLUTION NO. % - %(� 7 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, h, ROVING IMPROVEMENT EXTENSION AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR IRACTS 11781 AND 11622 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its consideration an improvement Extension Agreement executed on MAY 12, 1986, by Roy E. Daly and Company as developer, for the ieprovement of public right -of -way adjacent to the real property specifi ally described tnerein, and generally located on the northwest Corner of 19th Street and Hermosa Avenue; and WHEPrAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of said Tracts 11781 and 116Za; and HEREAS, said Improvement Extension Agreement is secured and accompar -d by good and sufficient Improvenent Security, which is identified in said mrovement Extension Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho . ucamonga, California, that said Improvement Extension Agreement and said Improvement Security be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Extension Agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Cleik to attest thereto. , i y I1 CITY OF 1W.CHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 4, 1986 T0: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Linda Beek, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: Approval of Pace: Map 9508 located on the northeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Seventh Street submitted by Roland and Naom+ Childs Parcel Map 9508 was approved by Planning roanission on November 13,1985, for 02 division of 2.26 acres of land into 2 parcels in the Indust 'al Specific "Plan Development District licated on the northeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Seventh Street. CC & R's have been approved by the City Attorney. Improvements ve to be constructed at the time of building permit issuance. RECD MDATION It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution approving Parcel Map 9508 and authorizing th,e City Clerk to cause sane to record. Attachments m � 4� PARCEL ti AP N0. 9508 B ! LA rwa. r uEL v u r+var,.un r .q.n W�wau. err rWr y _� L� � •: a. �rfi-41— � hl J r l— CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENGINEERING DIVISION PROJECT P. M 9508 TITLE: EXHIBIT; �4' RESOLUTION NO. & ^% (o 8 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCARINGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 9508 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 9508) WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 9508, subaitteA by Roland and Naomi Childs and consisting of 2 parcels, lecatec on the northeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Seventh Street, being a divisio,i of Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 7555 as shown on a map filed in Book 77, Pages 42 and 4.1 of Parcel Maps, records of said County, approved by the Planning C,maisstnn of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and WHEREAS, Parcel Map Number 9508 is the fin:' lap of the division of land approved as shown on said Tentative Parcel Hap; and . tilEAS, all of the requirements established as prerequisite to approval of t.,e final map by the City Council of said City 'iave now be &o met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Parcel Map Number 950,1 be and the same is hereby approved and the City Engineer is authorized to pre+ent same to the County Recorder to be filed for record. — ' 1 /v-7 CPiY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 4, 1986 - tm TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hobbs, City Engineer BY: Linda Beek, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: Acceptance of Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement from Fredrick Wade - for the property at 12999 Summit Avenue (APN 225 - 181 -64) The Subject property, 12999 Summit Avenue is located on the southwest corner of Summit and Emmett Avenues. The city does not require Emmett Avenue to be improved at this time. The developer, Fredrick Wade, submitted a Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement for the construction of the lmprovec-nts on Emmett Avenue. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution accepting the Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement and causing the same to record. respectfully su �tted, B Atta ents �y g RECORDING REQUESTED BY: WADE DEVELOPMENT CO and WHEN RECORDED NAIL .TO: 885 E. LEXINGTON AVE. CITY CLERK POMONA, CA 91766 CITY OF RANCHO CUCANONGA P. 0. Box 807 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91730 REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT COMTRAC_ T qMp �1E }I AGENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this --l&IL— day Df_ARRTT ---- ---- - 1986 between FREDRICK MADE by and (hereinafter referred to as "Developer•), and the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as •City•), provides as follows: WHEREAS, as a general condition precedent to the issuance of a building permit for 12999 ,a "It development the City requires the construction of missing off - site street improvements including one -half of the Rave r ad�acenthto "thetproperty to be developed; and y b" atttter, WHEREAS, the Developer desires to postpone construction Of such improvements until a later date, as determined by the City; and WHEREAS, the City is agreeable to such postponement provided that the Developer enters into this Agreement requiring �` the Developer to const -uct sJ d improvements, at -: expense to the City, after demand to do so by the City, which said Agreement shell also provide that the City may construct said improvements if the Developer fails or neglects to do so and that the City shall have a lien upon the real property hereinafter described as security for the Developer's performance, tad any repayment due City. NOW, THEREFORE. THE PARTIES AGREE: 1. The Developer hereby agrees thit be will install off -site street improvements including one -half of the Pavement, curb, nutter, street Ilghts and tees in accordance and compliance with all applicable ordinances resolutions, rules and regulations of the City in effect at the time of the installation. Said improvements snall be installed upon and along Em ctt yav not to exreed the centerline of said street or beyond the frontage of the subject property except as required to provide for adequate drainage and traffic transition per City Standards. 2. The installation of said improvements shall be completed no later than one (1) year following written notice to the Developer from the City to commence installation of the same. Installation of said improvements shall be at no expense i to the City. 2 s Fq'� 3. In the event the Developer shall fail ur refuse to complete the insta.1lation of said improvements in a timely manner, City may at any time 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 conpietion incurred by the City from the Developer. 4. To secure the performance by the Developer of the terms and conditions of this Agreement and to secure the repayment to City of any funds which may be expended by City in completing said improvements upon default by the Developer hereunder, the Developer does by these presents grant, bargain, sell and convey to the City, in trust, the following described real property situated In the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, to -wit: (legal description) 5. This conveyance is in trust for the purposes described above. 6. Now, therefore, if the Developer shall faithfully Perform all of the acts and things to be done under this Agreement, then this conveyance shall be void, otherwise, it shall remain in full force and effect and in all respects shall be considered and treated as a mortgage an the real property and the rights and obligations of the parties with respect thereto shall be governed by the provisions of the Civil Code of the 3 o Y'•i State Of California, and any o.her applicable statute, pertaining to mortgages On real property. 7. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the b:.nefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, successo's and assigns of each of the parties hereto. >. To the extent *equired to give effect of this Agreement as a mortgage, the term "Developer• shall be "mortgagor• and the City shall be the -mortgagee- as those terms are used in the the Civil Code of the State of California and any other statute pertaining to mortgages on real property. 9. If legal action is commenced to enforce any of the provisions of this Agreement, to recover any sum which the City is entitled to recover from the Developer hereunder or to foreclose the mortgage created hereby, then the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its costs and such reasonable attorneys fees as shall be awarded by the Court. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year first above written. CITY CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, a municipal corporation By: L rey ng Mayor ATTEST: ever y ut a et C1ty Clerk Asa° DEVELOPER x' y4r APPROVED AS TO FORM tY ttorney rfrrrf rftrfflf errff tsrerffrrtrrffff • :f rf rfxrf : »xfrf trfrxttrf riff STATE OF CALIFORNI4 ) COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO)) ss ' On me ,I9 ,before the un ersrgnee Notary uo c and BEVERLY A. AUTHELEi Dersona y „ppeare NG and City Clerk, respectivejsonally, known to me to be the Mayor CALIFORNIA, a municipal coroor tionhe CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAe Person., who executed the within instrument known on to behalf to be esaid municipal corporation, and acknowledged to me that such municipal corporation executed it WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SZAL. Notary gnature STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF .CSAN &ERR*AA�gQ -U 1 ss On this t me, q the before l —i P-oved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be tho personivy whose •amew within instrument and acknowleged that subscribed to th0 WITNESS MY HANG AND OFFICIAL SEAL. executed it. otary gnature .� am NDY r+zmu pN a �rtYJ NOTE: WHEN DOCUMENT IS EXECUTED BY A CORPORATION OR PARTNERSHIP, THE ABOVE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. A CORPORATION /PARTW �UIILMENT IS REQUIRED. MUST BE COMPLETED IN TRIPLICATE. /5-j 5 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM FREDRICK WADE AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted Ordinance No. 58 on Febrtary 21, 1979, to establish requirements for construction of public improvements in conjunction with buildirg permit issuance; and WHEREAS, installation of curb, gutter, sidewalk and pavement established as prerequisite to issuance of building permit for 12999 Summit Avenue (APN 225 - 181 -64) has been met by entry into a Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agrerment by Fredrick Wade. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California does accept said Real Property improvement Contract and Lien Agreement, authorizes the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign same, and directs the City Clerk to record same in the Office of the County Recorder of San Bernardino County, California. /S� 1, Y CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT BATE: dune 4, 1986 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. llubbs, City Engineer BY: Lida Beek, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: AELE1SE OF CASH DEPOSIT FOR SETTING FINAL MONUMENTS FOR 'TRACT 12090 The engineer for Tract 12090 has verified pay -.vent of his fees for setting monuments and markers. Ties have been received by the City. The developer, USA Properties Fund, Ltd., is requesting release of $7,600.00 deposited on April 23, 1983, Receipt No. 19796. REC— fEN0ATI0N: It is recommended that the City Council approved the reb ase or cas eposit. qRel ctfully su tted .: Attachments /5S w ®A,:I ['4A ^c April 29, 1986 Beverly 1lailsy City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Baseline Road Ranch,5 Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 RE: Traci 12090 Dear Bev: Ksc /6 ?SC 4-zs —s� This letter is to request a release of the $7,600 cash deposit paid by USA Properties as Guarantee of Performance for Setting of Final Monuments. This deposit was paid on or around April 20, 1983, on USA's check 85446. A letter from Warner Younis of Psomas Engineering should have been aent to your office previously. If not, please contact me at orrr Diamond Bar office. very truly yours, USA PROPERTIES FUND, INC. Patti Peterson Director of Market Services PP /jk Devebpment DM.sxm 706 N. Diamond 88r Blvd., Diamond Bu Cal-fomia 91765 (714) 595-WM Headquarters: 1801 Witshlro Boulevard, Swte A. PO. Box 2165, Santa Monica. Call1 ria 90006 (213) 4533311 _ .e CITY OF RAR 30 CUQkMr,::GA STAFI REPORT DATE: June 4, 1986 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Vartan Vartanians, Associate Civil Engineer 'u SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF REIMBURSEMENT ASREEMENT FOR IMPROVEMENT OF HERMOSA AVENUE IN CONJUNCTION WITH TRACTS N0. 11625 AND 11781, LOCATED BETWEEN 19TH STREET AND HIGHLAND AVENUE Attached for City Council approval is a Reimbursement Agreement with Ray E. Daly Company, the developer of tFC subject tracts, for the costs incurred in the construction of the street iwrevements easterly of centerline of Hermosa Avenue between the limits of the subject tracts. The above work is beyond the off -site street improvement requirements for said tracts, but necessary for the safety of the traveling traffic. The costs have been reviewed and verified by the Engineering staff. Funds in the amount of $17,373.20 are to be drawn from the Systems Development Fund. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City Council approve the Reirbbursement greem7 ment forfor the steet improvements easterly of the centerline of Hermosa Avenue between the limits of Tracts No. 11625 and 11781, and authorize release of funds :n the amount of $17,373.20 from the Systems Development Fund. Resppgtfuily subinit,Vd. M A AGREEMENT FOR HERMOSA AVENJE IMPROVEMENTS IN CONJUNCTION WITH PACTS 11625 and 11781 This Agreement is made and entered into this 8th day of May, 1986 by and between Roy E. Daly and Company, a Kansas general partnership, hereinafter referred to as Developer; and THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as City. RECITALS WHEREAS, the City and Developer desire to mutually particirate in construction of street improvements of a portion of Hemaosa Avenue between 19th Street and Highland Avenue; and WHEREAS, the Developer has expressed its willingness to include said construction with the required improvements for Tracts 11625 and 11781. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS [.GREED AS FOLLOYS; 1. The Developer shall contract for the construction of the street improvements of a portion of Hermosa Avenue between 19th Street and Highland Avenue, said improvements as further described in City of Rancho Cucamonga Drawings No. 726 and 996. 2. The City agrees to contribute toward the cost of improvementr of Hermosa Avenue fruv Station 29+40.63 to Station 39 +64 54 easterly of centerline of Hermosa Avenu: as shown on said Drawings No. 726 and 896 in the quantities described in the a.ttazhed Exhibit °A°. Total amount being a lump Stan of $17,373.20. 3. The City agrees to pay funds to the Developer in the amount of said share following completion and acceptance of above improvements by the City. 4. Each party shall indemnify the other parties and its officers, agents, and employees against and hold them free and harmless of and from all claims and liabilities of any kind arising out of, in connection with, or resulting from, acts of omissions on its part or on the part of its officers, agents, contractors, and employees in connection with the construction. S. This Agreement may only be changed with the mutual consent of the parties in the form of written contract amendnents. /5-8 5, This Agreement and the terms and conditions contained herein are all subject to a successful completion of construction of improvements. IN FITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as the date first above written. CITY OF RANCH CUCAMONGA, a minicipal corporation by ng, ayor e rey ATTEST: every ut a et, ty .. er APPROVED AS TO FORM: y t orney Roy E. Daly and Company. a Kansas General Partnership /� r EXHIBIT •A• Remove 13,122 sq. ft. of AC pwt @ 40i /SF 55,248.80 Construct 6,292 sq. ft. of 3" AC /4" A9 0 950/SF 5,977.40 Construct 6,830 sq. ft, of 60 AC pvmt @ 90E /SF 6.147.00 TOTAL $17,373.20 `.M `VIO GpUNTY SNERIFp. SOf� = ro� phi Z. -D d, rd r.+ i wr Sgfw, K May 12, x986 Mr Lauren Was-erman, City Manager City of Rancho Cucamonga Piet Ofticq Box 907 raacbo Cucamonga, California 91730 Dear Mr Wasserman Floyd TWwe0 sanUJ Enclosed is the proposed ilecal year 1986 -97 addendum to the Law Enforcement service contract between the City of Rancho Cucaponga and the County of San Bernurdino. Please have the original and five (51 copies of the attached contract signed by the City representative and return all copies to the Sheriff's Bureau rf AdmlDistratlou After a"roval by the Board of Supervisors, an executed copy will be forwarded to you n' DJ aem Enclosures -6 Sincerely', FLOYDDUT�IDDWELLL ",�, S9ERIPy By Br /" uce Jaokeon� —_ Bureau of Administration t ( -I/ Pmt 0f ka Box 569. Sa i 9: ,dtno. CA 9ZQ3 OCOUNTY CF SAN BEMARDINO STANDARD CONTRACT cw py,nrnl — CONTR.CTNY4eER SHERIFF 83 -319 Al ry ppr,mmt Conuxt PNa.rnta�w 10.1. FV)'1D TIDIIELL, SHERIFF D m c., 2311 Continula aure„WnNO Sue 00pa NO WNa loONP emewte Cmnx: 401 9646 001 3 5.409 CWk to u is RMm,. _ Il rn,vee, M:mp.Uw,^f wem.n,preOmt mmYfn RM lWbnnq. SSA a wFtl,ret Nwnbe o /pyrnfntf 12 H,mbew tD# EPRNwd vmunt vl.xA .n $ e THIS CONTRACT is entered into In the State of California try and between the County of San Bernardino, hereafter called the County, aria City of Rancho Cucamonga hertaftercalled City IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: Itlaa for a belowrid mena tet'ofloan budodSatIwfa torypwGrr aw ane,fomDrab. 7, Ome bums &V curve for pNOmuace or ws, ve On, uv ns. ae a ad n nddacmry pManruncs and taus /a!mmlnerion, oNer ramv uad m,Wrhna. and amrA Pan; #ttd /lariona, aM addenda, if ury.l FIR=l AVENDYENT T -1 CONTRACT Contract Number 83 -819, prodding for Law Enforcement service to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, is hereby amended effective July 1, 1983, by replRCiog Schedule "All referred to in Paragraph IV with a new Schedule "All as attached hereto and Incorporated herein by reference. Except for this amendment, all other provisions of said contract remain as stated therein Any provisions on the reverse side and referenced attachments hereof constitute a part of this contract and are Irworponned Iwrein In full COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ► Chairman, Board t — ps erotsor Dated ATTESTED Wr—kOT the Board of Supervisors ISurf it mporation. company. eml By ► laudw ked S*wrurr) Dated Title Address ►f�,y� ,f ""'u s/9 /�� .wwwnl at m budget expenditure Ot umy Couneel E County Adminavothe JNive r.F.1 ae 1 a�l.�. ►1P, (, F.) 4 a- Is "Alf SCHEDULE "A" RATES LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICE CONTRACT CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA FY 1986 -87 SERVILr 5 — 168 hour General Law Patrol Units 1 — 112 Hou- General Law Patrol Units 2 — 80 Hour General Law Patrol Units 3 — 40 Hour General Law Patrol Units 2 — 80 Hour Traffic Patrol Units (with radar) 4 — 40 Hour Traffic Patrol Units (with radar) 5 — 40 Hour Detective Units Captain and Car Sergeant's Marked Un•t Additional Unmarked Jnit (2) Marked 4 —Wheel Drivi Patrol Unit Marked Hini Van Deputy 1 (1) Radio Dlapatchers (5) Senior Deputy Dif "erential (3) Secretary II (1) Secretary I Differential (1) Extra Help Safety (3/4) Transoribe� Typist II (2) Travel Expens. County Direct Cost County Direct Cost are those costs assessed to the Shr 'a Department by the County for: Personnel Liabllity Ins. $44.254 Personnel Boiling Fee 15.904 Vehicle Insurance Fee 313 ADDITIONAL CHARGES BILLED QUARTERLY: " FT 1986 -87 COST f 1,575.930 to 227,155 of 307.988 to 232,395 as 308.886 as 311,655 as 410,695 e" 79,287 as 6,4.7 as 10,6116 ae 8.6 i1 as 6,112 43,655 131,905 13.206 28.362 1,173 16,036 50,673 1,030 60.471 TOTAL f 3.835,409 " Monthly Payment Schedule: 1st Payment Due July 15th, $319.611 2nd through 12th Payment Due 5th of Each Month $319.618 Overtime: Overtime and court appearances estimate for FY 86 -87 is $126,290. Actual overtime will be billed quarterly. Vehicle Maintenance: 'Estimated maintenance cost based on 1,008.000 miles e22e per mile is $221.760. Actual cost will be billed quarterly. E -9 Charges: Cost :3r food, medical expense and etc., will be billed quarterly. a Proposed, sub;ect to change due to Memorandum of Understanding changes. Of Leas Fuel and Maintenance (RCSCDA) Revised 05/08/86 16,3 - ,NO COUNTY SHER1Fps PLO CFA `"'..,�r ¢ "Ded4alM To Yau safety" ha US y a May 15, 1080 Air. Lauren Wasserman, City Manager City of Rancho Cucamonga 8320 Baseline Road tC Past Office Bwx 807 Rancho Cucamonga, Calffom(a 81730 Dear Mr. Wasserman: ),..,a I C-c Floyd Tld Aell shinff At a May 7, 1066 meeting, SANBAO Beard Members endorsed the CAL -1D program and recommend d that all cities participate. Wesley MCDanle„ SANBAO Executive Director then sent a letter to all City Managers, Police Chiefs, the County AdLitnfstratfve Officer, and myself b. fngfng us up to date on the program's progress and attached both an updated cost allocation based on January 1988 population, and a copy of the Proposed agreement to participate. tie also said in his letter that Deborah Barmack, Lieutenant Jim Cox, and any of the RAN Board members will be happy to answer questions you may have about the CAL-ID program. Attached W an original copy of the agreement Wes sent you. Please have it approved by your City Council. We would like to have these agreements returned withbu 30 days so that we can formalize a 1080 -87 budget and begin the operation of CAL -1D on July 1st. Thank yvu for your as3f3tancei FT:kc attachment Floyd Tidwell, Sheriff Post Ofltm Box 569. San C= nxidiao. CA 92407 Telephone: (714) 3913111 /� The Son Bernardino County Tiansportaflon Commisslon SAN BF COUNCIL COOPERATING ASSOCIATED GOVERNMENTS A PLANNING COUNCIL OF COOPERATING INTENACTI` /E GOVERNMENTS Wells Fargo Sullding, 334 W Third Street, Suite 401 San Bernardino. California 92401 (714) 884.8276 Date: May 7, 1966 To: City Managirs Police Chiefs County Administrative Officer Sheriff RE: CAL ID Fingerprint Program Gentlemen: Planning activities for implementation of the computerized finger print analysis program (fondly known as either CAL ID or the RAN Board) have now been completed. A technical coumtttee, chaired by Deborah Barmack, of which I am a member, comp•Tned primarily of sheriff's and police department representatives, has completed as analysis of costs, staffing needs, and appropriate formulae for sharing this expense. From a city standpoint, representatives from Montclair and Son Bernardino Police Departments ware primary participants. The RAN Board then met and endorsed these arrangements, and subsequently the two- county Board approved them as well. SANEAG has been filling a go- between role vis -a -vis the County and the cities The city elected member (Mayor Nat Simon of Fontana) on the governing RAN Board wan selected using SANEAG as the forum, and we've been using the SANEAG agenda and Board meetings as the Lnformatioudl base. Thus, we are now serving to facilitate budget and cost - sharing concurrence ac' adoption of implementation Agreemeats. This letter conveys the budget and cost- sharing conclusions and transmits the proposed Agreement for your review. We hope that you will be able to agree. Time is important; we're late in the budget cycle and you will need to insert these figures in your own police coats. Please note t.at the coat spread will also be applied to contract cities. After running through several more comp.ex formulas, it was agreed that the cost - sharing should be by straight population, adoptud annually per most recent Department of Finance estimates. It became apparent that the use of additional factors such as crime statistics actually affected the dollar spread very little, and so we opted for simplicity. A copy of the cost allocation information is attached for your early consideration, and will be useful in constructing your police department budgets. The .4, 5;_— CMES OF: ADELMM 601POW.1110 BEAR LARL CUMCOLTON, FO WMA.OIW10 TERRACE, LONA LWOA wO WC AIR NEEDLES ONTARO. RANCHO CUCANONM MDLANDS. FNU'-SAN REIWAR004C. URIAN0. VICTORYlILLCOUMr OF SAN IND W ROM3 ommittne feels that most Jurisdictions may simply wish to have his _, a line item coat within the police budget, since the ollars are quite modest Jurisdictions may then choose, if they ish, to create some revenue scheme of their own, each as a urcharge on parking citations. Please be aware that this spread a based upon full participation; if some Jurisdictions do not oin in, the costs for the remainder will rise. he SANBAG Board endorsed the program and this letter at this orning's meeting. Lt. Jim Cox from the Sheriff's office will ow be scheduling visits with each of you to discuss the program, oat sharing, and Agreement. You may also wish to question eborah Barmack, myself, or the poJice representatives from San ernardino and Montclair. Dal transmittal of the Agreements for participation will low, requesting approval by each City Council. incaroly, esloy C 4cDaniel ¢ocutive Director 4:sh tachments SANBAG Board 5A4 Board /Technical Committee INTEROFFICE MEMO sy`�IW DATE April 4, 1986 PHONE 383 -3718 4. 1 t FROM DEBORAH ROBINSON BARMACK, Executive Analyst Board of Supervisors TO SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY CAL -ID BOARD craur°rs'°1,i°r " m°° SUBJECT FINANCING ALTERNATIVES FOR CAL-ID PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. San Bernardino County's portion of costs for the CAL -ID Program mould be allocated among the County and all of Its cities based on each jirisdictlon's percentage of the overall population. 2. A contingency fund equaling ten percent of the Program costs should be established beginning in the second year of the Program. 3. The proposed allocation of costs should be presented to the Association of San Bernardino County Police Chiefs, the San Bernardino County City Managers, and the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SanBag) Board of Directors for their Information and comment. BACKGROUND: Members of the Financing Alternatives Subcor: mlttee met to develop alternatives for financing the San Bernardino County CAL -ID Program costs. The review of these financing alternatives was made in recognition of the following basic assumptions: Consideration of assessments was made based on a total budget to cover the purchase of equipment, site preparati m, personnel and other associ- ated costs to be borne in me operational snit, with services delivered by the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Identi'ication Bureau. The option of Indeperdent police departments having direct access to equipment could be explored once the system is fully operational. All cities within the County of San Bernardino Intend to actively partici- pate in the use of the Cal -ID system. Following is a list of the four major alternatives which •. •ere explored by the Committee: 1. County Funding: The County of San Bernardino could finance all of the local governments' share of the equipment purchase and all operational costs of the system as part of the Identification services provided to the cities within the County. / . /r ass IOM: San Bernardino CAL -ID Board Page Two April 4, 1986 2. Assessment Based on Population: The County and each city could be assessed a percentage of the total equipment and operations cost of the program based on the percentage of total county population residing within that jurisdiction. This is the simplest method of assessment which was considered. After the first year of the program, the assessment would equal approximately SOs pe, capita for each;urisdiction. 3. Assessment Based on a Combination of 7opulation and Other Factors: Formulas could be devel�peo to Include two or more factors on a jurisdic- tional basis, such as population and crime rate; population, crime rate and arrests; etc. The allocation based on population and crime rate resulted In only minor deviations from the population allocation. 4, Assessment Based on System Usage: Assessments could be made to cover operations and/or equipment costs based on the actual on -line computer time for each jurisdiction. The computer software is currently designed to identify the jurisdiction for which Inquiries are being made. Assessment based on actual computer use time would accurately reflect the percentage of time which should be paid for by specific jurisdictions. Several legislative proposals are under consideration to allow for penalty assessments or to provide State financial assistance for the maintenance for CAL -ID equipment. Any proposed legislation, however, would not be passed In sufficient time to impact the initial start -up costs fcr the San Bernardino - Riverside CAL -ID Program. Legis- lative proposals should be monitored and analyzed to determine their impact on our local system. After review of these various alternatives and their Impact upon tho effectiveness of the CAL -ID Program, the Committee unanimously recommended that the San Bernardino County costs for CAL -ID be allocated among the County and Its cities based on each jurisdiction's percentage of the overall population. Recognizing that the CAL-ID equipment may need to be upgraded, expanded or modified in future years and that there are many unknown issues related to the operation of the CAL -ID Program, the Committee felt it would be prudent to initiate a ten percent contingency fund which would allow for future program modifications. Since the first year allocations are higher to include purchase of equipment, the Ccmmittee recommended that the contingency fund be added to the cost allocations in the second year of the Program. Most San Bernardino County jurisdictions are well into their 1986 -87 budget develop- ment. The Committee recognizes that the amount of these allocations should be known to each ; urisdiction for inclusion In next year's budget. However, It Is also necessary for various groups to review and comment on the proposed allocation of costs. The Committee, therefore, recommends that the proposed method of alloca- tion and actual costs per jurisdiction be presented to the Association of San Bernardino County Police Chiefs, the San Bernardino County City Managers, and the SanBag Board of Directors. After their review, it is recommended that the Committee present a final recommendation to the RAN Board, along with any modi- fications which are necessary as a result of comments by these various organizations. At th_t time., the r- AI_ -it) RL rd will fw a4pri to rakes formal a0lon with regard to a method of financing San Bernardino County's portion of the CAL -ID system. CALAD COST ALLOCATIONS + It is recommended that an Increase of up to 109. of annual allocations be added beginning In the second year to establish a contingency fund. The fund would be used for unanticipated needs, such as updated software, equipment modifications, etc. . Totals rounued (C) Contract law enforcement /( 9 5/86 y Estimated Percentage 2nd and Population of the Total 1st Year 3rd Year Jurisdictions as of 1.1.86 Population Allocation Al location+ Adelanto 4,433 407. S 2,960 S 2,100 Barstow 20,048 1 81% 13,394 9,503 Big Bear Lake (C) 5,766 529. 3,848 2,730 Chino 49,709 4.489. 33,152 23,520 Colton 27,951 2 529. 18,648 13,230 Fontana 53,390 4.819. 35,594 25,253 Grand Terrace (C) 9,991 909. 6,660 4,725 Loma Linda (C) 11,863 1 079. 7,918 5,618 Montclair 25,180 2 279. 16,798 11,918 Needles 5,091 469. 3,404 2,415 Ontario 110,691 9 971'. 73,778 52,343 Rancho Cucamonga (C) 73,842 6.659. 49,210 34,913 Redlands 51,567 4.449. 34,336 24,360 Rialto 53,477 4.829. 35,668 25,305 San Bernardino City 137,372 12 379. 91,538 64,943 Upland 56,527 5.099. 37,666 26,723 Victorvii le (C) 23,012 2 079. 15,318 10,868 San Bernardino County 390,568 35 179. 260,258 184,643 TOTAL 1,110,473 100.00% $740,0000 $525,00,1• + It is recommended that an Increase of up to 109. of annual allocations be added beginning In the second year to establish a contingency fund. The fund would be used for unanticipated needs, such as updated software, equipment modifications, etc. . Totals rounued (C) Contract law enforcement /( 9 5/86 y O O O O O O 6 O m O O N N Cl y N r N T q O 9 A h � u M u O O 6N1 41 Y 5 � % O O O w t \ O Q W •'1 N q' 6 ° M N N n •y a (/ 12D1 T m o 0 0 0 0 r o 0 0 ° \ n o n d 41 Y q •'� N i•1 N ° N N • m T O O O p O O n \ ry ry (q� N O b A Q M M m y d y 4 o T m a O o o O 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 s n % r o •y ai y Ol r Y N N N •y N N N W M \ pp 0 N N O O O O O O O O O O O O N N Cl y N r N O N q A u M u 5 � % O w T Q W 3h M q' N M •y (/ 12D1 O n O O A O O p p m O n o o j n O o O N O\ O N O O n r L a n G _ G m P y \ tl mo 8. a T H 9 v q ti ... m m n O N O O w Y ^ o v I O L y v tl N C O � y m O � r P g m N 0 N e O O O /1 m r r O N P O O O .1 m\ N O N O O r Y O Ip 1'1 r 1'1 6 a N o O t y N n " C M O sQ5 N Y pyp om 8 U T 9 m mL? n Y1 O O O O O N O O p G E C p IO o n N r O o O 0 w Y a m n v N n N a a O N w w r r L n o y y O H G � p ~ r O y A P � tl \ • N m m n 8 nl •. rl I r P 1p N N O Ip N y tl N Z N < 6 Y p G u �< VC Z ¢ COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STANDARD CONTRACT FOR COUNTY USE ONLY 1101.11 N,m, yrnpNn W ta1My THIS CONTRACT is emend Into in the State of California by and between the County of San Bernardino, hereafter called the County, and hererfter sailed CITY re•m, bnn o,w F.1 1010 N• NSN MIeKyI11y N0 �A IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: Woo (van below wd ddiNonal bond sheets Set forth mnror to be erndeted, amount to bepald, mamaaofpayrnr=tome for perfomwrwe or completion, deemdnsdon of mnsfactorr performaxv and team for mnnfnadon, odwr ermr and tondidonr, ad anwb plan. a„eclfRSUont, nd ddendr. if ny.l WHEREAS, Senate Bill No. 190 (Chapter 1234 of the 1985 -86 Legislative Session) provides for funding and procedures relating to the California Tientification System; and WHEREAS, • region composed of the area of the Counties of Riverside and San 9ernardino has been formed for implementation and operation of an AL-,mated Fingerprint Identification System in compliance with Senate Bill No. 190: and WHEREAS, the L)sta of the Regional System will be allocates, to the users within the aforesaid Counties on the basis of fifty percent (501) for the San B,rnardino County area and fifty percent (501) for the Riverside County areal and WHEREAS, there will be costs for implementation and operation of a local subsystem within San Bernardino County; and WHEREAS, a local RAN Board has been established for the area of San Bernardino County comprised of the following members: A member of the Boatd of Supervisors, the Sheriff, the District Attorney, tree Chief of Police of the City having the largest number of sworn personnel, a Chief of Police selected by all other police chiefs within the Cor�ty and a Mayor selected by the City Selection Committee; and WHEREAS, '.he County of San Bernardino and CITY desire to enter Into an agreement for the implementation and operation of an Automated Fingerprint Identification System for the benefit of the citizens of their jurisdictions; W.. Ilraf / �V ep. 1 •, 3 NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, conditions, and stipulations, hereinafter set forth, tl`e parSl�to agree as follows: 1. CITY agrees to be a user of the Automated Fingerprint Identification System established for the areas of San Bernardino and Riverside Counties. cITY's use of the System under this agreement shall be through the local subsystem for the San Bernardino Co�,nty area. 2. It is agreed that the total costs applicable to the San Bernardino County area for the Regional SystLa which are not paid by the State and the total costs for the local subsystem within San Bernardino County which are not paid by the State shall be allocated to each user within San Bernardino County based on the users percentage of the total population of all users within the County of San Bernardino. The population of the COUNTY for allocating COUNTY costs based on population shall be the population of the unincorporated area of the County. The population figures used for allocating annual costs to all users shall be the most recent State of California Department of Finance Population Estimates. The costs for the Regional System shall be consistent with the budgets approved by the Regional and Local RAN Boards. The costs for the local subsystem for the San Bernardino County area shall be consistent with the budget approved by the local RAN Board and the Board of Supervisors of COUNTY. 3. The Regional RAN Board .nall approve procedures and policies for operation and use of the Regional Automated Fingerprint Identification System. The Local RAN Boa d shall approve such for the local subsystem for the San Bernar6ino County area. The Sheriff of the COUNTY shall be responsible for managing and operating the local subsystem within the COUNTY consistent with directions of the local RAN Board. All such procedures and policies shall be consistent with the technical requirements of the Regioral System. 4. CITY shall pay to the Auditor /Controller /Recorder of COUNTY within thirty (30) days of entering into this agreement its share of costs under this agreement for the first year (July 1, 1986 through June 30, 1987) based upon the assumption that all cities within San Bernardino County will participate in the program. COUtTTY'a Auditor /Controller /Recorder shall subsequently adjust the billing to CITY based upon actual participation of cities. After the first year under this agreement, City shall pay its annual cost share by August 1st or fifteen (15) days after approval of CITY's budget, whichever is later. Payments under this agreement shall be deposited in an interest bearing trust account with any earn ed interest biimg applied for expenses of the Automated Fingerprint Identification System. 5 Any amendments to this agreement shall be in writing and approved by the parties before becoming effective. 6. !a The rm of this agreement shall commence upon execution by both parties and shall continue until terminated as hereinafter set forth. Either party may terminate this agreement by giving notice of termination to the other party on or before February 1 of any year to terminate this agreement as of the subsequent July lst. / 2 ? Page 2 of 3 7. Any notices required to be given under this agreement shall ba delivered in person or by first class mail to CITY'S Clerk or t Clark of the Board of Supervisors as applicable. 8. Following approval of •1.^ budget for the local subs for the San Bern! dino County aiea, ^UJNTY's Sheriff shall fis y tar na3c the funds anc expenditures of .Y,e Automated Fingerprint Ide fixation Sustain and a _ablish a separately identifiable account for allocating costs pursuant to the terms of this agreement. 9. Any user of the System which is allowed to enter into programs participation after the System has originally been implemented shall be required to pay its fa;r share of original start -up, implementation and equipment costs prior to partieip..tion in the System. Any such new users may be subject to additional assessments as recommended by the local RAN Board. Such fair share costs shall be based on the percentage of population of the user to the total population of all users and the amount of the costs shall be as determined by the local RAN Board for the San Bernardino County area. 10. Each user of the Automated Fingerprint Identification System within the San Bernardino County area shall be required to be a party to an agreement with the COUNTY setting forth obligations and responaibi li ties of users so that all such users are treated consistently and casts are allocated to all users based on their per:ar.tage of the population of all users within the San Bernardino County area of the Regional System. .1. COUNTY shall provide users with a financial report at the end cf each fiscal year covering the costs for the San B_mardino County are, portion of the Regional System and the local subsystem for said area consistent with regulrr County practices. 12. Any disputes over charges under this agreement will be resolved by the local RAN Board for the San Bernardino County area consistent with the terms of this agreement. 13. Each party shall indemnity and hold the other party her _sus from liability for acts or omissions of itself and its agents and employees in connection with the performance of this agreement. COUNTY OF SAN etRNARDINO ► r$IaR /IC Cheinnan, 3oarSupernson Dated_ 8y► umm....esna./.r ATTESTED Dated.— Title_ Oork of the Board o Supervisors Address_ �NY.01a 104x+1 r0 /m Pawa..y a110 A111rnutM Aa \bw PIVMwaY rOr Y /paalYna a11Y CMMaU .i! Apna1 AOPIn1aVYwlGO �T• � a�» woo as.. nano Yw� �t� 1~- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM paten June 4, 1906 "I Paver and Hembers of the city Council Prom, Lelmen Wasserman, City Winger Subject, Chaftey - Garcia horse Added Consent Calendar Item - June 0, 19.6 The Ptiwanda Historical Society, has approached the City viii) a request cur he -p toward continuing their liability insurance pwlrcy on the Lhaffey -Wreia house. MIS polity also names the City as co-inaureu as we are the .wncr of the property and Its Improvewentsl. Rather, however, than pay for their insurance as they n.aie reououteu, e would suggert a yearly stipend be granted for miscellaneous expenditm .. connected vitt the hoLue...sucn as insurance, touch uc pa nt, COOL Hate, etc., at the option of the hociety. In this way .heir cash Short treasury woulc have then be assured the necessary cash available to meet contracted obligations, like tnaurance, without the City cmmtung to pay for it. we vould suggest that wo set the Stipend at $150 for this year and inclades a like figure for the upcoming fiscal year. J 7#A CITYOV RANCHO CUCAMONGA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMORANDUM . DATE: June 2, 1986 T0: Rede elopment Agency Board and Executive Director FROM: JIM, t, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Pu ase of Comouter Equipment The agency Intends to purchase computer equipment In fiscal year 1986/87 to Increase efficiency in the revle of projects and programs. In an effort to accelerate the computer capabilities and to save funds, the agency staff Is recomrending purchase of one complete unit and trinter In fiscal year 1985/86 and the remainder of the equipment In fiscal year 1986/87. The total cost breaks out as follo : I IBM 512K RAM, 30 MEG: $3900.00 1 Sysdyne EGA Subsystem: 775.00 1 Toshiba Printer. 1020.00 Total: MR. 00 Fund, are available In the current Redevelopment Agency budget to make this purchase as savings occurred In the publication /advertisement area. Therefore, staff Is recommending a transfer of funds from tho Publication/ advertisement account to the capital outlay account to make the purchase. Both the City and agency realize s savings as a grcup discov t has been given of approximately $3000 by purchasing three units at one time (I for the Redevelopment Agency, 1 for Revenue Assessment, and I for Administrative Se .Ices (the last is have been included In the Fv 85/86 City budget). Purchasing staff did an outstanding job of negotiating a large savtrgs by the group purchase of these three machines, etc. Recommendation The agency authorize i g y purchase of the computer equipment as outlined and authorize transfer of the funds as outlinro In the report JH:dh SAP.' • c• LiW CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT V1,3 DATBt June 4, 1985 if IO: Mayor and Members of City Council FROMt Lauren M. Wasserman, City Msnager.,IPA� 79" SOB JECrt At the direction of the City Council, staff has researched the library eervires offered in not only Rancho Cucamonga, but alto cities in the vest end of San Bernardino County. The staff report considers the following issuest 1) Comparative levels of service 2) Comparative levels of funding 3) policy Considerations and alternatives 4) Staff Recommendation Cf-IMAgilTIVE LEVELS OF SERVICF. For purposes of this section ve vill start by comparing Rancho Cucamonga'• level of servira, as provided by the Sao Betmardino County Free Library System, with the level of library senicv provided by our owo neighboring cities. Ontario and Upland. Those cities operate independent municipal library systems. ):%TSiT1[.UrSI'r17f T7yT41f�S1%7T:4 L'kationt Rancho Cucamonga Qne -nrert County of San Bernardino $ us 10,000 Square Feet gp]R °e to IIon,a nti on RaN ae 40,000 Volumes to 73,000 Population or 0.54 Vr w +es per person. Lipgy�Cerd e_[n pgnvl erf ea Re tin? 16,776 cards to 73.000 Population or 22 c.rde per 100 persons. 1'enre _.0 Ope- etian7 Moo-Tues. 30 -8; Wed- Ihurs. 10-6; Fri -Sat 10- 5 ... Total takly Ruurs 50 /)S City Council Meeting June 4, 3986 EVALUATION OP LIBRARY 88RVICIS Page t Location, Upland Operator: City of Upland SWs 24,000 Square Peet yoluwa to Population Rad9t 116,422 Volumes to 54.000 Population or 2.15 Volumes per person. Litrary Cards to Popularion Ratio: 40,000 cards to 54 MO Populatioo or 74 cards per IOC versons. Sours of Operation: Mon -Than. 30 -9; Fri -Sat. 12- 5 ... Total Meekly Hours 54 Location: Ontario Oorrator: City of Ontario Sign: 44.060 Square Peet Volume to PonuIxt4ju Ratiot 200,000 Volume, to 108,000 Population or 1685 volumes per person. Library Cards to PoRulmelon Rating 579000 cards to 108.000 Population or 52 cards per 100 persons. Sours of Ootratlnet Moo-Thurs. 9 -9; Fri. lOfi; Sat. 9 -5; San. 12- 5...Tota1 Weekly Hours 70 The preceding comparison clearly indicates that Rancho Cucamonga loge far bebind in all areas of on -site service. The County contends this lack of on -site volumes is partially mitigated by each branch, such as Rancho Cucamonga baying full availability of access to the County's full system stock. As member of the Inland Library System, however, Upland and Ontario also have access to these very same resources. so this "accessn member is irrelevant to the comparison. Practically speaking, local residents Key act be aware of the Availability of these materials from other branch libraries. To further understand this comparison, the question act be asked, "Are Upload and Ontario well beyond the norm in library services?" In other words, are we comparing Rancho Cucamongi s service against two "gold plated" municipal library serviced The answer to that question is, "no ". 7� City Council Neetiog June 4, 1985 EVALUATION OF LIBRARY $ERYICBS Page 3 While both Upland and Ontario provide line services, both comaunitiea are very much in the mainstream of service provisions within California. Uplgnd - Lit zAy Group 3 - SO X300- 100.000 nooulaeion - Circulation per capita ... Ranks 13th of 21 systems - Reference material per capita... Ranks 4th of 21 systems - Hours of operation... Racks 4th of 4 with one iscLlit7 0otario - Library Grano 2 - 100.000 - 500.000 popuLtien - Circulation per Capita... Ranks 27tb of 36 systems - Reference material per Capita... Ranks 20th of 36 systems - Hours of operation... Ranks lot. of 2 with one facility The Service delivery in Rancho Cucamonga is substantially balm that offered by neighboring communities. F7T.WfS rrnrrwq'l ia1 [tTSr:L17rrB�L1,7GbTxzTmrT;M - Circulation per capita... Ranks 9:b of 10 systems - Reference For capita ... Ranks 9th of 10 system - Hours of operation ... (imalid comparative data) ft7stpJ Upland 3 Per Capita $12.89 Statewide 15th of Rankin, 21 Ontario $11.63 22nd of 36 Han Bernardino County $ 6.70 10th of 10 The figures quoted in the two preceding areas, SERVICE and FUNDING, were taken from tho public ldbrary Statistics 1986, Advance Rdition, published by the Library Development Services Bureau, California State Library, Sacramento, California. Another factor to consider wbon discussing library funding for the City of Rancho Cucamouga is the allocation by the Board of Supervisors •o our Branch. HARM COCARONCA'S budget appropriation ............ $220,000* RASCHO COCAWONOA'8 library revenue generated ....... $280.000* *These figures courtesy of Sao Bernardino County and relate to '85 '86. Based on the above inforuatioa, it appears that gaucho Cacaaooga taxpayers are subsidising other elements of the County's library system. 2/ City Council Meeting June 4, 1986 EVALUATION OF LIBRARY SERVICES page 4 If the City Council wishes to improve the serviced in our branch library, there are several alternative policy options available: 1. Bequest that the Board of Supenviaors allocate a greater share of the Library dollars to Rancho Cucamonga end request that scheduling be more responsive and compatible to the clients served. There are also some options the City a" wish to axplers with the County, i.e., Library Zones, County Service Areas, Kello -Roos, etc., for am or aa8ltional revenue sources. (See attached memorandum from Elizabeth Banns, Deputy County Counsel, to Cal McElwain, Supervisors Second District, dated March 11, 1986). In our view, given the circumstances at band, none of the new revenue generators as described, provide a realistic approach to increasing library services in Rancho Cucamonga. 2. Take aver the library and convert it to a municipal system. It is significant to note, bovevars that just because the sty would we and operate a library system does not automatically mean the level of service would improve. k'e could easily adjust the hours of operation to be more responsive, but all other changes would require an atensive c➢mmsit,%= of general fund dollars. If it is the policy decision of the Council to take over the library, it must be recognized the City will also be taking Duet the problems associated with an underaised, understocked, undermuned facility. Io summary, the City is faced with the option of either requesting a "fair share" of County revenue to upgrade the level of library service, or we most evaluate the feasibility of assuming full responsibility for library services. Alub 1PQ'1IIfffi. It is recommended that the City work with our County Supervisor within the next few months to seek an upgrading of library services in the Rancho Cucamonga Branch. Compared to orb ". Srwt. branch libraries, the local branch is deficient. In addition, it is recommended that the staff be incarnated tc explore the feasibility of utilizir; redevelopment funding, if possible, to fund the construction of an addit.cnal breach Library in the 99 -acre park site on Base line, east of Haven Avenue. At the present time, sufficient general fund revenues simply are not available to divert to library services without adversely impacting other vital public services. However, at some point in the future, if the City has abundant revenues from ales tax, this option mass be feasible. LIB /kep 79 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM nate, Jura 3, 1986 Tot Mayor are Pemaera of City Council Prom, Lauren M. wasserman, City Manager Subject, Evaluation of Library Services - Addendum touncll ANtnd.^. Item D-2, June 4, 1986 MN i a• Staff bas Compiled additional Information on the Library Services to that which you received In your agenda packets. Previously, the available Information prerented was a listing of eorparative data botween the Rancho Cucamonga branch d: the ban Cernardino County Litrary and two of our neighborinq m,.n IC1palities, Upland and Ontario. The latest information assembled [..¢pares Rancho's branch with tour other branches of the ban bernaralno County Library System which also verve municipalities. Pontana, Montc YAir, tn:no, and Victorville. (Planes see attached). If furtter information is dean ed, please lot me know. Thank you. /7Iql Rambo Cucasonga branch Library Loca[ on: Rambo Cucamonga :/Orators County of San berrardim Volute to Population Ratios 41,365 volumes to 73,642 Populatica or 0.56 Volume per person (Updated 6/2/86) Lihtary Cards to Population Ratios 16,776 cards to 73,842 Population or 22 car da per 100 persona, (This nuabur supplied by Branch. rounty headquarters, however, Quotes a lower nsaber of cardholder at 9,3OC) Hours of Operation, Mon -Toes. 10 -81 NeQ= :hurl. 10 -6: Fri -Sat. 10 -5... Total weekly Hours 50 P011"M Branch Library Locatson: FJntaaa Lparatc[, County of San 6ern dim Sizes 13,0b8 square feet Volune to Population Ratio 70,652 Volunas to 56,103 or 1.25 voluxes per person Library Carde to Population Ratio: 10,800 cards to '_6,183 Population or 19 library cards per 100 persons Hours of Operations Ron - Tours, 10 -91 Fri -Sac 10- 5 ... Total •eekly hours 58 _.ont..3a1: Branch Library LOtbtlOn, Pontclair Operators County of San Bernardino Sizes 14.100 square feet values to Population Ratios 67,837 volumes to 24.717 or 2.74 volunes per person Library Cards to Population Ratios 65,000 cards [0 24,711 Population or 26 library cards per 100 persons Hours of Operation, Pon -TVes. 10 -81 tied - Tours. 10 -6s Fri -Sat. 10- 5 ... Total weekly Hours 50 t nh ■ Chino Branch Library Locaticn, Chino rem:, County of San Bernardino Site, 10,600 square feet Volume to Population Patio, 50,169 Volumes to 49,000 ar 1.02 volumes per person Library Cards to Population Ratio, 12,500 cards to 49,000 population or a5 library cards par 100 persona Hours of Operation, M0n-Re0. 10 -8, Thurs -Sat. 10 -6... Total Meekly Hours 54. Victorville Branch Library Locatlon, Virtorville aerator, County of San bernardino Sirs, 7,500 square feet l Volune to Population Ratio, 44,459 volumes to 23,012 or 1.73 Volumes per person Library Cards to population Ratio, 15,000• cards Hours of Operation, Mon- Tbure. 10 -9, pri -Sat. 10- S ... TCrel Weekly tloure 58 ' I• Mote, Victorville also serves Hesperia am! Apple Valley, therefore '.y ratio would not be representative). %Ir(Z-- DATE FROM INTEROFFICE MEMO Mnrch 11, 1986 ELIZABETH L. IthUNA Deputy County Coundal PHONE 3148 TO CAL McELWAIN, supervisor Board of Supervisors, Second Supervisorlal District inl Aa,- 4� _E Caary of Su• `raeuatno SUBJECT `Ounry Free Library System, Financing of Additional Library Ser- vices within the City of Rancho Cucamonga A branch of the County Free Library System is located in Rancho Cucamonga ( "the City) in a building granted to the County by the Lion's Club. The deed has a reversionary clause which we are informed provides that the property will ru - -rt to the Lion's Club if used for other than library purpor,os. The City wishes to have an additional library facility, probibly .n the proposed City cultural facility. The County Free Librltry System ( "the Library), however, has no -funds with which tt build or staff an additional facility. Therefore, you have arFed ae to provide you (and through you, the City) with an outline oP tho options for financing a new, additional branch library within the City. Those options are discussed below and a smart ze our discussions with the City on February 3, 1986. It is my understanding that the City currently is studying the overall provision of library services, and this memo will +esist in the completion of that re- port. 1.) WithdrawAl of the City from the Libra The City is included within the Library System by choitro, The County Free Library System is organized and operated under Educa- tion Code Section 19100. Ed.Codo § 19103 provides in pertinent part thats "After the establishment of a county free li- brary, the .. legislative body of any city in the county maintaining a free public library . may notify the board of supervisors that the city ... desires to become a part of the county free library cyst. . Thereafter tho City .. shall be a part ..f the systom and its inhabitants shall be entitled to the benefits Of the county Eree library ... The City may withdraw from the Library under the provisions of Ed.COds §§ 19104, 19105 and 19106, copies of which ate at- tachod. Such a withdrawal would have the financing iapact de- scribed below. Before Proposition 13 (now Article XIIIA of the Catifornia Con- lllmlOOC11w,Ytl 1­29 CAL McFLWAIN, Supervisor, 2nd District March 11, 1986 Page 2 stitution) the County levied an additional property tax to fi- nance operation of the Library. With the passage of Proposition 13, the Library was limited to its share of the one percent (11) property tax Special legislation allowed a county free library system to participate in the Special District's augmentation fund to make up a portion of the property taxes lost. The Library presently :s funded in three main ways: with a share of property taxes, augmentation funding, and state grants. (The Library also receives lines and donations). Wore the City to withdraw from the Library, that portion of the property taxes attributable to the City's tax rate areas which current)y pass to the Library would oars to the City instead. It is doubtful that augmentation funding would be available after withdrawals it is available to a county free library system only because of special legislation. See Revenue and Taxation Code Sections 98.6 and 2216. It would be up to the City to apply for grants. In sum- mary, it would become the City's responsibility to finance li- brary services at the level desired and to explore additional financing methods where iecessary. Therefore, the following options are presented with the assump- tions that the City will remain a part of the Library but that additional services will be needed in the Rancho Cucamonga area: 2.) Formation of Library Zone for Special Tax Levy. Education Code § 19173 provides that the Board of Supervisors may create special taxing zones within the boundaries of the Librr ^.y to provide additional lit• ary services. within that zone. Al- though § 19173 was enacted prior to Proposition 13, we believe it still provides authority to create a zone in which to conduct a special tax election. In this case, the zone would encompass the City of Rancho Cucamonga. A special tax levy ie the inancing method available bore. There is no provision in state sw for levying service charges or as- sessments to support the L'bracy. Instead, as noted, before Proposition 13 the Board wsa authorized to levy an additional property tax to support the Library. The *successor* of this tax is the "special tax` approved by the voters as described below. Any special tax election is conducted under the provisions of Government Code Section 50077, and requires & two- thirds (2/3) vote of the registered voters voting. The cax cannot be an ad valorem tax but is collected on the tax roll with property — taxes. We alto would confirm that there are no Proposition 4 limit issues prior to calling the tax election. Special tax rev- enues could be expended only in the zone where generated for the purpose stated in the ballot mnasure. 0 / 40 CAL MCELWAIN, Supervisor, lid District March 11, 19R6 Page 3 3.) Formation of a CointY Service Area (•CSA ") or Zone of CSA 70 o[ Plc a Tax Levy, A county service area may be formed for the purpose of p- oviding library services at a higher level than those p[cvided County- wide. See Govt.Code § 25210.4(e). Such formetion m.:st o through the L1FC. A zone of CSA 70 (the County -Vida CSA) could be formed by the Board fur such a purpose, but only after the LAFC had giver. CSA 70 "library powers ". Any CSA or zone includes Incorporated areas only 'oy ordinance of the City Council. In either case, the purpose of forming a special district would be to provide a financing method for extended services within the district. The financing method would be the same as that avail- able to the Library, as CJA service charges are not available to a CSA or zone with library powers. 4.) Formation of a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District. A Community Facilities District ( "CFD ") may be formed to provide financing for library facilities with a useful life of five years or more. Government Co a 3.5. Howevor, at the present time such financing is not available for library services. Fi- nan.ina cor such enrvices would be p= ovided by the passage o£ pending legielatien, Senate Bill 1115 (1986). As you know, the CFD in formed after a majority protest hearing: a six ctal tax election may be =alled within the CFD boundaries. The tax must pass by two - thirds (2/3) of the voters voting on it. Mello-Roos contains special provisions for landowner voting in areas with fewer than twelve (12) regiaterad voters., Given the cost of the proceedings, library facilities might be included with other infrastructure. We also suggest that the City explore other funding possibilities such as charter city powers, the redevelopment agency or a com- munity rehabilitation district under SB 1322 (State. 1986, Ch. 906). Please do not hesitate to contact us with your questions or comments. ALAN K. MARLS APPROVED FOR RELEASE County Counsel It&5¢g_V -lam JP ELIZABETH L. HAMM ALAN K. MARKS Deputy County Counsel County Counsel ELM sme Cc: John Joyner, Supervisor, First Supervisorial District Aarbara Cram Riordan, Supervisor. Third Supervisorial District Gus Jamos Skropos, Supervisor, Fourth Supervisorial District Robert L. Hammock, Supervisor, Fifth Supervisorial District Robert B. Rignay, County Administrative Officer /8/ P� CAL MCELNAIN, Superviror, 2nd District March 11, 1986 Page 4 Vernon O. Knourek, lusistant Administrative Officer, Uffico of Special Districts Barbara Anderson. County Librarian Albert Decaprio, Asaietant County ,ibrarlan Albert B. lleid, Administrator, Gr,,eral Services Agency - /9a - - i 1 . OEDIEARCE R0. 30E AD ORDD3MCE Of Till CODRCIL Of SEE CITY OF EAICEO CpCANONGA, CALIFORNIA. AMDDINC SECTIPI 8 OY ITS 111ARCING go. g30'0,A SCBOOL FFOn AMISS ' pggTAIPIRG SO THE YIRAECIRC The Co•ucit of the City of Rancho Cacaaoog@ does hereby ordain as follwal ¢aCTla! It Section 8 of Ordinance Do. JO of the City of Paa ^bo Cucamonga hereby is a"Died to read as follow" aeKrn(rl gt a e t Y d ti n_Ot-- YA�slle6L. Ooti: further asendsaot of this Section 8, no tees or deduction of land in lieu of fees shall be required for all projeets submittal aft the effective data of this Ordinance Po. 305 onrsmnt to thin Ordinance No. 30 as aseuded.a Clezk urnm 2, The Mayor @ball sign this Ordinance and the City shall tense the use to be pub! •itbiu fifteen (15) days after its passapt at least once i. Ea" Dall Rmart, a c odpacircOf 91 tin circulation published at in the City of Ontario, California, Cucamonga, California. pASSED. AppRovo, and ADOPTED this dny of . 1986- ATES: DOES: ASSENTS 193 Je_`£re7 King. Mayor CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA cacwef0 STAFF REPORT ���' +. < 9 C TV f S Z y 1 DATE: June 4, 1986 wf TO, Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Debra Meier, Assistant Planner SUBJECT* APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION - ENVIRONMENTAL BACKGROUND: The applicant has appealed the Planning Commission's ec sTi -ion for Tentative Tract 12902. The applicant is appealing two Conditions of Approval imposed on this t ^act. The Planning Commission, at its meeting of April 23, 1986, held a public hearing to consider Tentative Tract 12902. Based upon that review and the input from the public, the Planning Commission determined that the proposed tract is consistent with the City's General Plan and current Development Code, subject to all conditions of approv -l. Attached for your review and consideration is the Planning Commission Staff Report which outlines the issues. Also attached is a copy of the Comission Resolution of Approval with Conditions and Minutes of the meeting of April 23, 1986. RECOMMEOATION: The Planning Commission recommends approval of the pro ec w conditions based on the findings contained within the Resolution. 4Rewtfully s � ted ler City Planner BB:DM:das Attachments: Appeal Letter from Applicant Planning Co.- mission Staff Report - April 23, 1986 Planning Coaniislan Resolution of Approval Conditions Planning Commission Minutes - April 23, 1986 /d with - —i C April 00, 19a6 The Honorable City Counci. City of Rancho Cucamonga 9720 ease Line Road Rancho Cucamonga ca 91779 NOTICE OP APPEAL Tentative Tract 12902 To the Council: The underalgnbo Tract referenced abo the applicant for approval of the Tentative ve, hereby appeals the action of the Planning commission With respect to said tract at it 1986, in the following ragardas s me e ting of April 22, approval Athateit be'- squired eitheratoiunderq underground condition of otfsite utilities across •Znraosa Avanue from the project or pay an in lieu foe of approximately ono halt the cost of such undergrounding. coryuaityetrailnalongtthe channel (the ta LaoaaiCr ckbedJean oconaended by the Equestrian Advisory committes.w 2. Applicant contends that the action of the planning commission is Without force or effect, since the tentative sap vas neither conditionally approved nor disapproved Within the time required by law, and is therefore deemed approved as provided in Government Code section 66452.4. Respectfully submitted, WOODLANDPACIPIC DEVELPNEHT, IIK By' �S- RSL Mr 04C 1 A. Action Requested: Approval of tentative tract fcr custom lot residential su division and Tree Removal Permit. B. Project Density: 1.3 du /ac C. Surroundin Land Use and Zonin ort - acant an South - Agricultural uses and Low Density Residential (less East - LownDensitycResidentials(less fthan 2 du /ac) Nest - Vacant land; Low Density Residential (less than 2 du /ac) D. General Plan Dest nations: ro ect ite - a ' -- North - Very Low Residential (less than 2 du /ac) South - Ve�� Low Residential (less than 2 du /ac) Nest - Flood Control Corridor; Very Low Residential (less than 2 du /ac) E. Site Characteristics: The site is located at the base of the mw -a r e aunts ns and slopes from north to south with an overall gradient of about JD%. Because of its location, the site IS subject to storm water flows from the mountains and the natural drainage channel 1s a significant feature of the /�� ITEM E -- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAAIONGA STAFF REPORT. T A } DATE: April 23, 1986 UC �� _Z > TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Debra Meier, Assts ^ant Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12902 Proposed res ent a su div of s e n emander i Parcel' on 39.1 - o o acres in the Very Low Residential District (less than 2 located of land du /ac), at the southwest corner of Hermosa Avenue and Almond Avenue - APN 201- 07: 6, -5, 25, 26, 35 and 36. In addif,on, applicant requests a Tree Removal Permit No. 86 -22 to remove select portions of trees. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of tentative tract fcr custom lot residential su division and Tree Removal Permit. B. Project Density: 1.3 du /ac C. Surroundin Land Use and Zonin ort - acant an South - Agricultural uses and Low Density Residential (less East - LownDensitycResidentials(less fthan 2 du /ac) Nest - Vacant land; Low Density Residential (less than 2 du /ac) D. General Plan Dest nations: ro ect ite - a ' -- North - Very Low Residential (less than 2 du /ac) South - Ve�� Low Residential (less than 2 du /ac) Nest - Flood Control Corridor; Very Low Residential (less than 2 du /ac) E. Site Characteristics: The site is located at the base of the mw -a r e aunts ns and slopes from north to south with an overall gradient of about JD%. Because of its location, the site IS subject to storm water flows from the mountains and the natural drainage channel 1s a significant feature of the /�� ITEM E PLANNING MMISSION VF REPORT i TT 12902 - WOODLAND ACIFIC April 23. 1986 Page 2 site. West of the natural channel the terrain rises to the western property boundary with slopes exceeding 50%. Another unique feature is the 65 year old Red Gum Eucalyptus grove that covers most of the site. I1. ANALYSIS: A. General: The tract would create four lots facing Hermosa veA nue at the northerly portion of the tract and three cul -de- sacs taking access from Hermosa Avenue that utilize reduced width right- of-way standards to allow for maximum tree Preservation. With the use of reduced width right -of -way standards, no on- street parking will be allowed. Lot sizes range from 20,000 square feet to o,,er 80,000 square feet. Considering the variation in lot size, terrain and unique natural features this tract has tit, totential for the truly custom home tract (similar to 'The Roods' on the east side of Hermosa). Lot 29 will be conditioned as non - buildable at this time. This lot will be accessed via an easement through Lot 15 pending development and public right -of -way access provided from the north. B. Design Review Committee: Design Review Committee has reviewed t o pro ect on two separate occasions. Approval was recommended after the following issues were discussed and resolved: 1. Use of reduced roadway width standards consistent with tract on the east side of Hermos4 (TT 12237) to minimize grading and maximize tree preservation. Revision: Right -of -way reduced to 40' with a 28' curb separation. 2. Concern with stream bed alignment and buildable area on lots at the west end of court •A•. Revision: The stream bed will be regraded and moved westerly for a length of 300't to adequately protect Lots 21 and 22 at the end of court •A•. The remainder wiil be left in a natural state. /0 PLkIHlNG CO:L4ISSI071( IFF REPORT TT 12902 - w00DLAND'raCIFIC April 23, 1986 Page 3 Eliminate excessive grading and tree removal on most northerly lots facing Hermosa Avenue. The use of split- level /ralsed foundaticn house designs will be encouraged to maintain the natural terrain. Revision: CCdR,s shall be prepared for the project to preserve existing trees and minimize grading allowed ter construction of homes. 4. Trees adjacent to Hermosa Avenue should be preserved to the maximum extent possible. Additional front and sideyard setbacks nay be necessary to accannodate adequate tree preservation. Revision: Lots siding onto Hermosa Avenue shall Provide increased sideyard setbacks to preserve the appearance of the grove along Hermosa Avenue. 5. Elimination of lots accessing from Tentative Tract 10088 Revision: That portion of the tract west of the drainage channel and south of Tentative Tract 10088 has been designated as non - buildable until public access from the north 1s provided. Eliminate development within Alquist - Prlolo Zone, Revision: The northerly 3001t of the subject property has been designated as a remainder parcel becausa of Its Inclusion in the Alquist- Prlolo Special Studies Zone. As a result, this area will remain in its natural state except for flood protection measures necessary along Hermosa Avenue and Almond avenue. C. Trails Committee: The Trails Committee has reviewed the project at ength an as made several recommendations regarding placement of local feeder trails and reduced width and meandering trails that would allow for the preservation of as many trees as possible (see Exhibit •F•) The Trails Committee recommended an additional trail along the Alta Loma Creekbed, which the applicant prefers not to / ff PLABNING CO.K4ISSION vFF REPORT TT 12902 - 400LA4 VACIFIC April 23, 1986 Page develop and requests Commission discussion to resolve the issue. The Alta Loma Trail would be a community trail with a 20 foot dedication that would physically bisect individual lots The applicant feels that this situation would be undesirable to potential buyers and creates a situation of questionable liability. The Trails Committee intends to have the Alta Lama Trail within the boundaries of the required drainage easement for the channel, creating a dual use easement. The Committee feels that the Alta Loma Channel Trail 1s a major community north /south ro-ite linking the northern boundary of the City to the southern boundary of the Equestrian Overlay Zone. The uniqueness of such a trail would enable it to be one of the few aesthetically enjoyable trill routes within the City. Since the groves could not be retained as parks due to unavoidable financial considerations, the Committee felt that this community trail would preserve a semblance of this unique grove for the appreciation of all City residents. The applicant had requested Commission review of the Alta Loma Channel Tail in a letter of April 1985 (see attachment). On May 8, 1985, the Commission reviewed this request and was advised by the City Attorney not to give direction to Mr. Scott because the item was subject to pubiic hearing. Consensus of the Commission was to defer any discussion of trails unto Tentative Tract 12902 came before the Planning Commission. 0. Grading Committee: As a custom lot subdivision, grading is proposed or strcet improvements, development of equestrian trails and flood prevention measures only. Preservation of the grove to the extent Possible is a critical aspect to the development of this tract. The Grading Committee approved the conceptual grading plan subject to ap rovat of a final grading plan and all requirements for custom lot subdivisions. In addition, if any additional trails are added ac a E. Under round le Utilis: The Engineering Division has noted that over ead ectric tie nes less than 66KY and tetecommur.itation lines exist on the opposite side of Hermosa Avenue. Normally, it would be the recommendation of staff to require the developer to contr;bute towards the future underground utilities by paying an in -lieu fee equivalent to one -half of the front -foot cost of undergrounding. However, the sar,.e owner, who recently completed the project on the east side of Hermosa Avenue was not required to underground the overhead utilities due to an ambiguity in the City policy at the time of recordation. Therefore, the Commission has two options fnr consideration: 1) to require the developer to pay an in -lieu fen equivalent to one -half of the front foot cost of undergrounding the /O �0 PLA11NING commissIou r FF REPORT l TT 12902 - WOODLAND CIFIC April 23, 1986 Page 5 overhead utilities with the understanding that the City shall bear one -half of the cost in the future; or 2) reouire the applicant to underground the overhead utilities on the opposite side of the street along Hermosa Avenue frontage with this project. The Conditions of Approval reflect both options. The appropriate "OPTION" shall apply as determined by 'he Commission. F. Environmental Assessment: The Initial Study has been conryleted and expanded upon y geo- aT gic and hydrologic studies to address sp=ciflc areas of concern. The geologist's preliminary review detected a fault trace in the northern portion of the property. This portion has been deleted from the proposed development until more detailed information can be gathered. Hydrology studies have focused on the natural drainage course that runs the Urgth of the site and intersects with County Flood Control facilities at the southern boundary. Mitigation measures based on 100 year storms along the creek have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval that would sufficiently protect proposed development, while allowing the creek bed to remain, for the most part, in its natural state. A study of plant and animal life was prepared when development of the groves was initially proposed. At that tire, there was no evidence of rare or endangered plants or animals found on the property. Further, it was found that the vegetation was principaily non - native and although foothill creatures frequent the site, it held a relatively low habitat value. Staff has completed Part II of the Initial Study and finds that although significant factors are involved with the site, appropriate mitigation measures have been applied to the project that will alleviate any factors above an insignificant level. Therefore, it is recommended that a Negative Declaration be issued with mitigation measures Incorporated into the project and Conditions of Approval. III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: This project is c.nsiscent with the Development Code and the General Pan. The project will riot to detrimental to adjacent properties or cause significant environmental impacts. In addition, the proposed use and site plan together with recm.- nended Conditions of Approval, are in compliance with the applicable provision of the Development Code and City Standards. IV. RECOHNENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve entat ve Tr7-a­cJ 12902 and related Tree Removal Permit 86 -22 through adoption of the attached Resolution and Conditions of Approval. ws PLANNING comisSION ( FF REPORT l- TT 12902 - NGODLAND 41FIC April 23, 1986 Page 6 Res fully subn ed, Brad Buller City Planner 88:DM:ko Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Utilization Map Exhibit "8• - Natural Features Exhibit •C" - Tentative Subdivision Map Exhibit •D" - Conceptual Grading Plan Exhibit •E° - Tree Removal Areas Exhibit •F" - Trails Tree Removal Permit 86 -22 Letter fro:a Applicant May 8, 1985 Staff Report Memorandum from Trail Advisory Committee Part 11, Initial Study May 8, 1985, Planning Commission Minutes Resolution of Approval with Conditions � 9/ C C TOtTATM YA► 71ACT 1A07 MY Ch RANUHO CUCAIllaNGA PLANNING DINISION r►Ert, . 1'T /''902 EXHImr.��SCALF, /'9� � ATURE Crry OF nuts. T% /2902 RANCHO CUCAMONGA TrrLE: A � R AN[ M DIVLSI(,YV E`CHIBM yCALE -- s t� i i Q f�3 • CITY OF mm, 77'12902 RANCHO CUGkMONi GA �,✓Firta- / ✓ibir�r� �tfav K.ntvNM DWLW tv �Sa E, —. '19� 7[1RA7itt IW J iBAR IZb1 pyMVw<aav .�.rwv�.� hA�R.aarodr ltOitVtvxn.w — Lv0•e1tvW.Atn ny� '� OF s t� i i Q f�3 • CITY OF mm, 77'12902 RANCHO CUGkMONi GA �,✓Firta- / ✓ibir�r� �tfav K.ntvNM DWLW tv �Sa E, —. '19� n �A ` 4c or -- nom. . /i% •;"; l' - ,....__ _ , .I �y°.�auf� ���7 T r• � ; __ � C �.. r I - - - -�c _,d_i _ _� _ _ •+vw_ lei /��lJ r- r- •�fSBT _� NOi1'f'i CITY OF rru 11/2,02 RANC D CUCAMaNGA mu,e'C A`u� /Eir�di,%z'� P /mil PI ANNING DIVL90IV E*UMT' SCALE _ f TL ItA YAP TRACT r i -JOS - - -.ate at.r 1r, mlat� �.Qr� /m�•I� ® Ff Y�CC /tIl10Y•I/ .fflDr na�i7 c /� TKO vor 1 70 t. ,e�Wi�uFD oni,4 CrIN OT• G07- -A� Y — 607 - RRSr Is 4s RANCHO CL'CAMO \'GaA nEm. _� / %902 Verse Avywtra/ A-era5 R-A! TNM DWMN IXHIEIT,_ZE- SGIFi /7*7 C Trgi/ y -. C bt1`t w © ; `w 1 � }1 1•v ® .I'T`S- µ3 'R r7I1 ® N "1 V CI 'Y 1 OF rrE�t ��2 RANCHO CUCAMO� \'GA rnu, Ii,� PLANNING DrvZiON CEX7HIAiT - �_SCq�Fi -- / / 1 % r Z O On d 0 Z .Z Z 3 a F- Z W a O J W W O z W a W a City of i- Cucamonga Tree Removal Perini GENERAL INFORMATION ' {' 2"AA Ordinance No. 37, pertaining to the proservatlon of trees on private property, requires that no person remove or relocate any woody plants In excess of twenty (20) feet In height and having a Tingle trunk circumference if twenty (20) Inches or more and multi-trunks having a circumference u Ihlrty (30) Inches or more (measurdd twenty-four (24) Inches from grounu level), without first obtaining a Tree Removal from the City. LOCATION OF SUBJECT SITE West side Rexmosa A pW at Foothills NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE OFAPPLICANT: Woodland Pacific DevelocnOrt, Ina.) ••,�•, 111 W. 9th Street Upland California 91786 (714) 946-1802 NAME. ADDRESS. TELEPHONE OF PROPERTY OWNER (it ~ other applicant): Dick Scott-'Inc., 1111 W. 9th Street Upland L.JSfoznia 91786 0114) 946-1802 ' REASONS F09 RFMOVAL(at .- tach neces.ary sheets): 'o con31rvct roads per , midi. on ; < . aG_tive `ftact 1 application T a La' ^902 , PROPOSED METHOD OF REMOVAL Tv.ze Lt<wg ,rod e� -9- fall :.•• pr trees curt far firewood, doze stumps. :V.• -u(Jµ14?r.. ..�. APPLICANT'SSIGNATURE:. I '}i3?I(I� ^ATE _3110 /f1A .� ,„T•c This application shall Indutla n plot plan• indicating location of all trees to be removed and retalf The species, number, and size of the trees to be removed shall be so designated. It a tree Is disew then a written statement from a licensed arborlst staling the nature of the disease shall be raquli ❑ APPROVED U DENIED < l .:. By. J :. c Reasons•. �.. 1 ra.n- Date: An approval shall not become effective until after a ten (10) day appeal pedal. Notllicatlon of appro-ral shall be gluon to property owners adjoining the subject property. 11 no appeals are received, then the permit shall . e beaomo effective ten (tq days from the date of action This approved tree removal permit Is valid (or 90 days Should applicant failed to remove the trees within this 90 day period, a now Parrott shall be raqulnd.'"" I. TJCIC e CT'i n April 19, 1985 Mr. Lauren Wasserman ��• City Manager City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 9340 Baseline Avenue, Unit A Rancho Cucamonga, California 91130 Lear Lauren: Re: Property At North End Of Hermosa Avenue As you know, we are currently developing the easterly aide of the above referenced property, in a project knot, as •Tho Woods`. This development was the subject of numerous cm municationa, letters, and other negotiations, spanning a several year period, the result Of which has been the development which 13z underway. This development, and the property on tha cart aide of Hermosa, which we own, are unique ones, with the stand of trees, etc. The Planning process for the property on 010 east aide o/. Her 7sa, currently under development, was accorded top priority by all affected departments and groups in an effort to (reserve the visual and aesthetic resources mid as many of the trees as possible, and to create a natural setting without extensive on -site grading. During the planning Proeess, we questioned the wisdom in removing literally hundreds of additional trees, in order to provide a network of equestrian trails, when, statistically, only a small fraction of home owners in the area north of Baryon have horeea, (according to information furnished to me by bath city staff and by Hs. Pm Henry, of Ne equestrian committee). However, in effort to resolve all matters harmoniously, we agreed to Installation of all of the trails, including, an extremely expensive trail, at the insistence of the project planner, immediately adjacent to Hernoru Avenue, on the east side. To install this trail, we had to remove trees to a distance of approximately 30' fm,. the curb line, and perform 1111 WESTNINTn STREET . ► ND.CAUFORNIA91768 . 714926.1602 , Nr. Lauren Wasserman April 19, 1985 Page 2 extensive grading, both elements which we had hoped to avoid in an effort to preserve the aesthetics and natural beauty of thJ area. In .TUno of )984, we began land plamIng for the property on the vast side Of Mermesa, and prepared a nurtxc Of schematics which seemed to meet the criteria of the planning staff and other affected agencies. After a number of meetings, reviews, etc., we concluded that the design criteria for that particular parcel was more intensively affected by geographical matters than the east side. Significant among the geographical tatters are the gradients of the property, the corifiguratton, and the creak rucning through the property which will become a ,mrtion of the Alta Loma storm drain facilities, for which we have given easements to the storm drain district. Accordingly, our plans were tevimrd to -rt the engineering criteria, and after several meetings with staff and varicus com ittees, we appear to have solved all matters as they relate to the land use concept, configuration and gradient, including an agreecent to individualize custom typo houses on certain of the lots, with attractive bridge driveways, etc. In addition, we agreed to the city's consulting geologist reviewing the geological and seismic data submitted on the property by Richard Nips and Associates, In ahnrt, we seem to have brought the proposed development to a point of acceptance by all affncmd city departments, however, the same situation is not true with the equestrian committee, whom I understand is an appointed group to give advice to rho staff, Planning Commission., and the Council. At }our suggestion, on Tuesday, April 16, 1985, I met with M. Pam Henry- in attendance was she, M. Bruce La Claire, of my office, and 1. I found her to be a charmirg perm, who appeared to understand our concerns war the apparent mandates of the equestrian comittee, but who reiterated the committee's position chat it would be necessary for there to be three .meth- to-south" equestrian trails within a distance of 3001 to 6000. In her analysis, she Projected the opinion that since the gereral plan of the City shows an equestrian trail parallel with the creek bed, that this exact location is mandated into the General Plan. Perhaps this is true, however, my understanding of the intent of the general plan, and in the shoving of equestrian trails thereon, is that certain flexibility be accorded in the exact locations, depending on such circtunctances as grams, drainage facilities, topographical, and aesthetic situations. Frankly, we acs at a quandary. if the el estrien ceaamittee's insistence prevails, we will be fOcMd to remove hudteds of additional trees, bisect a number of lots, with an casement for an w.- uentrian trail, for only approxim mly 1% of the people in the city, ,,nd do it with the knowledge that it mould parallel an additional planned trail located approximately 100' to 150' to the west. �/' M. Laumn -a_-- rows \ April 19. lY5 Page In addition, the hisectinj of individal lots With such trails raises a series of legal, 1lability, mintenance, and invasion of Privacy elements, which .+e do not feel is in the best interests of, the prospective purchasers Of L1ese hours, or the City. .miss.. C_ -f He are ntluctrnt to formalize an appeal of this ratter to the City Council, since ie strive toward the working net of land use patterns, With staff, and ether affected groups, to arrim at acceptable Coxrm4se. aPPeara to br good reason for do , Whuecu theca fad =aA However, ins Henry, has is trail that the cqueatrian tounaittee is adasarwt on Heir insistence upon a trail fo`lwinq the creek bed, which uauuld bisect a mrber of the lots. hb also question the essentiality of the eztcrt of equestrian trails, when there are a number of prospective purchaser, of homes, who do not wish to maintLdn equestrian facilititm nor to participate in the equestrian life- style. In fact. the City statistics show that the vast majority of hcao bchers do not wish to own borses. Ma realize that the pr+cblems set cut in this letter. are wive, and may requite more time for a dotailed study on the port of the City; eSortuaately# howevers ezistit3 there constraints give us, in of our LJ CC cdmitmm is to retire debt on the property, no more tine to devote to long negotiations. Ms. Henry ircicated that the equestrian c0235ttee we, in c41ete accord w2. ith the trail system as set out on our tentative nap for Lots 1 through 3 Per that reason, we request the follwirgt 1. Allow us to process, on an interim basis, tentative tract 12902 covering Iets 1 through 12 only, an that we could obtain !mediate tentative approval, for these 12 lots, and proceed with ergineeting, recordation, and construction as expeditiously as p sitse. 2. Request the City Council taco this ratter under adviseeent, on a fomalized basis. (not of an appeal mattze), to djsu the essentiality of having an additional trail parallel to the one which K ace to construct on the east side of Percher, Qxni them in an add�itioaal city trail achedrled on the westerly portion of wr proper, at the top of the slope. through Tract 10088, an that there mould 6ety, In effect, three north•acuth tzalla within, as stated herein, 300' to 600' of each other, with the necessary rvoval of hundreds reds of additional trees. Pur, uant thereto* if it is ford that the creek trail is to be a requirement for the develorn t, of the balanme of ohs property, we would request guidance in the method in Mich the sty proposes W individual each individl lot weer to utilize his let. vithoot cures w imvaasiaro of priv l# and without the liability to be inn ¢red allowing full use, by the 4*atsias, of tie property, to the by Of the proposed trail bisecting the lots, as the egce tr'han CM ittm requests. It is our undecstardimg that the City does not hdsir to rimers this liability, WE do not wi--h to der so, and r think it a fair assumption that the porchasers of homes wourid prey not to do so. .aa� - .r M_•. Lauren Wasserman April 19, 1985 Page 4 I tope that the comments contain in this letter will indicate our sincere interest in solving a situation in a harmonious nature, without friction, In a spirit of cooperation, between the city, ourselvaa, and the equestrian factions, bearing in mind all 'actors as e. =�aeratod herein. Should you appmw c1 this reasonable request, we would be able to proceed with development of that portion of property in which we are in full agreement with the standards set out by all of tho affected City departments, and the 12, and obtain answers rs to questions as related to fors l through expeditiously, obtain ensrers to questions as they affect Wes 13 through 32, so that the balance of tho project could be presented to the commission, ar: the Cooneil, with all pattlus in agreement. Sincerely, Richard N. Scott President Dick Scott. Inc. RNS/ca, S I CITY OF R.kNCHO CUCA OXG:1 MEMORANDUM DATF: May 8, 1985 TO FROM: SUBJECT: CkCA1r01. �' rz Chairman and Members of the mlanning Commission Pam Henry, Trail Advisory & Parks Development Comission ALTA LOMA CHANNEL TRAIL AND THE T° "" CASEMENTS THROUGH Thy RICHARD SCM/Mmi A�S(�iZ`OSvFF 606UP--f(jiYc�MPMtN 1 The Trail Committet required r..iy one north /south community trail over this project and Li.. A. ca Loma trarannel Trail. 2 The trail along Hermosa was required a collector for the several east /west feeder trails that dumped out onto Hermosa Avenue; no requirements for landscaping were made by the Committee. Staff directed the design of the parkway, just a: are most parkways along major public roads. 3. Because this is a unique area with the nanerous trees creating a forest -like environment, the standare feeder trail requirements fo^ cleared trail widths of 15 feet ane also grading requirements were altered so that the preservation of maximum number of trees was encouraged. We suggested "meande,ing ", natural pathways through the easemerts, with some tree tt,nning to ensure safety, and no alteration of the footing. 4. The Alta Lcma Channel Trail was established to overlay the drainage easement for dual use of tie easement. S. The Alta Loma Channel rail is a major coumunity north /south route linking the northern border of the rity to the southern boundary of the Equestrian Overlay zone. Its continuity is very important if it is to be a viable part of the recreational trail system. 6. Because the Alta Lama Channel Trail is north /south, it does not duplicate the functmon of the east to west Almond Trail, it Intersects that trail at Almond Street. The Almond trail swings south, along the top of the essentially impassible cliff which borders the west side of the Alta Loma Channel. It runs south for a short distance to bypass some deep ravines, before continuing westward. ao3 Y s � f PLANNING COMMISSIC IM Alta Loma Channel Trail May 8, 1985 Page AT 7. The location of the Alta Lama Trail, alongside the channel and creek, enable it to be one of the very few asthetically pleasing and enjoyable trail routes in the City. A recreational vs. a strictly circulatory experience. 8. The Citizen Advisors for the General Plan designated the Hermosa Groves a unique area, desirable of preservation for public enjoyment via a park designation Because of financial and other constraints, that has not been feasible. However, by providing a community trail overlay on the required drainage easement, a small semblance of that unique environment can be preserved for the appreciation of City residents. PH cv CITY OF RANCHO CUC^.IONGA STAFF REPORT DATE. May 8, 1985 TO: Chairman and Members of the ,tanning Commission FROM Rick Gomez, City Planner BY: Curt Johnston, Associate Planner SUBJECT: REVIEW OF E UESTRIAN TRAIL RE UIREMENTS FOR TENTATIVE custom of s_ o vision or ots on acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (less than 2 du /ac), located on the west side of Hermosa Avenue, south of Almcnd Street - APN 201- 071 -5, 6, 25, 26, 35, and 36. I. BACKGROUND: The Equestrian Advisory Committee reviewed this pro ect on two occasions recently and recommended specific locations for community and feeder trails as discussed below. The applicant, however, requested Commission review and direction of the trails recommendation prior to full consideration of the Tract Map. At issue is the requirement for a Community Trail along Alta Loma Creek. II. TRAILS COMMITTEE RECO!!4S70AtION: Exhibit •A' shows the Trails Comittee recommendation which ncludes community trails along Alta Loma Creek and at the north and south project boundaries. Local feeder trails will be located behind lots off of the three cul -dA- sacs. The Trails Committee recommended that standard trail Improvements be waived in favor of maintaining natural contours with a meandering 10 foot wide trail. Fencing on both sides of the community trail should be brown versus standard white extruded concrete rail fencing. The applicant, Dick Scott of Woodland Pacific, is concerned with the requirement for a trail along the creek and submitted a letter requesting further review of the issue. The key issues discussed in the letter are outlined in the following sectior staff analysis is provided. II. ISSUES /ANALYSIS: A. 0u lI ation of Commintt Trails: The applicant is concerned that tree nort south community trails are proposed within a distance of 300' to 600', and the requirement for a trail along the creek is excessive. t° C PLANNING COMMISSION "rAFF REPORT TT 12902 - Woodtrno icific May 8, 1985 Page 2 As shown on the General Plan Master Plan of Trails (Exhibit 480), three community trails converge near the subject property At the top of , steep slope along the west boundary of TT 12902 is a portion o' the east /west Almond trail which will be installed with development of Tentative Tract 10088 (Exhibit 'CO). The general alignment of this trail pard,..is Almond Street. Almond Street dies not connect through TT 10088 so alignment of the trail jogs south along Archibald Avenue, and then runs along the south ind east boundary of TT 10088 back up to Almond Street. An easterly connection along the boundary between TT 10088 and TT 12902 would be extremely difficult considering a steep slope drops off roughly 40 feet down to the creekbed. East of the subje,:t property within Tract 12237 a community trail is planned along Hermosa Avenue. This trail serves a dual purpose of providing north /south circulation for residents within Tract 12237 (Exhibit •00) and accommodates the community trail on Hermosa Avenue. Although improvement plans have been approved for a 30 foot wide trail in tnls location, the Equestrian Committee stated at their April 10 meeting that only a 12 foot wide community trail would be necessary. Regarding the creek trail in question, the alignment parallels Alta Loma Channel to make use of the drainage right -of -way, similar to Demons Channel or Cucamonga Creek. The portion of this trail adjacent to TT 12902 will provide a direct link to the Almond Trail. IS. Blseeted Lots /Ltab1IIty: The applicant is concerned that sect ng ots wits a trail along the creekbed will limit the full use of the property, create an invasion of privacy, and increase the lidb111ty of future homeowners. The Equestrian Advisory Committee felt the creekbed, as it exists, is a natural barrier dividing the lots. The Development Cade requires trail access to the rear of each lot (Section 17.00.060.E). Since the creekbed is ncer the base of the slope and westerly access is not feasible, the required community trail will function similar to a typical rear lot trail. The fences wilt inhibit entr} onto private property, but gates will be required on both sides of the trail at each lot to provide east /west access for homeowners. In audition, the numerous trees on the property will buffer the Lomas from the trail. C. Tree Preservation: The cpplicat.t is concerned that construct on a tails on the property will cause the removal of hundreds of additional trees. • _ • -rw�YYA Q• C PLANNING COMMISSION 'AFF REPORT TT 12902 - Woodlano dcific May 8, 1985 Page 3 The Equestrian Advisory Committee shares this concern and recommended that the standard grading procedures would not be andeth that the project trails at a minimum 10 foot width. creekbed D. Eomestuyers 5eosnot wis ptoimaintainLeequestrian u facilities t and that only a small percentage of the people in the City make use of the equestrian trails system. The Development Code prohibits within new subdivisions in requires the deelopment of regional trails. excluding the keeping of horses the Equestrian /Rural area and local feeder, community, and IV. RECOKpYoATION• The Equestrian Committee recommends that a C, y tra T be along the creekbed as indicated in the staff report. The Commission should review all input and elements regarding the issue and provide the appropriate direction to the applicant and Staff in order to final the preparation of staff / reports a propriate conditions for this project. R e submitted, Attachments: Exhibit •A• - Tentative Tract 12902 Exhibit •8• - General Plan Master Plan of Trails Exhibit •C' - Tentative Tract 10088 Exhibit 'D' - Tract 12237 Letter from Applicant I { ..g....t •..,. { QOQO 1 oapep }}L. ...... °...........e S' RD 1 F e.ea � 1 { k of W ¢ z O ; Q fi o --3 Q Y a� ° V S H a (' 7C = U W ¢ U •O tiaJ tj i °z$a a yF °a co QQ i s W OZ N °o y � N OO. f U O cr w ¢ LL vCJ W e a I °. I H 0. w o ➢i {� a LU �z t LL a w l ?� L wu IN: 1 I { ..g....t •..,. { QOQO 1 oapep }}L. ...... °...........e S' RD 1 F e.ea � 1 Jinn Markman, City Attorney, stated that he understood the SIA's concern, but any changes in land use densities would not be made overnight, but would be subject to advertised public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council. Additionally, that any changes considered by the City would be under the guidance of the City A,torney's office. Chairman Stout advised staff that the decision of the Commission seemed to be two Comnicsloners, himself and Commissioner Chitiea, in support of the alternative to look at sites on a case -by -case basis, and two Commissioners, Mctliel an? Rempel, in support of the no change alternative Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner, advised the Commission that staff would convey the Comissinn s recom+endations to the City Council at their May 15, 1985 'r meeting. i • : r . e 0. %n P. REVIE'A OF EUUES'RION TRAIL REQUIREMENTS FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12602 NVU UlNIVO PACIFIC - custom of su v s on o ots on acre 0 1 Land In the Very Low Residential District (less than 2 du /ac), located on a the west side of Hermosa Avenue, south of Almond Street - APR 201- 071 -5, 6, 25, 26, 35, and 36. 1 Dick Scott of Woodland Pacific stated concerns with trails requirements placed on this tentative tract by the Trails Committee. " Jim Markman, City Attorney, advised that the Commission could listen to Mr. Scott's concerns; however, would suggest that direction not be given at this n time since these are matters subject to public hearing G The consensus of the Commission was to defer discussion regarding trails fro /+' Tentative Tract. 12902 until such time as the tract canes before the Planning I Commission as a public hearing. ADJOURNMENT: Notion: Moved by Stout, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to adjourn. 10:05 p.m. - Planning Commission adjourned. R ectfu)�ubmitted, 31t��o7LL �•, Ric G z + Deputy Secretary i Y i Planning Commission Minutes -10- May 8, 1986 l r CITY OP RA::CHO CUC:` m:OA PART II - INITIAL ST -DY Eh'VIROf1N=;rA1. CHECKLIST DATE: A /" / APPLICJCT: FILING DATE: Z' 1;7 - p /•,'1 LCc b mum: T PROJECT: �Gf<'1f/%'% /i :, —' n'. j�•/.1//,4..�, Ile /� ✓ %/%. ✓_ PROJECT LOCATIONS G?C!1f17 1. ENMROV. SsrAL IHPACTS (Ezplaaarlon of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required cn attached sheets). I YES kSi NO 11 Soils and Ceoloay. Will tha proposal have fi signicant results 1n: A. unstable ground conditions or In changes in geologic relationships? / b. Disruptions, displacements, Compaction it burial of the Cull? ✓ C. Change in topography or ground surface Contour intervals? ✓ d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? ✓ e. Any potantlal increase in wind or water erosion of soil,, affecting either on or off Bite conditons? / f. Changes in erosion alltation, or dcposltl�n? -- g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such �L as earthquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? h. An increase in the rate of extraction and!or use of any mineral resource? ✓ 2. Nvdroloey, Will the proposal have significant results 1n: ' I a. Changes in currents, rents, or the Of flowing ourse of dire. tion w in g , Avers, or ephemeral stream channels? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage partarns. or the rate and a ,,ur.t of aur runoff? face voter c• Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d Change in the soount of surface water in anv body of waters e• Discharge into surface waters, or any . alteration of surface voter qualip•? I* Alteration of groundwater characteristics? S Change in the quantity of groundvacers, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through Interference with an squifer? Quality? Quantity? page l YES �aygr. a V/ h. The reduction in the amount of water wise other- available for public water supp110s? 1• Exposure of people or property to water related hazards -- such as flooding ooding or seichest 3* 41r DUallty Will 111 the proposal have significant a• Constant or periodic air emissions from or indirect sour...? mobile Stationary sources? /• b. Deterloration of a=blent air quality and /or Saterferance with -1C the attainment of a air quality standard.? pplicable c• Alteiatlon of local or regional climatic conditions, affecting air movement, or temperature? moss taro a. Dim ota Flora. Will tae proposal have significant rasulta s• Change in Including d the characteristics of speciea. iversity, distributloa, or number Of any species o plants? / fb• lteduetlom of t e nuabers of any 6nfquo, rare V or endangered speclns of ' s —: Plants? �/, f__ _ r t ?age 1 YES c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of Plants trtb an area] / d. ;;eduction in the potential for aµrlcultural V production] / Fauna. 1 11111 the proposal have 81- nificant result, ✓ n: a. Change in the rharactnriatics of species, including dlveralty, distribution, or numbers of any species of anama),? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare r V o� endangered spacfes of animals• ✓ c. Introduction a, new or disruptive opeclea of animals into an area, or rssult In a barrier to the migration or row cent of animals] _ ✓ d. Detcrirration or removal rf existing Limb or wildlife habitat) / 3 ? latlon. 111.1 the proposal have significant V result& in: a. '4111 the propos 1 alter the location, distri- buticn, density, diversity, or growth rate of the h:can population of an area] - _ ✓ h. W-1 the proposal affect "jettrg housing, or create a demand for addicl,tnal la•.sing] _ ✓ 6. iocio- ECOnomlc Factors. Will the proposal have signiflcan, tasults in: a. Change in local or regional ao.10- economic characrorlatics, Including eca .odic or cooe:cial diversity, tax rats and property values} -- J b. Vill project caeca be equitably distributed amon3 project beneficiaries, i.e , buyers, tax payers or project users} ✓ 7. )and Use and plannine Consideration•. "ill the ' proposal have eignlficane results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present or Planned land use of an area? ✓ o. A conflict with any designations, objectives,` Policies. or adopted plans of any govern: eatal eacltlea} -- c. An Impact upon the qulalty or quantity of axlsting consumptive or non- consueptiva recreational opportunities} \ —_ •/ CZ Page 6 8. Will the YES }!AY9f o resultorenelon. proposal have significant TaaY1CA tp: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b• Effects on exlsting streets, or demand for _- new street construction? c. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for law parking? V d. Substantial impact upon existing tranaporea- tlon -- system? .._ ✓ e• Alteration$ to present patterns of clrcula- t1on or Movement of people and /or goods? ✓ I, Alterations to or effects on present and _�_ Potential water -borne, tail, yes transit or air traffic? Vol 8• Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists -- or pedestrians? 9. Cultural lources. 11111 the proposal have •ignif scant results in: a. A disc,:�anco tt' the integrity of archaeological, paleoutologital, /or and historical resources? ✓ 10. Health. Safetv, and Wutsance Factors. Will the �_ proposal have signiticsnt results in: A. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? �✓ e. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident? ✓ d, An Increase In the number of individuals of species of voctet or pathenogenlc organism or the exposure of people to such organis=t / Vj e. Increase in existing noise luvels? f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous Y noise levels? -- V111 8• 7ho creation of objectionable odors? h. An increase It light or glare? -- /3 I C � Pa gc S 11. Aesthetics, 4111 the YS :tAY3r {p proposal have significant results in: a. The obstruction or degradation of env i vista or vice? scenc b. The creation of an assehetical+, -- slte? offensive ✓ e, A conflict with the obleetive of deslgnsced _— or potential scenic corridors? 12. Utilities and Public Services. 4111 the proposal have a aignificanc V need for new systems, or alcera�lons to the following: a. Electric power? ✓ b, Natural or packaged gas? , C. Communications rystems? ✓ d. Water supply? ✓ e, Wastewater faeilitles7 ✓ f. Flood control Structures? g. Solid waste facilities? —_ / Ae h. Fire protoccion7 ✓ 1. Police protection? J. Schools? k. Parks or other recreational facilities? '✓ z 1. Nalntenance of public fscilities, including roads and flood control. fac111ties7 ✓ m• Ocher governmental sazvices? 13. Enarry and Scarce Resourel. U111 the proposal have cignlficant rnaultecln: a. Use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy? b, Substantial Increase In demand upon existing sources of energy? _ e. An increase in the demand for development of new sources of energy? d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption of y non- rcnevable foray of energy, when feasible ronevable sources of energy are available? �_ C C- Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or scarce natural resource? 14 Mandator, Findin s of Significance. Page 6 YES MAYBE NO a, Does the p-o]ect have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the labitac of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to ellainato a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate Important e%amples of the mater periods of California history or prehistory? ✓ b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short -term, to the disadvantage of long -term, environmental goals? (A slwrt -term impact on the environment is one which occurs In a relatively brief, deftnitiva period of time while long- term impacts will endure well Into the future). ._ to Does the Iroject have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the Incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, and probable future project.), ✓ d. Doc% the project have environmental effects vh -_h will "we %,b,tantial adverse effects on human belags, either directly or indirectly? V% II. DISCDssIow OF E- IMROA>@NTAI. EVALUATIO`? (i.e., oP aflSrcative answer to the above questions plus a diccusafon of proposed mitigation measures), r i Page 7 III DETEI_YINATIoN On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ I find the proposed project '==iO NOT have a sig,11ficant effect or. Chu en:ironoent, and A — GATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find ths: although the proposed project could have a significant effete on the ervlron=ent, there will not be a significant effect In this case because the oitigation measures described on an attached these have bten added to the project. A NEGAIIIE DEC—' WTIJN STILL BE PREPARED. EDI find the proposed project W envlrsccnt, and an WVjRO \�mr Date 4•2 /•4* �X�%GA22f'1�77 0� Y'fl-yl - , 2 the unite of f /vWa� lie dW/ r� ur�f 111 -° fo bUi /dabs �r�q tv��irn �r� /off. o�� a�/ dii�c� and a riaw k p>4 7%w w111 Im' Giiarx A// otter' aYZaS c - - /one fi� - c /rairra nnfiria/ �t��. i �Lr� i5 a lwten�� / >�r �'o/� /�}' dgmAy& Walerh ph �hi5 �✓/!8. To /Cdu4f -/� /ike /ihc�q' P74 Erich daRye all IVIla'iny0 cv /I/ !l:-, abode /), { fad letel and &e1bqe4 .604r-t leiom ft/ P a/(0 alb. -fle e /e corerea' /� a unfae 9rvle W At 'Ciuw will 4-V Wa r� /W e aezery � m A�f f�"� �TJY 7%L! GO/i�7`C�71l1'i 07�' bIY ®�5� �GepfY.rs/� �7Z?/ �5 OnlA A. �O�O�°G�7o79 mG.�bu�� 8orr %dim .�lU���g h?ve /nGrecr� avf�Ye a�P�Prq� � ��xic� 7l1Pi /h1� of �lae 9ro� �i-om HG�'mo.� A�Giiu2 b• /f 16' le4 1~11 fo /ihtrerr ,cam /Va/ vub /,G 6fiisv:�, a5 a rf o� c dF.✓ 1*4kitf 1911 •im firA�f � r RESOLUTION No. 86 -41 A RESOLUTIGN OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCdD CUMMAGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIOa4LLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT HAP NO. 12902 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Hap No. 12902, hereinafter 'Nap" submitted by Woodland Pacific, applicant, for the purpose oR subdividing the real Property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as 39.7 .cres locates on the west side of Hermosa Avenue, south of Almond Avenue into 29 lots, re.;Jlarly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on April 23, 1986; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has recommended approval of the Map subject to all conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Olvisi s's reports; and Engineering and PlanningPDivision 's Commission andhas has cons-derad presented at the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the C ;ty of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows: SECTION 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings in regard toTn;a{Tve Tract No. 12902 and the Pep thereof: (a) The tentative tract is consistent with the Genera) Plan, Development Code, and specific pldns; (b) The design or Improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specific plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; (d) The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; (f) The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. (g) That this project will not create adverse impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration is issued. RESOLUTI04 NO. TT 12902 - NOODLANCS LIFIC April 23, 1986 Page 2 aECTI04 2: Tentative Tract Map No. 12902 a copy of which is attached heret,,, 's iFereUy approved subject to all of the following conditions and the attacned Standard Conditions: Planning Division: 1. Lots siding on Hermosa Avenue (1, 11, 12, 18, 19, d 24) shall provide minimum 36 feet side yard setback from curb face. 2. Height, material and type of fencing used along Hermosa Avenue shall be subject to review and approval of the City Planner. 3. Tree remove' is allowed only for the construction of streets, equestrian trails, flood protection and minimal pad preparation per 3p roved Tree Removal Permit. Additional Tree Removal rermits will be required at such time that proposed dwellings are submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval. 4. C.C.6Rs shall be prepared for the project to preserve existing trees, maintenance of trails, and minimize grading. Further. CCdR's shall prohibit solid (view obstructing) walls or fences. The C.C.SRs shall be prepared by the applicant and submitted to the City for review and approval prior to approval of the final map. 5. All trails, fences, drainage provisions and site clean -up shalt be accomplished in conjunction with street improvement installations. This shall include appropriate texturized pavement treatment where the community trail crosses Hermosa Avenue. 6. Provide an easement for community trail purposes west of the drainage course to the west property boundary as recommended by the Equestrian Advisory Committee. A modified community trail standard will be required subject to the review and approval of the Equestrian Advisory Comittee prior to recordation. Engineering Division: 1. Main north /south natural drainage channel: A. Minimal grading is allowed within the channel as necessary for flood protection for future residences as approved by the City Engineer. 0/9 RESOLUTION No. TT 12902 - NOODLAIRC VCIFIC April 23, 1986 Page 3 8. All buildings shall be set back a minimum of 50' from the edge of the Q100 water surface level, unless erosion preventing measures such as rip rap are building provided backs line e tol this ioeffect Ashall be placed on the final map. An offer of dedication to the City for drainage purposes for the total area within the building set back lines shall be made on the final map. 0. A final drainage study shall be prepared by the developers engineer for the total project and approved by the City Engineer prior to recordation of the final map. 2. Drainage devices from the cul -de -sac streets to the natural channel shall be provided as approved by the City Engineer. Easements for the devices shall be dedicated on the final map. 3. A minimum 20' wide easement for access to Parcel 29 frog Court '8'. 4. The Almond Street crossing of the natural channel shall be designed to pass a Q100 under the street. S. A storm drain system shall be constructed within Almond Street to conv.v flows from the area to the northeast of the Remainder Parcel to the natural channel generally as shown on the conceptual grading plan. 6. The developer shall place underground the existing overhead electric lines less than 66 KY and the telecommunication lines on the Opposite side of Hermosa Avenue for the entire length Of the subject tract upon construction of the streets for Tract 12902. 7. Prior to recording, a deposit shall be posted with the t assessmentsinun er that Alta cLama OChannel LiAssessment District among the newly c -eated parcels. • RESOLUTION 110. ^ TT 12902 - WOODLAND I -IFIC t April 23, 1986 Page 4 BUILDING DIVISION: 1. All required drainage easements, per review and approval Of Building Official, shall be shown 3n final map. 2. Prior to recordation of final map, the applicant shall: a. Remove the reservoir; or, b. Provide proof positive that no other party has claim to the use of the reservoir and bond for its removal. The reservoir shall be removed at the time of street construction operations. Under both conditions, service lines that are determined to have a detrimental effect en lot 4 or adjacent lots sh 11 be removed. Lot 4 shall be returned to structural adequacy under continuous Inspection of a qualified soils engineer. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23RD DAY OF APRIL, 1986. THE CITY OF RIUICHO CUCA40NOA I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Comission held on the 23rd day of April, 1986, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, NCNIEL, RE4PEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: CWHISSIONERS: BARKER a,:)-i CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIIONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: April 23, 1986 TO: Chairman and Members of thIYee jP,lanning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Plannen'T BY: Debra Meier, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ADDENDUM TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - ENVIRONMENTAL Staff recommends the following conditions to be added to the Resolution for the the above project: BUILDING DIVISION: 1. All required drainage easements, per review and approval of Building Official, shall be shown on final amp. 2. Prior to recordation of final map, the applicant shall: a. Remove the reservoir; or, b. Provide proof positive that no other party has claim to the use of the reservoir and bond for its removal. The reservoir shall be removed at the time of street construction operations. Under Loth conditions, service lines that are determined to have a detrimental effect on lot 4 or adjacent lots shall be removed. Lot 4 shall be returned to structural adequacy under continuous inspection of a qualified soils engineer. Staff also recommends the following modification to Engineering Division Condition 7 as follows: 6. Underground Utilities wa�cr Aga.... 1) Option 1 - The develope- shall pay an in -lieu fee equivalent to one -half of the front foot cost of undergrounding the overhead electric lines less than 66 KY and telecommunication lines or. the opposite side of the street (a Lv al of 2127 feet) prior to recordation of final map; or a 2) Option 2 - The developer shall place underground the existing overhead electoic lines less t1nan 66 KV an4 t.1e telecoomunicat�on lines on the opposite side of the street for the entire iength of the subject tract dff0f 10 OeJO$OJO1 foi i�f 190 7011 upon construction of the sutie:s for Tract Staff recommends the addition of the following Engineering Division condition: 7. Prior to recording, a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments under the Alta Loma Channel Assessment District among the newly created parcels. Years ago and stated that smoke and fire alarms and exit lights had been installed, as well as crash 'jars on the doors He stated that he had been unable to make contact with the Fire District to determine what is required and advised chat the VFW would be willing to do whatever is necessary once the requirements are determined. There were no further comuents, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea asked If staff had received written notice from the Fire District as to what is required Mr Putrino replied :ht: a copy of the letter from the Fire District to the applicant was received by staff. One of the requirements is to present a plan. He indicated that Mr. Barnes' plan may not have been an electrical plan showing the Wrin, system for the fire alarm which is actually what was requested by the Fire District.. He advised that this letter was dated approximately a month ago. Chairman Stout suggested that the Fire District be invited to present testimony with respect to their contacts with the VFW since there seems to be some factual disputes between the two which need to be settled He further suggested that the item be continued No weeks and asked the Fire District to provide a case file including all correspondence Mott on: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Chitlea, unanimously carried, to continue the public hearing for the Revocation of Conditional Use Permit 84 -14 to the May 14, 1986 meeting. ♦ r t r t E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT A40 TENTATIVE TRACT 12902 - WOODLAND PACIFIC - A propose res en a su o v s,on o o an one rema n er parce on 39.7 acres of land in the Very Lam Residential District (less than 2 du /ac), located at the southwest corner of Hermosa Avenue and Almond Avenue - APN 201- 071 -5, 6, 25, 26, 35, and 36. In addition, applicant has requested a Tree Removal Permit to remove select portions of trees. Debra Meier, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. Richard -cott, Hoodland Pacific, gave an overview of the project. He asked for clarification of Standard Condition J-6(a) regarding surety and the posting and execution of an agreement guaranteeing completion of all on -site drainage facilites to the satisfaction of the Building Official prior to the issuance of grading and building permits He suggested this be done prior to issuance of grading hermits for each individual lot rather than prior to recordation of the mtp and be included in the CC&R's or some type of delineation on the final maps. Ptanninp Commission Minutes -3- April 23, 1986 V;o 7 Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil' ingin3er, advised that these were conditions of the Building Official in the Building and Safety Division, therefore, lie would not have the authority to agree to an amendment to the condition. Mr. Scott asked if this tract were approved by the Commission tonight, would it be agreeable to add a notation to allow this to be worked out with staff. Mr. Hanson replied that the condition was made to the satisflc3tion of the Building 3fficial, which would grant some latitude. Hr. Scott asked for clarification of building setback line relative to the offer of dedication for drainage purposes. Mr. Hanson replied that this would be a SO foot setback line from the edge of the 100 year water surface. Me further explained that it would be an offer of dedication for the total 50 feet on either side of the water surface area. Mr. Scott asked if this would be to the edge or the creek? Mr. Hanson indicated that this was correct. Frank Williams, Associated Engineer, suggested that it might be better to word that dedication be within limits of the 100 year flow ratrer than saying building setback lines since there may not be any building setback lines on this side o" the creek. He Indicated that the problem with the condition as stated is that it may be in conflict on a couple of lots where the 50 foot setback cannot be obtained and alternate methods may have to be used. Mr. Hanson replied that le would like to establish one on the west side as well as the east side st,ce staff doesn't know if structures could possibly be constructed there. He Indicated that staff woule like to make sure that those structures are not within 50 feet of the setback line. Mr. Scott addressed the Grading Committee's recommendation that grading of any additional equestrian trail required by the Commission be reviewed by the Committee prior to action on the map. His understanding was that this recommendation would be attached as a condition of approval on the tract that would be resubmitted while doing balance of processing. Mr. Hanson stated that he understood the reconrendation to require the review of the type of grading done on that trail which would be taken care of prior to recordation. Mr. Scott was concerned that the •;taff report stated that If an addition trail was required he would havr to g3 back to the Grading Committee and submit plans prior t^ tentative nip approval. He indicated that this was not his understanding when talking to Gridfng staff and his understanding was that review could be done following afproval of the tentative map and while doing everything else. Planning Commission Minutes -4- April 73, 1986 Brdd Buller, City Planner, advised that if the trail is to be moved, staff, would recommend that the Comaisslon not take action on this tentative map untm staff has a :hence to look at the Tina' plans inrluding grading and make a recommendation. Mr Sc -ought up the issue that trails would be a liability to the City if trails ected lots he protested the undergrourding of utilities on the east sl f Hermosa Pam Henr„ representing the Trails Advisory Committee addressed the trail issue. Ms Henry advised that the Committee had tried to give this developer as much con,ideration as possible and determined that it was reasonable to delete the trail along Hermosa as a community trail and leave the trail along the channel and the creek. She advised that this is a unique trail in t:.at it is one of the few aesthetic trails in the community. She explained that the reason the trail was placed in this location is because of geographic problems The committee addressed the grading issue and suggested that the trail be left as close to natural state as possible following the creek and recommended as few trees as possible be removed to permit safe passage and crat grading be kept to a minimum if not eliminated all together to keep the latura. to -ain in tact She emphasized the importance of the trail as a connection w the Almond trail to the north and the continuation o+ down to the Alta Lama Channel to the Alta Lama Basin Frank Williams, Associated Engineers, advised the the applicant would like to keep the trail in as natural state as possible and not do extensive grading and drainage controls; huwdver, the City has adopted community trails standards which require stringent design He stated that if this recommendation was adopted, the appllccnt would need relirl rrom that requirement. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea stated that the Eucalyptus grove in this location is a very unique and special feature of the City which should be available to the entire Community She advised that should the trail be moved to Hermosa, It will be lost to tLe residents of this City as a whole and she could see no reason to do th,t. She further stated that the alignment of the trail on the east side des discussed a year ago and it was agreed that this would not be the community trait. She advised that the trail mentioned further td the west 1s unaccesslble and is a jog on the Almond trail which goes north /south beca•ise of the terrain She did not want to see this tract devrioped in an-/ other way than witt the trail along the creek bed. She stated the utiliti,s should be undergrounded. Commissioner McHiel agreed that the utilities should be unuergrounded. He was not particularly concerned with the trails, but supported Commissioner Chitiea's recommendation. Planning Commission Minutes -5- April 23, 1986 teat' Commissioner Rempel was concerned with the maintenance of trails and stated that there may be some real problems eventually for the City. He advised that a considerable amount of water came down that channel in 1969 and the trail is going to be very costly to maintain. He stated that the utilities should be undergrounded. Chairman Stout stated that the trail is essential along the creek bed and the standards should be modified in this case. He agreed that the utilities should be undergrounded. Commissioner Chitiea advised that the Trails Committee did not want the trail constructed under community trails standards; this would be a special situation and treated as such. Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that if the Commission's direction is to recommend approval of the community trail along the creek bed but not to the •urrent standards, he felt they could be wurked out with the Trails Committee Commissioner Chitiea agreed that this should go back to the Trails Committee. Chairman Stout asked if staff was satisfied with the engineering for the channel as far as flood control. Mr. Hanson replied that staff will look at it closer in final the design phase, but was fairly satisfied at this point. Commissioner Rempel asked if staff knew the location of the minimum 50 foot setback from the 100 year flood plan. Mr. Hanson replied that it wa.s a best scientific guess Commissioner Rempel stated that ne really didn't like guesses and was not comfortable with i feet back from a guess line. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by McNiel approving Tentative Tract 12902, with the requ existing overhead electric lines less than 66 k, lines on Hermosa, and language added to Plannt� require design of the community trial along the c preserves natural terrain as much as possible, Equestrian Advisory Committee prior to recordatior Division conditions requiring drainage easements b and the requirement of either removal or bond reservoir Motion carried by the following vote: to adopt the Resolution •eaent to underground the and the telecommunication Division condition 6 to :ek bed to be such that it rbject to approval by the and inclusion of Building be shown on the final map, 9 of the removal Of the AYES: COMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, REMPEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS ISSENT ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER Planning Coamission Minutes •6- - carried April 23, 1906 i CITY OF RANCHO CUCAbIONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 4, 1986 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Brun? Cook, Associate Planner • SUBJECT: ENVIROM9ITAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 86 -01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCIO1UN1iA - An amendment to Section subdivisions,a Settlona 7 1 03,to grading of custom lot pertaining to usable yard area, and Section 17.02.140 pertaining to definitions of the Development Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga I. BACKGROUND: This Development Code Amendment is in response to the irecon of the Planning conission to clarify the intent and p -ovide more flexibility regarding grading of custom ]at subdivisions. The goal is to foster innovative grzding techniques or in situations where strict adherence to grading policies would be impractical, allow alternative techniques which still maintain the primary goal of minimizing grading and des'gning built structures to conform to the natural topography. II. AHALYSI5: The Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of this amendmart on April 23, 1986. This Amendment would revise three different sections of the Development Coda in regard to grading of risto:n lot subdivisions. Firstly, grading requirements for custom lot subdivisions are modified to permit more flexibility in the Ldministering of grading policy Secondly, language in regard to usable yard space is expanded to clarify Intent in regard to custom lot subdivisions. And finally, the definition for the term •subdivision• is expanded for consistency with th %e day -to -day use of the term. II1. CORRcSPONDENCE: This Development Code Amendment has been a verttie3 as a public hearing to The Daily Report newspaper. IV FACTS FOR FINDING: Before approving the Development Code Amendment. the oGuncil must determine that the Amendment will not be detrimental to adjacent properties or cause significant environmental impacts. In addition, the proposal must be consistent with the intent of the General Plan and the Development Code. d� 1477 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT OCA 86 -01 - City of Rancho Cucamonga June w, 1985 Page 2 IV. RECOMMENOATION: The Planning Commission recommends approval of this3�t Code Amulment. If the City Council concurs. issuance of a Negative Declaration and adoption of the attached Ordinance would be in order. Respe lly soma , % rad 8uller City Planner BB:BC:ns Attachments: Planning Cammiision Staff Report. April 23, 1986 Minutes of the April 23. 1986 Planning Commission Meeting Planning Commis ;ion Resolution City Council Ordinance r n• CITY OF R-ANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 23, 1986 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Bruce Cook, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENNTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE ANENOMENT 0 Urnposa�to ecc on L7.06.010-5(a) pertaining to grading of custom lot subdivisions, Section 17.08.040 -J pertaining to usable yard area, and Section 17.02.140 pertaining to definitions of the Development Ccde of the City of Rancho Cucamoaga, Ordinance No. 211. I. BACKGROUND: This item has been continued from the Planning arsmt`T sin meeting of March 26, 1986, to allow s!af• the opportunity to re.ise the language of the amendment to: a) clarify who has the decision making responsibility to determine when and where it is appropriate to implement more flexible grading criteria on custom lot subdivisions, and b) incorporate language specifying the need to require usable open space in some form other than as graded yard area on projects where the intent is to minimize grading. ti. ANALYSIS: In response to the first item, staff has reworded the proposeT'revision to Section 17.06.010 -5(a) as follows: Staff feels it is a policy issue that would be most appropriately handled by the Planning Commission. The Commission's determination would be made based upon the merits of the proposed development and recommendations of the various review Committees. Accordingly, To e:courage innovative site planning techniques and provide for a variety of housing styles. grading within custom lot subdivisions shall occur for streets, trails, and drainage control only. Additional grading may be allowed subject to approval by the Planning Commission where innovative grading techniques are utilized and where the site constraints and strict adherence to this requirrment to limit gradlag would render development of the site infeasible. $4jest to aMraval by iM Planning Qwisstan open the 3a 1TEh G PLANNING COMIISSION STAFF REPORT Development Code Amendment 86 -01 April 23, 1986 Page 2 reaammealatien of the Grading Committee. The intent is that built structures be designed to fit the natural topography and that grading be minimized, wherever possible. (Refer to Section 17.08.040 -J Ir regard to requirements for useable yard area.) Regardir:g the issue of useable yard space, st.•f 1s proposing inclisior of new language to amend Section 17.08.040 -J as follows: Usabl± Yard Area. For single family detached/seml- deza,;ned SuDdIvislons. a minimum 15 feet of flat, usable re,.� yard area shall be provided betwta the house and tap or toe of non- retained slope banks or to the retaining wall in the case of retained cut or fill per City grading standard drawings. However, in areas cf hilly or sloped terrain where grading is being designed to minimize alteration to the natural land form, usable open space should be provided in the form of decks, patios, balconies, or some similar form of built structure designed to fit the natural topography rather than as graded level yard area. (Refer to attached Ordinance for illustrations used to help clarify intent.) III. ENVIROtaIENTAL ASSESSMENT: Staff recommends that the Planning amm ss on ma a the findings required pursuant to Division 13, Chapter 6, Section 21166, of the Public Resources Code that would not require a subsequent or supplemental Environmental Impact Repert and recommends Issuance of a Negative Declaration. This finding is based upon the fact that the Development Code implements the existing goals and policies of the Gene-al Plan which were fully analyzed with regard to environmental impacts during the General Plan EIR. IV. FACTS FOR FINDING: Before approving this Development Code n en t e Commission must determine that the Amendment will not be detrimental for individuals and for property, and will not cause significant environmental impacts. In addition, this project must be consistent with the intent of the General Plan. V. CORRESPONDENCE: This Development Code Amendment has been a verb as a public hearing in The Oa11v Report newspaper. VI. RECOM!ENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission rev ew a e ements and input regarding this proposal. If the Commission determines that this Development Code Amendment is consistent with the Facts for Findings, then Issuance of a Negative Declaration and adoption of the attached Resolution would be in order. PDeANNINO C'K4'SSION STAFF REPORT Development Code Amendment 86 -01 April 23, 1986 Page 3 Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB :8C:cv Attachments: Staff Report . March 26 1986 Staff Report - February 12, f986 Initial Study, Part II Resolution of Approval �ar r yr m Xu nV UU%.An1VMJA C%CAAro�y STAFF REPORT DATE: March 26, 1986 1977 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Bruce Cook, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT n ')posal to amen Section - pe n a rca ng o grading of custom lot subdivisions, and 17.02.140 pertaining to definitions, of the Development Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Ordinance 211. I. BACKGROUND: This Development Code Amendment is in response to the re 3%i oin of the Planning Commission to provide more flexibility regarding grading of custom lot subdivisions. II. ANALYSIS: In reviewing the Development Code, staff perceives the source o7 the problem to be primarily the result of two specific Issues: (1) the misapplication of the term •custom lot subdivision", and (2) the 'all or nothing" inflexibility of the current standard for grading of custom lot subdivisions which does not faster innovative grading techniques or alternatives in unique situations where strict adherence to grading policies would be impractical. There are three types of subdivision applications within the Development Code as follows: Custom-lot Subdivision: The tondiAon where a piece of land Is subdivldedan lots are sold in an ndeveloped state on a lot -by -lot basis for individual development. Tract Subdivision The condition where a piece of land is su v e now, but to be developed at some future date as a single tract by one developer. Total Residential Development The condition where a p ece o an s su v concurrently with site development of a housing product. The term custom lot subdivision has been mistakenly applied to both custom-lot an trac subdivisions, The intent of a "custom-lot subdivision' is the condition where land is subdivided and :� 3.3 PLANIIING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCA 86 -01 - City of Rancho Cucamonga !Larch 26, 1986 Page 2 undeveloped lots are sold for individual development of "arstom homes'. The rationale here is that custom homes are traditionally higner -end products in which grading of lots is ift to the individual property owner instead of being predetermined, in the hope of encouraging innovative site planning techniques and a variety of housing styles. To apply this term to projects that are being subdivided now, but to be developed as a single tract at a future date, is a misapplication of the term for custom lot subdivisions, not consistent eith the intent. As a remedy, staff would propose the following 4efinitions be added to Section 17.02.140 of the Development Code: Tract Subdivision: A subdivision which creates five or more parcels to a developed as a whole or in part by an owner or building for all residential projects of more than four (4) dwelling units. Total�Developent Subdivision: A project whtth includes tthe to al review of ent a eve o t nt riding _ tentative tract landscaping, D rove , unit placelent. des an rep pc. a,,pu mans cnac grauing wltnln custom loo suoalvlslons snail occur for streets only. As stated above, the primary purpose to limiting gra ng of custom lot subdivisions 1s to leava the land to as natural a state as possible to allow for the greatest flexibility in the ability of the property owner to design and tuild his /her own unique dwelling. However, there are some situations ohere an individual lot -by -lot grading scheme becomes Impractical. The physical constraints of the site may require certain techniques such as rear yard cross -lot drainage, shared use and maintenance of slope banks, etc. In these situations, for these techniques to work, grading of lots becomes interdependent upon adjoining lots. This type of scheme can only be reasonably expected to function if this site is graded on a comprehensive, mass grading basis. In situations such as this, the Oevelopment Code requirement limiting the grading to streets only for custom lot subdivisions can present obstacles that severely inhibit the ability to develop a particular project site with a feasible, workable solution. As a remedy, staff would propose a revision to Section 17.06.010 -5(a) as follows• .r a T PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCA 86 -01 - City of Rancho Cucamonga March 26, 1986 Page 3 To encourage innovative site planning techniques end Provide for a variety of housing styles, grading within custom lot suDdivisions shall occur for streets, trails, and drainage control only. Additional grading may be allcwed where inmvative grading techniques are utilized and where the site constraints and strict adherence to this requirement to limit grading would render development of the site infeasible subject to spproval by the Planning Commission upon the recommer;ation of the Grading Committee. The intent is that built structures be designed to fit the national topography and that grading be minimized, wherever possible. III. EM![ROMLMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Staff recommends that the Planning Zomm ss on ma a the findings required pursuant to Division 13, Chapter 6, Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code that would not require subsequent jr supplemental Environmental Impact Report and recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. This finding is based upon the fact that the Development Code implements the exis:in3 goals and policies of the General Plan which were fully enalyzei with regard to environmental impacts during the General Plan EIR. IV. FACTS FOR FINDING: Before approving this Development Code n ent, t e ssiOn must determine that the Amendment will not be detrlmentai for individuals and for property, and will not cause significant environmental impacts. In addition, this project must be consistent with the intent of the General Plan. V. CORRESPONDENCE: This Development Code Amendment has been a vert s as a public hearing in The Daily Reoort newspaper. VI. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommP.Ms that the Planning Commission rev ew a e eOents and lnpu` - larding this proposal. If the Commission determines that tics Development Code Amendment is consistent with the Facts for Findings, then issuance of a Negative Declaration and adoption of the attached Resolution would be in order. Res�y submitted Brad Buller City Planner 88:BC:ns 64 'Y PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DCA 86 -01 - City of Rancho Cucamonga March 26, 1986 Page 4 Attachments: Staff Report - February 12, 1986 Initial Study, part II Reso tion of Approval t t CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: February 12, 1936 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller. City Planner BY: Bruce Cook, Associate Planner SUBJECT: GRADING OF CUSTOM LOT Sn!OIVISIOtIS ��curQ� fz� n c• 3 I ABSTRACT: The purpose of this report is to receive policy re �i coon regarding grading of custom lot tracts. Staff is recommending that the Development Code policies on grading be revised to allow greater flexibility to deal with varying site conditions. It. BACKGROUND: The Development Code distinguishes between two types o u- sions. "Tract Subdivisions" are the more traditional form whereby the developer subdivides the land into Individual lots and then builds a house on each of the lots from a previously approved set of house plans. Once constructed, these tract homes are then offered for sale to individuals for residence. A "Custom Lot Subdivision• Is a case wnere subdivided lots are sold in their undeveloped state to Individuals who then build houses on these lots on a one- by -oie basis. Per the Development Review process of the City, before home sites can be constructed, grading plans must be approved. With tract subdivisions, mass grading occurs over the entire site, Including both streets and lot sites. However, grading with custom lot subdivisions is limited to streets only and also to trails, when applicable. The Development Code does not permit mass grading of tot sites with custom lot subdivisions. Mass grading should be distinguished from "padding' out of the lots. Padding of lots is characteri :L-d by cut and fill slopes to create terraced, flat, building pads. Mass grading Involves grading techniques that are sensitive to natural terrain, such as contour grading and variable slope bank gradients. (King Rauch Estates is an example of mass grading). III. ANALYSIS: The operative word in the definition of custom Tot su v s ors is individual; custom lot subdivisions, as opposed to tract home developments, are where the person owas a raw piece of land and has the opportunity to design a custom home specifically suited to the site constraints. To encourage a variety of housing styles and site planning techniques, the Development Code limits grvding for custom lot subdivisions to streets only, and requl-is buildings to be designed to fit the natural topography. Im PLANNING Ca`MSS101/ -AFF REPORT Grading of Custom Lac Subdivisions February 12, 1986 °age 2 l ,k Limiting grading to streets only requires that each lot be graded independently in a self-contained manner. There are some situations where .i individual, lot -by -lot grading scheme becomes impractical. The physical constraints of the site may require certain techniques such as rear yard cross -lot drainage, shared use and maintenance of slope banks, etc. In these situations, for these techniques to work, grading of lots becomes taterdependent upon adjoining lots. This type of scheme can only be reasonably expected to function if the site is graded on a comprehensive, mass grading program. In situations such as this the Developmu.. Code requirement limiting the grading to streets only for custom lot subdivisions can present obstacles that severely inhibit the ability to develop a particular project site with a feasible, workable solution. The primary source of the problem is that, as it currently exists, this Development Code requirement applies as a universal standard to all projects regardless of special or uniqu, circumstances, it is staff's opinion that a reasonable solution to this dilemma would be to still require this limitation on grading for custom lot subdivisions as the primary direction but to provide the flexibility to allow comprehensive grading of the site when special circumstances warrant such a solution. Another aspect for consideration is the issue of versus usable yard space. Grading policy of the been to minimize grading and to design built natural topography as much as possible. Th to Development Code criteria for grading st of minimal building pad areas. However, anot creation of flat, usable yard areas developments. This policy is reflected in criteria for a minimal 15' usable rear ya homes. Both are useful and necessary Palle standards to achieve a high quality living staff has recently experien ed minimal grading City has always ures to fit the Policy is reflected lating the creation City policy is the or single family to Development Code per single family to promote design implementation of both c situations in which the has proven to be problemattic�tes concurrently for the same project The problem is that these two policies can be mutually exclusive of each other; to implement one 1s don: at :he expense of the other. If grdding of the site is kept to a minimum, this obviously inhibits the ability to provide flat, usable yard space. On the other hand, to provide flat, usable yard space obviously implies more extensive grading of the site. Because of these situations in which two City policies are in direct conflict with edcn other, 1.e., the implementation of one limiting the implementation of the 238 PLANNING COMMISSIOI( ^'AFF REPORT Grading of Custom Lot Subdivisions February 12. 1986 Page d other, staff has had difficulties 1n resolving design Inconsistencies of project submittals in making than conform to City Standards. Staff is requesting the Commission's discussion of this issue to Provide staff feedback and direction In establishing priorities so that these two policies of minimal site gradirg versus flat, usable yard a.ea are in conflict with each other, there is a consensus policy as to wni 6 direction to proceed. IV. RECOWxDATION: Staff recommends that the Planing Commission roc a atF to prepare for the 'omoisslon's review a Development Code Amendment that would ameid the section that now limits grading of custom lot subdivisions to streets only, to where directi nitforocustom lotnsuhdivisions, butlwheresalso andagree of flexibility is permitted to allow mass grading for the project area when site conditions warrant it as deemed appropriate by the responsible agency of the City. Res ui submitted Brad Buller City Planner 88:BC:ns Attachments. Development Code Definition of Custom Lot Subdivisln Development Code Section Limiting urad mg Of Custom Lot Subdivisions to Streets Only CITY n FA.\CEC CDG:SO \CA + PAST I . U11TIAL STLTY 12"M :,' %NTAL CH "CRUST DATE: M_;_e2__Jy.. - liciyo APPLICA:T l p%'i�'!Gtt` FILING DATL:_rinac.t 1-0) 151 _.»r Hmus Car„dMQ•ol PRWECt :/SS1cnCZd4:�r[L�@I`rJLcut LL56)4nozmoew�l�aJa` r;- PRDIECT t0CATT0:1:_ O/A I r4Vi10X`LStAl IMPACTS (EsPI•ra[-On of all "yes" and "ony +n" answers are required on attached sheets) CD yo TES !MAYBE No 1. Sails and Ceoloev the proposal have signs, Scant rasul,.s in a Unstab'e grwlnd conditions or in changes in geologic relat4orships? is Disrupriorc displacements, compaction or burial of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface cpntour incarvals? _ 41C d The destruction, co�aring or modification Of any unique geologic or physi "al features? C- Any Potential increase in wind or water erosion of soils, affecting either on or off site to- eitons? I. Changes in erosion siltation, or deposition? g Exposure of people or propert,• -o geologic hazards such as earthquakes, Idalides, mad - slides, ground failure, or similar Y Lards? h. An increase in the rate of extraction and /or use of any mineral resour -e? 2. Rydroloay. Will the proposal have significant results ins CD yo I Page 2 YES `%Y3E \0 a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction 7- of flowing . -Ams, rivers, or aphemeral stream channels? b. Changes In Absorption races, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? C Alteratlons to the course or flow of flood wavers? _- d. C .nge In the amount of surface water in anv body of water? -- e Discharge into s' -face waters, or any alteration of surfac. water quality? _ _— . L f Alteration of groundwater characteristics, g Change in the quantity of gcoundwateray either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interference with an aquifer? Quality? Quantity? h She reduction in the amount of water other. visa available for public water suppl,es? _ — i Exposure of people or property to water related harards such as flooding or mulches? 3 Air u..11ty. Will the proposal have significant results 1w a. Constant or periodic air emflalons from mobile or indirect sources? Stationary sources? _— b Deterioration of ambient air quality and /or int•rferenca with the attslnment of applicable air quality standards? c. Alteration of local or regicnal climatic conditions, affecting air movement, molature or temperature? -� 4. more Flora V111 the proposal have significant results in: a. Change In the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or number Of and species of plants? -- b. Reduction of the numbers of an or endangered spectes of plantsy inique, rare 's .. v{ Yrs MAYBE \0 c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of Plants into as area? —` d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural production? -- Fauna. Will the proposal hav, significant results In: A. Change in the characteristics of species, Including diversity, distribution, or numbers of any species of e4i=ls? �- b. Reduction of the Aumbars of any unique, rare or endangarad spacias of animals? C, Introduction of new or disruptive species of animals into as area, or result in a barrier to the mlfrarion or ravement of animals? o. Deterioration or .1 of existing fish or Wildlife habi:atl 5. Pcoulaticn. Vill the proposal have significant results ins a. Will the prop<cal alter the location, distri- bution, density, diversity, or growth rate of the human poputation of an area? b. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a dcaand for additional housing? 6. soeio- Eccno-_Se Factor.. Will the proposal have sigoificanc results in. a. Change is local or rational socio-economic characteristics, including economic or cocercial diversity, tas race, and property values? b. Will project costs be cqufcaLly distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers, tax payers or project usera? 7. Land Use and Planning Considerations. Will the proposal have slgnifican• results in? a. A substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an areal b. A conflict with any designations, objectives, Policies, or adopted plans of any governmental entities? e, An impact upon the qulalty or quantity of existing consamptivs or non - consumptive. recreational opportunities? Page 7 9 M: W Page 6 YES myn No 8. iransnortation. Will the proposal have significant results £n: I. Ceneration of substantial additional vehicular Movement? —_ sX b. Effects tm existing streets, or demand for new atraat construction? c. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for now parking? d. Substantial impact upon existing transporta- tion systems' - -_ X e. Alterations to presenu patterns of circula- tion or tiovis"t of people and /or goods? -- f. Alterations to or effects on present and potential voter -borne, rail, mass transit or air traffic? g. Increases In traffic hazards to =tar vehicles. bicyclists or pedestrians? _ __- 9. Cultural 1 Resources, 11111 the proposal have significant rasults £n: a. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological• Paleontological, and /or hisrorical resources? 10. Health. Safety. and Nuisance Factors. Will the Proposal have elgniflcant rasul - in a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? c. A risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances In the event of an accident? _ d. An increase in the number of Individuals or species of vector or pathenogenic organizaa or the exposure of people to such organisms? e. Increase in existing noise levels? f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous • mulse levels? •s — -- S. The creation of objectionable odors? i' h. An Increase In light or glare? Page S energy, uhen feasible renewable sources of energy are available? f w , �� � 1 ♦ W/.i4ri aal'y YES YAM SO 11 Aesthetics. Will•tha proposal have significant results in: A. The costruction or degradation of any scenic vista or view? b. The creation of an aeathatically offensive site? c. A conflict vlth the objective of designated or potential scenic corridors? 11, utilities and rublie Services. Will the proposal have a significant need for naw systems. or alterations to the following: a. Eleetric power? b. Watural or packaged gas? e. Co=unications systema1 — d. Water supply? XC o. Wastewater facilities? f. F!ood control structures? 9. Solid waste facilities? h. Fire protection? 1. Police protection? J. Schools? k. Parks or other recreational facillcles? — �- 1. Nsintenance of public facilities, including roads and flood control facilities? n. Other governmental servleea? 17. Energy and Scarce Resources. Will the proposal have significant results ins a. use of substantial or excessive fuel or energy? _ b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy? • c. An Increase in the demand for development of new sources of energy? d. An increase or perpetuation of the cons.aption of non - renewable forms of energy, uhen feasible renewable sources of energy are available? f w , �� � 1 ♦ W/.i4ri aal'y s, a Page b 1^-S WSE NO e. substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or scarce natural rescurce? 14. Handatom Pindints of Slcnificance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environmenr, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, Cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to elininate a plant or animal community, reduce the cumber or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important esacplas of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b Does the project have the potential to achieve '- short -tern, to the disadvantage of long -tern, environmental goals? (A shorr -term impact on the environment is me which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while leng- tam impacts will endure well Into the future). _ c. Does the project have impacts which are _ 7 Individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively consi:erable means that the incremental affecrs of an Individual project are considerable when viewed In connectian with the effects of past projects, and probable future projects). d Does the project have environmental effect, which will cause substantial adverse effects on h=n beings, either directly or Iodiractly? h( II. DISCUSSION OF ENMO10T.g7u =TiOv (i.e., of affirCetive anrners c the above quesciOne plus a discussion of proposed mitigation measures). Tc/osloPt taint Go�pg te�ta�tctl7S 'T1z `.fj+tHirrttda GOat� E ?DtAC tQM OV -%AOL 4A�a �aF*�+ Fi,w+ t3rFt�.l t laps w p+.iFt -�(zw Litt. SastaaO 11U �,.tVtaO pIM�. -I-uL Rl `f r IMPr !S 17t tpa, la -IS-41L Gs. iaa 'F,,., I Mj4o6 �uP.awti. x[ -tb 'i—:k {- -_tor+ 13 , /Gii4�rsR 6, SaeZteN ZI�6L e{r TAIL �uVyLiL t�a�sotJ{iL\S C.�Ot! t i S47fiRCPtlQ1C �.t�/tRoeJMts+l'TPt- Ic�aa� -T P�yoa -'� Ldw�O ,Jmr gc Fsre� -+ {Rwr 4 P �Jailva - pstt.ep,arctt>,J Lhw rsoc p�sQrvws.. �4S IyVal A III DETMJMA�-ION On the basis of this. initial evaluation: I find the proposed project CODLD NOT heve a significant effect on the enviror_ent. and a "ECATICE DEM.AxSTIOY will be prepared. th effect enath'lerrvaroa =enty oposed project could have a significant In this case because the oitigation eeasures describedcantan[feee attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PEEPAM. NEGATIVE ❑ I find the proposed project X {y have a significant efface on the envireement. and an £7vIg0'NVT LMPACT gbPOET it roguired. Date Mflewa \4 J-%S& ,( � � Sit rScure — ,�"�e�tyTt Qr a .JeR Titl Pa6fs 7 RESOLUTION N0, 96_43 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSi0N OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA, RECORyEON Op 17.06. lo.S(CODE- Af1ENDv NT HO 86-9; 17,06,010.5(.) PERTAINING APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISIONS, SECTION 17 TO GRADING ENDING SECTION YARD AREA, ANp 17, 02.140 PERTAINING CUSTOM LOT 02'140 PERTAINING TO DEFINITIOPS,USABLE WHEREAS, on the d na the Govern advertised public 2 hearing u April maent and 9 pursuant�t19Se Planning o Section 65854 Commission held of the California revise t MIIEREAS, the Planning Commissior, finds ft Subdivision Development ode repufr usable Dements necessary to clarify and area and definftfons Pertaining grading of custom lot SECTION 9 to subdivisions. tollcwfng�s10 me Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission has made the 1. standards fw{them is gworranted I Older t0 bring current Confcards for grading and established CC it subdivisions Y Policies and Into 2• That Procedures; significant impact Development Code Amendm on the environment. a °t MOpld 3• That and not have conformance with Proposed a Oevelopm�� Code Amendment with goals Doltcles�a the General Dec SERI -0 _17 The Rancho Cucamonga Planning reco�dsciss� not create significant adverse 1 once Negative Declaration mP° t 00 tho envlrooumr that of a NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED; March 26. 1986, moent and That 1. f RanncchodC�o an9 hat 65850 the Calitorrtfa Goner March. 1986, hereby recommends approval of the City Sections 17, Development Code Amen Cm roval the 26th d contained in 06.010 -S(a 17.08.040 -J ent 86.01 a the attached Ordinance, and 17,02�0d1as as Resolution No. Page82 -01 - City of RCho Cucamonga 9 C 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt Development Code Amendment 86 -01, as stated herein. 3. That a certified copy of this Resolution dnO - elated material hereby adopted by the Planning c(MIssloa U ill be forwarded to the City Council. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 23RD DAY OF APRIL. 1986. MMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCANONGA T A _ . n ATTEST• �4G gad u ter; i. Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of thu Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby , :ertify that the foregoing Resolution was duly anc reWarly Introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Caamissicn of tilt City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular neeting of the Planning Commission hell on the 23rd day of April, 1986, by the following vote -to -tit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIfSI, MCMIEL, REHPFI, STOUT NOES: COMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARBER �. 'D T n + + + R f 8:05 p.m, _ Planning CoaniSSIOn Recessesd 8:20 p.m. - Planning Caeuission Reconvened + + + R + -• ^- Cucamonga, Ordinance No. 211. Brad Euller, City Planner, reviewed the staff report. Mr. Buller advised that the language h the Ordinance pertaining to usable yard area should be placed with that which was specificd in the staff report. Ralph Hanson, Assistant City Attorney. suggested the following amendment to Section 17.02.140: fore Subdivision oe as arwc a•e or stbdfvtsfon by an iownerreor� builder �rmore acta subdivision for the development of four or more residential dwelling units shall be nequtred to apply for development /design review as a total development. Such al 'PI ication shall be required as a condition of tentative tract approval. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. TSere were no ccanents, therefore the public hearir.3 was closed. Mo-ion: approval to the, City Councilhof Development to ado t the Restsution as amended. Notion carried by the following vote: pment Code Amendment :5-01, AYES: UHMISSIOURS: CHITIEA, MCNI0., RTNP0., SiOUi NOES G7lMISSIONERi. NOnE ABSENT: UMMISSIONERS: BARKER - carried NEW EUSINESS H. XSIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11549 - °a PE alms aoa u a ng a eva ons or a rn:o ClA1R - Design Review of svt�Hvlslon of 21 lots on 17.5 acres •n a Very Low rResidential sDistrict (Loss than 2 �4s /ac) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, $ide of Etiwanda, south of Summit _ APR 225_181 -20. located on the east Planning r001111ission Minutes _g_ April 23, 1986 CD VF ORDINANCE NO. Z) C,, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AMENDING TITLE 17 Or THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE TO REVISE SECTIONS 17.06.01045(a), 17.08.040J, AND 17.02.140 PERTAINING TO GRADING OF CUSTOM LOT SUBDIVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS, RESPECTIVELY WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: The City Council hereby finds and determines the following: A. That the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, following a public hearing held in the time and manner prescribed by law, recommends the Amendment to Section 17.06.010- E5(a), 'Grading of Custom Lot Subdivisions', Section 17.08.040 -J, 'Usable Yard Area", and Section 17.02.140, 'Definitions', of the Development Code as hereinafter described, and this City Council has held a public hearing prescribed by low and duly heard and considered said recommendation. 8. That this Development Code Amendment is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. C. That this Amendment is consistent .Ath the objectives of the Development Code. 0. That this Amendment to the Development Code will have no significant environmental impact as provided in the Negative Declaration filed herein. SECTION 2: That Section 17.06.010- ES(a), 'Grading of Custom Lot SubdivisionsTT Section 17.08.040 -J, 'Usable Yard Area', and Section 17.02.140, 'Definitions', are hereby amended to read as follows: Section 17.06.010 -ES(a) to read as follows: To encourage Innovative site planning techniques and provide for a variety of housing styles, grading within custom lot subdivisions shall occur for streets, trails, and drainage control only. Additional grading may be allowed subject to approval by the Planning Commission where innovative grading techniques are utilized and where the site constraints and strict adherence to this requirement to limit grading would render development of the site infeasible. The intent is that built structures be designed to fit the national topography and that grading be minimized, wherever possible. `Refer to Section 17.08.040 -J in regard to requirements for usable yard area). Ordinance No. OCA86 -01 - City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 2 Section 17.00.040 -3 Usable Yard Area. For single family detached /semi- detached subdivisions. a minimum 15 feet of flat, usable rear yard area shall be provided between the house and top or toe of non- retained slope banks or to the retaining wall in the case of retained cut or fill per City grading standard drawings.) However, in areas of hilly or sloped terrain were grading is being designed to minimize altertion to the natural land form, usable open space should be provided in the form of decks, patios, balconies, or some similar form of built structure designed to fit the natural topography rather than as graded level yard area. us=. R� ?i. / T f#wJ,00 LnVaw YnPa 4P,`GQ LLV &L yRV i{+/GEt 4,J T36 fpovTOµv ""e. S", 4- TPue-- TUP4;�- 4-a 4 /•G F�K,=_' t�Qc14J.44 Section 17.02.140 to read as follows: Subdivision Tract: A subdivision which creates five or more "rceTs to a developea as a whose or in part by an owner or builder. A tract subdivision for the devele{.ment of four or more residential dwelling units shall be required to apply for development /design review as a total development. Such application shall be required as a condition, of tentative tract approval. Subdivision Total Devil o meat: A project which includes the rota rev ew OT a residenrial development including tentative tract map approval, unit placement, landscaping, design review, etc. I CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 4, 1986 TO. City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd S. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Laura Psomas, Landscape Designer SUBJECT: Approval to order the work connected with the formation of Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 5 and give final approval to the Engineer's Report. Attached for City Council approval is a Resolution ordering the work in connection with the formation of Street Lighting District No. 5 (Caryn Planned Community) located between the extensions of Banyan Avenue end Highland Avenue on the north and south and between the extensions of Rochester and Milliken Avenues on the east and west. The attached Resolution also approves the Engineer's Report which wms tentatively approved by Resolution 86 -135. Phase One cons -sts of Tract Nos. 12642, 12935, 12937, 12940, 12941 and 12942. Future tracts will be annexed to the district at the time of recordation of each tract. The developers, Yaufman and Broad Development Gioup and the Marlborough Development Corporation, 4ave been notified of the hearing by mail. dsp" ally sutealt , LBN , as AttacWnt: Resolution asa. i i z w Isa, 910 wax 1411a-c4a a wc, a tj sly ` 64;&ll-f a s GL_.�wmh 1444 - - IIZ�E�lrtti �t�n.�ua a- ff - e44. awl ueeOA-179�4 da� . o of o ' O/� e �� c�+a�ati a✓ ? Nos..,/ Z '40 +/Z43S t— i� t2-717 /Zy401 l2--yaYYjQ••�v �1 //Z�y�g4Z�Z. 1j1Pati 1 i-�- �,,zz 1, � w' "L-4 A RESOLUTION 0? THE CITY C00::CIL OF THE CITY OF Rf.WC110 CUC MONGA. CALInuum, ORDERI IG THE WORK IN CO!r1eCTION WITH THE 1'ORfArIO3 OF STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT no-N, WHER'..S, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga did on the 6th day of July, 1943, adept its Reuolution of Intention Ito. 43-AN to order the therein described work in connection with Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4, which Resolution of Entantlon No. i3.M4 was duly and legally published in the Ume, fern and miner as required by law, shown by the Affidavit of Publacatlon of said Resolution of Intention on file in the office of the City Cler?: and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notice of the passage of said Resolution of Intention, headed "Public Notice- was duly and legally Posted, w: ere approprin ".e, in the time, form, canner, location, and number as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Posting said notices, on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notices of the adoption of the Resolution of Intention were duly mailed, where appropriate, to persons owning real property proposed to be assessed for the improvements descrltad in said Resolution of Intention No. &JoW, according to the names and addresses as prescribed by law, which said copies were duly mailed in the time, ford, and ®aner or required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Mailing on file in the office of the City Clerk; and L'HEFEAS, said City Counall having duly received and considered evidence, o,al and documentary, concerning the jurisdiction facts in this proceeding and concerning the necessity for the contemplated work and the benefits to be derived therefrom and said City Council having now acquired jurisdiction to order the proposed work. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED as follows: SECTION 1: The dity Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has determined that the public interest ant convenience requires that said City Council order the formation of Street Lighting Maintenanoe Di3t4lat No. 8, and any subsequent annexations So said District, and said City Council hereby orders that the wore, ae net forth and described in said Resolution of Intention No. 49.11 s be done and made. SECTION 2: The Report filed by the Engineer is hereby finally approved. SECTION is The arassasatnta for fiscal year .bl!!W and method of assesseent in the Englnner'a Report are hereby approved. JbN r PASSED, APPROVED, and AJYJPTED this , Woft AYES: Dahl, Buquel., Schlosser, Frost, Mikels NOES: None a LABSENT: None J n D. ike s, Mayor A C� amlmmaroe,sasaseaormc w""e-c -�m�Yl.lYw,. &.a �-a rer. lotrroMrti C�90C1i •�1 �a 1-11W0 Kaufman A Broad July 9, 1985 City Of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Base Line, Unit C P. 0. Box 807 Rancho Cucanonga, CA 91730 Attention- Engineering Dept. Regarding: Street Lights Maintenance Distric• Gentlemen: As the proposed developers of Tracts 12935, 12917, 12940, 12941, 12942 and 12642, this Is to autho•fre you to snneu the above Tracts into your Street Light Maintenance 013tricts at such time as the Tracts are recorded. Sincerely yours, RAUFHAN AND BROAD OF SOUIMN CALIFOR°.IA, INC. �oC J J�d Presi de Northve sion FJS /eel RECEIVED fill. I I ;;r.. ...1 Of RAR010 CUCAMOBO.I 1 MGiN(IR�RO arsxl�� �SS 'R4 S - h) 0 554 - 170 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY ^r R101CH0 cucAHONGa, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNE:TION WITH THE FORMATION OF STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 5 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga did on the No. 66-136 to order the 7th of m therein described work in connectioniwithfStreet Liight ng Maintenance ppDistrict Nn the Resolution of +mAnneruasirequired by laws and 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 'Public Notice' was duly and legally posted, where appropriate, in the time, form, manner, location, and nuaber as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Posting said notices, on file in the office of the City Clerk, and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notices of the adoption of the Resolution of Intention were duly mailed, where appropriate, to persons owning real property proposed to be assessed for the improvements described in said Iesolution of Intention No. 86 -136 according to the names and addresses as prescribed by law, which said copies were duly mailed in the time, form. and manner as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Hailing on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS. said City Council having duly received and considered evidence, oral and documentary, concerring the jurisdiction facts in this proceeding and concerning the nocessity for the contemplated work and the benefits to be derived therefrom and said City council having new acquired jurisdiction to order the proposed work. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED as follows: SECTION 1: The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has Cunn�rf Interest convenience requires rt No. ,Cd ociilorder the formation of Street L ghtingMaintenanDistt 5an any subsequent annexations to said District, and said City Council hereby orders that the work, as set forth and described in said Resolution of Intention No. 86-136 be done and made. SECTION 2: The Report filed by the Engineer is hereby finally approved. SECTION 3: The assessments for fiscal year 86-87 and method of assessmen n e gineer's Report are hereby approved. /` / a5Z Twos CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENGINEER'S REPORT STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NUMBER 5 CARYN PLANNED CQ"PIUNITY SECTION 1. AUTHORITY FOR REPORT This report is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 15, of the Street and Highways Code, of California (Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972). SECTION 2. GENERAL DESCRIPTION This report deals with the establishment of a Street Lighting Maintenance District for the Caryn Planned Community. The District will eventually include the majority of the area Included with the Planned Community, as approved by Ordinance No. 246 -A. Areas to be included in the work program are the street lights within the rights -of -way or designated easements of streets dedicated to the City and are limited to local, collector and secondary arterial streets, including Vintage Drive. The work program excludes maintenance of street lights in rights -of -way of major arterial highway: (Banyan Avenue, Rochester Avenue, and Milliken Avenue). These areas will be included in the City -wide lighting district for arterial highways. SECTION 3. SCOPE OF WORK The specific areas to be maintained by the District as defined in the preceding section, will became part of the ac•ive work program at such time as the specific areas are annexed into the District. The normal process will be the dedication of the areas to the City, constructicn of the street lighting system, and, upon demonstration of satisfactory operation, the acceptance by the District no later than the following duly. The Developer will make a sufficient deposit with the Southern California Edison Company to provide for up to twelve (12) months of ordinary and usual maintenance, operation and \'`I- <=) 7 servicing costs of the street lights in each development at the time of ` initial operation of the lighting system. Upon establishment of assessment effective July 1 of each year, any •maining deposit shall be refunded to the 5 developer, Work to be provided for, with the assessments established by the District, consists of maintenance, operation and servicing of street lights. Annual Engineer's Reports will be prepared and approved by the City Council defining the specific work program for each year and its estimated cost. The plans and specifications for all street lighting will be prepared by the developers for the subdivision imirovements and will be approved by the City Engineering Division. Detailed maintenance activities or the Street Lighting Maintenance District include: the furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation and servicing of any street light improvement and the repair, removal, or replacement of all or any part of and improvement, providing for the illumination of the subject area. SECTION 4. ESTIMATED COSTS As development proceeds within the Caryn Planned Community, the area to be maintained by the District will Increase and so will the cost; however, the number of dwelling units will also increase. It is anticipated that the G number of dwelling units will increase at approximately the same rate as the maintenance area will increase, thereby keeping relatively constant the cost pyr dwelling unit, excluding cost of living Increases. Based or historical data adjusted for inflation, it is estimated that the quantity of street tights and the maintenance and energy costs for assessment purposes will be as follows: �SO . A. Phase One Construction - The estimated cost (at current dollars) for the District as Initially formed ccmprising the 227 dwelling units of Tract Nos. 12642, 12935, 12937, 12040, 12941, and 12942: Lamp Ouantit Rate" Month /Year 81 ea. 5800 Lumen x $8.90 x 12 • 8,650.CO total annual maintenance cost MOLE Arterial lighting shall be annexed into a separate district. B. Ccmplete District The estimated cost (at current dollars) for the District upon completion of all areas within the entire Caryn Planned Community is: Lamp Quantity Rate" Ninth /Year 370 ea. 5800 Lumen x $8.90 x 12 - 39,516 Assumed to be high pressure sodium vapor, 5800 lumen or 9500 lumen; actual type and size may vary. ++ All night enargy service per lamp per montn including maintenance costs. All the costs are based on Southern California Edison Company monthly rates including matntenanca. All costs and areas are based on current estimates and may or may not be valid for future years. Pe total cost and unit cost vary as th± monthly rate varies and as additional areas for maintenance are annexed to the 0 strict The monthly rate is established by the Southern California Edison Company and is not currently controlled by tha size of an area or any operation of the developer The size of the areas bang annexed to the 915trict only hat an Influence on the total cost. The c,)sts shcom are estimates only, and the actual tasempnt will be based on actual cost data. SECTION 6 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM A copy of tr- proposed Asse:smert Diagram for the tracts that will comprise the Maintenance District originally Is att„chO to this report and labeled -3- "Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 50. This diagram 1s horgby Incorporated within the text of this report. The District will originally comprise Tract Nos. 12642, 12935, 12937, 12940, 12941, and 12942 of Phase One of Caryn Planned Community as each tract is reccrded and annexed into the District at the time of recordation. Additional traits will be annexed into the District upon individual tract recordation. SECTION 6. ASSESSMENTS Maintenance costs for the entire District are found to be of specific benefit to all developed residential property within the District to accordance with the following relationship. Land Use Assessment Units Single family residential dwelling units 1 unit Estimated Annual Assessments Estimated Phase One: Total annual cost (Section 4) $8,650.80 Assessment units Single family 221 d.u. x 1 unit • 227 assessment units Estimated assessment rate • S8650.80 22T— • $38.10 per year Thus, estimated assessments of 38.10 per single family dwelling unit will initially be required for the original District. Estimated Planned Community complete: Total annual cost (Section 4) Assessment units Single family - 940 d.u. x 1 unit 940 assessment units Estimated assessment rata • $39 516 • 542.04 per year -4- .D6o Thus, estimated annual assessments of $42.04 per single family dwelligq, unit is projected to be required it protect completion. ?stimated assessments are i'o^ c.mparism only. Actual assessments will be set ty oublic hearing each year in June And will be based on actual energy and ouiotenance expenses and developed land use suamaries. 'k ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 5 ANNEXATION NO. 1 FUTURE FOWMILL FREEWAY page CITY OF RANCHO Cl.'CA�10� \GA ENGINEERING DIVISION 6 '> VICINITY Nl,\p I N • tin page CITY OF RANCHO C.UCAAiO:QGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 4, 1986 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City rngineer BY: Laura Psomas, Landscape Designer CNGnftli`-1p o° s, c � z LM t SUBJECT: Approval to order th3 work connected with the formation of Landscape Maintenance District No. 6 and give final approval to the Engineer's Report. connection with located Approval formation of oLan Landscape Resolution District moo. 6 qC ry work lanned on the located between the extensions of Banyan Avenue and Highland Avenue on the north and south and between the extensions of Rochester and Milliken Avenues on the east and west. The attached Resolution also appeoves the Engineer's Report which was tentativaly approved by Resolution 86.118. Phase One consists of Tract Nos. 12642, 12935, 12937, 12940, 12941 and 12942. Future tracts will be annexed to em of recordation of each tract. the district at the it The developers, Kaufman and Broad Development Group and the Marlborough Development Corporation, have been notified of the hearing by mail. c u11Y Aid, LBH•L s , �� Attachment: Resolution ., bow W son— CAW""YM. WJSNM ehe to FMa l.A^ M'fi 9]aY+•n.A1tt300a Kaufman ABioad 3u17 9. 1985 City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Base Lino, Ua1t C F, D. Dos 807 Rancho Cucamonga. CA 91730 Attention: Engineering Dept. Regarding: Street Lights Mainceoance District Gentlemen: 12937. 12041, 12942 of As the proposed isvtooauthorize your totonzez< the abovesOrac stints and 12642, this your Street Light tlafntenaace Districts a[ ouch t ate recorded. Sincerely yours, 117C. KhUrti&y MD BROAD OF SODTUM CALIFORNIA. g 90 k J• Northve Division FJS /owl Illl.: ! �ic7 ...r OF OMC W CUCAV.041 1%GINEERING 046"J" { oS S�, - 1-7/ A RESOLUTION OF THI: CITY CPJNCiL ar THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMOttSA. CALIFORNIA, ORDE11111C 1HE WOYR IN CONNECTION WITH TIC£ FORA'ATION 01' LkagCAPE KIIN "ENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 (.ARYN PLARNEII COf31L'NITYI AND .%CIj)TIHG THE FINAL ENGINEER'S P.EPDRT WHEREAS. the City Cokncll of tl%! City of Rancho Cucamonga did on H!y 7, 1986, adopt Resolution No. 86 -118 gyring Its preliminary apprcvul to an CnginL -r c Report prepared in connection w'th the fcrakation of an assessment district to be know•i is "Landscape ltnintetance District No. 6' pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1973; and WHEREJS, Lie City Council of tl* City of Rinchm Cucamonga did in Ili. 7, 1486, adopt Resolution No. 86 -119 ceclaring its: intention to orc'er '.he fli'mation of at assessment district Us to known as 'Landscape Halrtenance District No. ;' and to lery and collect assessmruts pursuant to the Lardscaping and Lighting Act of 1972; and VHCREAS, a certified copy o' sat. Resolution rya. 86 -119 wan duly published in the time, form and manner racuired by law as shown by the Aff'davit of Publication of said Resolution in file in the office of the City Cle,•k of the City of Rancho Cucamongd: and WHEREAS, a totice of public. hearing was duly mailed to all persons owning property within the proposed Landscapa Ilaintinance Listrict No. 1 in the, time, fora and manner as required by law; end WHEREAS, a p0lic hearing has been hod and this City Council has duly received and considered evidence, oral aid dockmentary, concerning the necessity for tha contniplated work and the benefits to be derived therefrom and this City Cuuncil Pas now acquired Jurisd'ctfon to order, the proposed work. NSW. THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby resolve as follows: SECTION 1: TAU City Council hernty order the fmsatloe of ' Landscape an nance District No. 6' and tlit maintenance of certain landsa oe improvements to be located within nald Landscape Maintenance District, as more partictlarl; described to the Engineer's Report. SECTION 2: This City Council hereby :onfires the diagram of 'Landseeoe n nance District No. 6' as more particrlarly described In said Engineer's Report and hereby confirms the assessments nor fiscal deer 1986 -87 and the lethad of assessment as more particularly desc -ibed in the Engineer's Report. •iECTION 3: The City Clerk of tea City of Rancho Cucamonga 1s hereby an-ii—U ri —ected to file the diagram and assessment contained in the Engineer's Report, or a eertiffed ropy thereof, with the ttounty Auditor. /S1- CITY OF RAN= CUCAHONGf. ENGINEER`S REPORT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 SECTION 1. AUTHORITY FOR REPORT This report is prepared in compliance with the requirement of Article 4, Chapter I. Division S of the Street and Highways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1872). SECTION 2. GENERAL DESCRIPTION This report deals with the establishment of a Landscape Maintenance District for Tentative Tract 12642 and Parcel Map 8617. The District will include all of the numbered and lettered lots within both the Tentative Tract Map and the Parcel Map. Areas Included within the work program are the trees and ground cover within lettered lots dedicated to the City, trees and ground cover within the dedicated streets to the City, except ground cover on local streets (those streets on which lots face), trees and ground cover within landscape easements dedicated to the City and other areas required by the Specific Ilan, or by the City Council, or as dedicated by the various subdivisions. These areas listed above will become part of the active work program, at such time as the apreific areas are dedicated to the City. Annual Engineer's reports will be prepared and approved by the City Council defining the specific work programs for each year and the estimated cost for those years. As the development proceeds within the District, the 9-3a to be maintained by the District will increase and so will the cost; however, the number of units will also increase. It Is hoped that the number of units would increase at approximately the same rate an the maintenance area would increase; thereby, keeping Constant or decreasing the cost per unit, excluding cost of living Increases. The normal process will be the dedication of the areas to the City, then the areas landscaped by the developer, then after a period of maintenance by the developer, the acceptance of maintenance by the Maintenaaoa Dist-tat. There will be a lag time from the original dedication until the District actually begins the cost of maintaining property. It is intended that the area within Tentative Tract 12643, adjacent to Tentative Tract 12642, may annex to this District and the landscaped areas dedicated to the City, within Tentative Tract 126,13, would become past of the active work program of the Diatrict. -I- a6,6 SECTION 3. PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS (SCOPE OF WOEX) The plans and specifications and installation for all landscaping will be completed by the dbvelopers at their cost fcr the individual areas to be m0 ntainod within each subdivision and be approved by the Community Development Department. Maintenance Activities VetaIL maintenance activities on the areas to be .aintalned by the District inulvde: The repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement, providing for the life, growth, health and beauty of the landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, Spraying, fertilizing or treating for disease or injury; the removal of trimmings, rubbiah, debris and other solid waste, the maintenance, repair and replacement an necessary of all irrigatlra systems, and the removal of graffiti Iron walls immediately adjacent to the cultivated areas. SECTION 4. ESTIMATED COSTS No costa will be incurred by the District for original improvement construction. Based on data from other cities, and from the City of Rancho Cucamonga for landscaping maintenance District No. 1 and from a revtew of proposed landsoaping plane, it is estigated that the maintenance cost for assessment purpos3e, based upon current dollars, cstimated areas to be maintained and estimated number of completed dwelling units will be as follows: Complete District The estimated cost (at ctrreat dollars) for the District upon completion of all areas within Tentative Tract 12042 is shown below: Equestrian Trail - 18,000 s.f. 0 0.05 . 945 Parkways, L'_opos k Oreenbelta - 323,20U s.f. 0 0.25 - $ 95,550 Trees - 950 0 $5.00 - $ 4,700 TOTAL ANNUAL MAINTENANCE COST - $101,195 -2- 1 �'CT SECTION S. ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM A copy of the proposed boundary map and legal description of the Assessment District are attached to this report and labcled "Exhibit A" and "Exhibit 8 ". Precise lot dimensions are included in the referenced tract maps and Assessor's records. SECTION H. ASSESSMENTS Maintenance costs for the entire district are found to be of specific benefit to all property within the District in accordance with the following relniions: Land Coo Assessment Units F ffi et a we ng Ust 1 Unit Vacant Land 1/4 Unit /Acre I Ccmasrcial /Church 2 Unita /Acro (Private School) V 4 t R gY i _5 U Estimated Assessments Estimated Planned Community Complete Total Annual Cost (Section 4) - $101,195 Assessment Units Summary Land Use Units Assessment Assessment Ualta /Unit Units Dwelling Units 470 D.0 1 470 Vacant Laid -0- 1/4 Unit /AC. Commercial /Cburch 7.9 Ac. 2 Units /Ac. 15.5 (Private School) TOTAL ASSESSDENT UNITS 455 8 Assessment Rate . IA1.195 208.31 T9r8_ Effective Assessments Dwelling U.sits - 208.j1 per year - 17.36,per month Other Developed Land Uses - $416.62 per acre per year $34.72 per acre per month Estimated assessments are for comparison only. Actual assessment will be set by public hearing each year in June and will be based OD actual maintenance expenses and developed land Una summaries. v .• ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANOSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 ANNEXATION NO. I \ DRMN WD MIE UQWENINDL TRACT 12 642 CITY OF RANCHO Cl.'CA\ IQ \GA `�1 W ENGINEERING DIVISION! -- VICINITY MAP 1.n ^�6 (J „exNieir n, N Pt, 'y _.\ T� C ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 ANNEXATION NO. I tta. TRACT 12642 A� N *wt[ ruKrrnwa Pte CITY OF RANCHO CUCAt%10 \I 8t j ENGINEERING DIVISION VICINITY MAP ;r7/ un tta. TRACT 12642 A� N tislr, Pte j ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 ANNEXATION NO. 1 0 CFO" MO TOR YVNTENAhCC TALE r.m¢xuac TRACT 12935 NO `ti�s CITY OF RANCHO CUCANIONGA A titlr.; r• /..�,n{,_ '- ®o\ "EXHIBIT 4' ,�`.1�, - ENGINEERING DIVISION $j 2n6 VICINITY MAP �) / 7� N ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 ANNEXATION NO. 1 \-%\ \\ GN L40 TREE MAJOCRANCE TREE WWTERUIEE f�, •s z tin CITY OF RANCHO ENGINEERING DIVISION VICINITY MAP C)-; TRACT 12935 1 I I 0 J ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 ANNEXATION NO. 1 j ✓. ,- a-M C"-4 AND WIEE WASKENAKE TALC W TLNCce 'n I�. CITY OF RANCHO CUC.A\ 10M ?Y�( �: ENGINEERING DIVISION Tkin VICINITY MAP 7i/ un Y' w TRACT 12937 I P2iz €! H un I a ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 6 ANNEXATION NO. 1 GROUND YID TREE 4YNTCNANOC TRACT CY OF RANCHO CUCAAIONGA ENGINEERING DIVISION VICINITY' MAP �%S N 12937 W ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM _ LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 ANNEXATION NO. I I 4nAC' z :r. 9 ' J,4cl "'I.- I - I . .ICMAWDU i.VP*_. �`~�•� MAD UD ME YYMCNINCC TRACT 12940 "cc L�CNUCZ I .a��' —Lt4 title; CITY OF RANCHO COCA \10 \GA ��exule -- i� ENGINEERING DIVISION t' VICIN''ITY MAP .�7b :< — DD6e ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 ANNEXATION N0. 1 \ \ \ \\ apaW RFp ME lll' TCNRRCt TREE 1uCnM cz TRACT 12940 CITY OF RANCHO CUCA \fOKCA Y ENGINEERING DIVISION 6I —�tA 's VICINITY MAP a77 nn A title. 1 • Pate ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 ANNEXATION N0. I 13 1 A4 AN •/ TRACT 12933'2m a I I! "a MME N111NTCNANCC TII[[ Na11R[Ry,e TRACT 12941 CITY OF RANCHO COCA \10 \CA z deb ENGINEERING DIVISION 1n 1' VICINITY MAP page _ ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 ANNEXATION N0. 1 \ \ \1 GAMM "0 TREE WNTENAKE TREE Wu ?EN ,X TRACT 12941 CITY OF RMCHO CUC. INCA yq/��i `� W ' ENGINEERING DIVISION TT a�� N vtclNlTV m1Ar ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 ANNEXATION NO. 1 \ \d \\ OPdlm µp "CC NYNTCNANCC TREE N Trm"a TRACT 12942 CITY OF RANCHO CUCANIO \CA Z ENGINEERING DIVISION T+ �n VICINITY MAP D g0 pate ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 ANNEXATION N0. 1 r � r 1�4 q 9 ? oro' "o "at NUHTCNINCC TRLC NL'NTLN&YCe r jU.JMIT t t f! ' TRACT 12942 i CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ` ENGINEERING DWISION -Xp/ 4 1► T - w EXN161T "B• Tract No. 12642 as recorded in Bock 96, Pages 82 -85 Tract No. 12935 as recorded in Book 96, Pages 82 -85 Tract No. 12937 as recorded in Book 96, Pages 82 -85 Tract No. 12940 as recorded in Book 96, Pages 82,83 Tract No. 12941 as recorded in Book 96, Pages 82 -85 Tract No. 12942 as recorded in Book 96, Pages 82 -85 Official records of San Bernardino County, State of California �7 m CITY OF RANCPIO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 4, 1986 TO: City council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BT: Laura Psomas, Landscape Designer SUBJECT: No . 12833HTONSTPEET LIGHTI NO. FOR TRACT Attached onnection with iAnnexationlNo approval 15 to Street Lighting Maintenance District Nof. 1. The following is a project to be annexed: District No. 1 (arterial) 12833 The attachd tentativelyeapp approved Resolution No. e o. 86- 147onEMayn21,'1eport which was 986 RMOMIENDAT.f.A It is recoviended that City Council approve the attached resolution ordering the wo.I 'n connection with Annexation No. 15 to Street Lighting Maintenance District no. 1 and approving the Engineer's Report. Respectfully subm ted, LBH• :dlw Attachments M RESOLUTION NO. 8 � —/-?;L. •. A RESOLUTION Or THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEXATION NO. 15 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND ACCEPTING THE FINA1 ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR TRACT NO. 12833 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga did on the 21 day of May, 1986, aoopt its Resolution of Intention No. 86 -148 to order the therein described work in connection with Annexation No. 15 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1, which Resolution of Intention No. 86 -148 was duly and legally published in the time, form and manner as required by law, shown by the Affidavit of Publication of said Resolution of Intention on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notice of the passage of said Resolution of Intention, headed •Notice of Improvement•, was duly and legally posted in the time, form, manner, location, and number as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Posting said notices, on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notices of the adoption of the Resolution of Intention were duly mailed to all persons owning real propetey proposed to be assessed for the improvements described in said Resolution of Intention No. 86 -148 according to the names and addrasses 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 cnnsidered evidence, oral and documentary, concerning the Jurisdiction facts in this proceeding and concerning the necessity for the contemplated work and the benefits to be derived therefrom and said City Council having now acquired Jurisdiction to order the proposed work.. SECTION 1: 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 No. 86 -148 be done and made; and SECTION 2: The Report filed by the Engineer is hereby finally approved; a`nd- SECTION 3: The assessments and method of assessment in the Engineer s Repo�re hereby approved. SECTION 4: The assessments shall not begin until after 60 percent Of said trcTSiiave been occupied. an CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Engineer's Report for Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 Annexation No. 15 SECTION 1. Authority for Report This report is in compliance with 1. Division 15 of the Streets and (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972). SECTION 2. General Description the requirements of Article 4, Chapter Highways Code, State of California This City Council has elected to annex the tracts enumerated in Exhibit 'A' into Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1. The City Council has determined that the street lights to be maintained will have an effect upon all lots within said tracts as well as on the lots directly abutting the street lights. are: Mork to be provided for with the assessments established by the district The furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operating and servicing of street light improvements on arterial and certain collector streets. ImprovEment maintenance is considered of 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 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 approva. for the development and as approved by the City Engineering Division. Reference is hereby made to the subject tract map or development plan and the assessment diagram for the exact location of the street lighting areas. The plans and specifications for street lighting improvement on the individual development 1s hereby made a part of this report to the same extent as if said plans and specifics were attached h.reto. Detailed maintenance activities on the street lighting district include: the repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement, providing for the illumination of the subject area. SECTION 4. Estimated Costs No costs will be incurred for street lighting in-+rovement construction. All improvements will be constructed by developers. Base4 oa available data, it is estimated that maintenance costs for assessment purposes will be as indicated below. These costs are estimated only, actual assessments will be based on actual cost data. ags The estimated total cost for Lighting Maintenance District No. '1 (including Annexation No. 15) comprised of 7,734 lots, and 262 9500L, 230 5800L and 3 27,5001. street lights is shown below: I. S.C.E. Maintenance and Energy: amp ze uan y ae 5,800E a 27,500L 230 3 8.75 14.00 *High ressura o us epor Lamps Nate Mo's Total 262 X 9.90 X 12 31,125.60 230 X 8.75 X 12 24,150.00 3 X 14.00 X 12 504.00 55,779.60 2. Costs per dwelling Unit: Total Annual Maintenance Cost 55,779.60 • 7,21 year /unit o. o n s n s 7.21 divided by 12 • .60 /mo. /unit Assessment shall apply to each lot as explained in Section 6. SECTION S. Assessme�pia�am Copies of the proposed Assessment Diagrams are attached to this report and labeled 'Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1', Annexation No. 15. These 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 assessable land, the asses one each lot dwelling parcel parccl of to the number Of dwelling units per tot or parcel. It is proposed that all future development shall be annexed to the District. O4 SECTION 7. Order of Events 1 City Council adopts 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 proceedings. S. Every year in Hay, the City Engineer files a report with the City Council. B approves, or modifies and approves the iindividualsassessments. haring and EXHIBIT 'b• Properties and improvements to he included within Annexation Ho. 1S of Street Lighting maintenance District 1: Tract 12833 6,807E 9,SDOL 27,SDOL 22 6 2 t • ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE OISTRICT NO. 1 ANNEXATION NO. 1 S CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA I COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CAT.=nl?MTA t'4 94' v Imwir' LYOP+i'sm/'�v 8540 ARCHISAID. SURE B. RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CA 91730 • (714) 980 -2244 e August 14, •1985 Lloyd Rubbs City of Rancho Cucamonga Landscape Be Lighting Maintenance Districts 9320 Baseline Road, Suite C Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Dear Lloyd, This,ls to request annexation to the Landscape and Lighting Maintenance 11716fFicts for Tract 12833. A act'u"Y. n Far Pr67ect Manager SF /lmb 290 REAL ESTATE DEVELOPM4NT 1� AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA as COUNTY OF SAN BERNiRDINO j° Linda T. Paricion I, , do hereby certify that I am the Legal Advertising clerk ofyTHE DAILY REPORT, a dally Canty acrd Of S i� aforesaid and that the attached advertisement of resolution No. 86 -148 City of Rancho Cucamonga wds published in said newspaper one (1) time to wit: Nay 23, 1486 I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. c (Signature) Dated at Ontario, California Oils 23 day of tlay '19 --!6 29/ a STAFF REPORT'�i DATE: June 4, 1986 Wn TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer SUBJECT: Public Nearing for Annual Assessment for Landscape Maintenance Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 Attached is the City Engineer's Annual Report, a map of the referenced districts and a resolution enabling the City to levy and collect assessments for Landscape Maintenance Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. The annual assessment for each district is as follows: 86 -87 85 -86 Landscape Maint. Dist. No. 1 $28 00 $38.00 per Assmt. Unit Landscape Maint. 01st. No. 2 $223.77 $223.77 per Assmt. Unit Landscape Maint. Dist. No. 3 $258.75 -0- per Assmt. Unit Landscape Maint. Dist. No. 4 $128.34 $154.10 per Assmt. Unit Landscape Maint. Dist. No. 5 $113.41 $163.64 per Assmt. Unit RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City Council hold th -e public hearing, and if appropr, ate, approve the attached resolutio�i establishing the assessments for 1986 -87 for Landscape Maintenance Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, Lnd 5. Respectfully ubm ted, LOH:bc a9� RESOLUTION 10. 8 4 '/ / 3 A RESOLUTION OF YHE CITY COUNCIL OF RE CITY OF RAECHO CUCAMONGA TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS MITHIN LANDSCAPE MAINTIMANCE DISTRICT NO. 1, LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT R0. 2. LANDSCAIE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 90. 3, LANDSCAPE MA13TRIANCE DIS71ICT ■O. 4, AND LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISIRICT 10. S TOR RE FISCAL YEAR 1986 -87 PURSUANT TO RE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTDIG ACT OF 1972 13 CONNECTION WITH LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS dOp. 1. 2, 3, 4 AND S RDEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga did on the 21st day of May. 1986, adopt its Resolution Of Intention No. 86 -139 to order the therein described work in connection with Landscape Maintenance Districts goo. 1, 2, 3, 4, and S which Resolution of Intention No. 86 -139 was duly and legally published in the time, form and manaer as required by laws shown by the affidavit of Publication of said Resolution of Intention on file in the office of the City Clerk; and 9SMEAS, said City Council having duly received considered evidence, oral and documentary, concerning the jurisdiction facts in this proceeding and concerning tho necessity for the contemplated work and the benefits to be derived therefrom and said City Council having am acquired jurisdiction to .rder the proposed work. SECTIDH I: It is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cut smooga thct the public interest and convenience requires the levy and collection of assessments within Landscape Maintenance Districts gas. 1, 2, 3, 4, and S for the fiscal year 1986 -87, and said City Council boreby orders that the work, as set forth and described is said Resolution of Intention WO- 86-139. be done and made; and SECTION 2, Be it further resolved that the report filed by the Engineer is hereby finally approved; and SECTIm 3, Be it finally resolved that the assessments for fiscal year 1988 -87 and method of assessment in tte Engiueer'e Report are hereby approved. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this * day of *, 19a. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Jeffrey King, Mayor a 9.3 CITY OF RANCHO CDCAMOiiGA 1986 -87 ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR Landscape Maintenance Districts No.s 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 SECTION 1. AUTHORITY FOR REPORT This report is prepared in compliance with the requirement of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 5 or the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972). SECTION 2. GENERAL DESCRIPTION The report deals with the projected costs for Fiscal Year 1985 -86 ano the estimated assessments for Fiscal Year 1986 -87 of the following maintenance districts for various subdivisions throughout the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 Landscape Maintenance District No. 2 Landscape Maintenance District No. 3 Landscape Maintenance District No. 4 Landscape Maintenance District No. 5 Areas to be included in the work program are specifically defined in the body of the report and on the attached Assessment Diagramsand specifically tabulated in Appendix A. The total area of said Maintenance Districts arc as follows: Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 314,376 �j� + parks Landscape Maint, ,,nance District No. 2 �• tr' + Darin Landscape Maintenance District No. 3 "• Landscape Maintenance District No. 4 — IDSISi— .r + Parks Landscape Maintenance District No. 5 Work to be provided for, with the assessments established by the District: The furnishing of services and mecerials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operating, servicing and restoration of parkway improvements. Improvement maintenance is considered of general benefit to all areas in the District and cost shall be divided as indicated :n the body of this report. SECTION 3. PLANS AMD SPECIFICATIONS Parkway improvements were constructed by the developers for the individual subdivisions. The plans and parkways are as stipulated in the conditions of approval for each development and as approved by the Engineering Division. Reference is hereby made to the subject tract map of development plan and the assessment diagram for the exact location of the parkway areas. The plans and specifications for landscape improvement on the individual development are hereby made a part of this report eo the same extent as if said plans and -1- M VI specifications were attached hereto. Detailed maintenance activities include the repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement, providing for the life, growth, health and becuty of the landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimwdng, sprying, fertilizing or treating for disease or injury; the rmaoval of trimmings, rubbish, debris and other solid waste, the maintenance. repair and replacement as necessary of all irrigation systems, and tie removal of graffiti from walls immediately adjacent to the cultivated areas. SECTION 4. ESTIMATED COSTS No costs will be incurred for parkway initial landscaping improvement construction. All initial improvements will be constructed by developers. Based on historic data, estimated maintenance costs for fiscal year 1986 -87 are as follows: A. Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 No. of Square Feet in Landscape Maint. Dist. No. 1 314,376 No, of Square Feet Maintained in Fiscal Year 85/86 186,850 Projected No. of Square Feet to Be Maintained in 86/87 314,376* *See Appendix A for Detailed Parkway Inventory Estimated Revence $94,197.00 Less Estimateu Expenditures of $33,637 - $60.560.Ci Fund Balance 7 -1 -85, $63,066 • Projected Reserve at Fiscal Year End $123,626.00 These funds will be used for Restoration of Parkways, Tracts 9444 b 9445,Archibald Ave. and Wilson Ave. -2- o19S Projected Expenditures 1985/86 1986/87 Contract Services $23,741.56 $49,200.Ou Electric 1.356 DO 3,500.00 Water 5,424.00 13,Pnn O0 Labor 3, 12.00 Materials 100,00 Equipment 1,00.00 Assessment Admin. 3,115.00 8,453.00 Parkway Restoration 40,072.00 General Liability 527.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $33,637.00 $120,764.00 Estimated Revence $94,197.00 Less Estimateu Expenditures of $33,637 - $60.560.Ci Fund Balance 7 -1 -85, $63,066 • Projected Reserve at Fiscal Year End $123,626.00 These funds will be used for Restoration of Parkways, Tracts 9444 b 9445,Archibald Ave. and Wilson Ave. -2- o19S D. Landscape Maintenance District NO_2 (Victoria Planned Co"nity) Na. of Square Feet in Landscape Naint. Dist. No. 2 590.666 + Park No. of Square Feet Aaintaine•i in Fiscal fear 85/85 Total Projected No. of Square Full Half Ammt. Units No. of Dwelling Units F.Y 85/86 1921 3466 3654 No, of Dwelling Units Annexed 85/86 325 668 659 No, of Dwelling Units to be 3,000.00 Water 3.teel.00 Assessed in F.Y. 86/87 2246 4134 4313 Miterlals 1,941.00 Total Estimated Cost 120.764 • S28.00 Annual Assessment No. of Assmt. Units 4313 10,401.00 per Unit D. Landscape Maintenance District NO_2 (Victoria Planned Co"nity) Na. of Square Feet in Landscape Naint. Dist. No. 2 590.666 + Park No. of Square Feet Aaintaine•i in Fiscal fear 85/85 8 Acres Windrow Park Projected No. of Square Feet to be Maintained in 86/87_510,666 + park Proected Expenditures 1985,86 1986/8' Contrrct Servl-es $20,300 M $144,941.00 Electric i.ZOD 3,000.00 Water 3.teel.00 _ 15,000.00 Laoor 10,784.00 Miterlals 1,941.00 _45,534.00 5.000.0!+ Equipment _ 1,535.00 20,000.00 Tssessment Admin. 10,401.00 19,798.00 General Liability 6,300.00 TOTAL FSTIMATED COST $48,962.00 $259,573.00 Estimated Revenue $297,157.00 Less Estimated Fapenditures $489622.00 • 248,195 Fund Balance 7/1 /ub - 359,264 • Projected Reserve at Fiscal Year End $307,459 These funds will be used for Restoration of Victoria Park Lane Full Half 1/4 No. of Dwelling Units F.Y.85/86 745 1211.04 Acres No. of Dwelling Units Annexed 85/86 No. of T.-ellin. Units to be Assessed in F.Y. 83/87 862 1194.3 Tres Total Estimated Co f25LM73 !223.77 Annual Assessment -3- per Unit C. landscape Maintenance District No. 3 (Hyssop) No. of Square Feet In Landscape Maint. Dist. No. 3 6,050 + Basin No. of Square Feet Maintained in Fiscal Year 85/86 -D- Projected No. of Square Feet to Be Maintained in 86/87 6,050 Proje:ted Expenditures Estimated Revenue $2,817.00 Less Estimated Expenditures _ $1,051.00 - Projected Reserve at Fiscal Year End $1,766.00 These funds will be used for Reserves for unusual expenses and cash flow Full Half No. of Units F.Y. 85/86 8 0 No. of Units Annexed 85/e6 0 0 No. of Units to be Assessed to F.Y. 86/87 8 0 Total Estimated Cost $2.070 2258.75 per parcel No. ot Assmt. n --r— Assessment SE 1985/86 1986/87 Contract Servic;s $594.00 $834.00 Electric 29.00 150.00 Hater 198.00 500.00 Labor 270,00 Materials 100.00 Equipment 50.00 Assessment Admin. 230.00 145.00 General Liability 21,00 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST 511051.00 $2.070.00 Estimated Revenue $2,817.00 Less Estimated Expenditures _ $1,051.00 - Projected Reserve at Fiscal Year End $1,766.00 These funds will be used for Reserves for unusual expenses and cash flow Full Half No. of Units F.Y. 85/86 8 0 No. of Units Annexed 85/e6 0 0 No. of Units to be Assessed to F.Y. 86/87 8 0 Total Estimated Cost $2.070 2258.75 per parcel No. ot Assmt. n --r— Assessment SE 0. Landscape Maintenance District No. 4 (Terra Vista) No, of Square Feet in Landscape Kaint. Dist. No. 4 205,151 (2- 5 acre Parks) No, of Square Feet Maintained in Fiscal Year 85/86 50,143 Projected No. of Square Feet to be Maintained in 86/87 205,151 sparks Projected Expenditures Estimated Revenue $100,000.00 Less Estimated Expenditures $6,728.00 1985/96 1986/87 Contract Services $3,108.00 $62.997.00 Electric 20.00 4,000.00 Water 100.00 17,000.00 Labor 35,776.00 Katerials 5,000.00 Equipment Assmt. Units 12.000.00 Assessment Admin. 3,500.00 10,407.00 General Liability No. of Dwelling 1,490.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $6,728.00 $148,670.00 Estimated Revenue $100,000.00 Less Estimated Expenditures $6,728.00 • Projected Reserve at Fiscal Year End $93,272.00 These funds will be used for Reserves for casn flow and unusual reintenance costs Total Full Half Assmt. Units No, of Dwelling units F.Y. 85/86 425 422/211 636 No. of Dwelling Units Annexed 85/86 458 128/64 522 No. of Dwelling Units to be Assessed in F.Y. 86/87 883 550/275 1433/1158 Total Estimated Cost $148,670.00 $128.34 No. Of sm . units TM -5- Ogg 1 i D. Landscape Maintenance District No. 5 No. of Square Feet in Landscape Maint. Dist. No. 5 24.000 No of Square Feet Maintained in Fiscal Year 85186 24,000 Projected No. of Square Feet to be Maintained in 86/87 24,000 Projected Expenditures Estimated Revenue $6,760.00 Less Estimated Expenditures $2.987.00 - Projected Reserve at Fiscal Year End $3,773.00 These funds will be used for Reserves for cash flow and unusual maintenance costs Full Half No. of Dwelling Units F.Y. 85/86 44 _0- No. of Dwelling Units Annexed 85/86 -0.— -0- No. of Dwelling units to be Assessed in F.Y. 86/87 44 -0- Total Estimated Cost $4,990.00 $113.41 No. at sm . unity ��— SELTION 5 ASSESSY£Nr DIAGRNI A copy of the proposed Master Assessment diagram is attached to this report. Detailed diagrams of each tract are included in the various District Formation and Annexation reports. These diagrams are hereby incorporated within the text of this report. Lot dimensions arm as shown on individual Tract Maps as shown in records of County Recorder. -6-p(� �/%C 1985/86 1986/87 Contract Services $2,000.00 $2,721.00 Electric 100.00 300.00 Water 400.00 1,I00.00 Labor 100.00 270.00 Materials 100.00 100.00 Equipment 50.00 100.00 Assessment Admin. 237.00 349.00 General Liability _ 50.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $2,987.00 $4,990.00 Estimated Revenue $6,760.00 Less Estimated Expenditures $2.987.00 - Projected Reserve at Fiscal Year End $3,773.00 These funds will be used for Reserves for cash flow and unusual maintenance costs Full Half No. of Dwelling Units F.Y. 85/86 44 _0- No. of Dwelling Units Annexed 85/86 -0.— -0- No. of Dwelling units to be Assessed in F.Y. 86/87 44 -0- Total Estimated Cost $4,990.00 $113.41 No. at sm . unity ��— SELTION 5 ASSESSY£Nr DIAGRNI A copy of the proposed Master Assessment diagram is attached to this report. Detailed diagrams of each tract are included in the various District Formation and Annexation reports. These diagrams are hereby incorporated within the text of this report. Lot dimensions arm as shown on individual Tract Maps as shown in records of County Recorder. -6-p(� �/%C TOTAL ASSESSABLE UNITS 1986/87: Landscape 1,.intenance District No. 1 - 4313 Landscape Maintenance District No. 2 - �I66- Landscape Maintenance District No. 3 - �- Landscape Maintenance District No. 4 Landscape Maintenance District No. 5 - ANMEXATIOM SUIMY (1985/86) Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 Full Asset Half Assort. Tract /Dev. Units Units 12588 22 12028 16 12029 35 12030 10 12031 16 12532 111 12077 16 12077 -2 8 10210 33 12830 103 12801 -2 32 12922 308 11915 150 11853 72 12650 -1 61 _ 386 607 Landscape Maintenance District No. 2 (Conversions) Full Asset. Half Asset. Trut/Dev. Units Units 12833 117 -7- 306 4 Landscape Maintenance District No. 4 Full Asset. Half Asset. Tract /Dev. Units Units 12672 No. 128 12590 31 unit 12319 25 No. 12319 -1 25 assessment 12319 -2 22 District 12319 -3 30 $258.75 Der 12319 -4 37 Landscape Maintenance 12319 -5 35 4 $154.10 12319 -6 39 unit 12319 -7 27 No. 12319 -8 34 assessment 12670 25 12670 -1 24 12670 -2 31 12670 -3 39 12670 -4 34 ra SECTION 6. ASSE59W Improvements for the entire districts are found to be of general benefit to all lots within each District. It is proposed that all future development shall be annexed to the appropriate District. 1986 187 ASSESSMENTS -8- 3o/ 7 85/86 36/87 Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 $38.00 $28.00 per assessment unit Landscape Maintenance District No. 2 $223.77 $223.77 per assessment unit Landscape Maintenance District No. 3 S 0 $258.75 Der assessment unit Landscape Maintenance District No. 4 $154.10 S128.34 Der assessment unit Landscape Maintenance District No. 5 $163.64 $113.41 Der assessment unit -8- 3o/ 7 STATE OF CALIFORNIA AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION ODUNTYOFSANBERNARDINO ea I, L" a R. Pariatan that j aim the Leegal do nt*aWPer of goner a� �otp7�pH�Eyl)AILY REQpg� dib Cmmty god StAtd aioresald and Nvt the atIn tW a - cf b; e o of Resolution tlo. 96 -1,9 City Poncho Cucanonga was PubLL+hed In said newspaper one (1) tine to wit: "aY 23, 1996 � under Penalty of Per1�Y that the lorcgoln8 !s hue and Dated at Ontado, Call OmW thls �(Slytuturej 3 day of yaY �iy 96 Ati.1, O� �Ma W .pp�TfY m I41 I,I.1 yM . :i1'� x'016 r•w. , n iw1 .j Amn, �mgpr�i�rw.yna� 41h111r' Al •'y d/YII y�r_f.F ~y 1�0MY.L y��W �4� YMy C�4.1��6 m!rl dw w w1. 11Y M.F�LL•�� CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: Juan 4, 1986 TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Robert Rizzo, Assistant City Manager BY: Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer SUBJECT: Establish Annual Assessment and Approval of Engineer'a Report for Street Lighting Maintenance Districts Nos. If 2, it and 4. EVALUATION: The City Engineer's Annual Report and a Resolution to Levy and rollect Assessments within Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 are attached. The following comparative table will reflect fiscal year 1985/86 assessments as opposed to fiscal year 1986/87 pending annexation 1 into Lighting District 3 and annexation 3 into LighLing District No. 4. Description Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 (Arterial) Lighting Maintenance District No. 2 (Residential) Lighting Maintena ..e District No. 3 (Victoria) Lighting Maintenance District No. 4 (Terra Vista) 1985/86 1986/87 Variable S 8.91 S 7.52 S 1.39 36.22 31.23 4.99 48.65 48.03 .62 27.14 32.21 (5 5.07) RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached Resolution to levy and collect assessments within Street Lighting Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4. Respectfully, o zo Assi �ty Manager RR: LH:kmm 303 RESO.UTIOg 10. 4 -) A RESO.OTIad Of SEE CITY COUNCIL OF TEE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 10 LEFT AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS NIYaD STREET LIGHTING MAINTSNANCE DISTRICT 10. 1. STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 90. 2. STREET LIGHTING MADITWANCE DISTRICT 90. :�. ZAD STREET LIGHTING MAIlTEMCZ DISrAICT 30. 4. FOR SHE FISCAL YEAH 7986 -87 POLcUANT TO SHE LANDSCAPING AND LVBTING ACT OF 1972 IN CONNECTION VITH STREET LIGHTING MALITERANCE DICTRICTS NOS. 1, 2. 3 AND 4 VHEREA9a the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga did on the 21st day of May, 1986, adopt it% Resolution of Intention No. 86 -138 to order the therein described work in conuaction with Street Lighting Maintenance Districts Has. It 2a 3, and 4 which Cesolution of Intention No. 66 -138 wee duly and legally published in the time, form and manner as required by law, shown by the affidavit of Publication of said Resolution of Intention on file in the office of the City Clark; and VEXREAS, said City Council having duly received considered evidence, oral and tacumeotary, concerning a jurisdiction facts in this procaediug and concurring the necessity for the contemplated work and the benefits to be derived therefrom and said City Council bevies now acquired jurisdiction to order the proposed work. SECTION I: It is hereby resulved by tb• City Council of the City of Rancho Cecamoaga chat the public interest and camenience requires the levy and collection of assessments within Street Lighting Maintenance Districts Nos, It 2, 3, and 4 for the fiscal year 1988 -87a and said City Council hereby orders that the work, as set forth and described in said krsoluticn of Intention No. 86 -138, be done and cads; acd SECTION 2: Be it further resolved that the report filed by the Engineer is hereby finally approved; and SECTION 3: Be it finally resolved that the asessmente for fiscal year 1986 -87 and method of ossessumat in the Engiueer's Raport are hereby approved. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this a day of e, 19a. AYES: HOES: ABSENT: Jaffrey Eingy Mayor 304/ CITY OF RANCHO CIICNUM 1986 -87 Engineer's Report for Street Lighting Districts 1, 2, 3 and SECTION 1. A MMITY FOR REPORT This report is prepared in compliance with the requirement of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division i of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972) SECTION 2. GENERAL DESCRIPTION The report deals with the projected costs for Fiscal Year 1985 -86 and the estimated assessments for Fiscal Year :986 -81 of the following maintenance districts for various subdivisions throughout the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Street Lighting District No. 1 Street Lighting District No. 2 Street Lighting District No. 3 Street Lighting District No. 4 Lights to be included in the work program are specifically defined in the body of the report. The total number of lights within said Street Lighting Districts are as follows: Street Lighting District No. 1 Street Lighting District No. 2 Street Lighting District No. 3 Street Lighting District No. 4 464 Arterial Lights - VU—Local Lights Yicorta 361 Lights Terra vis --4T4 Lilts Work to be provided for, with the assessments established by the District: The furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operating, servicing and restoration of street light Improvements. Improvement maintenance is considered of 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 shall be considered to benefit the same as a lot. SECTION 3. PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS Street lighting was constructed by the developers for the individual subdivisions. The plans and street lights are as stipulated in the conditions of approval for each development and as approved by the City Engineering Division. Reference 1s herby made to the subject tract map or development plan and the assessment diagram for the exact location of the street lighting areas. The plans and specifications for street lighting improvement on the individual development are hereby made a part of this report to the same extent as if said plans and specifications were attached hereto. 40 Detailed maintenance activities include tha repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement providing for illumination of the subject area. SECTION 4. ESTIMATED COSTS No costs will be incurred for street lighting improvement construction. All improvements will be constructed by developers. Based on historic data, estimated maintenance costs for fiscal year 1986 -87 are as follows; Street Lighting MNnterance District Ito. 1 (Arterial) A. Number and Types of Lamps in District 1985/86 Lamps 1985/86 770 Annexations 1986/87_ 16000L �- --95- 5800L -717— TOTAL - W 0 Number of Units in District 1585/86 Units 1985/86 Annexations 1986/8' T 76UT— 3604 -- 7617-" .5 C. Projected Expenditures Ex endltures: 1985/96 1986/87 n Hance epair Southern. California Edison 31;536 27,315 637,49 C Administration 1,112 3,745 Total Estimated Cost $31,065 564,434 D. California Edisons Maintenance Rates Lamps 1985/86 1986/87 yt-fences 27500L 22000L T3-.75- 13:64- -754- 160DOL 11.69 12.08 .39 95DOL 9.95 10.16 .21 SBOOL 8.82 8.93 .11 E. Estimated financial Status at June 3n, 1986 Estimated Revenues $34,378 Less Estimated Expenditu as $31,065 plus prior year reserve $9,1ji - equal the projected fund. atrf-scaTTear End in the amount of $12-.Z4i' -- These funds will be used or reserves against unusual expenses an or nanry maintenance. 04 F. Fiscal Year 1986.87 Assessment Calculations Lamps REEMM Rates Cost 27500L 22000L 160DOL 9500L —25S— "Tll i6 5800L — 209-- —6'g3• _ TOTAL $4.458.40 x 12 i'S3, Sn- TOTAL ANNUAL ESTIMATED COSTS: • 1986 /87 ANNUAL ASSESSMENT NO. Of; UNITS IN 53501 + 3745 • $57246 - $7.52 G. Assessment Comparison 1985/86 1986/87 Increase(Decrease) Assessments $8.91 $7.52 ($1.39) 16% Decrease Street Lighting Mafmenance District No. 2 (Residential) A. Number and Types of Lamps in District Lamps 1965/86 Annexations 1986/87 27500L 22000L — 16000L — 9500L 5830L —75T- -55I- Less Tract 12414 Mt-in District) -- — Total 627 B. Number of Units in District Units 1985/86 Annexations 1986/87 -z4M— Less Tract 12414 (Not to District) _ 92 Total 2310 3 307 C. Projected Expenditures Ex eennd_ltures 1985/86 1986/87 Main new and Repair Southern California Edison Z.Iuu 38,642 7;M 67,415 Administration 1,189 4,719 1 Total Estimated Cost $41,931 $74,192 Y G D. California Edisons Maintenance Rates Lamps 1985/86 �9 Z222000000LL 1986/I87 Variances 13.25 13.84 i9 ? 16500L 11.63 12.08 .39 9500L 9.95 10.16 .21 5800L 8.82 8.96 .11 E. Estimated Financial Status at June 30, 1986 ' Estimated Revenues $34,819 Less Estimated Expenditures $41,931 plus prior year reserYes —$=F equal the projected reserves aT7FisuTYear End in the amount of —JT.M These funds will be used for ordinanry maintenance F. Fiscal Year 1986 /87 Assessment Calculations Lasp_s_ Quantity Z2225DOODDLL Rates Cost 16000L 9500L -- 6800L X27— x 12 $6/,415-- { TOTAL ANNUAL ESTIMATED COSTS: 1986/87 ANNUAL ASSESSMENT n NO. OF UNITS IN 0 ICT— 67,415 t 4719 • $72,134 • $31.23 a G. Assessment Comparison 86 1136- 198 Increase�Dec ar l Assessments —335 I i 0 stmt Lighting Maintenance District No. 3 (Victoria) L_ ampsL A. Number and Types of Lnmps in District Lamps 1985 /86 Annexations 1986/87 275ODL 6800L —355— X45 2,983.68 -- —7;74I.76 22000L -- li X 12 'f35-901Z2' f 16000L -- 9500L 58DOL -355— —355- 8. Number of Units In District Units 1985 /86 T.— -967-- Annexations 1986/87 —762- .5 C. Projected Expenditures Expenditures 1985/86 1986/87 Maintenance and repair $805 $805 Southern California Edison 35,244 35,804 Administration 1,192 2,506 Total Estimates Cost $37,241 $39,115 D. California Edisons Maintenance Rates Laep�; 19a5/86 19887 Variances 22000L 13.2s 13.84 .59 16000L 11.69 12.08 .39 9500L 9.95 10.16 .21 5800L 8.82 8.96 .11 E. Estimated Financial Status at June 30, 1986 Estimated Revenues $35.286 Less Estimated Expenditures $37,241 plus prior year reserve T1{7 Tequal the projected reserves a —scaT Year in the amount of M,796. These funds will be used for reserves aga unusual expenses. onary maintenance and rate maintenance F. Fiscal Year 1986 /87 AssessA_nt Calculations L_ ampsL Quantity Rates Cost 22000L 16000L 9500L 6800L —355— X45 2,983.68 -- —7;74I.76 li X 12 'f35-901Z2' f TOTAL ANNUAL ESTIMATED COSTS • 1986 /87 ANNUAL ASSESSMENT NO. O� UNITS IN LIMA= 38,901 2506 - $41,407 - $48.03 G. Assessment Comparisons 1985/86 1,86/81 Increase(Decrease) Assessments -9F.' 3 348 07 - - - - - - MY- Pending Annexation P.o. 1 into District No 3,Tract 12833 Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4 (Terra Vista) A. Number and Type of Lamps in District Lamp; 1985186 Annexations — 1986/ 77M — --T-- T 15000L 9500L 6 Number of Units in District Units 1985 /86 Annexations 19P1./87 T -426- —607— -1J37- 5 422 522 472 16000L 11.69 " I6lTII' C Projected Expenditures 9500L 9.95 Expenditures 1985/86 1936/87 Maintenance and repair —69r - 945 - Southern California Edison 19,506 34,598 Administration 1,192 [,422 Total Estimated Cost 21,394 37,966 D. California Edison. Maintenance Rates Lamps Z272000060LL 196 1986/ Variances 13.25 13.84 59 16000L 11.69 12.08 .39 9500L 9.95 10.16 .21 5800L 8.82 8.96 .11 E. Estimated Financial Status at June 30, 1986 Estimated Revenues $16,889 Less Estimated Expenditures $21 394 plus prior year reserve -u- equal. the projected reserves at -FisH ear End In the ami,unt of (4585] -The.e funds will be used for N/A 3w F. Fiscal Year 1946/87 Assessment Calculations Lamps Quantity Rates Cost Z750IX. Ia.31 —0.62 22000L T M. 5T' —77.w 16DOOL —TM 9500L —91— —IOT6— X86 5800L 330 -- —6:98— '7;95,t^,g(f x;836:30 x 12 46,035.60 TOTAL ANNUAL ESTIMATED COSTS: • 1986 /87 ANNUAL ASSESSMENT 46,036 + 2422 w $48,458 - $32.21 G. Assessment Comparison 1985/86 1986/87 Increase(Oecrease) Assessments —PMT X32 YI 55 07-- 18% Increase SECTIONS. ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM A copy of the taster Assessment diagram for each district is attached to this report. Detailed diagrams of each tract are included. These diagrams are hereby incorporated with the text of this report (Assessment Diagram are on file in the City Clerk's office). �T� ASSESSMENT SUMMARY 190/0 1985/86 1986/87 Lighting District No. 1 (Arterial) —8741— --r. 57- District No 2 (Residential) 36.22 71.23 Lighting District No. 3 (Victoria) 48.65 x8.03 Lighting District No. 4 (Terra Vista) 27.14 :4.56 SECTIONS. ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM A copy of the taster Assessment diagram for each district is attached to this report. Detailed diagrams of each tract are included. These diagrams are hereby incorporated with the text of this report (Assessment Diagram are on file in the City Clerk's office). �T� TOTAL ASSESSADLE UNITS 190/0 1986/87 Lignting District No. 1 (Arterial) ZEN— —76U— Lighting District No. 2 (Residential) 764 2310 Lighting District No. 3 (Victoria) 745 862 Lighting District No. 4 (Terra Vista) 636 1504 SECTIONS. ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM A copy of the taster Assessment diagram for each district is attached to this report. Detailed diagrams of each tract are included. These diagrams are hereby incorporated with the text of this report (Assessment Diagram are on file in the City Clerk's office). �T� STREET 1.1Ci NK DISi1ICT ND. 1 Tract 10491 9539 9584 9584 -1 9584 -2 10569 9583 11350 11609 9441 11696 10762 10277 -1 9269 11663 12019 12020 ;?roi 12022 12040 9658 11734 12090 10045 10045 -1 12023 12024 12025 12184 11173 -1 11173 11144 12237 12237 -1 12237 -2 12305 Original Formation and Mnezatlrns Tract 12670, 12670 -1 11915 11853 12922 12801 -2 12650 -1 D.R. 64 -51 P.X. 9318 P.N. 9204 12672 12319, 12319 -1 11781 12739 12741 11893 3/�)- Tract 12316 12316 -1 12317 12317 -1 12364 12361 -1 12402 11934 12044 12045 12046 12530 12238 12332 -1 12386 11577 12523 P.X. 7827 12365 11035 12320 thru 4 12490 11606 -1 10046 10047 12721 9619 12621 12091 thru 8 11625 12740 12772 -1 12801 -1 12590 -1 thru 6 12833 - Peneln9 STIIEET UGH TING DISTECi YO. 2 Original Formation and Annexations Tract Tract Tract 10491 12532 12530 9539 12830 12238 9584 10210 12523 9584 -1 12801 -2 11577 9584 -2 12922 P.M. 7827 10569 12650 -1 123209 9638 D.R. 84 -51 11605 -1 11609 P.N. 9318 10046 9441 9619 10047 11696 12772 -1 12621 9269 12525 1273S 9658 12740 12741 10045 11893 12801 -1 10045 -1 10035 12184 12237 12237 -1 12237 -2 11013 9399 9400 12414 11549 -1 12588 3/'s STREET UGHTINC OTSTAICT 110. 3 Original Formation and Annexations Tract 11934 12044 12045 12046 No Annexations STREET LIGHTING OISCTRILT NO. 4 Original Foraation and Annexations Tract 12316 12316 -1 12317 12317 -1 12364 12364 -1 12364 12402 12590 12590 -1 thru 6 12670 12670 -1 thru 4 12319 12319 -1 thru 8 31Y ■ i- AFFIDAVIT OF PUKICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO I,_r.tr.t, a_ r,Tt T do hereby certify that I am the Legal Advertising clerk of THE DAILY REPORT, a daily r&xgmper of general circulstlon in the My of Ontario, County and State aforesaid and that the attached advertisement of Resolation fro. 86 -138 City of ranch% Cucamonga was published In seld newspaper On. (') • i,- to wit' day 23, 19E6 I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing Is true and correct (Signature) Dated at Ontario. California this 21 day of w ':av ,79Bfi. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 4, 1986 TO: City Council and City Manager UL PROMS Robert Rizzo, A3sistant City Manager BY: Jerry B. Pulwood, Assessment Revenue Coordinator SUBJECT: Establish Annual Assessment and Approval of Engineer's Report for the Park and_Recreation Improvement District BS P.D. IHeritago and Red Hill Community Parks). EVALUATION: The 19988 properties within the Park and Recreation Assessment District, 85 P.D., will realize an across the board assessment reduction in fiscal year 1986/87. The following comparative tables will reflect these reductions. Description 1985/86 1986/87 Decrease Per Residential Swell Unit S 34.65 S 33.50 S 1.15 Vacant Land 1.5 Acres or Less 17.32 16.75 .57 Vacant Land 1.51 to 3.5 Acres 5.99 50.25 1.74 Vacant Land 3.51 to 7.0 Acres 121.29 117.25 4.04 Vacant Land 7.01 to 14.0 Acres 242.59 234.50 8.09 Vacant Land 14.01 to 25.0 Acres 485.16 469.00 16.16 Vacant Land 25.01 Acres and Larger 866.42 837.50 28.92 Staff is in receipt of the Assessment Diagram, Engineer's Annual Report and Assessment Roll as support documents. The Assessment Diagram, Engineer's Annual Report and Resolution are attached for Council's consideration. The Assessment Roll is presently available and will be available on the night of the Puhlic Hear)+'. June 4, 1486, for Council's review; the Assessment Roll size of 1461 pages prevented Si being attached to the report. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached Resolution confirming the Diagram and Assessment, and providing for the Levy of the Annual Assessment in the Park and Recreation Assessment District 85 P.D. (Heritage and Red Hill Community Park). Respectfully, Ab%}_�s zgyp Assi asl' nt City Manager RR:JBP:kmm Attachments j/ V ORDER OF FRDCEM CITY OF RANCHO CUCUUNGA PARK AND RECREATION IWRDYFREHT DISTRICT (RERIYALE AND RFD HILL CONFUNITY PARK) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JUNE 1. 1986 DAs: Announce that in'. is the tfn and Plug fixed for the publlc hearing relating to the armusl levy of assesseents for wsts of ulntenance and fW"Imsents for the Assessgent Dlstrfct. CLERK: Awo a that notlCe has been given In the Benner and fare as required by 10. and a Certificate of cupllame 1s on file and open for public inspection. STAFF: - Explain purpose, scope and order of procedure for Publ IC Nearing - Explain general nature, location and Oltent of the existing worts of faprovexnt - Provide description of boundaries of Assessnent District - Present and suearlte •Report• pursuant to the pmvistenf of the 'Landscaping AM llghtlnq Act of 1972• - Explain mthad and foreuta o1 assessment spread • Rate reCommandatfon as to any Wiflcgttms necessary 1, the gsuslamts or prcceedings STAFF: Report Cm protests rKelved. ENO OF STAFF REPORT _ OPEN FOR PUBLIC DISCUSSION IUTOR: ASK EACH SPEAKER TO IDENTIFY TNEX'FLYES AND •HEIR FROPERTY. First, ask to how from these persons who wish to speak In n000- TM—Oi to the Proposed annus: my of aSNSSeentf Next, ask to Mar free anyone who wishes to speak to favor of the prueedings. STAFF: Final report on protests ruttvM. STAFF: Presentation o/ Premed changes or modifications to the Engineer's 'Report •, if W. CITY COUNCIL: Discussion. CITY COUNCIL: B Foil" dychn Public Having CLOSED. IF THE LE6ISLATIYE BODY MINES 10 PAOMEO• CITY COUNCIL: Adopt RESOLUTION COIFIUIINO OIAMAN AND A:SES;IEHT AND OROCRINO ANNUAL LEVY OF ASSESSNIATS: This Is the f"al vtlon to levy the annual assessment. RESOLUTION g0. 9(.—/75' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF IRE CITY OF RANCHO COCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA. CONFIRMING THE DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT AND P1071DING FOR THE LEVY OF I ^, ANNUAL ASSESSMENT 10 A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT WPIREAS. the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, has previously formed a special assessment district pursuant to the terse of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 ". being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, in what is knwu and designated as PARE AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (HERITAGE AID RED BILL COMMONITr PARS) (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District "); and WRERE69, the City Council has initiated proceedings for the levy of the annual assessment for the Assessment District; and WHEQEAO, at this time a public bearing bas been held in the manner and form as required by lava and the City Council has considered all oral statements and Written proteges medo or filed by all interested persons; sad WREREAS, this City Council in am satisfied with the assessment and diagram and all other matters as contained in the Engineer's "Report" as now submitted for final consideration and approval, and is am desirous of proceeding with the levy of the anneal assessment. ROW. THEREFORE. IT IS HERESY RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2: That all protests and objections or every kind and nature be, and the sane hereby are, overruled and denied. SECTION 'A: That the final Engineer's "Report ", consisting of the final submitted sssessmout and diagram for the proceedings, is hereby approved and confirmed. SRCTion 4: That the assessments for fiscal year 1986 -1967, as contained to the final Engineer's "Report ", as approved, are hereby confirmed and levied upon the respective subdivisions of land in the Assessment District in tbo amounts •_ set forth in said find approased "Report ". ME, SECTICK 5: The City Clerk #ball 'mmcd.stely accomplish the following: A. Deliver to the Superintendent of Str,,sts the assessment, together with the diagram attached thereto and made a part thereof, a. confirmed, with a Certificate of Confirmation attached a:d the date thereof. Said Superintendent of Streets #ball tbe: isootdiatelf place for record saif diagram and assessment in his office in a suitable boot as a permanent recur, and attach a Certificate of Recordation. E Cause to be filed a certified copy of the diagram and assessment with the County Auditor, said filing to be completed no later than the 3rd Monday in August. SECTION 6: That the above confirmed assessment *ball be collectrd at the sane time and in the some manner as County property tozos are col Ircted, and all lays providing for the collection and enforcement of Coouty taxer shall be applicable to the collection and enforcement of these assessments. PASSED. APPROVED, and ADO UD this * day of *, 19*. AIRS: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Beverly A. Autbelet, City Clerk Jeffrey Ring, Mayor 3i9 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PARK AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 85 -PD (HERITAGE AND RED HILL r:OMMUNITY PARKS) REPORT PURSUANT TO LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT 09: 1972 FISCAL YEAR 1981 -1987 MAY 13, 1986 290 SotM Ar*hokn WC4 SWfe 10D, Anohelnt Caftmo 92805 • (/tQ 7745740 • (2%0,) 0247611 ` - r 9 i TABLE OF CONTENTS _ PAGE SECTION 1 AUTHORITY FOR REPORT 1 SECTION 2 FINDINGS 2 SFCT10N 3 DISTRICT ANALYSIS 3 SECTION 4 ESTIMATE OF COST 4 SECTION 5 METHOD OF SPREAD 5 EXHIBIT A ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM MAPS I f SECTION 1 - AUTHORITY FOR REPORT This report for the 1986 -1987 fiscal Year update Is propared pursuant to the order of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and In compliance with tho requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Division 15, Section 22500 of the Streets and Highway Code. Pi: isions for this annual assessment are included in Chapter 3 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972. The purpose of this report is to sat forth findings and the assessment analysis for the annual levy of assessments for Park and Rocreetion Im- provement District No. BS -PD, thereafter referred to a3 "the District ". This District, utilizing direct benefit assessmontc, has been created to provide funds to finance the cost of construction, maintenance, and oper- ation of Heritage Community Park and Red Hill Community Park In the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 1 +T Y SECTION 2 - FIBS Section 22573, Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, requires assess- ments to be levied according to benefit rather than according to assessed value. The section states: "The not amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district may be apportioned by any formula or method which rairly distributes the not amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated bonafitz to be received by each such lot or parcel from Me Improvements." The tent of determining whether or not a parcel will bansf't iron the Imp:ovoltents Is contained In the Improvement Act of 1911 (Division 7, commencing with Sactlor Solo of the Street& and Highways Code, State of California). The 1972 Act also provides for the classification of various areas within an assessmont district into benefit areas when, by reason of variations In the nature, location, and extent of the mlprovcrse:+ts, the various areas will receive differing degrees of benefit from the Improvements. Benefiting areas consist of all territory receiving aubatantlally the same degree of benefit from the Improvements and may conslat of contiguous or noncontiguous areas. As the asausmants art levied on the basis of benefit, they are con- sidered a user's fee, not a tax, and, therefore, are not governed by Ar- ticle XIIIA. Properties owned by public agencies, such as a city, county, state, or the fuderal government, are not assessable without the approval of the particular agency and, normally, are not assesse4. Certain other parcels used for railroad mainline right -of -way, public utility transmission right -of -way, common areas, and nonprofit organizations (I.e., churches, clubs) are also exempt from ascassmant. The assessment for mobile home parks will be based upon thr - nderlying lot wreaga. SECTION 3 - DISTRICT ANALYSIS A Improvement District Boundary The improvement district includes all of the City of Rancho Cuca- monga with the general exception of the Etlwanda area In the northeasterly section of the City. The Etiwanda area Is not In- cluded in the Improvement district because community park design and construction in that area Is, In general, being financed by do- valopment fees pursuant to the Quimby Act. The assessment dis- trict boundary Is shown on the assessment diagram map (Exhibit A). All parcels of real 5: ✓?stay affected are mare particularly de- scribed In map. prepared in accordance with Section 327 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, which are on file In the office of the San Bernardino County Assessor In the Hall of Records, 172 West Third Street, San Bernardino, California and which are hereby made a part hereof by reference. B. District Name City of Rancho Cucamonga Park Improvement District No. 85-PD Facilities The existing works of Improvement are generally described as follows: The construction of Hsrit&&o Commwdty Park Including, but not limited to, grading; planting; Irrigation; onsite roads; sidewalks; parking lots, lighting; restrooms; equestrian facilities; playground equipment; picnic facilities; athlotle facilities; and walking, jogging and equestrian trails 2. The construction of Red Hill Community Park Including, but not limited to, grading, planting, Ir- Igation, onalto rosus, sidewalks, parking lots, lighting, waterscape, restrooms, senior citizens facilities, playground equipment, picnic facilities, major lighted athletic facilities, jogging trail, underground storm draln system, and adjacent public street Improvements 3 D� SECTION 4 - ESTIMATE OF COST The Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 permits carrying forward sur- pluses or recovering deficits In subsequent fiscal years. Gents for the district will be reviewed annually. Any surplus credited against assess- ments or any deficits shall be Included In the assessment for the following fiscal year. 1986.1987 Fiscal Year Estimated Casts and Budget Summary Deficit from 1985 -1986 Budget t$19,299.75) Contributions (Interest earned) Redemption Fund (Limited to Pay Bond Debt Service) 22,780.00 Spacial Reserve Fund (Limited to Pay Bond Dobt Servico) 44,613.50 Total Estimated Available Funds $ 48,M.75 County Special Charges f 200 DD Administration Charges 280 00 Consultants' Fees Fiscal Agent Charges 25,000.00 First Debt Service Installment (1 /2/87) 115M.00 324,770.00 Second Debt Service Installmont (VW571 479,770.00 Total Estimated Costs 5887.520.00 Balance to Assessment 1839,426.25 4 SECTION 5 - METHOD OF SPREAD The Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 Indicates that lighting assess- ments may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distrib- utes costs among all lots or parcels within the District In proportion to the estimated benefits received. A. Definitions The District Is divided Into three categories for Cis purpose of de- termining the assessments as follows: Category A - includes parcels based on the numbar of existing residential units within certain ranges of parcel size Category B - includes all parcels not defined In Category A or Category C. Category C - Includes exempt parcels. dxsmpt paresis ware dis- covered by searching the Cou .ty Assessor's computer tapes for those parcels that an listed as exempt by the Assessor or which have an assessed value of less than $SOO. In conducting this search, several parcels were included as exempt that show parcel sizes In excess of 1.5 acres and type codes of, for example, res- Identlal or agriculture. These parcels were added back Into the rolls and assessed. S. Formula The assessment formula is based on actual land use Information contained in the current San Bernardino Assessor's computer files and Assessor's parcel maps. Category A: All parcels containing existing residential dwelling units and meet- ing the .following conditions: Assessor's Number of Existing Ras. Size Range Parcel Size Range Cwelling Units per Parcel 0.4 Less than 1.5 acre and 1 or more dwelling units 5 1.51 acres to 3.5 acres and 2 or more dwelling units 6 3.51 acres to 7.0 acres and 4 or more dwelling umib 7 7.01 acres to 14.0 acres and 8 or more dwelling units B 14.01 acres to 25.0 acres and 15 or more dwelling units 9 25.01 acres and larger and 26 or more dwalling units 5 Category A Is based on the number of existing resldental units... Val actual ssnl"w*'t for Bond Debt Service Par existing nalden- alre dwelling uilt i unit may decrease each year as more residential unite ulit within the Impro vement district. Maintenance costa, how. ever, an expected to increase an and will somtwhat offset the anticipated decrease In assessments duce to now development. Category e: All parcels not defined In Category A or Category C. Category C: All exempt parcels as defined b 4ow: 1• all Properties currently tax exempt, 2, all Public ownerships; 3. rallrosd mainline rl h 8 ta•of -way; 4 major utility transmission rights -of -way; 5• mineral rights; 6. Parcels so small they currently cannot be built upon; 7 all normally assessable lass than $5011 and 1 S acres ess; and assessed valuation of 8, nonprofit organlzalon• (I-*-, ehwchos). C' Summar of Prollminaa Assessment Amounts Category A: The Preliminary estimated assassmant which will be levied annually is $33,50 Per residential dwelling unit for those parcels in Catago- rY A. Category A Parcels containin g more man one residential unit will be assessed for an amount equal to $33,50 times the number of dwelling units 302 Category B: The assessment which may be levied annually for parcels within Category B shall be according to the following schedule: Assessor's Assessment Size Range Definition per Parcr-te 0- 4 less than 1.5 acres f 16.75 5 1.51 acres to 3.5 acres 50.25 6 3.51 acres to 7.0 acres 117.25 7 7.01 acres to 14.0 acres 234.50 a 14.01 acres to 25.0 acres 469.00 9 25.01 acres and larger 637.50 Category C: The assessment shall be 50.00 for Category C parcels. • Some assessments may vary from the values given above by 6.01 or S.02 either way. The computer spreads the .ctual Balance to Assessment, carries tho e>-tra pennies left over from an even spread, and adds them one at c tin" to the assessment roll from the first parcel downward to make the total assessment spread ex- actly equal the Balance to Assessment. The individual 1986 -1967 assessments by Assessors parcel number (Exhlb- It B) have been tabulated and arc an file at City Mall with the City Clark of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and are hereby nade a part hereof by this reference. Dated ?Wel!i /911i MLLDAN ASSOCIATES if Ranch3 Cucamonga of California Fi 3a 9 . - Preliminary approval for annual Isvv ,{ usssssmant of the district and Preliminary approval of the.enginsor s uport were made on the _ day of _ , 19_ CITY CLERK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STATE OF CALIFORNIA Final approval, confirmation and levy of Uro annual assessment and ail matters In the engineer's report were made on the day of 19 __, by adoption of Resolution No. _ by the City Council CITY CLERK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STATe OF CALIFORNIA A copy of said assessment roll ar.d engineer's report was filed in the of- ficas of the City Engineer and the City Clark an the _ cloy of 19 CITY CLERK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STATE OF CALIFORNIA CITY ENGINEER CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STATE OF CALIFORNIA 8 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM $MEET I OF 6 PARK AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 85 - PD (HERITAGE ANb RED HILL COMMUNITY PARKS) My or RUICIID COCAMONEA CoONn Or SAN SEENASEM ETAn Or CALWORNA SCALE w ru �m WA ...ens... as.s� V .�elre -.a �Y.u� r lIIl3v.. M. .V...tYM .CYf.}ry...... ... ~YMiiTRN .4M• aV. rK ♦f. ....e r..ar a.o wan r ✓ r am r w +R�..r• r.ra -a.a w w` �r.�a.rs.�.�/ ti..../ I (r •LLP n amr..r- ar�.o. LIJI.�Y�� a p 3D SH[[T 4 Of f PARK AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 83 — PD SEE SHEET 3 _ ru !I i d r �t r� • • I• aFm 208 6 lots I 6 �OOC d r 0 I.4 333 �0■ 1017 u� O N S m m 1 at 0 N F W W S N W W N h N W W S W W W N aNaOT a OR a a"" PARK AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 25 - PD . J SEE SHEET4 33(-1 w O } O ArftoAVtT OF PUNUCATtON STATE OFCALiFORNIA N OOUNTPOFSANBERNARDAO l as am thesue- Advertising . am the Legal AdvecUshig clerk Of . do REPORT, a that I 0e vaper of general chmisu n, pTuf6illEatD�AIItn the q RT, a dopy of qty and State aforesaid and that tbo attached a City of RSrcho =e3m a'at PablbW to said neMpaper e r r T t tawtt Nay 23, 1986 cloae�ct ' coder penalty of per)ary that the foregoing b true and fSlgtuture) Dated at Ontario. CaMornia fhb day of �� Mt4Pota. n 6 wtlfry 0.agYtD Af rM• ucrnY„ wlMV.air.t.j�tr n.nn. wwv.si wrsrn.�r� r�.rti wWa., ...wwrrn,�Or'r+r+wwa r�.~..�n.+ar Mew ti'r""wrr r�rR+rwwws'..yr i IrwM rr.wrw.e_w~u �b r Tw Mw r w r twrwq M+�r r�wr�r"'yr r r.w,r ..rrw..Y, r w rryr, .�wr.e.r.rw rrr,t r•,...r�a..� r a1'�DrL.Irrq , �♦TTli1. Mr �t.•.IwYA WMaIaT � MrWt .rva.ar A aun.rur, tTn tu.. r M .aw..rr� wwr,r '.'�T rww... w�rw,rjNMfl.r two w M taor nwow��,.iMr r...w.r. a�.,w.r "'� DrCe�rwrM rr�rnn rr ' �mnrAwr..nn I . �f+w,rnarr�� xrna! CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 4, 1986 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, Associate Planner SUBJECT: APPEAL OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 05 -53 - ANDERSON - The appeal of Con Lions of prova rT equTr ng the un ergrounding of utilities and the meandering sidewalk along 6th Street for the development of three industrial buildings totaling 61,845 so. ft. on 4.47 acres of land in the General Industrial /Rail Served District (Subarea 5) located cn the north side of 6th Street, 300 feet west of Turner Avenue - APN 209 - 211 -40. I. ABS74ACT: The developer is requesting the deletion of the oG do rtins imposed by Planning Commission in approving this proiect requiring the undergrounding of utilities and the installation of meandering sidewalk along 6th Street. Staff is recommending that the City Council uphold the Conditions of Approval. II. BACKGROU40, This project was previcusly approved in 1580 for the N opmon J four multi- tenant industrial buildings. Although the developer had completed Build in g A. the approval of Buildings I. C and D expired. Therefore, the developer resubmitted a new application with a modified site pea:. in order to comply with the minimum standards of the City's current Industrial Specific Plan and received approval from the Planning Commission on April 23, 1986. Copies of staff report and Planning Commission minutes have been attached for your review. The Conditions of Approval required that the developer pay an in -lieu fee for the full cost of undergrounding the existing utilities, approxi-ately 316 feet in I ength, and the installation of meandering sidewalk within the parkway along 6th Street. III. ,ANALYSIS: A. Situ Characteristics: The existing Building "A" fronts on 6th free[ where the o f -site improvements are completed except for the meandering sidewalk and full landscaping and irrigation system was installed as shown in Exhibit "C ". With rega,d to existing overhead utilities, the project site has 66 KV and 12 KV electric lines and telecommunication tines on the same poles as shown in Exhibit "E ". �:6 a CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPOdT Development Review 85 -53 - Anderson June 4, 1986 Page 2 B. Under round in of Exlstin utilities: The developer 1s oD ect ng to the un ergroun ng o ut hies at the present time or paying any in -lieu fee for future undergrounding of utilities. The reason given is the added cost of redoing the newly completed street improvements with the undergrounding work; and that the undergrounding of 12 KV lines and telecom unication lines would not eliminate any utility poles since the 66 KV lines have to stay. Staf9 Comments: On October 10, 199, t6 Planning Conmissiou e a Dec al Workshop to fc -0 to policies on the undergrounding of existing overhead utilities with the purpose to beautify streets in the City. The established general policies were as follows: 1. All types of streets should have utilities placed underground as a condition of land development. 2. Actual undergrounding may be deferred and au in -lieu fee paid in those circumstances where •hn Planning Commission falt it was impractical to underground at the present time. 3. The obligation to place utilities underground hnuld be shared equally by properties on both sides of the street in proportion to street frontage. On May 14, 1986, proposed language changes to refine and clarify the policies noted above Mere presented to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission held a preliminary review and directed staff to prepare additional changes for their consideration at their May 28, 1986 meeting. On May 28, 1986, the Planning Commission reviewed and approved the policies as cutlined on Exhibit •I•. In reviewing this project, the Planning Commission considered all public input and the recent conVIetion of off -site street iuprovaments, and felt tl.at it was impractical to underground the existing utilities at the present time and allowed the developer to pay an in -lieu fee for full cost of such undergrounding of utilities. The requirements of paying an in- lieu fee will provide for the undergrounding of existing utilities except for the 66 KV electrical lines in the future. . Y CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Development Review 85 -53 - Anderson June 4, 1986 Page ; C. Neanderin Sidewalk: The developer oojectad to the insta cctnn o meandering sidewalk because it wuuid entail redoing a portion of the existing landscaping and irrigatinr, system. The developer also stated that between Archibald Avenue and Turner Avenue there are no existing sidewalks; therefore,ie installation of a meandering sidewalk for this Project lead; nowhere. Staff Coeaent• This prujtct was originally reviewed and approv y" t e Planning Cemmission in 1980, prior to the adoption of the industrial Specific Plan in 1981. Therefore, the installation of a meandering sidewalk was not required. With the adoption of the Industrial Specific Plan, 6th Street is designated as a Special Boulevard where meandering sidewalk is required. Based on a field survey, the areas an both sides of 6th Street between Archlbalu Avenue and Lucas Ranch Road show parts of the developed aria having meandering sidewalk and others tnat do not have a meandering sidewalk as shown in Exhibit •H'. However, between Lucas Ranch Road, and all the way to Haven Avenue, most of the areas an both sides of 6th Street are vac_nt where any new development would require the installation of meandering sidewalk. Therefore, the condition of requiring meandering sidewalk for this project is appropriate and further Implements the lndustrial Specific Plan for Special Boulevard. Deletion of this condition would set a precedent for infill parcels within the City. Iv. RECOK4ENOATInN: Staff recommends that the pity Council uphold the tondiL�s or rpproval for Development Review 85 -53 and deny the appeal request. a Rc _ fa�ly tt Brad Buller , City Planner 88:NF:ns Attachments: Letter of Appeal Request fro Planning Commission Staff Re Exhibit •A• - Location Map Exhibit •B• - Site Utilizati ErhibIt •C' - Detailed Site Exhibit 00' - Site Existing Exhibit •E' - Photo of Exist and Off -Site I. Exhibit 'F• - Location of C1 Exhibit •G• - Typical Overhe Exhibit •H• - Area Plan Show Exhibit °I• - Resolution for 33 8 the Applicant rt & Minutes, April 23, 1986 Map Utility Map 's 66 Utilities, on -Site Lines n of Meandering Sidewalk ding Utilities t 1 NMARK, INC. NAGf MEM, CONSTRUCTION 6 SYNCICAT/ON —RECEIVED — CITY OF RANCHO CUCUMNOA "NINO DIVISION AM APR 3 01986 PM 71S19101ll1L�1I12131415 6 Beverly Autheiet, City Clerk Rancho Cucamonga City Hall 9320 Baseline Raod Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Re: Developmental Review 0 8553 520 NORTH EUCLID AVENUE ONTARIO. CALIFORNIA 91782 TELEPHONE: 17141 999.879 S April 29, 1986 Dear Beverly; This letter shall constitute our appeal to the City Council of the Planning Commission action of April 23, 1986. The specific conditions we are appealing are as follows 1. Requirement for a meander) -g sidewalk on Sixth Street 2 Requirement for undergrounding of existing utilities. ADA/ds [ Yours truly, N f �D��Afld�KOn Steve Crowe, architect, replied that the building would nd approximately 20 feet above the perming There were no further comments. Commissiane: Chitiea stated it would be ni to have a restaurant at this location. Chairran Stout agreed and stated it s a good idea to move the restaurant back a little from the intersec on due to the considerable amount of lar,dscaping on Spruce and Foot 1. He liked the change and thought it appropriate. Motion Moved by Mnitel seconded by Chitiea, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolut n approving Environmental Assessment and Development Review 85 -05. Mott ca.•ried by the following vote: AYES M!SSI04ERS: tiCIIIEL, LHITIEA, STOUT NOES: CCM9ISSIONERS: NONE ABSEI COMMISSIONEgs: BARKER i STAIN; COFWISSSOIIERS 0.EMPEL - carried Commissioner Rempel returned to the podium. J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOP4ENT REVIEW 8S -53 - ANDERSON - The development of n us r a u i rugs tota ng square ee on 4 47 acres of land in the General Industrial /Rail Served District (Subarea 5) located on the north side of 6th Street, 300 feet west of Turner Avenue - APN 209- 211 -40. Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. She recommended a minor change to the Engineering Division conditions of approval to require the undergrounding of 12 kv lines in addition to the existing telecommunication lines an the north side of 6th Street. Commissioner Chitiea asked if there was a condition r?lative to meandering sidewalks. Ms. Fong replied that meandering sidewalks were required in the Standard Londitions. Chairman Stout invited public comment Planning Commission Minutes -12- 3 v April 23, 1986 . i ♦ _ k Richard A - -t, representing the applicant, gave an overview of iroject. He addressed the issue of the banding and questioned if this was essential given that the building is concealed to the west by existing property and - po•eitially concealed to the east by proposed development. He was cc-cerned wit, the expense and questioned the aesthetic value of undergrounding two of th• lines on the existing pola,. since the poles and 66 kv lines would rt.jin He was also concerned with disturbing the existing landscaping end irrigation and advised that the project contained an under3round vaulted lire system. He additionally objected to the requirbr4nt of meandering sldt,walks and advised that it would necessitate the removal of existing landscaping and would not connect to any existing or pr ,)posed structures. He axed for clarification of the requirement of the reciprocal agreement for the driveway and asked how far and to what extent Mr. Hanson replied that it woulc be to the normal building setbacr. line; one drive aisle. There were no further comments. Commissioner Rempel suggested an 1n -lieu fee for the utility unde ^gounding. He felt the meandering sidewalk should be constructed as conditioW. Regarding the texture banding, he stated it is not essential to carrying t around to the back of each of the buildings, but there should be some color band on all the buildings. Chairman Stout stated that since those back buildings are essentially hidden from the street, he would agree and that some color banding would be acceptable. He advised that the existing landscaping needs to be replaced where removed to construct improvements Commissioner N.cNiel concurred with an in -lieu fee for utility undergrounding. He stated that texture banding is not essential on the back sides of the buildings. Commissioner Chittea considered the in -lieu fee appropriate. She suggested that when the sidewalk goes in, the applicant could possibly do some additional berming to the front of the building. She was in fasor of continu'ng texture around building, but would not hold up the project for that. Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Chittea, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Development Review 85 -53 with an amendment to Engineering Division Condition 1 requiring the undergrounding of 12 kv ltne. in addition to telecommunication lines on 6th Street, and amendment to Planning Division, condition 3 changing the required texturized banding to a color band. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COISiISSIONERS: MCNIEL, CHITIEA, REMPEL, STOUT NOES: CG+LNISSIOIIERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER - carried • a � t 3 4�/ C RESOLUTION NO. 86 -45 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW N0. 85 -53 FOR 3 MULTI - TENANT INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS TOTALING 61,845 SQUARE FEET LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 6TH STREET, 300 FEET WEST OF TURNER AVENUE IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL /RAIL SERVED DISTRICT filed by Arnold Anderson for review oft he above8describbedlpro�vt;iandion was WHEREAS, on the 23rd day of April, 1986 the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission h e a meeting to consider the above - described project. follows: WOW. THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolved as SECTION 1: That the following can be met: 1. That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and 2. That the proposed use is in accord with the objective of the Industrial Specific Plan and the purposes of the district in which the site is, located; 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 improvements in the vicinity. SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the env tromuent an tat a Negative Declaration is issued on April 23, 1986. SECTION 3: That Development Review No. 85 -53 is approved subject to the follow nig conditions and attached Standard Conditions: _ L Resolution No _ DR 85 -53 - Anderc , t Page 2 Planning Division• I. Outdoor eating area /plazas shall be added to the east property boundary between Bcildinga A and B, and to the west property boundary between Buildings C and D. Detail deslg�s of the outdoor eating area /plazas shall o; submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to suomitting for plan check. Detailed plan shall bt included in the landscape and irrigation plan and shall be submitted for Planning Division review and a.proval prior ta issuance of building permits. 2. All front office entrances shall be provided with texturized entryway and landscaping. Detail designs shall be included in the landscape and irrigation plans and to be submitted for Planning Division review and approva r or to issuance of building permits. 3. A o;nd between two accent strips at the top of the buildi n shall be provided to the four sides of the building elevations for Buildings n, C. and D. 8. The design of the floid wall shall include such materials as split -face block or concrete and shall be submitted for Planning Division review and approval prior td issuance of building permits. Engineering Division: 1. Prior to issuance of building permits the developer shall PAY to the City an in -lieu fee for the full ccst of undergrourding the existing overhead electrical (less than 66 kv) and telecommunications line: fronting the project, a distance of 116 feet. 2. Notice of Intention to join the proposed Median Island Landscape Maintenance District shall be filed with the City Council prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3. An off-size hydrology study to verify tn` flood wall locations, configuration and height shall bo submitted for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. Resolution No, / OR 85 -53 - Andersdh Page 3 l APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22 R0 DAY OF APRIL, 1986. !H^ COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY I. Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was daly end regularly introduced, passed, and adopteJ by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held an the 23rd day of April, 1986, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, CHI -IEA, REMPEL, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER J vy� M , � P!| \ #2` i \ . I |! § |)\ ° \ gi= /j £�O �| . !. / !�( /{ \ f � 1 / \te! BE!e e t/\ »7 ;_# q /G ( j � 9 § `�- ! 3� § � { � ■�| # y | U }! \ k | , ■3 _! � .4,6-- � 6 a 8 a C px7EEE x8w ,� aSEo xr �ysE gBS:s gr3s�g?$� '• = -5+� so7 Y x�s� .s . "s nfl 1-0 s" tt° Ea r 19:rfi x 3 =p' a�:3a 9 :g'V£g. ,'sY $t_o sa ?g= Q da $ .. _fie =: b s g_-ic9 Ex Br L -= «8 �`Y $ as86E: ?a� aeziFds3s ' 34 -a C- gw Irii t� i Ears N ; y87D S �9'Y lj 2b = E rl I �I x =j $. SSa y�a_ 4E§ yta 'E �i \'�I .. IVI 1i :P ib e?''e�a ssa�ts N E°:`^ rh E Cs- €3 oFla� =•:C: 3 a9 gt € LY � -. 3• €g s "a �_'" :LSg Asya "; 3 ;�-a b333 y I 3 Y' ,tb�- ^95i{ gp y �� f= �8 L`_i D sEZ3 _YYS a_ i Y E "s a "gpL C3MI oh =.Sg xa L$ =e`3is €- 3s ;S� f- _aR$'b e- s ab 3^-. $.•K- •�Lt� oft °9$ s t - -3 .a:s3Y s-j.. .y iii - "a e5z 9$ a- eb€ <•s3 ° -€ Mir 38 4 aL -s$S ash stg 33 s� g = esg -g _r!i Nis &s $03 €o th s �s 3I0 !fie ts°a as § §s _i s4' Sspa a I im- q1 it 51 5 a :_$° a - 35 _ °r -e $sae ZE 'ebaa La- ��b• fiCg x. se r rb_ € eaEa 3_ bi?g ss7 ;s33 n fl; Lyys L2S =e8- <a 3Lt$ i 7e: '°nY iL �. G°`o -• °.! j=kI ao so 3c1) �I 0 z e 6 1 L &y= = v 380Y -2 Xr - a- ZT 2a9 s rah ass$ as3.. a ee '�$i r'. Ig.EZ 3 3` z LIZ 2y SF 1 3s ax 92, s33�a acs a R3ca Bafs3 a 'F :fi� Nim- �ox_ 3 s. r3 =• p' =* a "sg »' '- a- $.:5oy` e $g j =A $�s ssaaa a S ?# s ^o3 �gcsfi» 3 9 ifit ii°" "r r?�$La ? € ¢ - a E hp Vp-.- M g gst° E_ Rcs cg� �� _. c °eee ga Sfi� E34 S ys$ - s 4 $ es = i e-aa € xe. a _s' a'aK aE - $ xs3 cgs �¢= •ns,gs j$ r-x� �e x 8t= Sos° g Ea�3 ga 3r_ =3 gs_ �'s5s €o e�gs s 8�3e3 �3 gEg= :^ x's scat g bid €��¢ ,3a$ QSY}'i _Y Y E a13- : ss8 : ❑ 1= 74:3 !� -gar P8_ ^aa 9 a 4.x53 a= t Y' = 3taRe <sa g$5 SO 7 Z !9 \/ is - ! Dab \ \: » /\ & it| U = t 4 H/ d #§ \\ !/ . 1� :& ! !, *�a §f � a- m| 1 ;a \ � \� S$ � � �\ \| ■ \ � � j§ � I 11 i |# % %��•� /\ \ "`^ ! y R ! 2 : %|!t ■ {E \ t \ . 2 y / !�& § e� \ © >£&§.12 £ ;. w ® © \ %! / .g & - � e # ■` � \ � — . , :. -� a . . ) /!�: j j ( �}§ {\ )�- - !!! � \�5 � � a- m| 1 ;a \ � \� S$ � � �\ \| ■ \ � � j§ � I 11 i |# % %��•� /\ \ "`^ ! y R ! 2 : %|!t ■ {E \ t \ . 2 y / !�& § e� \ © >£&§.12 £ ;. w ® © \ %! / .g & - � e # ■` � \ � — . , :. -� a . . ) /!�: j j e u d a 6 ^y txi_i a4 - -E- ayeaa�' x Q It 11 :s aa3d gl 3ES g'es -:set �e =� Z- Lg3e z "a 3 a ? id e ►`-g 88 3� g 3 4�C My $_ tl - — x E [ e ` `8Y $.a s f ss° ea �=e3 y _ ,y Sa -E�b f ay8 Lz EE g1= :t _s %I °ge° as a N �� M i ( his \ \ �! a a gj j . id |.= 9 t } :ale C \!!2 � \ § ,\ !..:, ,- • §) Zlz ! / 2 \ \ / gag . . ! /n ! � I §� § � ! g! :& H N ; ( . ! | } § � _ | II! ■�� | &a - � # !\g� � { � |2` � �]! )o ` t\ } ! §� , � \ §k / !� 2 � 2! h/ §� j | 2 ! ! ■ = | § ! ; ! � \! j/ \� � j C C CITY OF P.ANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 23, 1986 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy rong, Associate Planner SUBJECT- ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -53 - he eve opment or n us r a u ngs toZaling 61,845 square feet on 4.47 acres of land In the General Industrial /Rail Served District (Subarea 5) located on the north side of 6th Street, 300 feet west of Turner Avenue - APN 209 - 211 -40. I. PROTECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION. A. Action Requested' Approval of site plan, elevatiens, and ssuance o a egative Declaration. 8. SurrounVn land Use and Zoning: N -off scant; General-Industrial/Rail Served District (Subarea 5) lauth - Vacant; General Industrial /Rail Served (Subarea 5) East - Vacant, existing industrial buildings; General Industrial /Rail Served (Subarea 5) West - Vacant, existing industrial park; General Industrial /Rail Served (Subarea 5) C General Plan Designations: Project to - General Industrial/Rail Served North - General Industrial /Rail Served South - General :ndustrial /Rail Served East - General Industrial /Rail Served West - General Industrial /Rail Served D. Site Characteristics: 8uild4,q A that Vronts on 6th Street and e o -s to mprovements a•e completed except for the meande ^lno sidewalk. The site for Buildings B, C and D, which is behind Building A. has been rough graded. II. ANALYSIS: A. General: This proposed proJect was previously approved in 1980 air 2fe development of four multi- tenant industrial 3st). ITEM 3 PLANNING COK4ISSIOM 'AFF REPORT { EA 6 DR 85 -53 - ANC RSON April 23, 1986 Page 2 buildings. The developer has completed Building A (as shown in Exhibit "C"), and graded the pads for Buildings C and D. Unfortunately, the approval of these three buildings expired. Therefore, the developer is requesting approval of this development and hes modified the previous approved site plan to comply with the .inimum standards of the City's current Industrial Specific tIan. B. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee has reviewed the project and has recommended approval with the following improvements to be made to the project which the developer has agreed to: 1. Outdoor eating area /plaza area be added to the east and west property boundary as shown in Exhibit "01 ". 2. A texturized band between the two accent stripes should be provided across the top of all four sides of the elevations for Buildings 8, C and D. 3. Entryway and landscaping in front of the office entrances be provided as shown in Exhibit "D2 ". C. Under roundin Utilities: Overhead utilities exist on both s es o tie t greet frontage. The project site has 66 kv and 12 kv electric lines and telecommunication lines on the same poles. It is the r-commendation of the staff that the 12 kv electric lines and tho telecommunication lines be undergrounded at the expense of time developer from the utility pole along the westerly property line to the first utility pole east of the easterly property line. D. Environmental Assessment: Staff has completed the nv ronmenta ec st an3 has determined that there will not be a significant impact as a result of this project. If the Commission concurs with the findings, issuance of a Negative Declaration will be in order. III. FANS FOR FINDINGS: This project is consistent with the General Flan and the IndustHdI Specific Plan. The orojec' will not cause a significant adverse impact, and in addition, the proposed use, building design, site plan, together with the recommended "on ditions of Approval, are in compliance with the Industrial Specific Plan and all other applicable provisions of the City standards. 35-3 PLANNING comisSIo 1AF. .EPORT EA b OR 85 -53 - ANOtRSON April 23, 1986 Page 3 V. RECOIMENOATION: Staff rpcomxnds that the Planning Commission Ts—sue —a Ie-t ve Oeclaratini, and approve Oevelopment Review 85 -53 through adoption of the _.Lathed Resolution and Conditions of Approval. Resp "ully submittd, Brad Buller ' City Planner BB:NF:ns Attachments: Exhibit •A• - Location Hap Exhibit 'B• - Site Utilization Map Exhibit •C' - Detailed Site Plan Exhibit •0• - Conceptual Landscape Plan (2) Exhibit 'E• - Conceptual Grading Plan Exhibit 'F• - Utility Plan Exhibit •G" - Typical Elevation Exhibit •H• - Floor Plan Initial Study, Part II Resolution of Approval with Conditions I . 11 R C C y1[Ni 1IiY" YYrY, 4 .b. . _ONM tiY yAy VV :vcszx CITE' Or RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLAN r¢,G DWM**,r EXHW, f SYyN (/I dI� 4 .b. . _ONM tiY yAy VV :vcszx CITE' Or RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLAN r¢,G DWM**,r EXHW, f raoxn -i CITY OF RANa-10 CUCAMaNC ;A ►rErtl TTC[EI 1 PLANNING DIV'ly N E7CHIQfIti_,f% SCaLE _�i c/Xy �I 1 t_ /�v {J •� I� z .� . § t.4} » �3f9 w ƒZ� 2 • >� \� 35/ � A `f $ % � i . � �§ � Nit A � C LOCA7IO'1 OF AS <V EL= " ^iC'L "VAS 1 Z Le end 1�-66 KY tines NSEN _side of street Q — substation N CITY OF ITEM: N RANCHO CUCAMONGA r�,� +T17 Z*LOCATION OF 66KV ELECTRICAL LII ENGINEERING DIVISION PYum m. 3bo CI'T'Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 3(A/ (1I (a KV F.lecirical a /tkV Eledr/cal 61 i elecemmunicaiwits /a' Cal is 34..)L H Li SA V O� U� 4 ri RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ESTABLISHING A POLICY FOR THE UNOERCROUNDING OF EXISTINU OVERHEAD UTILITIES. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga •ashes to remove unsightly existing overhead utility lines in order to promote a more aesthetic and desirable working and living environment within the City; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to establish a policy to inform property owners and developers of the City goal. NOW. THEREFORE, be it resolved and established that all developments, unless specifically Kaived by the Planning Commission, shall be responsible for undergrounding all existing overhead utility lines including the removal of the related supporting poles adjacent to the limits of a development as follows: 1. Lines on the project ;e of the street: * a. Said lines shall be undergrounded at the developer's expense. b. In those circumstances here the Planning Commission decides that undergrounding 1s impractical at present for such reasons as a short length of undergrounding (less than 300 feet and not undergrounded adjacent), a heavy concentration of services to other users, disruption to existing improvements, etc., the Developer shall pay an 1n -lieu fee for the full amount per Section 6. c. The Developer shall be eligible for reimbursement of one - half the cost of undergrounding from future developments as they occur on the opposite side of the street. 2. Lines an the opposite side of the street frem the project: The Developer snail pay a ice w tha City for one- a �Te— amount per Section 6. 3. Lines on both sides of the street: The Developer shall comply with ec Jon 1 aboVe—an-d--ffe—fijigible for reimbursement or pay additional •ees so that he bears a total expense equivalent to ono -half the total cost of undergrounding the lines on both sides of the street. 4. Pole lines co ntal or tar er electrical lines: All n- eu ees pa n accordance nos s a e un ern ua with Sections 1, 2 or 3, above, except for 66 KV or larger electrical lines. 3U EXHIBIT 'I° a. 66 KY or larger electrical lines, and b. electrical lines less than 66KV, if no telecommunication lines exist on the poles. 5. Limits of Responsibilities: a. In -lieu fees: The fee :hall be based upon the length of the property being developed from property line to property line or the center of adjacent streets (alley, railroad or channel right -or -way, etc.) for corner properties. b. Undergounding: ggUndergrounding sill extend to: (1) the first exim the roect boundaries,st(2) a newepoleferected atra project boundary or across the street (alley, railroad, or channel right - of -way, etc.) for corner properties, or (3) an existing pole within 5 feet of a project boundary (not at a corner). 6. Fee �nt- he amount for in-lieu amount hall equal fished by enthe as up dated periodically Information supplied necessary. h ility * All references to street shall also mean alleys, railroad or channel rights -of -way, etc. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF NAY, 1986. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAHOKGA BY: . av ar er, ce a rman ATTEST: ra u er, epu y acre ary T, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the Rancho May. 1906,aby the following vote-to-wit: AYES: Commission held AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NCNIEL, CHITIEA, BARKER, R."HPEL NONE STOUT 3 GV CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 4, 1986 TO: Hayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Howard Fie'-is. Assistant Planner SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING COWISSION DECISION ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT IIT REVIFiTAS'1�e6�iRCGS (IFE request to appeal • ann ng emm ss or. Action during review of a request to modify the approved building elevations for a 6 -plex movie theater of 25,188 square feet, within an approved master plan (Virginia Dare Center) located on the northwest corner of Foothill and Haven in the General Commercial (GC) District - APN 1077 - 104-01 and 03. BACKGROUND: During their regularly scheduled meeting on April 23, 1986, t e�i—filaning Commission reviewed a request to modify the building elevations for the Edwards Cinema. The Commission approved the request after discussing the aesthetic effects of eliminating ttie stepped - stucco detail and instead utilizing 3/4• wide score lines to achieve separation of horizontal color bands along the side and rear elevations. The '—mission then questioned the applicant about the exterior finish and expressed concern that the exterior finish would not match other previously approved buildings in Virginia Dare Business Center. The applicant responded by stating that the proposed 'lack -wipe' finish would be similar to, but not the same as, the dash stucco finish on t:;e existing buildings. It should be noted that although the subject of exterior finish was not discussed at Design Review or Planning Commission during development review, the Commission understood the exterior finish would remain consistent on all buildings. This understanding was based upon the following facts: (1) a different finish was 'lot spaclfied on the approved plans for Edwards Cinema, and (2) the conditions of approval for the Virginia Dare Winery Business Center required that all remaining buildings be corpatible with previously approved architectural program. (Refer to Resolution No. 83- 798, Condition !4 ) The Commission clarified that their intent was that the exterior finish would be consistent throughout the project. 3 �� CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT OR 85 -22 - Edwards Cinema June 4, 1986 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: Staff reconmends that the City Council review and cons ear aii material and input regarding this item. su Re� ed, Brad Buller City Planner BB:MF:ns Attachments: April 23, 1986 Staff Report Minutes of April 23, 1986 Meeting J a r r v- ssioner Rempel asked if trere was a way to use the scnool property for parking until the school is developed Mr. Holley adv that staff would look into this suggestion. Steven Ford, William Lyor any, advised that fn areas where parks are located an additional 4Z space nff- street parallel pane(ng have peen provided. Motion: ;loved by Rempel, seconded by Chi�Unani. ried, to app -ove the 'Victoria Park conceptual design. ♦ f ; R f OLD BUSINESS N DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -22 - EDWARDS CINEMA - A request to modify the approve building a evat ons or a -p ex movie theater of 25.188 square feet, within an approved master plan (Virginia Dare Center) located on the northwest corner of Foothill and Haven, in the Ceneral Commercial (GC) District - APN 1077- 104 -01 and 03. Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report. Glen Gellatly, Bissell Architects, advised that when the final plans were in the Building Department for plan check, it was noted that a detail pertaining to the side and rear elevations showing a layered furring effect on the elevations had been omitted. He advised that the detailing was never part of any documents which had gone before the Design Revlrw Committee, Planni•.q Commission or City Council. He advvsed that what was shown was a color ;arc. treatment using three colors with some layering of the stucco on the ✓ V,t fascade and returning it around the corners on the two sides. Hr. Gella ly presented a model of the building. Chairman Stout asked if the actual construction drawings with the detail on them had been submitted to the City and done to error. Mr. Gellatly replied that was correct. Chairman Stout stated that he had gotten confused that Mr. Geilatly was talking about the front elevations and what he was actually saying was the furred out detail is to remain to the front elevation, with a step down effect as it returns on •he two sides. Therefore, the only part of the construction drawing detail which was being requested for deletion is the side and rear elevations which the applicant intends to put some type of scored treatment in there. Mr. Gellatly concurred and stated that the itent was a long, clean reveal allowing for a clean color break line. Planning Commission Minutes -17- April 23, 1986 .3,v � Chairman Stout stated that the confusion came because he understood the applicant wanted to remove the furred out detail from all elevations of the building He recalled discussion regarding the detail on the front elevation, but did not recall if there was discussion relative to the sides and did not behave it had been made a condition of approval He stated he had no objection to this request because there are two buildings on either side of it and there is some detail in the color band which is consistent with what has been required. Further, that !ram a distance the furred out detail would not be seen on CHe back anyway. Commissioner Rempel stated a con.-ern that there was never an understanding at 03sign Review that there was going to be a change in the texture of tha building He advised that he had gone to the site and the texture looks like an amateur had laid out the block rather than trying to accomplish the appearance of adobe. He stated twat nowhere c he submittals does it show that the building texture will not be similar to ghat exists. Further, that it nas been changed from rest of buildings and is not acceptable. He felt the texture should be dash, which was the approved texture for the center. Mr Gellatly pointed out that this is 13 acre site with a number of buildings to be built, and did not see a prOlem with going to different types of use texture of the same to texture could be consistent monotontous on o13aacres. He advisedtthat he was trying to get a texture variation with this type of finish, and it may not look like much now but once its painted the finish gives a rustic appearance He explaired that "sack wipe' is a thin coat of plaster which is wiped onto the block to cover the joints. He advised that the colors, Proportions and break up would satisfy all concerns. He pointed out fnat mission style architecture has all types of textures and that nothin„ nas consistent in the old wineries. Cormissioner Chitlea stated that the comiunity, trail runs behind this project. She pointed out that the project to the nortl was requir"d to do considerable upgrading to the backsides and there are other places in the City which back up to the comminity trail that have been required to bring detailing around the back. She wanted to see this project give that same consideration to the trail. Mr. Gellatly stated that stucco texture was never discussed at any of the meetings. Further, that during Oesign Review on all of the projects everyone knew the finish was going to be stucco, but it could have been blown dn, hand trowelled or some other type of stucco treacw nt. Therefore, the applicant could have gone to a cheap finish, but was providing a rethod which is unique. There were no further public comments Commissioner McNiel concurred with the continuance of the color band. He w-is concerned with tha texture change and agreed that it should be consistent wi:.h the existing buildings. planning Commission Minutes _18_ April 23, 1986 3r� 6 > Don Chrlsteson, applicant, stated that the Commission was 0allenging the professionalism of Mr. Gellitly by stating that they know more about the design and what the finish is going to look like than he does. He suggested that the Commission allow the work to continue until enough of the wall has been completed to juke it fairly. He pointed out that the wall is nowhere near completed and is being judged too earl: He felt that by the time it is all finished and painted the Commission would be happy with it, since it would look lice a slurry wail with a lot of character. He stated that there are a number of building, across the street in the Barton complex which are not consistent, and requested that he be given that flexibility Chairman Stout asked if there was a motion for reconsideration. There was none, therefore the original motion carried by the fallowing vote: AYES: Cad4ISSIWERS HOES• COK41SSIONERS: ABSENT: CON.4ISSIONERS: REMPEL, MCNIEL, CHITIEA, STOUT HONE BARKER - carried 0. T S - Oral Report Brad Buller, ty Planner, gave an overview of the current status and review procedures for tit l s. Chairman Stout advised had this item placed on the agenda because the system doesn't seem to be ing. He asked that staff prepare a report on the status of trails with soma lysls on staff time ind budgetary needs. He believed there may be the need fo he expenditure of funds for a consultant to put together not only a plan whic indicates an inventory of trails and their current condition along with a lis f current problems associated with completing the system, but an implementatlo ian of how it will work. He suggested that the report include some type of edul.ed time plan. Commissioner Chitiea stated that she wholeheartedly su ted this direction. Mr Buller stated that if it is determined that trails are a p rity for next year's work program, this proposal might require a budget txpen Lure which would have to be approved by the City Council. Planning Commission Minutes -19- April 23, 1986 3�9 IF C CITY OF "NCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: April 23, 1986 01 o�p T0: Chairman and Members of the Plann ng Comoission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Howard Fields, Assistant Planner SULJEL': OVv— PMENT luing 85 -22 - EOWAR05 CINEMA _ Modification to the aDDroved bu ng elevations The modification request was scheduled as a regular item at the Design Reviaw Comoittee meeting of April 17, 1986. The Comsittee reviewed and deliberated on the issue and after considerable discussion, decided to defer this item to comments, tlafe ireport,resolution of apprcvale andvminutestto familiarize the Commission on the background. BB:HF:ko Attachments: DRC Camaents Staff Report Resoluticns 85 -112 b 83 -798 Minutes d ITEM H z Y DESIGN REVIEW COHHENfS 6:00 - 6:30 Howard April 17, 1986 111112PHENI REVIEW 85 -22 - EDWARDS CINEMA - A request to modify the approved bu dint' a evat ons for a s x -p ex move theatre of 25,188 square feet within an approved master plan (Virginia Dare Center), located on the northwest corner of Foothill anJ Haven in the General Commercial (GC District), APH: 1077.104 -01 and 03. Related File - CUP 83 -07 Issues' The applicant proposed to delete the "furred-out• stucco detail on side and rear elevations due to cost. This modification would significantly affect the shadow patterns and relief that this stucco detail provides to an otherwise stark building elevation. Staff Comments: Architecture: Staff feels this modification -request to the theater's e evat ons would effect the projects design to a detrimental way. The stucco detail provides articulated planes to highlight and accentuate the bands of horizontal color changes which occur in the building elevations and provide relief to the large building mass. Staff recommends that the Committee uphold the approved elevations. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Staff Planner: Howard Fields 137/ L N - a. i �yh Da Y i I �I a u� E AI V F4W-1 — pct 1 1 cy a e m 0 a. rc CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: July 24, 1985 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jack Lam, Community Development Director BY: Dan Coleman, Senior Plarner SUBJECT: CEVELOPNENT REVIEII 85.22 - EDWARDS CINEMA - Development of a s x—ip Tex mov eitheatre of , square feet, on thirteen acres of land located on tho northwest corner of Foothill and Haven (Virginia Dare Center), in the General Commercial (GC District), APH - 1077 - 104 -01 and 03. Related File - CUP 83 -07 I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: - A. Action Requested: Approval of site plan, elevations and review of shared parking concept. B. Purpose: Development of a 1,800 seat theatre. C. Location: Northwest corner of Foothill and Haven (Exhibit D. Parcel Sfze: 13 acres. E. Existing Zoning: General Commercial F. Existing Land Use: Vacant G. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Vacant, General Commercial South - Vacant, Office Professional East - Vacant, Community Commercial West - Vacant, General Commercial H. Site Characteristics: Former Garrett Winery site which has een regra and. ate I is under construction. The site Slopes at approximately 2% grade. N -� 32-3 PLANNING CORMISSIO:I S F REPORT OR 85 -22 - Edearas Cfncma July 24, 1985 Page d2 l II. ANALYSIS. A. General: On December 12, 1984, the Planning Commission approved a revised master plan for the Virginia Dare Center which included the proposed 1,800 seat theatre (Exhibit "81). This change in use provides for considerably more parking demand than was formally shown under the original concept Plan. Therefore, it was necessary to consider a shared parking program under the theatre proposal consistent with the shared Parking provisions in the Development Code. In addition, the theater site plan proposes to eliminate nine parking spaces in front of the theatre to create a convenient drop -off point and larger open plaza arils. In addition, the Design Review Committee recd- nended that Staff analyze the shared parking concept to assure that substantial conflict will not exist between the office and theatre users. The attached table (Exhibit °F°), indicates that if all businesses were open at full capacity, a total of 1,226 parking spaces would be necessary versus 784 provided. In other words, if the theater opened mid -day, there is a 100% shared parking overlap during office /restaurant users and oc nema3patrons will tn elach its t peak C during the summer months. In response to this concern, the Christeson Company has indicated their willingness to reserve an office pad until such time as the theater and regaining uses are fully established. Staff would recommend that a new parking analysis be provided at that time to deteimine tP a conflict exists. 8, to tion;. The following options should to considered relative shared parking: 1. Defer construction of an office building until theater and other uses are fully established for one year, or 2. Limit matinees (eg. /screens), on weekdays, subject to annual review of parking, or 3. No matinees during daytime hours on weekdays. C. Dest n Review Committee: The Design Review receameided approve o t e propose elevations as consistent with `he desiggn theme of the Virginia Dare Center. However, tte Committee expressed concern with the permissibility of the C. %41 ' N- s PLANNING COa1ilSSIOt4 E 'F REPORT OR 85 -22 - Edwards Cinema July 24, 1985 Page 13 light bulo strip en the south elevation. As the Commission will recall, recent inter,retation by the Commission and the City Council concerning the Video Zone was that a light bulb strip is defined as a sign and could not be permitted in addition to the other wall signs proposed under the sign regulations for a business within a shopping center. Whereas, thn N -- n- e4 - - - -- ___..._..___ _ r,ex,oitity for certain uses, such as iheaters and regional malls, to develop uniform sign programs. Further, the Sign Ordinance does not establish any limitation on the type, number, size or - fine(ght of signage for a movie theater. The Sign Ordinance requires the Planning Commission to approve the conceptual sign program for the theater, as illustrated on the attached elevations (Exhibit "D "). 0. EnvtronmEntal Assessment: The Planning Commission issued a Negat ve ec aratmon on June 8, 1983. No further action is required. - III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: This project is consistent with the Deve opment ode and General Plan. The project will not cause detriment to adjacent properties or cause significant environmental impacts. The proposed site plan design and elevations together with the recommended conditions and compliance with the appmtcable regulations of the Development Code. IV. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission rev ew the nformation provided and snlect from the options regarding shared parking. If the Planning Commission can support the Facts for Findings, a Resolution of Approval is attached, Respectfully submitted, n Jac L� Community Develo Director RG:DC:cv Attachments: Letter from Architect Exhibit •A• - Location Map Exhibit •8" - Master Plan Exhibit 'C• - gevised Master -Plan Exhibit 'D" - Elevations Exhibit •E" - Grading Plan Exhibit 4F"- Parxmrg Calculations Resolution of Approval with Conditions 3 %S u- t, l C_ l i C F � J •1 IV n l .a _ gwg n c 0 RESOLUTION no. 85 -112 A RESOLUTION OF rd': RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING CO,4NISSION APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO THE GENERAL tliE 85 -22 LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER. OF HAVEN AND FOOTHILL Ill COtRClAL DISTRICT DISTRICT wards filed by Ed WHEREAS, for2th day of June, 1985, a complete application was d.sign review of the above - described project; and Co'naissioWHEREA a air the 24th day of July, 1985, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning meeting to consider the above - described project. follows: NOW. THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Comnfssion resolved as SECTION 1• �• That the follawfnn can be met: 1• That the proposed project objectives 1s consistent with the of the General Plan; and 2. That the proposed use is in accord with the objective of the Development Code dnd the purposes Of the district in which the site is located; and 3. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of and applicable Pr3visions of tha Development Code, 4• That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will rot be detrimental to the Public health, or welfare, or materiall vicinity, mproveminis in the SECTION 2: That this project will not create adverse impacts on the env ira=ent an tat a Negative teclaration was issued on June 8, 1983. SECTION 3: That DeveloPment Review Ho. 85 -22 is approved subj g the follow nn cenafttons and attached Standard Conditions: :c Design Review 1. All pertinent conditions of CUP 83 -07 P.eso,utton 83 -79, shall •apply. , as contained in 2. Construction shall include a parking lot with minimum of 455 Parking spaces within 31X feet. r , ;0 3. Under the current Shared parking concept, the construction of office structures adjacent to the theater, insofar as the same require more than 85 parking spaces shall be deferred until specifically approved by a modification to the Conditional Use Permit for the site. At the time any such office structure is proposed to be developed, the applicant shall submit a detailed parking analysis to determine if there is adequate parking for all then operating and proposed uses. This study shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission. If a conflict exists between the theater and other uses, then the Planning Commission shall consider a modification to the applicable unbuilt Conditional P emaining office buildings the in anu amount ocaomnenuratp with the parking overlay, limit the hours of operation of the cinema, or other appropriate means of assuring adequate parking. This condition shall be incorporated in a document approved by the City Attorney to be recorded to provide Notice Of Condition to prospective purchasers of the subject property Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the cinema. 4. A textured treatment shall be used in the pedestrian walkway underneath the arbor that runs through the site, including across.the parking lot. S. The arbors shall be planted with vines, and creeping varieties Of vines or ivy shall be utilized against wall surfaces throughout the project reminiscent of the original winery. 6 Adequate lighting shall be provided on all sides of building for the safety and security of theater patrons. 7. Proper crowd control facilities and management shall be provided for waiting lines to ensure that theater patrons do not block access to adjacent buildings or conflict with V ehicular circulation. 8. Grand openings and other special events, such as movie premieres, shall require review and approval of a Temporary Use Permit by the Planning Division. 9. Trash enclosure /transformer location shall be modified to provide access to the satisfaction of the Foothill Fire Oistrict. Engineering Division: 1. All pertinent conditions of PIA 8303 shall be adhered to. 2. A lot line adjustment shall be recorded to eliminate the lot line between the two parcels containing the theater prior to the issuance of building permits. BY APPROVED , AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JULY, 1985. , n �� OV �Y :MISSION OF �G CIT' OF RANCHO CUCANONGA I, Jack Lan, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. do hereby certify thit the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly Introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 24th day of July, 1985- by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: CQNNISSIONERS: NOES: CaMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, CHITIEA, BARKER, REMPEL NONE REMPEL K -la. 3S/ C RESOLUTION 710. 83 -798 J A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMCNGA PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83 -07 TO REVISE THE MASTER SiTE PLAN FOR THE VIRGINIA DARE WINERY BUSINESS CENTER LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND HAVEN AVENUE OA 13.1 ACRES OF LAND - APN 1071 - 401 -01 AND 03. CemmissionH approved on he Environmental�Assessment Plannin 83 -01 for a Master Plan at the Virginia Dare Business Park Center, and WHEREAS on the 12th day of December, 1984 the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the shove- described amendment. follows: NO'd, THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission resolves as SECTION 1: 1 That the proposed master plan as revised 1s in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the District J to which the site 1s located. 2. That the proposed revised Master Plan together with conditions applicable detrimental to thePu hereto blichealth,safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the revised Master Pin complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. SECTION 2: That the Conditional Use Permit No. 83 -07 is approved subject to-c—o-n-dTiMns contained within the Planning Commission Resolution No. 83 -79 and 83 -79A, and the following conditions 1. The owner shall provide for Implementation of a shared parking program concept through: a. Executing all necessary parking exchange agreements between all property owners to the satisfaction of the Citv Attorney prior to development. b. Under the current shared parking concept, the land use mix cannot provide for any greater Intensification of parking demand through modification of land use types. a Resolution No. 83 -10B Page 2 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12th DAY OF DECEMBER. 1984. CO.c1MISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA I t rrAA t C. Assure through an executed agreement with the County Flood Control 01strlct, long a term lease agreement which provides for the use of tse area Shown on the western boundary of t,%P plan for parking for a minimum of fifty years. d. Provide for a greater distribution of compact parking stalls. 2. Assure with further detailed site plans, the enhanced opportunity for pedestrian orientation features around the restaurant cluster Haven Avenue. adjacent to 3. Provide a conceptual landscape plan subject to Design Review approval prior to the submittal of any detailed site Plan. Cthe re that the architectural statement for all ining buildings will be compatible with the all architectural program currently approved for Virginia Dare Mtnery office building. S. The fast food use at the northeast corner of the site shall be deleted from the Master Plan. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12th DAY OF DECEMBER. 1984. CO.c1MISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA I t rrAA t _, ( �■ k� (� j. e 19 , Ag| / w AW �! . #if, ! Z | | I � / t� � � ■ � 9 .! | 9 � � I 2 �jt! © || ( �■ k� (� j. e 19 , Ag| / w AW �! . #if, ! Z | | I � / .! | 9 � � I 2 �jt! © || � � |__��• ||§ .- " -`-9 3 E # i � N W u u 0 a no Bic YNd ele= a.aXaa:rt Sc�xaY n 3: §i != s a _ say s ?a _" 14=. Y3[a'3'$ ?8L.a8 3 :s. 9a.aa areE_g� _Ea � ieaa = Is or E till xY =: if EE �Sa3': g is =Ld7 — d? E= gagsti ao aalc;i 3 *s�': 8! °•_� 3Ee L3 Y9 .it & pu D 12 3sg is ygi g s s� !a ipLic ^='-' is LSD E�_ YL. 9F =:11".1 F =: a$ ce3s e_ Fsa. gog _Y 'ss�_gcfia=? i= `LS Is Vt 9i -:A =r ?�8 8g° c�� C ?7 -a =f' S•FaB 33ig -' 3 ?s: asae� aa8a; C .6,i iada`�ha Ca lia ait jL l\ � �.``.aS =^• C #- ': LEf4r7_ZL —� ::may$ •ZS` sag %a 3:. #i ae #sea ta�a _ :e•?8 Z. 73iR iTas .L =1.e 33 e3es�q «PHIS j is "ss "L =i 'ay iE$ €tea Bigt a = ±.Y 3 :a r 23ca s s __ r s s:sEc !j= sp"-sa a 4y g .gs�_ 3H 8 -s e$H -s _ is air Hr= S ? Y" 33 s--r- ° #z: is -f f$ P' y- F-ae s' M, 39 #Yls 3g•?a$ = ea ss-a :9 .2 Ni i-: y ' sf �ELada_ =ss=p %.35ce zz C Ea fit 8==' s= -6 i `r cE:aa .Se § •' y_ys n?i§ s 4% ? aiE3 "sS3I= :6a_ds�N ----i Mil- F is I "I � � " � i `I �► � a I 3 2Z 2 22 21 _Z2 a ='3 YaV ; Q ' Via 'Y Y s i _ c_3 1 1 x -tail u M2 . 3a 9vi d §34 °i 5- 3 a 3a E- e= 3 � � za s r!' 5' Z4 1:i 3i zx= 3 as ��e& _j3 •s -3 K =ia € to �iz a_- _� ��� Es.i as dL__a : T-. a i s ozin oa gs i ea -s ada= "fie §i 3 4� cL1a'3a Sa Mss ce $ "z "g 55 S I VK N'' C L e• N `C d 0 6 l•a des: " = =4S 3 �' - jaz ski = ^fi -s ka3 t �9� a- s.a i l'• s a s s sy a� a ka8 7.JY d R SY VAR .' � 3k e S &: I �3 �a a: :•: =i 3:r ;S hS Y F= = = y3 d ss =5 i gp 3 R:h S� yd 3 E— S3 � 9F si °yamy =� Yai La �; «I l9 s i ahpi s _ sail 3s, �'1 g f= �i °= k za yay 3 ai�IL ?La] Oxx y1 y i +Y y- E-•� aSiB tz-^ cs =i 3aEY °� _d a'3l •ij tk SCI °Y= �, �£ �s: _ =- : =�` Ago •�� Z i • .. N aai "e� -Z- aYI7S �SS �LLie X. _3Y q =�ki L c a�.,laE r 41! o : eL1 'LYi ;its le -:a 2 F' -re f as iii g g is 732a °° 3.a 5EE3 Lea: z$ay aF = ;a ._ ig F� -3e s 14 1 .. f ^a 3:z at3i Fa YEa2 Yic si 3 =a s :a :f §esf e2rs� .:3a 9:33 ta Y `► y �� � �I y �f �� �I�i i. iY.: a? -� s� iaf: �r s s -g_ "3 =8 s$ S12j 2- ! at ; a a E tv ea ?C a 5 F s is r : r : a- =ea _ 3 �: t ° ° lit: _ .,, �C ii 3i� 5i 3 ;3s ° 3 � - `g• � 23u C C MI /} /k $f , \} :. } \| t! � \ { A T !! !§ 1 / s / § : � \� J-5 � q k #! § i . ,. -. \ : §\ ,IL Vz \ jj | q - f _\ Zfg !/ J \ #£ # ,! as /} /k $f , \} :. } \| t! � \ \� � } � | ! � | | ! � | k \! \/ #� /2 � \ j� !! !§ 1 / § : � \� #! § ! . ,. -. \ : §\ ,IL \� � } � | ! � | | ! � | k \! \/ #� /2 � \ j� M. ENVIROtCiENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL $PECTFTC PLAT! AtlEND:i =Ni 95 -0_° - Amend1ng ection c ark in & Loto to - ver,1e defined interior building areas that can be deducted from the ` over•11 parking requirements; Section E.3, Parking Spaces Recuired III -29, to include a parking ratio for research L develo- • •. uses: Table III -2, Land Use Definitions for research L development uses and Identification of the applicable subareas (Table 111 -1) 11. ENVTRO:tMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND OEVELOP14ENT CODE AMENDMENT 85 -02 - Amending ectidn RX c8'6 interning o -S to parking language to clarify public safety issues. ots to nc utle additional Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Chairman Stout advised that these amendments had been discussed by the Commission at several meetings prior to this hearing and that they had been continually fine tuned to arrive at this point. Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Mchiel to adopt the Resolution recommending approval of Environmental Assessment and Industrial Specific Plan Amendment 85 -02 to the City Council. Motion carried ty the following vote: AYES COtViISSIONERS: BARKER, Mom, STOUT, CHITtEA NOES: COXMISSIONERS: NONE C ABSENT: C0:44ISSIOIIERS: REHPEL - carried Motion: Moved by Chitiea, sectaded by MCNiel, to adopt the Resolution recommending approval of Envirormental Assessment and Development Code Amendment 85 -02 to the City Council Notion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, BARKER, STOUT NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: REHPE, - carcied NEW BUSINESS 0. DEeaterlioENT -REVIEW S 85-22 uare a t0 awn OS CINEMA - Development of a 6 -p leK movie Corner of Foothill and Haven (Virginia Dare Dared Center) at o tthenOGe General 07. ercial (GC) District - APN 1077 -103 -01 and 03: Related File: CUP 83- Planning Commission Minutes -11- Mly 23, 1995 C t� -aaa. r Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. l James Markman. City Attorney, proposed an aeend:ient to Planning Division condition 3 of the Resolution explaining that an overlap conjunctive parking use of almost 100% would exist assuming that all proposed office pads are developed. Because of that and because of the differing hours of operation, he advised that it is unwise at this point to deny a trade off of the theater use for any or all of the office pad uses, but also unwise to preclude the other uses a second look at what happens when the theater operatts. He additionally reco W ended that an agreement be recorded to assure ;hat any prospective purchasers would have notice that there is an approved site plan, but the office structures which could operate at the same time as the movie theater, at least in the summer and on vacations, are not assured unless it Is demonstrated that the parking needs are met. Hr. ,Markman then read the following amendment to Planning Division condition 3 Into the record: 3. Under the current shared parking concept, the construction of each office structure adjacent to the theater shalt be deferred until specifically approved by a modification to the CUP for the site. At the time any such office structure Is proposed to be developed, the applicant shall submit a detailed parking analysis to determine if there is adete parking for aproposed qua 1 then operating and proposed uses. This study shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission. If A contiict exists between the theater and other uses, then the Planning Commission shall consider a modification to the ( unbuiltbremain ingiofficeebuildingstInrea amount footage of the the l parking overlap, limit the hours of operation of the cinema, or other appropriate means of assuring adequate parking. This Condition shall be Incorporated in a document approved by the City Attorney to be recorded to Provide Notice of Condition to prospective purchasers of the subject property prior to the is once of a auiiding permit for the cinema. Chairman Stout invited public Coament. Don Christeson, Christeson Company, stated that the °, mginia Dare Master Plan was approved in December after many hours of aeliberation over parking with City staff, parking specialists, and "Pl esentatives from Edwards Cinema. lie constructedtbasedcongthed pp ovedasite Plan. Further, that he iobjected and to coming back to the drawing board at this late date with second thoughts after the master plan had been carefully planned. He advised what the City Attorney suggested that the theater u, disaster to into the operation to see if Christeson esis a is problem and if a problem does surface, deal with it whcn the last building last building could stated cutm back eliminateptheikn wn exist, the size of the the Christeson Company has been cooperative in the 2 1%2 years it Further, that Process the project through the City. had taken t; Planning Commission Minutes -12- Mly 24, 1985 N ,,. Chairman Stout explained that the reason it had taken 2 1/2 years to process the project is due to the fact that the Christeson Company had made two or C three major revisions to the original plan. He advised that the Planning Car -mission is very careful in considering these types of projects, therefore it was not as if it had taken 2 1/2 years to process this proposal. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, stated that the City is in concurrence with what Mr Christeson has stated in regards to allowing the theater to procetd, which Is the reason the City Attorney was requested to draft the amendment. He advised that the only difference seemed to he that Mr. Christeson is referring to one pad, while the City Attorney's recommendation includes the two pads adjacent to the theater. Further, that the reason one office pad was not considered, is because the parking does not equate to the over lap. Mr. Markman ;tated that the proposal would only apply to each office pad adjacent to the theater and that no one is suggesting pulling all building Pads o-f the market Mr Christeson stated that he did not understand why this project was Ware the Comission when approval was granted in December. Chairman Stout replied that the approval in December was for the entire site and that each time a building goes into the center It will be subject to the Development Review Process, just like any other building in the City. Jack Lam, Community Development Director, stated that all the cond "ion proposed by the City Attorney is intended to do is formalize what Mr. Christeson previously stilted. Mr. Lam advised that Mr. Michaels of the Christeson Company had contacted staff and stated that the Christeson Company could not accept any of the options outlined in the staff report. Further, that a discussion ensued as to what conditions would be acceptable to the developer and to the City, and based upon that discussion with Mr. Michaels the City Attorney was requested to draft a condition. Mr. Markman was requested to draft a condition which accomplished the objectives of Loth developtr and the rity which would give the City some amount of control yet Additionally. alletheocondition doe: is Putpintoswrit writing if theretisea problem, ,e City has the opportunity to discuss witfi the applicant the adequacy of parking and does not limit the matinees or put a time limit on when the developer can construct another building. Chairman Stout explained that all the City is saying is that based on representation made in December when the master plan was approved, it in good faith believe, that the applicants parking concept is probably right, but if it 1s net right the City wants some protection. Further that the City Attorney's Proposal is the minimum amount of protection that the City can have to provide another altenative to revoking the Conditional Use Permit. Planning Commission Minutes -13- Zly 24, 1985 L N -ay 393 Mr Christeson stated that his concern is that tie had approval in Dezember aiB C nca the issue is being reopened. Further, that the City had an opportunity to rat donditinns on the theater at that time. Co.:nissioner Barkrr stated that a number of years had been spent on this project. Further, that the theater was not part Of the Original plan, but came in rather rapidly and almost at the last minute and the Coradission raised several concerns. He advised that no one was trying to destroy or delay this project, the Commission is simply trying to do its Job to assure that down the line people aren't parking and walking across the street from the Lewis project or the project to the north. He fu-ther stated that the City is attempting to act responsibly in trying to tak_ care of a problem noe before it occurs and to assure that people who are buying the Office pads know that there may be a parking problem. Commissioner Ba'.ar requested discussion regarding the proposed tights around the theater and stated that he disliked them. Chairman Stout disagreed with Commissioner Barker's cocment regarding the lights. Commissioner 'hitiea stated that she did not feel the lights would add to the overall prcaect and stated that there might be other forms of lighting that might b, more subtle and attractive. She additionally referred to condition 6 of the Resolution regarding adequate lighting, and suggested that decorative lighting be extended to the back of the building. Chairman Stout requested that the marquee design be submitted to the Design Review Committee. Jack Lam, Community Development Director, suggested that the Commission defer discussion on this item to later in the agenda to allow staff an opportunity to meet with the developer to reach a consensus on the amended condition. By consensus, the Commission deferred discussion of Development Review 85 -22 to later in the agenda. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS P. NOTICE OF ALF! - - -- -- - -- • °• • ° ^��� olio - Rita Loma School 0IStrict pans to acqu re the p c nery property located at the northeast Highland and Hermosa as a site for a second Junior high school. corner of Otto Kroitil, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report and requested V,at staff be directed to prepare a letter outlining the Commission's direction. Planning Commission Minutes 44- Culy 24, 1985 rk -as A Finyd Stork, Alta Loma School District, gave an overview of the acquisition of 3eyear He ad•nsad that availability of the buildings would be a minimum of 3 years Commissioner Barter asked how cany student: high school would ;r I:ousnd at this junior Nr Stork replied that tho District estimated a maximum 85U students. Co- missioner Chitiea requested that the school not be made a fortress. =issioner Barker stated that architects soretixs deal with sound attenuation by putting in no windows and agrees. with Cxmissioner Chitiea's comment The '!omiss'on directed staff to prepare a cover letter outliaing the con --- ns regarding the realignment of Highland Avenue and UM C'ty's request to review and Comment on the school's design and off -site lmprovenentt, as discussed to the staff report, and to also include a statement regarding architectural compatibility with the surround'ng area. PUBLIC COMMENTS COMISsionar Barker requested that staff reconsider having two design review ccMittes, cne fnr residential other office /commercial, to provide review C consistency and reduce the Design Review Committee load. that staff tbetdivided in o those categories• therefore hlst Concept might Proposed be Possible. The COneission requested that this Concept be discussed by the full Comalsslon at a future meeting. r • w r 0- DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 -22 - EDWARDS CINEMA (continued discusslcn) Jack Lam, Coawnity Development Director, advised that staff and the developer had agreed upon wording for condition 3 He explained that the developer has a proposal for one of the office pads; therefore, a consensus had been reached to reword the condition to reflect that when either site develops, it does not exceed a requirement for 85 parking spaces. James Markman, City Attorney, read the foilowing amendment to Condition 3: CO=Ission Minutes N - -15- July 24, 1985 a6 .,_ 3. Under the current shared parking concept, the construction of ea_h office structure adjacent to the theater, insofar as the same require more than r 85 spaces, shall be deferred until specifically approved by a modification L to the CUP for the site. At the time any such Office structure is Proposed to be developed, the applicant shall submit a detailed parking analysis to determine if there is adequate parking for all then Operating and proposed uses. This study shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission. If a conflict exists between the theater and other uses, then Conditional Use Perm It toshall redcei the asquare modification fotage 0Of h the plicable remaining office buildings in an amount commensurate with the pa -king overlap, limit the hours of operation of the cinema, or other appropr ate means of assuring adequate parking. This condition shall be Incorpora•.ed to a document approved by the City Attorney to be recorded to proviie Notice of Condition to prospective purchasers ofc the subject property prior t0 the issuance of a building permit for the cinema. Chairman Stout asked for discussion regarding the proposed lights on the theater Glen Gellatly, Bissel Architects, stated that the applicant felt ather strongly about the lights, which Occur only on the front of the IlW.uing He advised that the lights conjur up the very nature of the thea.ar and reinforce the accent color hand. Further, that they were important because of whine the theater sits cn the property Ne further stated that the lights are 2 inches in diameter and do not flash or move. Commissioner Barker stated that this project alerted art with a fpecifcic these and had maintained Ehit theme throughout; however considered the lights a blight t0 tr3t design. Commissioner McN1el Stated 'hat if they sere tastefully done, he could Consider the Idea but did not feel that they were necessarily apprcpriste for this project Co�mmits peer Chitlea We rd that therm fJ en element of excitement to hating tfid blest Answer ,Lrtlhertethat she Nwasnnottstrongly fortiori againsta1110 idea. ActO kruuU I, Senior planner, asked what the Intensity of the lights would be. Ilr 11411' replied that they would be low intensity, 40 watt bulbs which woul S -e cldar Chairman Hout Stated that he liKed the lights and felt they were And I,teresting and subtle idea The Commission determined that the lighting concept would be acceptable under thos, conditions. Planning COnmisSion Minutes -16- L dcdy 24, lgBS N a1 3 Chairman Stout asked for discussion regarding the decorative 1lghtfng to the rear of the building as proposed by Commissioner Chltiea. Mr Pedestrian icirculat circulation that area andrassur d the Commission t atb the iighti gowould De done nicely. Chairman Stout explained that the Commission wanted lighting which is adequate and architecturally con-pattble. Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Chitlea, to adopt the Resolution approving Oevelopnent Review 85 -22, with the second amendment proposed by the City Attorney to Planning Division condition 3, carried and the rarquee design be reviewed by the Oesign Review Committee. Moti vote: on carried by the following AYES: COWSSIOHERS: NOES: CO"WISSIONERS: ABSENT: CO"VISSIONERS: STOUT, CNITIEA, BARXER, MCNIEL NONE REMPEf - carrier AOJOURENT _ Motion: Moved by Barker, secorded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to beheld to the at workshop, to Respectful] bmitted, beginning p m' eC ry Planning Camtssion Minutes -Ij- N�as �� 7 July 28, Ig85 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 4, 1986 ElI TO: City Council and City Manager FROM: Lloyd B. Hubbs, City Engineer BY: Paul A. Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Traffic Signals 1985 -1986 Award CGnstructlon Contract; and Approval of Negative Declaration The City Council on April 16, 1986 approved the design plans and specifications, and authorized advertisement to receive bids for construction of traffic signals at the following locations: vineyard Ave. at 9th St.; Arrow Route at Hellman Ave.; Base Lin, at Beryl St.; Haven Ave. at Church St.; and Haven Ave. at Lemon Ave. (see sketch). The attached Initial Study, Parts I and II, have been prepared for the requestea adoption of Negative Declaration Environmental impact Statement. Atteched is a tabulated summary of bid proposals received for construction of the above signals. The Engineering Staff has analyzed the bids and documents and finds them correct and acceptable. The apparent low bidder is Sierra Pacific Electrical with a low bid of $279.740.00 for the construction of the five signals. RECOMNENOATION: It is recommended that the Citj Council approve a Negative Declaration for the p- oposal signal Installations and award the contract for construction to Sierra Pacific Electrical in the amount of $219,740.00 plus 10% contingency to be funded from SB325 and Systems Development Funds. Respec cfully subml LBH :bc Attachments 1985 -1986 SIGNALS AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS I - VINEYARD at 91h 4 - CHURCH at HAVEN 2 - ARROW RTE ct HELLMAN 5 - LEMON of HAVEN j - BERYL of BASELINE .399 W W 6 O N u u No O 6 n C G O u � N IZAa d L N N Vl N N N O O O J J J Ji J J S m O O O O O irS J O O O mi • u° ' °0 0 0 C P .r O Z b Pf h h 1•f h h • � N N •O •O 10 O LL.. C i.l Cj N Q o N W J J J J J J o u °O °o °O °0 r $ o 0 o a g q e o C N Q O N N If1 L P1 q U N O N N N N N N A O J J J J J J a 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O •G N 17 h N O 1.1 O; P 14 N O• •O •O b N N N m OI U M N N N N N N N r d O J J J J J J M C CI O O O O O G O Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 O Y O N •O A b O O r ► 01' O• N RI C Cl O 01 b 6 P P •D N N •'M !� N N M Y A V 4 Ol O N N N N N N a J J J J J J A L N m H O Y N N N N N N N > O K N O Q N U W H J J J J J •� 4 O O U A A A A A L 6 J Ol Ol Ol Ol P C N N N N N O u u u u u u u t/l ♦ F 4 Y.. yyy��l IZAa GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW APPLICATION INITIAL STUDY — PART I For all projects requiring environmental review, this form must be completed and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt of this application, the Planning Division staff will prepare Part II of the Initial Study and make recommendations to Planning Commission. The Planning Commission will make one of three determinations: (I) The project will have no significant environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, (2) The project will have a significant environmental impact and an Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, or (3) An additional information report should be supplied by the applicant giving further Information concerning the proposed project. Date Filed:_ -Z-,5 A4 rr I 19 8 G Project Title:_ Srq KcJ s wt Oarlh.c 1aea 1,.. Applicant's Name, Address, Telephone: - rv-kOcc. Dwtsto -s Name, Address Telephone of Person To Be Contacted i eA Concerning ths Project: Pnw1 A1 iZ _aq,e Assessor's Parcel No.: NAQ List other permits necessary from local', regional, state and federal agencies and the agency issuing such permits: e— ri.., � i2.e c(. (La..cowno..n q _�. ii�.(...�. sari oh —T `/ b/ r PROJECT DESCRIPTION Proposed use or proposed project: Flue- Pl%afr 5 c ,vi�S ,(y r• Acreage of project area and square footage of existing and proposed buildings, if any:_ IV I A Describe the environmental setting of the Project site including information on topography, so stab tli y, plants (trees), land animals, any cultural, historical or scenic aspec.s, land use of surrounding properties, and the description of any existing structures and their use (attach necessary sheets):_ 5j- rGe_•i- 1, 4.ersr� - -_e_n c 0 -014er- _L f rrtia Rcscc�rv%ta� Y�,.r < _i Is the project part of a larger project, one of a series of cumulative actions, which although individually small, may as a whole have significant environmental impact_ At 0 ydC) T_9 , �' WILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO -� I. Create a substantial change in ground contours? _ X 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise of produce vibration or glare? _ X 3. Create a substantial change In demand fir municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? ._ x 4. Create changes in the existing Zoning or General Plan designations? r_ X S. Remove any existing trees? How many? 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, flamnables or explosives? Explanation of any YES answers above (attach additional sheets if necessary): 7. Estimate the amount of sewage and solid waste materials this project will generate daily:_ v./ /A 0. Estimate the number of auto and truck trips generated daily by this project: hie c is e! Cec4 -aA 9. Estimate the amount of grading (cutting and filling) required for tht; project, in cubic yards : Ny/� 10. If the project involves the construction of residential units, complete the form an the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial P•aluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation cyn bg made by the Planning O1vi; ion. Oate:—�--Z¢ —eft Signature Title CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PART II - INITIAL STUDY ENFIROXxENTAL CHECKLIST APPLICANT:_ �(', -d L. - )pn FILIYC DATE- �F-' Z S _ O (p L00 NMMERt PROJECT LOCATION: UtAQ+ta rQ (J9 �� I{eIIRti r►�rrau) ' a 1 eRa I. EWIRO;.^.tENTAL THPACTS uAVen cltti 4goeA Q Leni00l (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" answars are required on attached sheets). YP.S HAYRE NO 1. gods and Ceolosy, will the proposal have stgnificant results in: a Unstable groundcanditionsor in changes in geologic relationships? __ X b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or burial of the SAIL? c. Change in topography or ground surface contour intervals? _ -_ x d. The destruction, covaring or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? __ X e. Any potential increase in wind or water erosion of soils, affecting either on or off site conditons? f. Changes in et'slrn Siltation, or deposition? __ X g. Exposure of people or properr� •o geologic hazards such as earthquake., landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? h. An increase in the rate of extraction and /or use of any mineral resource? ,y ' 2. Hydrology, will the propusal have significant rarults in: W =AAY a C f a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral straam channels? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage Patterns, runoff? or the rate and amount of aarface water c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in any body of water? a. Discharge Into surface waters, or any alteration of surface water quality? f. Alteration of g"oundvater characteristic.? g. Change to the quantity of groundvaters, either through direct aaditions or with - dravals, or through interference with an aquifer? Quality? Quantity? h. The reduction in the amount of v.ter other - vise available for public water supplies? 1. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or seiches? 3. Air Quality. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Constant or periodic air emissions from awhile or Indirect sources? Stationary sources? b. Deterioration of ambient air quality and /or interference with the attainment of applicable air quality standards? c. Alteration of local or regional climatic conditions, affecting air movement, moisture or temperature? 4. Blots Flora. Will the proposal have significant results ini a. Chanv1 in the characteristics of species, Sn•luding diversity, distribution, or number or any species of plants? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species Of Plante? 7j '!5 YES 4AYBE NO X '. _ x X x - - X { xgs ?axes NO c. Introduction of new or disruptive species of plants into an area? ! d. Reduction in the potential for agricultural production? _ ._ Jr Fauna. Will the proposal have significant results In: a. Change In the characteristics of species, including diversity, distribution, or numbers of any species of animals? a b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of anicls? _ 3 c. Int- oduction of new or disruptive species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? X d. Deterioration or removal of existing fish or wildlife habitat? a S. Yop.ulatioa. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, donoicy, diversity, or growth rate, of the human population of an area? % b. Will the proposal effect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? X 6. Socio- Economic Factors. Will the propocal have significant results in: a. Change in local or regional Socio- economic characteristics, Including economic or commercial diversity, tax rate, and property values? X b. Will project costs be equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e., buyers, tax payers -,r 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 designations, objecti�os. politics, or adopted plans of any governmental entities? X c. An impact upon the qulaity or quantity of existing consumptive or non - consumptive recreational opportunities? 7- % YES �L1Y8E NO 8. iran9aorratlnn. Will the proposal have significant results Sn: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? _ x b. Effects on existing streets, or demaud for new stracc constrectien? -- X c. Effects on existing parking fz_llitlea, or demand for new parking? x d. Substantial impact upon existing transports- clan aystema? e. Alterations to present patters of circula- tion or movement of people and /or goods? it I. Alterations to or effects an present and _ Potential water - borne, rail, mass transit or air traffic? g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrian? A 9. Cultural Resoureez. Will the proposal have significant results ini A. A disturbance to the integrity of archaeological, Paleontological. and /or historical �csourcas' 10. Health. Safety. and vufsance Factors. Wili the proposal have algntrfcaac results ini a. Creatlun of any health hazard or potential .,aalth hazard? _- X b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? X c A risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident? d An increase in the number of indlvid•.als or species of vector or pathenogenic organises or the exposure of people to such organises? —_ e. Increase in existing noise levels? �- f Exposure of people to potentially dangerous noise 1 vela? _- g. The creation of objectionable odors? _ it h. /.a increase in light or glare? 7- % , i, 'i YES MAYBE NO 11. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant results in: _ a The obstruction or degradation of any scenic vista or view? x b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive C site? e A conflict with the objective of designated or potential scenic corridors? X 12. Utilitle� aii Public Services. Will the Proposal liv significant need for new systems, or alterations to the following: a. Electric pwdr? _ _ x b. Natural or packaged gas? _ _ C. Communications systems? _ _ k d. Water supply? _ — 3 e. Wastewater facilities? _ _i f. Flood control structures? _ _ x S. So.id waste facilities? _ ___ r h. - re protection? X I. Police protection? X j. Schools? k. Parks or other reerentional facilities? 1. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads and flood control tacilities? �— — e. Other governmental services? __ X 13. Energy and Scarce 0.asources. Will the proposal have significant resvlts in: a. Use of substanc•,al or excessive fuel or energy? b Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy? c. An increase in the danced far development of .^r new sources of energy? d. An increase or perpetuation of the consumption of non - renewable forces of energy, when feasible >f renewable sources of energy are available? i, 'i r C o. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable or scarce natural resource? 14 Mandatory Findings of 'igniflcance. I- Does the project have time potential to degrade the qua.ity of the environment, suostantially reduce the habitat of fish at wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animsl community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a care or endcngered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the scaler periods o£ California history or pronistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve aho.t -tern, to the disadvantage of long -term, environmental goals? (A short -term impact on tte environment is one which occurs In a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long- term impacts will endure well into the future). c. Does the project have impacts which are Individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed In connection with the effects of past projects, and probable future projects). .r, YES MAYBE NO - X — — _Z d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? II. DISCUSSION OF ENVIROLri TAL d EVALUATIO :i (i.e., of affinastive answers to the above questions plw, a iscussion of proposed mitigation measures). (A Y , C III. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find the preposed project COULD NOT have a signiticant effect on :ha enviroement, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be .,- opared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant Jeffect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have bean added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL aE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MY have a significant effect on the u envirneent, and an EINIM.Ci 7T MPACr REPORT is required. e Z- Dat � Sl&iature Title J v, �J t3'�tF CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA.- PARK AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT -NO. 85 -PD (HERITAGE AND -RED. HILL-COMMUNITY PARKS) REPORT- PURSUAKT TO' LANDSCAPING AND LICHTING ACTOFI9T£ FISCAL YEAR 1989=1987-- MAY 13. 1986 (x1417745740 • RM 9241631 1 iTABLE OF CONTENTS iPAGE iSECTION I AUTHORITY FOR REPORT 1 SECTION 2 FINDIN—S 2 iSEC) ON 3 DISTR'C, i ANALYSIS 3 SECTION 4 ESTIMATE OF COST 4 ni SECTION 5 METHOD OF SPREAD 5 iEXHIBIT A ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM MAPS .i �i 'i �r- `i i , SECTION 1 - AUTHORITY FOR REPORT This report for the 1986 -1987 Fiscal Year update s prepared purouant to the order of the City C<. mcil of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and In compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Division 15, Suction 22500 of the Streets and Highway Code. Provisions for this annual assass.uent are Included In Chapter 3 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972. The purpose of this report Is to sat forth findings and the assessment analysis for the annual levy of assessments for Park and Recreation Im- provement District No. 85 -PD, thereafter referred to as "the District ". This District, utilizing direct benefit assessments, has been created to provide funds to finance the cost of construction, maintenance, and oper- ation of Heritage Con. nunity Park and Red Hill Coimnunity Park In the City of Rancho Cucamonga. i t. 5`CTION 2 - FINDINGS Section 22573, Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, requires assess- ments to be levied according to benefit rather than according to assessed 1� value. The section states: "The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment ^'district may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly ' distributes the net amount among all assessable lots w parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the Improvements " The means of determining whether or not a parcel will benefit from the Improvements Is contained In the Improvement Act of 1911 (Division 7, commencing with Section 5000 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California). P The 1972 Act also provides for the classification of various areas within an assessment district Into benefit areas where, by reason of variations In the nature, location, and extant of the Improvements, the various areas will receive differing degrees of benefit from the Improvements. Benefiting areas consist of all territory receiving substantially the same degree of benefit from the Improvements and may consist of contiguous or noncontiguous areas As the assessments are levied on the basis of benefit, they are con- sidered a user's fee, no; a tax; and, therefore, are not governed by Ar- ticle XIIIA. r� Properties owned by public agencles, such as a city, county, state, or the federal government, are not assessable without the appr-val of the particular agency and, normally, are not assessed. Curtain other parcels used for railroad mainline right -of -way, public utility transmission right -of -way, common areas, and nonprofit organizations (i.e., churches, clubs) are also exempt fran assessment. The assessment for moblle home parks will be based upon the underlying lot acne e. P SECTION 3 - DISTRICT ANALYSIS IA lmprovament District Boundary The improvement district Includes all oil the City of Rancho Cuc­ mange with the general exception of the Etiwanda area In the northeasterly section of the City rhs Etiwanda area la not In- cluded In the Improvement district because community park desig.i and construction In that area is, In general, being finhneed by de- velopment fees pursuant to the Quimby Act. The assessment dis- trict boundzry It, shown on the assessment diagram map (Exhibit A) ti All parcels of real property affected are more particularly de- scribed In maps prepared In accordance with Section 327 of the }' Revenue and Taxation Code, which are an file In the office of the �( San Bernardino County Assessor In the Hall of Records, 172 Was% } Third Street, San Bernarcino, California and which are hereby Y made a part here if by reference B District Name City of Rancho Cucamonga Park Improvement District No. 85 -PO 7� C Facilities Z� The existing works of Improvement are generally described as follows: 1 The construction of Ileritage Community Park including but not 'ImIted to, grading; planting; Irrigation; onsite roads; sldewal i; parkins lots; lighting; restrooms; equestrian facilities; playground equipment; picnic facilities; athletic % facilities, a. J walking, jogging and equestrian trails .. The construction of Red Hill Community Park Including, but not limited to, grading, planting, Irrigation, onsite roads, sidewalks, parking lots, lighting, waterscape, restrooms, senior citizens facilities, playground agaloment, picnic facilities, major lighted athletic facilities, jogging trail, underground storm drain system, and adjacent public street Improvements 2-{ 0 SECTION 4 - ESTIMATE OF COST The Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 permits carrying forward sur- pluses or recovering deficits in subsequent fiscal years. Costs for the district will be reviewed annually. Any surplus credited against assess- ments or any deficits shall be Included In the assessment for the followlr,3 fiscal year. 1938 -1987 Fiscal Year Estimated Costs and Budget Summary Deficit from 1985 -1986 Budget ($19,299.75) Contributions (Interest earned) Redemption Fund (Limited to Pay Bond Debt Service) 22,760.00 Special Reserve Fund (Limited to Pay Bond Deb: Service) 44 613.50 Total Estimated Available Fun's $ 48,093.75 County Special Charges $ 200.00 Administration Charges 56,280.00 Consultants' Fees 25,000.00 Fiscal Agent Charras 1,500.00 First Debt Servlc. Installment (1t 324,770.00 Second Debt inrvice Installment (1•,.87) 479,770.00 Total Estimated Costs $887,520.00 Balance to Assessment $839,426.25 r ■ SECTION 5 - METHOD OF SPREAD The Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 indicates that lighting assess- ments may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distrib- utes costs am:ng all lots or parcels within the District In proportion to the estimated benefits received. A Definitiuns The District la divided into three categories for the purpose of de- termining the assessments as foll:ws: Category A - Includes parcels based on the number of a (sting residential units within certain ranges of parcel size Category B - Includes all parcels not defined In Category A or Category C. Crtagory C - includes exempt parcels Exempt parcels were dis- covered �-v searching the County Assasor's computer tapes for those parcels that are listed as exempt by the Assessor or which hav3 an assessed value of les. than $500. In conducting this search, several parcels ware Included as exempt that show parcel sizas In excess of 1.5 acres and type codes of, for oxamp'e, res- Identiai or agriculture. These parcels were added back Into the rolls and assessed. B. Formula The assessment formula Is based on ritual land use information cuntalnsd in the current San Sarnardlno Assessor's computer files and Assessor's parcel maps. Category A: All parcels containing existing rosid:rtial dwolling unit3 and moot - Ing the following conditions: Assessors Number of Existing Res. Sip Ranee paroer Sira Range Der.11in9 Units pe- Iarcel 0 -4 Less than 1.5 acre an! 1 or more dwelling units 5 1.51 acres to 3.5 acres and 2 or more dwelling units 6 3.51 acres to 7.0 acres at d 4 or more dwelling units 7 7.01 acres to 14.0 acres and B cr more dwelling units B 14.01 acres to 23.0 acres and 15 or more dwelling units 9 25.01 acres and larger sad 26 or man dwelling units 5 311111 Category A Is based on the number of existing residential un:'s. The actual assessment for Bond Debt Service per exist!.-:,, residen- tial dwelling unit may decrease each year as moro ruldantlal units " are built within the improvement district. Maintenance costs, how- ever, are expocted to increase annually and will somewhat offset the anticipated decrease in asaessmenb due to new development. Category B: All parcels not defined in Category A or Category C. Category C: All exempt parcels as defined below: r .' 1 all properties currently tax exempt; 2. all public ownerships; 3. railroad mainline rights -of -way; 4. major utility transmission rights -of -way; r 5 mineral rights; 6 parcels so small they currontly cannot be built upon, 7 all normally assessable p..rcels with an assessed valuation of less than $590 and 1 5 acres or lass; and i -, 8. nonprofit organizations (I u , chur -has). !. C Summary of preliminary Asseslmant Amounts Category A: The preliminary eutimatcd ar.sesimant which will be levied annually Is $33.50 per ruldantlal dwelling unit for those parcels In Catego- ry A. Category A parcels contAning more titan one residential duelling unit will be assw.sed for an amount aqua; to $33.50 times the number of dwelling units. t, ',r.Lr. •. 6 r 1 Category 8: The assessment which may be levied annually for parcels within •_ Category 8 shall be according to the following schedule: Assessor's Assessment ' Size Range Dof" ^'tion per Parcel* 0 - 4 less than 1.5 acres S 16.75 5 1 51 acre% to 3.5 acres 50.25 6 3.51 xras to 7.0 acres 117 25 7 7.01 acres to 14.0 acres 734.50 8 14.01 acres to 25.0 acres 469.00 9 25.01 acres and larger 837 50 cafigory C: The assessment shall be $0.00 for Category C parcela. Some assessments may vary from the values given above by S.OI or 5.02 eithr^ way. The computer spreads the actual Balance to As .ssment, .arrles the extra pennies IaGt over from an even si lad, and adds them one at a time to the assessment roll from the first parcel downward to mate the total assessment spread ex- `,� actly equal the Balance to Assessment. 3 The Individual 1986 -1987 asssasrsnts by .%ssessor's parcel number (Exhib- +� it B) have been tabulated and are on file at City Nall with the City Clark of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and am hereby made a pArt hereof by this reference. Dated hAY /d . /916 _ _ WILLOAN ASSOCIATES of Rancho Cutamauga of Callfornis 7 Preliminary approval for annual levy of assessment of the district and preliminary approval of the anginser's m wrt were made on the _ day oe — I9— CI i'Y CLERK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STATE OF CALIFORNIA Final approval, confirmation and levy of the annual assessment and all matters In the onglnear's report were made on the __ day , 19_, by adoption of Resolution No. _ by the City Council C ITY CLERK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA , ;TATE OF CALIFORNIA A copy of said assessment roll and enginosr's report was filod In the of- fices of the City Engineer and the City Clerk on the _— day of __, 19_ CITY CLERK CITY OF RANCHO CUCAWNGA STATE OF CALIFORNIA CITY ENGINEER CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STATE OF CALIFORNIA A 7^ ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM SHSaT T OF S PARK AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 85 - PD (HERITAGE AND RED HILL COMMUNITY PARKS) CITY Of EAKIN) CUCANONOA COUNTY Of SAN OMNAAIMNO STATE Of CALIFORNIA 1 r...rns ri SCALE IN M c.� M p[ue[[a [ rM1Y1YY1 w n([ M M [I[rlar f[W p ra pn> Wy p{wO{A, I� MArp YYp Y lOp Y� -•YV a.wu ..r .uaw•.+ uu wri Mi»w>allL'IpX mp.r a .Ann s w [m a rr• Ile n. pn p W09 dtYOi. Ma��.n1f1.~a pp.[4 W01I [A ji Mr O ]1fy_ rat �Eti4TL (,.tts [n• w..oe [.sun.0 v ✓.r y 13045f a adLf� AT y A_¢m {YT tf<Vl_ A . SHIRT A OF E $MEET$ PARK AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 85 - PD SEE SHEET 3 NOOK 1077 HA EN AVE I A m m OK 0 I E 00 ,.T. NE OK r -1 FT I f i �eeK I i I � SCALE NI FELT /N[[T { OF { /M[STf PARK AND RECREATION ' IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 85 - ?D Ic �'b 2 0 V DOR- ' fi S j L7 2 < w r y W o Q 202 _ tt j 1 i =Ti ' pp� BASELINE RD h i I ,• I W i y SEE SHECT4 np ,pp •pN fGL[ IM F[LT 3' .ap J 9 CITY OF RANCHO CLCJI,IIONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: June 2, 1986 TO: Lauren Wasserman, City Manager FROM: Robert Rizzo, Assistant City Manager BY: Jerry Fulwood, Assessment Revenue Coordinator Y A\ 197 ) SUBJECT: Assessment District Overview for June 4, 1986 City Council Meeting. A comparative summary of Landscap9, Lighting, and Park and Recreation's annual assessments per unit for fiscal year 1986/87 and 1985/86 is provided for your consideration. A brief explanation of assessment variances between fiscal year 1986/87 and 1985/86 will follow each table. LANDSCAPE DISTRICTS Variance t Dec./ 1986/87 1985/86 Dec.(Inc.) 9 Inc. 1. Landscape Dist. No. 1 $ 28.00 5 38.00 $ 10.00 269 The decrease in Landscape District 1,4, and 5 assessments is a direct reflection of the following, A) Investments of funds. B) Delinquent assessment collections. C) Tighter expenditure controls. D) Aggressive assessment management. E) Proportional dwelling unit increase over actual cost. Landscape Maintenance District 2 (Victoria) assessment remained at 6223.17 per dwelling unit because of the extensive parkways. Landscape Maintenance District 3 (Hyssop) incurred maintenance cost during the latter half of 'fiscal year 1985/86, and it will incur cost during 1986/87. Therefore, this is the first year an assessment is being levied in this district. (Rochester Avenue and Fourth Street) General 2. Landscape Dist. No. 2 223.77 223.77 -0- -0- Victoria 3. Landscape Dist. No. 3 258.75 -0- (258.751 -0- Hyssop 4. Landscape list. No. 4 12b.34 154.10 25.76 179 Terra Vista 5. Landscape Dist. No. 5 113.41 163 -64 50.23 318 Tot Lut The decrease in Landscape District 1,4, and 5 assessments is a direct reflection of the following, A) Investments of funds. B) Delinquent assessment collections. C) Tighter expenditure controls. D) Aggressive assessment management. E) Proportional dwelling unit increase over actual cost. Landscape Maintenance District 2 (Victoria) assessment remained at 6223.17 per dwelling unit because of the extensive parkways. Landscape Maintenance District 3 (Hyssop) incurred maintenance cost during the latter half of 'fiscal year 1985/86, and it will incur cost during 1986/87. Therefore, this is the first year an assessment is being levied in this district. (Rochester Avenue and Fourth Street) N LIGHTING DISTRICTS I Variance 8 Dec./ 1. Lighting Dist No. 1 1587.52 1588 96 DeSliJ9) 9 Arterial 16i 2. Lighting Dist. No. 2 31.23 36.22 4.99 149 Residential 3. Lighting Dist. No. 3 4a 03 48.65 .62 1% Victoria 4. Lighting Dist. No. 4 32.21 27.14 ( 5.07) (19%) Terra Vista The decrease in Lighting Districts 1,2, and 3 assessments is a direct reflection of the following: A) Investment of funds. 8) Delinquent assessment collections. C) Aggrs_sive assessment management. D) Tighter expenditure controls. E) Proportional dwelling unit increase over actual cost. F) Reserve utilization. Lighting Maintenance District No. 4 (Terra Vista) incurred an 189 ' assessment increase totaling $32.21 per residential unit. The causes are as follows: A) Southern California Edison rate Increase. R) Proportional increase in number of lights over dwelling units. C) Prior year rates act too low. I 1 PARR AND RECREATION ASSESSMENT DISTRICT (85 P.D.) Variance 1 Dec./ 1986/87 1985/86 Dcc. (Inc.) L Inc. A) Per residential S 33.50 5 34.65 5 1.15 31 V.L. 1.5 acres or less 16.75 17.32 .57 31 V.L. 1.51 to 3.5 acres 50.25 51.99 :.74 38 V.L. 3.51 to 7.0 acres 117.25 121.25 4 It 31 V.L. 7.01 to 14.0 acres 34.50 242.59 8.09 31 V.L. 14.01 to 25.0 acres ,09.00 485.16 16.16 41 V.L. 25.01 acres and larger 837.50 866.42 28.92 39 The Park and Recreation Assessment District (85 P.D.) realized an across the board assessment decrease because of the following reasons: Al Investment of funds. B) Subdivision of parcels. C) Collections of delinquent assessments. D) Special Reserve earned interest trcnsferred to Bond Redemp- tion Fund. Respectfully, Robert Rizzo Assistant City Manager FcR: JBF s kmm k.' w r- ff r NW, Crff OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM bete, Juno a, 1966 vat Wwor 4n6 resbers of the city Council rras, Lauren wasnersin, City M.aaagor subjects chaffty- Garcia house Added Conant Calendar Item, - Jme e, 1986 She rtiwenda Historical Society, has appruiched the City with a request for he /w toward continuing their )lability insurance policy on the Chiffey- Qarcla Hdife. trais potty, -am names the City as co^insurea as we are the owner of thu puoperty and its inprovwoents). Anther, however, than pay for their insurance as they have requested, we would suggest a yearly •tipand be granted for slscelleneous expendituret connected wtth the house ... such as insurance, touch up paint, aoor sets, std., at the option of the foaety. In this way their Cash short trauury would haw then be auured the necessary cash available to suet contreatea obligations, like insurance, without the City Cc aia:ln9 m pay for it. We Would eugTt% that w cat the Stipend •c $M for this year and includes a like fignr� fcr the upcoming tircal year. WINERY BUSINESS CEME June 2, 1936 Ms. Beverly Authelat City Clark City of Rancho zueamonga P. 0. Box 807 Rancho Cuc.rmnga,. CA 91701 Re: Virginia Bare Winery Business Centre Uniform Sign Progra% Bear Beverly: M, or r AMVNIBTRATIOM J6110.11986 d We repuest to 49001 the Planning Cataisslon decision r"Irdfny the Virginia Bare Ninety Business Centre Uniform Sign Program. Enclosed herewith Is the $136.00 filing fee. Please schedule our rppeal on too next avail,01t City Council seating agenda. If you have any 4uestions, please call. lncorelY, � i Larry Tt� Project gar LT /ih Enclosure cc: Dan Christatan Glen Gellatly c{ �1 1601 Dove Strut, Sul-to iW • fia'wpott Beach. CA 92660 • (714) E03459Ti #W,orevsaon + a+n9ea,b, CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Post Wks ow my Y>zaC sn. un. P 0 Aw4h Cuca ,mrom4$1rdo L� n n n �'b OtlfM,A �YpWI �LnY> i •Iq•f4 w � Wf1Yq 4�1)IF> I ,.D •a � i i.�(e421 •144ta 44104 �>v >4Y1 1/IL I 4M WG i �y -�•�� 1: i 35204 TOTAL jft Y w ^b I CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA WIM - 31 DATE: June 2, 1986 TO Lauren Wasserman, City Manager um PROM: Robert Rizzo, Assistant City Manager Bys Jerry Pulwood, Assessment Revenne Coordinator SUBJECTS Assessment District Overview for June 4. 1986 city Council Moetinq,. A comparative summary of Landscape, Lighting, and Park and Recreation's annual assessments par unit for fiscal year 1986/87 and 1985/86 is provided for your consideration. A brine explanation of assessment variances between fiscal year 1986f87 and 1985/86 will follow each table. The decreaso in Landscape District i,4, and S assessments is a direct roflaction of the following. A) Investments of funds. B) Delinquent assossmout collections. C) Tighter expenditure controle. D) Aggressive assessment management. E) Proportional dwelling unit increase over actual cant. Landacape Maintenance Di List 2 (Victoria) assessment remained at $223.77 per dwelling :nit because of the extensive parkways. Landscape Maintenance District 3 (Hyssop) incurred maintenance coat during the letter half of 'fiscal year 1985/86, and it will incur coat during 1986/87. Therefore, this is the first year an assessment is being levied in this district. (Rochester Avenue anal Fourth Street) LANDSCAPE DISTRICTS Variance • Dec./ 1. Landscape Dist. No. I 1986%87 5 28 a0 198_ SLB_6 8.0 Dec (Inc.) $10.60— i Inc. 2— General 2. Landscape Dint. No. 2 223.77 223.77 -0- -0- Victoria 3. Landscape Dint. do. 3 258.75 -0- (258.75) -0- 11yesop 4. Landecape Dist. No. 4 128.34 154.10 25.76 174 Terra Vista 5. Landscape Dist. No. S 113.41 163.64 50.23 31% Tot Lot The decreaso in Landscape District i,4, and S assessments is a direct roflaction of the following. A) Investments of funds. B) Delinquent assossmout collections. C) Tighter expenditure controle. D) Aggressive assessment management. E) Proportional dwelling unit increase over actual cant. Landacape Maintenance Di List 2 (Victoria) assessment remained at $223.77 per dwelling :nit because of the extensive parkways. Landscape Maintenance District 3 (Hyssop) incurred maintenance coat during the letter half of 'fiscal year 1985/86, and it will incur coat during 1986/87. Therefore, this is the first year an assessment is being levied in this district. (Rochester Avenue anal Fourth Street) LIGHTING DISTRICTS me Variance ► Dec./ 193 1D88.96 Das.iI;c. tT_ 1. Lighting Dist. No. l 52 Arterial 2. Lighting Dist. No. 2 31.23 36.22 4.99 14► Residential 3. Lighting Dist. No. 3 48.03 48.65 .62 It Victoria 4. Lighting Dist. No. 4 32.21 27.14 ( 5.07) (191) Terra Vista The decrease in Lighting Districts 1,2, and 3 assessments is a direct reflection of the followings A) Investment of funds, 8) Delinquent assasament collections. C) Aggressive asseasment management. D) Tighter expenditure controls. E) Proportional dwelling unit increase over actual cost. P) Reserve ctlI zation. Lighting Maintenance District No. 4 (Terra Vista) incurred an 18► assessmont increase totaling $32.2T per reaidontial unit. The causos are as follows A) Southern California Edison rste increase. B) Proportional increase in numLer of lights over dwelling units. C) Prior year rates not too low. me ■ f A) PARK AND RECREATION ASSESSMENT DISTRICT (65 P.D. Variance 1 Dec./ The Park and Recreation Assessment District (85 P.D.) realised an across the board a*sesameat decrease because of the following reasonsr A) Investment of funds. B) Subdivision of parcels. C) Collections of delinquent assaoamants. D) Spaclal Reserve earned interest transferred to Bond Redemp- tion Pund. Respectfully, Robert Rizzo Assistant City Manager RRSJBEskmm `: 1906/87 1985/86 ac. (Inc.) t Inc. Par residential S 33.50 S 34.65 $ 1.15 31 V.L. 1.5 acres or less 16.75 17.32 .57 31 V.L. 1.51 to 3.5 acres 50.25 51.99 :.74 31 V.L. 3.51 to 7.0 acres 117.25 121.29 4.94 31 V.L. 7.01 to 14.0 acras 234.50 242.59 6.09 31 V.L. 14.01 to 25.9 acres 469.00 485.16 16.16 31 V.L. 75.01 acres and larger 837.50 866.42 28.92 31 The Park and Recreation Assessment District (85 P.D.) realised an across the board a*sesameat decrease because of the following reasonsr A) Investment of funds. B) Subdivision of parcels. C) Collections of delinquent assaoamants. D) Spaclal Reserve earned interest transferred to Bond Redemp- tion Pund. Respectfully, Robert Rizzo Assistant City Manager RRSJBEskmm `: AWAMI Debt Service Due Jules 1966 1N) 19Np 1l99 1990 1991 1992 1 9v 199{ 1995 194, 190'1 1918 1t?9 2000 2001 2CO2 2003 2004 2005 Table 1 S7 374 776 CITY OF RANCHO CUODI.iON�A IN►RODcxT nos ►ARK AND RECREATION 1Y/M„CCv glcmrr, rn_ c_c_.m (RE91TAK AN DLO RILL CQMITY ►AAKf) AW41 Debt service Principal :fiorast (1) Reprasents Interest free September 1, 1965 to July 2, 1396. -14- Y Total r: o� Y. 8 r F. E � L J Nw. wr .i mm , f': CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: June 4. 1965 TO: City Cou". and City wnager FROM: Lloyd B. hhJbbs. City Englruer S:: Linda Seek, Engineering Te:Mician SUBJECT: Approval of Map, improvement Agreement and Impro7ement Security for Tract 13027, located on the southwest corner of Highland and Ettwanda Avenues, submitted by The William Lyon Company. Tract 13027 was approved by the Planning Consission on December 11, 1955, for the division of 45.5 aces into 157 lots in the victoria Planned Community Developaw:nt District, located an the southwest corer of Etiwrlda and Highland Avenues. The Developer, The Yi'iliam Lyon Company. is submitting an agreement and security to guarantee the construction of the off -site improvements in the following amounts: Faithful Parfavanca Bond: 5932,000 Labor and Material Sand: 5466,090 Letters of approval have been received free the high school and elementary school districts and Cucamonga County Mater District. RECD G*=TIDM it "s recomended that the City Council adopt the attached resolutfon gproving Tract 1320:, acceptin said agreement and security and outhoriztag e Mayor and City Clerk to sign said agreement and to ca use said map to etcord. Ram fully submitted, lUl {.L s Attachments �tV15 � ai 1� may 1, 1906 Ms. Beverly Authelat C1779 -002 City Clark f office of the City Clark City o Rancho Cucamongga 9720 Baseline Road, 8ulte •C• Rancho Cuca[onga, CA 91770 Ra' APPeal from planning Cwrtolssion Action Vi r�ai�l� par* H1ne Pro act - Edwards Clnena Dear Ns. Authela4 and the Tover Limited, a California _ limited partnership hereby appeal from the Partnership, 4 California general partnership Of the City oL Rancho Cucamonga arequiringetheaaddie !onnotsslon a the coating around the entire outside extdrlor of the above- doscrlbed thestra building. .asued bulldi� appeal is based upon the tact thtt t validly of Rancho Cueaao- I her already been issued by the City Of such stucco and therefor* the tthhetactionnbt aopro 'R cdastructloa CoaOiasler was rithout jurisdiction. y thw Planning the that treaisprerex9n ;o further eePr based upon the tact !hat to the archltsctural review previously approved City of Rancho Cucamonga, a Droceiuras esta611shedDbby the did, not include the stucco) werehalsopapprote plans (which Commission and that a validly lssutri buildinad by the Planning Issued with respect to sucl plans, Tharatora,Prh�aation taken eq the Planning Cc4ftLssion which bur.,crts to ra u' a subsequent change to previously approved plans is unreasonable, 9 _ra ,� ram V r / &;a :1 J •Att[w. 1'lat'1[Wa, 1,[e[. ^urea 6 :� 6e e e[ y` / \ _��,� ► W- ...ar- ./r. V \,.Ol,.,y, a)h {•. {h • •...•.•,�,y {•..lfrr -...)• �r � �'�. / /44tiq NW.-1 // /..- .�YM4Y ►p•I and the Tover Limited, a California _ limited partnership hereby appeal from the Partnership, 4 California general partnership Of the City oL Rancho Cucamonga arequiringetheaaddie !onnotsslon a the coating around the entire outside extdrlor of the above- doscrlbed thestra building. .asued bulldi� appeal is based upon the tact thtt t validly of Rancho Cueaao- I her already been issued by the City Of such stucco and therefor* the tthhetactionnbt aopro 'R cdastructloa CoaOiasler was rithout jurisdiction. y thw Planning the that treaisprerex9n ;o further eePr based upon the tact !hat to the archltsctural review previously approved City of Rancho Cucamonga, a Droceiuras esta611shedDbby the did, not include the stucco) werehalsopapprote plans (which Commission and that a validly lssutri buildinad by the Planning Issued with respect to sucl plans, Tharatora,Prh�aation taken eq the Planning Cc4ftLssion which bur.,crts to ra u' a subsequent change to previously approved plans is unreasonable, 9 _ra ,� r: .,w * ".Cff ALLar. MaYxras. Lrcx. 04maLS & MALLORY A tiw.KW.e M "VcssK ff1��Of�,.fwf Y.s. Beverly Authelet 01779 -002 may It 19416 Page Two without justification, and constitutes a de facto revocation of a validly Issued building permit. Very truly yours, ALLEN, NATRINS, LECK, CANBLE & MALLORY� /J A. Nichael Joyce Attorneys for C/A sited, and The Tozer Partner ip lie I, Cad :�•dt .,(p is!+r�ea t I s� I CrrY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORAMUM oats$ Jose 3, 198C Tor mayor and members of pity Ceu L Prows Lauren N. Nasearbas$ Mty xaaa96r Subjects t• Lva luatlow o! Lit,rat Rarviaee - aadanotm Counetl Agenda I ies o-I. Jane a, 196b u Staff has a$Aptlod aaaLUGhal 1L1arfttlon on the Library services to that which you ts0 lved in your agenda packets. Previously$ the available latossation presentee was a hstieq of aaoparatiw data batvaea the Rancho Cucaoange Neenah or the eau bernaraino County Library arc two of our asighbarlug sunicipalitles. Upland aad Ontario. The latest information aeaerbled compare& Rasaho$s branch with tour other branchaa or the ban bernaraino County Library Systen which also serve muniaipalLtiaa$ Fontana. lentalaLr. Chino, a victorville. (please see attachan). It further information is desired. please lot to know. Thank you. Rambo Coeuoega branch Library Location, Rancho Cacaeon94 rVarator, County of Ban 9ereartida Volume to Population Ratio, 41,365 Vnitae0 to 73,642 Papuution or 0.56 Volmols per parson (Updated 6/2,16) Library Cards to emulation Ratios 16,776 Cards, to 73,842 Popolaticn or 22 cards par 100 persons. (This number supplied by Branch. County headassarters, however, auotea a lower number at cardholder at 5.300) Rnurs of rperation, RosrRns. 10 -8i bed -:Mss,. 10 -6i Pri -sat. 10- 5 ... Total Lbalsly lours, 50 Pontana Branch Library Locations roman, cpstatart County of Bea s4rastdino 8l_re_ 13,058 saaare test V616016 to Population Ratios 70.652 VOlumai to 56,103 or 1.25 "lures per person Library ".ran to Pmulation Ratios 10,800 Crrd3 to 56,103 Popularlou or 19 library cards per 100 peraalla Pours, of egeratton, Hon- Thura. 10 -91 rrl -Bat 10 -5 —Total Weekly lours 58 ko_ ntalur Branch Library Locations montolair ;'- -saraters County of sell Barnsrdim BiBes 14,100 square feet ValaPe to Population saelc, 67,037 yobmus to 26,717 or 2.74 voluewc per F-rBon Library cards, to Pupulat3on Ratios 65,000 Cars to 24,717 population or 26 llbrary cards per 100 porsom Hours or rs »Caftans Pon -7145. 10 -8! bed- Thusa. 10 -6J M -Bat. 10- 5 ... Total ` WeaBly Hours, 50 s u� o� 1' ) China, Branch Library . Location: Chino Coaratort County or Ban bernardiro Bunt 10.6D0 sense* feet Volurr to population Patici A,169 Volume to 49,000 Or '.02 valtwes Vr p *teen t Librsry Cards to Pv ;lulation Muo1 12.500 Cards v, 6P.)C0 population at 25 - libraty Ceraa par 100 persons Mourn of Operatian, MOh -wen, 10 -01 Thum -bat. 10- 6 ... Total weekly hours j 54. VSCto"111e Branch Library 1 Location: ylctorvliie Operator: County of San hernardino r Size. 7.500 square test 1 ". e Velma to Population Rst�o: 44,459 VolusO to 23,012 Cr 1.V) wlussa per Parson $$ Y' Library Cards to Population Ratio: 15.000• Cares Moms of fVeration: Mon- Thurs. 10 -91 rri -Bat. 10- 5 ... Total Weekly 110MCS 5B �! (• Mots: Victoryills also stress Weoper&* and Apple Valley, therefore ratio would not be representative). 71 y . {1wY • J S ..�6i! , Yb iR��i • ;�yy.SA i� .. — CITY OF RANCHO CUCASIONGA � STAFF REPORT . S Gt DAftt Joac 4, 1984 M Major and Members of City Council rRMlt Lances M. Bs+atrmsm, City ?LaoaXore M SOB.LCre f3dLVl+Ils 11II4t8 crIls .t the dLrectise of the City Cquatil, staff has researched the library services offered is not Only Rancho Cucamonga, bat also Cities is the welt and of San Bernardino County. t.FP_s„�!a[E•sy "` :a�uiders the foltauiay istaut 1) wiga[KI— !7, t!a�'pARez ]) j�lia�,Gwiir _ q..a�ati±aal L Caoa!•iiv[ cwfl_e av areitee, Par parposeo of this section we will start by coaparLot Reecho Cucamonga'• twat of service, as providot by the San tervrdiao County free Library System, with the Joist of Library service provided by our two neighboring cities. Oatatto and Upland. Those cities operate independent maieipal library system. Lmeatlamt Reecho Cucamonga Onarseatt Co+aty of Sa tareardimo Elgmt 10,000 Square Peet m Volw ra ■,Parana IL•NO1 41,000 Volumes to 77.000 PopuletLos or 0.76 Volus per pennon. . Laerarr Card* tg yaua1ar1WLjUly9 16,776 cards to 77,000 Population or 12 Cards Pei 100 palaces. ® tsars er AMA- &t1Q2: Mom -Suss. 10-81 Wed-Thurs. 10-61 Psi -Sat. 10- 3 ... Total vembly Boars 70 r :1 r City Council Meeting June 4. 1906 !VALUATION Of LIBRARY SUVIC2S page 2 '�U.t..a CI t�•Lr4r.reR^ Locations Upland Ooaraenrs City of Upland Hisgr 24.000 Square Peet Vetu.. ee reoataei e. m.eler 116.422 7oluces to 54.000 Population or 2.13 Volumes per person. r.ier.rr care. re re.ut.N o. 4d e; 40.000 cards to 54.000 Population or 74 card# per 100 paragon. Mauro of ,M.r.etoas Moo - Thum. 10 -9; Pri -Sat. 12- 5 ... Torsi Voekly, burs 34 tnc.No.s Ontario Donato!! City of oataric HWs 44.060 Square pea: V no to rorularto. caries 200.000 Volumes to 106,000 Pop- Alacioo or 1.03 volumes per person. tier.ry cams to rooutarlea !grins 37,000 cards to 100.000 population rr 32 cards per 100 persons. Hours RLOnaraelaa: Moe -Thum. 9 -9; iris 10 -6; Sat. 9 -5; Sun. 12- 5...Total Weekly Hours 70 The The Countycast•ado this tack of as-site volumes is pettia117 mitigated Cy oath kramcb:KSmeh_WO- 08 YSiCme s�Mayiy�tYlllNdiHil.Lp�.L maadgN�t� chi. Cammglr_hllb syao�st•ak� As member of i►• Island Library Syst". however, Upland sad Ontario also have access to throe very same resources. to this "access* anchor is irrelevant to the comparison. Practically speakimp local residents may mot be aware of the availability of those "terials from other broach libraries. 7b 0 , x City Council matting June 6, 1906 EVALUATION OI LIBRARY SEHVICCS Page 3 `\ MFI1:. � `.ket'fN`°,{M_t "iii�"arTFbte�a� t�7�tf7r?"ii�I'ra. Deti,.s`"�wti'tiia?ata at* 7=" �b? tii% �1ZPaif ""M!t[sii:llEfy'�f%��r�.oa alN�.trb�Califonla. Volume - IArarw Cr-,, + VI AMA-106 men 148AIALL29 Ctroulattem par rapits ... Hasks 17Ntb of 21 systems Hefersoc• matscial per tapita...Easls 4th of 21 syetxss Hours of operation... Ranks Atb t1 A with can facility Oatlri 1. - tll§Y.A Crone 2 .M RM_U.1 /.M -- .- 1...-- - Circulatiom For Capita...Raoks 2ytb of 26 syscome - Reference material per Capita. ..Rams 2Otb of N systems - lour$ of operation ... Kaska Is'.. of I with sae facility The Service daliwery is Batch* Cucamonga to substantially below that offered by neighboring caouaities. Bu tow rd {a.. Cvvarr - 1.4br/gy Cr,,L.L - Circulation per capita ... /!AkB 9tb of 10 rystme Reference per capita... goes$ 9tb of 10 system Soots of operation ... Ciafelid aonparative data) SL/tah / t+r CRa1N AlUctidn Im s• Upland $1249 13th 62 21 Ontario $11.62 22nd of 26 Su Beroardiao County p f lOtb of 10 The fdgurn quoted is the toe Prot Nl eas,:H M ted ZU2=, were taken fron the rablty LI\r+r+ llt+tl• tie• IetL_ Ad a .e calls {r. published by the Llbrcry Onelepsat Services Bureau, California state Library. Saerseoato. California. Anotbov factor to consider *ban discussing library funding for the City of RcacbO WUNOya is the allocation by the Board of Supervisors to our /ranch. RANCHO COCAM WArS budget appropriation ............ 5220,000* mMCRO COCMMQrS llbrrry, revenue generated ....... $2B0,OOo* Mass ;iswres conrtoay of Ora lonadiao Cousty and relate to 105 -100. fated co the above isfotwatiso, it appears tbat Banako Counonga tapyara are subaldisios other slaawats of the CooAty'o library Oaten. 02 City Council Meatfeg Jca• A, 1906 erAtGanON OF CIIRARr REe9ICer RncA'r'►e�5 page A ' A M AR`s if the City Couae witkas to _improve the sarvieu in out brsaeY Ifbra ' ao are' iWft— iLiif�.Finiw�je11q y0iyir�v�LrN1,,, i n• 1. RrneaereN.. «sr +e. mv_rrr �—�. _.- •-- ...,_._.. ootioaa the ­"j", `�`ew�esteesswpnd. 'Rere are alas isms ry swY wsh t° explore with the Caaetp, i.e., IiDrary 2 °nee, COMP service Area, Mello -Roos, oto., for nw or addicioesl revaote 6ources. (see attached mrmaraadom tram Elizabeth Gans, Donary County Conosele to Cal •YcZlwaia, Supervisor. second District, dated March 1:, 1900, to oar view. fires the circvcotaoces at head, eons o! the ow revezus gesaratcra sa described, provide a realistic Opp to am library services in Reecho Neaawsgs. 2. 'faleN: iieiti�l ib iarp-`wd'eon e`'�t ao-�-iu�}'e'i�o1�3sjr�s? It is elgaifieest to Note, hwevor, t_ha4„%eaS hove °sa the Ci tv roold ova and operate a library syscw#iiiliehj because the citVc laud °i'm� "=ttte tfr{ejede` a We could easily adjust the hr. s of Operation to be mere r ...... I— .... daeiaoa of the Council toat take aaver the library, to meet be recognized the City will also be taking over the problem esoociatad with am uodersised, undo stocked. Undermanned facility. In suaaary, the City is faced with the option of either requesttrg a 'fair share" of County revasue to upgrade the level of librcry service, or we cast "&lusts the feasibility of assumict full raspoosibllity fa: library services. uMAMA= It is •ecommeai to At the proseat ties, LW /kep wwwer, at tow Foist is the sales cat, this Option may be I 1 u i INTEROFFICE MEMO DATE on- DATE March 11 1986 FROM fy!Z.%gETH L. RASBA DQXty County Counsel PHONE 3148 TD CAL MCELLpN, Supervisor Board of Supervisors, Fecund Supervisorial District Us$ rwrl Mill ae.wea.. SUBJECT County Free Library Systems Finuncing of Additional Library ser- vices within the City of Rancho Cucamonga A branch of the County free Library System is located In Rancho Cucamonga (•the Clty) in a building granted to the County by the Lion's Club. She deed has a 'reversionary clause whim; we are informed provides that he property will revert to the Lion -s Club it used for other than library purposes. The City wither to have an additionti library fai:ilitr, probably In the proposed City cultural facility. The County Free Library Byston (-the Library "), however, has no funds with which to build or staff an additional facility. Thtrefore, you have asked as to provide you (and through you, the City) with an outline of the options for financing a new, additional branch library wltiuin the City. T11oae optins are discussed below and nummarias our dl sousslau with the City on February ], 1986. It is or undtrttanding that the City currently is studying the overall pravicton of library cervices, and this memo will .assist in the completion of that re- port. et. -the C1t " remWtlmrar The City is included within the Library System by choice. The Columty free Library Systst is organized and operated ur.der Educe - :ion Code Section 19100. Ed.Cods } 19103 provides in Svrtin+ne part that, "After the establishoont of a county free li- brsry, the .. legislativs body of any city in the ccuaty maintaining a !roll public library the 23Y notify thoe� tpdbof sups visors that county free library art of the City ... shall be a part tso. Thereafter the inhabitants shall be entitled htootheebenefits Of the county Erell library ... The City may withdraw from the LibraJ.'y under the provisions of Ed -Code ¢¢ 19104, 19LOS and 19106, copies of which are at- tached. Such a withdrawal would havu the financing impact dg- scribed below. Before Proposition 13 (now Article XtIIA of the catifornia con- 's lsp�� M / --) C? {a k. CAL MCELWAIY, Supervisor, 2nd District March 11, 1986 Page 2 stit•lticn) the County levied an additional property tax to ti- nance operation of the Library. With the paseage of proposition 17, the Library was limited to its share of the one percent (11) property tax. Spacial legislation allowed a county tree library oystam to participate in the Special District's augmentation fury to ask* up a portion of the property taxes lost. The Library presently is funded in three main wayss with a shar� of property taxaa, augmentation funding, and state grants. (The Library also receives tines end donations). were the City to withdraw tram the Library, that portion of the property taxaa attributable to the City's tax rate areas which currently pass to the Library would pass to the City instead. It is doubtful that augn*ntatian funding would be availabls after withdrawals it to available to a county tree library system only because of spacial legislation. See Revenue and Taxation Code Sections 98.6 and 2216. It would be up to the City to apply for grants. In aum- mary, it would become the City's responsibility to finance li- brary services at the level iosired and to explore additional financing methods where necessary. Therefore, the folisawing options are presented with the assump- tion• that the City will remain a part of the Library but that addi.ional cervices will be needed in the Rancho Cucamonga areas 2.) • Tornatiemn)!*Lib> Mr-.2ane.lorBMCia1_TazsLavy.., 46 Education Code ¢ 19177 provides that the Board of Supervisors may create special taxing cones within the bound.ries of the Library to provide additional library services. within that zone. Al- though 4 19173 was enacted prior to Proposition 17, we baLieve it still provides authority to create a zone in which to conduct a special tax election. In this case, tits zone would encompass the City of Rancho Cucamonga. A special tax levy Is the financing method availabla here. There is no provision in state law for levying service charges or as- sessments to support the Library. Instead, as noted, before Proposition 17 the fcard team authorized to levy an additional Property tax to support the Library. The •successor" of this tax is the Oapscial tax" approved by the voters as dsscribid below. Any special tax electirn is conducted under the yyootetclathe�r ge litir, r�c!cer ,�itr's!12AThe tax cannot be an ad vbiorea tax but is eo Tai:aid on the tax roll with property nxF sT. We also would caifics that there are no Proposition 4 limit isauex prior to calling the tax election. special tax rev - anues could be expended only in the cane where gonersted for the purpose stated in the ballot measure. /a D CAL McMWAIx, Supervisor, 2nd District March 111 1986 Page 3 3.) Yornatiaa etnsrCanat ;Serti'Ei'jic� -•(� sA,)„Or Tons Of CSA 70 oc Aec w ar�iW -� library county ssrvices•at area 4 higher leveldthan thoseP pose of County- wide. wide• Sam OOVt.COde J 25210.4(•). Such formationijust To ty_ through the LAIC. A sons of CSA 70 (the County -vido C3A1 could be formed by the Board for such a purpose, but only after the LAFC had given CSA 70 *library powers'. Any CSA or eons includes incorporated areas only by ordinance of the City Cowcil. In either case, the purpose of forming a special district mould be to provide a flntncinq method for extended service* within the district. 3: Sam$ �r" letiiis� .av- aa:.�:.,..�r-- ��c� -- ..v__. _ 4.) Ponatl ?arvt+a.94011a, os_Ceouritn _tlsa>Oistrlat. A Community racilities District ('CFO•) May be formed to provide financing for library facilities with a useGul life of five penes or move. Government Co a M.5, However, at the pretant time such financing is not available for library services.. Fl- nancing for such services would be provided by the asaga of pending legislation, Senate BL11 1115 !1966), pa As you know, the CFD is formed after a majority protest heacingi • e7scial tax election .aay ba_call within the boundaries. The :ax must pass bj, tetfa( y'�j)s�oliiths;�iies,avotlnq on !t. Ne1lo-Foos contains special provisions for landowner voting In- arras with fewer than twelve (12, regiatered voters; 0lven the coat of the proceedings, library fncilitles might be included with other infrastructure. We also suggest that the City explore other tuadinq possibilities such as ehsrtsr city powers, the redevelopment agency or a com- munity rehabilitation district under SS 1322 (State. 1966, Ch. 906). Please do not hesitate to contact us with your questions or comments. ALAN K. MARKS County Counsel APPROM FOR RlLCASL Ci>>Ct �•.1L�. d'• 9CLAnCL DeputyEco L. Coup ALAY K. MARKS Deputy County COUnsal County Counsel ELSaad cc' John Jayner, Supervisor, First Supervisorial District Barbara Cram Riordan, Supervisor, Third Supervisarial District Gus James Bkropos, Supervisor, Fourth Supsrvisarial District Robert L. Rammwk, Supervisor, Fifth SuPsrvisorial District Robert B. Rignsy, County Administrative Officer CAL McELNASY. Supervisor, 2nd District March 1L, 1984 %?e 4 s Vernon 0, Knoursk, Assistant Administrative officer, office of Special Districts Barbara Andorson, County Librarian Albert Decaprio, Assistant County Librarian Albert E. Xvid, Adainistrator, General Services Agency , �i m "• CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM npVl Jure y, 19pe 40t wAVnr AM wmbmrs of city Council Frors Lauren Mr Wasserman, city hangar bahtactt Evaluation Ot Li'KarY pr CYitOa Aad&mw council AgeMe lua !)•3r June �, 1980 dcett has cOrpilOO Occitiural lrtgn,uon on the Library services to thvt which you received tp Vci igenaa packets. Previously, the evellahle intoraaticn presentao was a listinq of c(pthrative data hetsson tbo p-shChO Ct AMCrpa FCAneh of the ben bacnarn.uw county Lit-racy spa ti,o of our nwighboring nunldlpalities, Upland and Ontario. Its latest lntufustlon •ss,ochlro cccparea Farcholp bratch with tout utbsc rranttes at the set becnaraino County Library bysten %hits, also cam e %UP&Clpalltleat yuntAnl, fantOlAtr, Chi", ann VLCLOryi Lle. 1piedsv "s ..ttechon). It turtter ltrgrutlur, is dreireo, please let t, It,,,. Trank you. C< a<,.Cho Cnc4M,rce Mranch Llhrary LnGatxont Rmrn o Cucamorla treratort County of fan ber"LaL,v Vnlure to Ponvlatinn passes 41,165 Volume# to 73,612 Population or U.Sb Volure& wr Petsor 1110stao 6/2.'Bt) Lthraty Ears/ to Mnul /tlon potrot 16,776 cardf to 71.b42 Population ur 22 care/ re[ 100 persons. (This nuuher ■uppliea by Drench. Cwnty Mara WlAre. hN"wr, "'totes a )owcr nuslvt of Caia1141oet at V,A)) "..urs of ttnntiant Yon -Tot. 10 -Vt Vea- tws. to -b, /Tr -fat. 10- 5...ibtal I&etly Y , 50 2n`t" stanch Libr,:a Wcarlont Pontans rnerawn County of Ban 6erMralno nsta. 13,Oba ruuarc feet Vn /.tre t� Poaulatlur Patlot 70.652 Vu Lwas W Sb,101 or 1.25 voluus Ber Person tihr.ry urea to Papule- On pataot 10.k6O COWD W 56,10 PnpuLUon or tV 1LLlary come per iW perso; "ours of /iteration: "on-ThWO, 10 -21 /ti -Jet 10- 5 ... TVtal eeakly bouim 56 Pontelair Branch Library t- OratiOnt "M:1419 oftratort County of fan PerMrofno bites 14,100 Soutar& fast yolur& to Population patios 67,017 Vuluns& to 24,717 or 2.74 valumam pas reroon Lthrary =,rut to Pgmlatron patio, tS,WO carom to 24,717 FVTUL4=on or 26 library .-.ds per 100 persons t Hours Long Yon Svcs, 10 -81 WIG- Yhrs. tU -6, bvt -Sgt. tU- 5 ... TUtal Yely o e W f Chim branch Library tncatiom China errata[, county of Ban barllardum stta, 10,+w suua[e Lent Volute to Population Pettus !0,169 7oluaas to 49,000 or t.W; volumes per 1,araon l ihcary raros to Mpulation ft um tA,Sou carus to ay,uoo ;oPulation or 45 linear/ carus par loci tarsona blurs of rp- radon, non -haC. to -81 Thtrs -Bat. 10- k-..dotal Mskly haws 5e. Victoryille bronct. Library l.ccatlon, Victcrvlile (inratnr, County of van bstnaraaoo nuar 7,500 sown fast Volute to PnPUlatInt, Patio, 44,459 vole v w 33,012 or /.tr3 vulutss per rerson Library Garde to PcpulAtton Patio, 15,000• carob hours of Ct raticns Mon- Thurs. 10 -91 rri -Bat. 10- 5 ... Total ncokly routs 58 1a rotes Vieterville also serves baspariu atw Apple Valley, ttacatore ratio would nut he raprnartau"). W N W U a w w W d a d CL 2 v d .co J e e r e � o � V Y - r M - 0 • J ;t W CG CO W UCC L L w ' e r r, 6 r LU °e e y Y = W L J L e y e 4 r Y ii. O 6 Y • • _ w C < C G O O 2 ii i ► y w J -! J am V e • s CC Q � O r • � • � • •q - �iF O �S i C r O w x 43 4J U L o M i W e Y L M •� J O w a ' M t O U ° a J �V w. O •,Ymr V .w t' C w i v . t J M 'I i 6 0 O 6 w 6 � t i v a w i r L e r . w L ■s r a b to 5. :• S 0 i I L 0 o 0 ► V i ►O � L .4 'I i W Cl) W Ci W N W f' Qw. a a O a. m •.i • i C R C 3 = E w w I Y Y a e � o °c a w � r � o w � i a • it � • c i � w w • I � � r � • 0 3 Y ► ■ r c S > a • .s • i C R C 3 = E w w I FTC' 1' c, 3 i it �r �I l� IIII(`I �1 flJ� II i I C� ✓ . (�7e �Q.. �?�2s.,�p•�u f1GL1. 4{Q�CA,{yy *. - f"7,'75, K_. ---fi�t1 �� ?moo :• ` .� R