HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021/12/15 -Regular Meeting Agenda PacketMayor
L. Dennis Michael
Mayor Pro Tem
Lynne B. Kennedy
Members of the City
Council:
Ryan A. Hutchison
Kristine D. Scott
Sam Spagnolo
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
December 15, 2021
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD – CITY COUNCIL
HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY SUCCESSOR AGENCY – PUBLIC
FINANCE AUTHORITY
CLOSED SESSION TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM 4:30 P.M.
REGULAR MEETINGS COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M.
The City Council meets regularly on the first and third Wednesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. in the
Council Chambers located at 10500 Civic Center Drive. It Is the Intent to conclude the meeting by 10:00
p.m. unless extended by the concurrence of the City Council. Agendas, minutes, and recordings of
meetings can be found at www.cityofrc.us or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 9097742023. Live
Broadcast available on Channel 3 (RCTV 3).
CLOSED SESSION – 4:30 P.M.
TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM
ROLL CALL: Mayor Michael
Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy
Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo
A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)
B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)
C. CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTS
D. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSION
D1.CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR ROBERT NEIUBER, HUMAN RESOURCES
DIRECTOR PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54954.2 REGARDING LABOR NEGOTIATIONS
WITH THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION (RCCEA), TEAMSTERS
LOCAL 1932, RANCHO CUCAMONGA MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT
GROUP, RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIREFIGHTERS LOCAL 2274, FIRE SUPPORT SERVICES AND
FIRE MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES GROUP – (CITY/FIRE)
D2.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL ANTICIPATED LITIGATION: INITIATION OF LITIGATION
PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.9: 1 CASE – (CITY)
D3.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE TERMINUS OF SMOKESTONE STREET, EAST OF
TORREY PINE COURT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91739, IDENTIFIED AS COUNTY
ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER 022804424, NEGOTIATING PARTIES JOHN GILLISON, CITY
MANAGER REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND CHAO PING YANG;
REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS. – (CITY)
D4.PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957
(TITLE: CITY MANAGER)
D5.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH
(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: PEPE’S INC. V. CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF
CALIFORNIA, CASE NO. 5:20CV02506JGBSP – (CITY)
D6.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH
(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: HIMNEL USA, INC. d/b/a ST.
MARY'S MONTESSORI SCHOOL AND GLOBAL PROPERTY HOLDINGS LLC VS. CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 2014554. – (CITY)
D7.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH
(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA V. DR LANDMARK, INC.; POWER MEDIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; HOFER
PROPERTIES, LLC; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 5 INCLUSIVE, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 1904713 –
(CITY)
D8.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8949 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022916222; NEGOTIATING
PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,
REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,
OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE.
NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH
ABOVE. – (CITY)
D9.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9333 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022916223; NEGOTIATING
PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,
REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,
OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE.
NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH
ABOVE. – (CITY)
E. RECESS – Closed Session to Recess to the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:00 P.M. in the Council
Chambers at City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.
REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL:Mayor Michael
Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy
Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo
A. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA
B. ANNOUNCEMENT / PRESENTATIONS
B1.Administration of Oath of Office to Reappointed Planning/Historical Preservation Commissioner Tony
Morales and Newly Appointed Planning/Historical Preservation Commissioners James Daniels and Al
Boling.
B2.Presentation of a Proclamation Recognizing Santa Claus for his Choice to be Vaccinated Against the
COVID19 Virus, and Providing Santa with Two Paid Floating Holidays Off in Accordance with the
City's Vaccine Incentive Program.
C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor
Agency, and Public Finance Authority. This is the time and place for the general public to address
the Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing
Authority Board, and City Council on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the
Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board,
and City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Fire Protection
District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board, and City Council
may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting.
Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the
Mayor, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be
addressed directly to the Fire Board, Agencies, Successor Agency, Authority Board, or City Council not to the
members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected.
Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any
activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting.
The public communications period will not exceed one hour prior to the commencement of the
business portion of the agenda. During this one hour period, all those who wish to speak on a topic
contained in the business portion of the agenda will be given priority, and no further speaker cards for these
business items (with the exception of public hearing items) will be accepted once the business portion of the
agenda commences. Any other public communications which have not concluded during this one hour period
may resume after the regular business portion of the agenda has been completed.
CONSENT CALENDARS:
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and noncontroversial. They will be acted
upon without discussion unless an item is removed by Council Member for discussion.
Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, and
Public Finance Authority and may act on the consent calendar for those bodies as part of a single motion with
the City Council consent calendar.
D. CONSENT CALENDAR
D1.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District BiWeekly Payroll in the Total Amount of
$2,158,297.81 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $1,604,931.89 Dated November 19,
2021 Through December 05, 2021 and City and Fire District Electronic Debit Registers for the
Month of November in the Total Amount of $1,198,638.17. (CITY/FIRE)
D2.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company in the Total Amount of $5,122.49 Dated November 19, 2021
Through December 05, 2021. (CITY/FIRE)
D3.Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of November 30, 2021 for
the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.
(CITY/FIRE)
D4.Consideration of a Resolution Adopting the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Salary
Schedules for Fiscal Year 202122. (RESOLUTION NO. FD 2021033) (FIRE)
D5.Consideration of a Resolution Repealing Resolution FD 2020023 Concerning a Declaration of
Surplus Land Pursuant to Government Code Section 54221 for Real Property Located at 8340
Utica Avenue. (RESOLUTION NO. FD2021034) (FIRE)
D6.Consideration of the Purchase of Body Armor from Safariland, LLC Utilizing a Piggyback
Opportunity Through a Competitively Bid Contract from the State of California, Contract 118
8407, in the Amount of $116,543. (FIRE)
D7.Consideration of the Final Map for Tract 20118, Improvement Agreement and Improvement
Securities for Street Improvements for Case No. SUBTT20118, Located South of 6th Street
and West of the Resort Parkway. (CITY)
D8.Consideration to Accept Public Improvements Located at the Northeast Corner of Center
Avenue and 6th Street per the Improvement Agreement Related to Case No. DRC201800553,
as Complete, File the Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY)
D9.Consideration of License Agreements for Public Improvements Adjacent to the Railroad Spur
Track on 8th Street West of Haven Avenue with BNSF Railway Company Related to Case No.
DRC201800546, Located at 10415 8th Street. (CITY)
D10.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Superior Pavement Markings, Inc. for
Annual Citywide Striping and Pavement Marking Services in an Amount not to exceed
$150,000. (CITY)
D11.Consideration of a Contract with Onyx Paving Company, Inc., in an Amount of $1,727,000, Plus
10% Contingency for the Rochester Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation Project. (CITY)
D12.Consideration of a Resolution Authorizing the Acceptance of the Conveyance of Property from
the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and Authorizing the Appropriation of
Funds for the Purchase. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021134) (CITY)
D13.Consideration of Resolution No. 2021135, Authorizing the City to Enter into the Settlement
Agreements with McKesson Corporation, Cardinal Health, Inc., AmerisourceBergen
Corporation, Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., OrthoMcNeilJanssen
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Janssen Pharmaceutica, Inc., Agree to the Terms of the
Memorandum of Understanding Allocating Settlement Proceeds, and Authorize Entry into the
Memorandum of Understanding with the Attorney General; and authorize the City Attorney to
take all actions necessary and convenient to implement the settlements. (RESOLUTION NO.
2021135) (CITY)
D14.Consideration to Reappoint William Wittkopf, Public Works Services Director, as
representative of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on the West Valley Mosquito and Vector
Control (WVMVC) District Board of Trustees. (CITY)
D15.Consideration to Approve the Housing Successor Fiscal Year 2020/2021 Annual Report.
(HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY)
E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTION
F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)
G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) CITY/FIRE DISTRICT
G1.Consideration of Resolutions to Certify the Environmental Impact Report (SCH 2021050261) and
Adopt the PlanRC General Plan Update, 20212029 Housing Element, and Climate Action Plan.
(RESOLUTION NOS. 2021132 AND 2021133) (CITY)
G2.Continued Public Hearing to Consider First Reading of Ordinance 991, to be Read by Title Only and
Waive Further Reading, Adding Chapter 3.76 to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to Establish
a NonResidential Affordable Housing Development Impact Fee, and Resolution 2021131,
Establishing NonResidential Affordable Housing Development Impact Fees. (ORDINANCE NO. 991)
(RESOLUTION NO. 2021131) (Continued Public Hearing from December 1, 2021 City Council
Meeting) (CITY)
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)
I. COUNCIL BUSINESS
I1.Consideration to Approve the Reappointments of Three Public Members to the Public Art
Committee. (CITY)
I2.COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
(Comments to be limited to three minutes per Council Member.)
I3.INTERAGENCY UPDATES
(Update by the City Council to the community on the meetings that were attended.)
J. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS
K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING – JANUARY 5, 2022
L. ADJOURNMENT
CERTIFICATION
I, Linda A. Troyan, MMC, City Clerk Services Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby
certify under penalty of perjury that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on at least
twentyfour (24) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California; 12505 Cultural Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA, 91739; and on the City's website.
LINDA A. TROYAN, MMC
CITY CLERK SERVICES DIRECTOR
If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's
office at (909) 4772700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.
CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT
“Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community,to create
an equitable,sustainable,and vibrant city,rich in opportunity for all to thrive.”
Page 1
MayorL. Dennis MichaelMayor Pro TemLynne B. KennedyMembers of the CityCouncil:Ryan A. HutchisonKristine D. ScottSam Spagnolo CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAREGULAR MEETING AGENDADecember 15, 202110500 Civic Center DriveRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD – CITY COUNCILHOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY SUCCESSOR AGENCY – PUBLICFINANCE AUTHORITYCLOSED SESSION TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM 4:30 P.M.REGULAR MEETINGS COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M.The City Council meets regularly on the first and third Wednesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. in theCouncil Chambers located at 10500 Civic Center Drive. It Is the Intent to conclude the meeting by 10:00p.m. unless extended by the concurrence of the City Council. Agendas, minutes, and recordings ofmeetings can be found at www.cityofrc.us or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 9097742023. LiveBroadcast available on Channel 3 (RCTV 3).CLOSED SESSION – 4:30 P.M. TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM ROLL CALL: Mayor Michael Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)C. CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTS
D. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSION
D1.CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR ROBERT NEIUBER, HUMAN RESOURCES
DIRECTOR PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54954.2 REGARDING LABOR NEGOTIATIONS
WITH THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION (RCCEA), TEAMSTERS
LOCAL 1932, RANCHO CUCAMONGA MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT
GROUP, RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIREFIGHTERS LOCAL 2274, FIRE SUPPORT SERVICES AND
FIRE MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES GROUP – (CITY/FIRE)
D2.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL ANTICIPATED LITIGATION: INITIATION OF LITIGATION
PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.9: 1 CASE – (CITY)
D3.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE TERMINUS OF SMOKESTONE STREET, EAST OF
TORREY PINE COURT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91739, IDENTIFIED AS COUNTY
ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER 022804424, NEGOTIATING PARTIES JOHN GILLISON, CITY
MANAGER REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND CHAO PING YANG;
REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS. – (CITY)
D4.PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957
(TITLE: CITY MANAGER)
D5.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH
(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: PEPE’S INC. V. CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF
CALIFORNIA, CASE NO. 5:20CV02506JGBSP – (CITY)
D6.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH
(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: HIMNEL USA, INC. d/b/a ST.
MARY'S MONTESSORI SCHOOL AND GLOBAL PROPERTY HOLDINGS LLC VS. CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 2014554. – (CITY)
D7.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH
(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA V. DR LANDMARK, INC.; POWER MEDIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; HOFER
PROPERTIES, LLC; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 5 INCLUSIVE, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 1904713 –
(CITY)
D8.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8949 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022916222; NEGOTIATING
PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,
REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,
OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE.
NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH
ABOVE. – (CITY)
D9.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9333 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022916223; NEGOTIATING
PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,
REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,
OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE.
NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH
ABOVE. – (CITY)
E. RECESS – Closed Session to Recess to the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:00 P.M. in the Council
Chambers at City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.
REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL:Mayor Michael
Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy
Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo
A. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA
B. ANNOUNCEMENT / PRESENTATIONS
B1.Administration of Oath of Office to Reappointed Planning/Historical Preservation Commissioner Tony
Morales and Newly Appointed Planning/Historical Preservation Commissioners James Daniels and Al
Boling.
B2.Presentation of a Proclamation Recognizing Santa Claus for his Choice to be Vaccinated Against the
COVID19 Virus, and Providing Santa with Two Paid Floating Holidays Off in Accordance with the
City's Vaccine Incentive Program.
C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor
Agency, and Public Finance Authority. This is the time and place for the general public to address
the Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing
Authority Board, and City Council on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the
Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board,
and City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Fire Protection
District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board, and City Council
may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting.
Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the
Mayor, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be
addressed directly to the Fire Board, Agencies, Successor Agency, Authority Board, or City Council not to the
members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected.
Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any
activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting.
The public communications period will not exceed one hour prior to the commencement of the
business portion of the agenda. During this one hour period, all those who wish to speak on a topic
contained in the business portion of the agenda will be given priority, and no further speaker cards for these
business items (with the exception of public hearing items) will be accepted once the business portion of the
agenda commences. Any other public communications which have not concluded during this one hour period
may resume after the regular business portion of the agenda has been completed.
CONSENT CALENDARS:
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and noncontroversial. They will be acted
upon without discussion unless an item is removed by Council Member for discussion.
Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, and
Public Finance Authority and may act on the consent calendar for those bodies as part of a single motion with
the City Council consent calendar.
D. CONSENT CALENDAR
D1.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District BiWeekly Payroll in the Total Amount of
$2,158,297.81 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $1,604,931.89 Dated November 19,
2021 Through December 05, 2021 and City and Fire District Electronic Debit Registers for the
Month of November in the Total Amount of $1,198,638.17. (CITY/FIRE)
D2.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company in the Total Amount of $5,122.49 Dated November 19, 2021
Through December 05, 2021. (CITY/FIRE)
D3.Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of November 30, 2021 for
the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.
(CITY/FIRE)
D4.Consideration of a Resolution Adopting the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Salary
Schedules for Fiscal Year 202122. (RESOLUTION NO. FD 2021033) (FIRE)
D5.Consideration of a Resolution Repealing Resolution FD 2020023 Concerning a Declaration of
Surplus Land Pursuant to Government Code Section 54221 for Real Property Located at 8340
Utica Avenue. (RESOLUTION NO. FD2021034) (FIRE)
D6.Consideration of the Purchase of Body Armor from Safariland, LLC Utilizing a Piggyback
Opportunity Through a Competitively Bid Contract from the State of California, Contract 118
8407, in the Amount of $116,543. (FIRE)
D7.Consideration of the Final Map for Tract 20118, Improvement Agreement and Improvement
Securities for Street Improvements for Case No. SUBTT20118, Located South of 6th Street
and West of the Resort Parkway. (CITY)
D8.Consideration to Accept Public Improvements Located at the Northeast Corner of Center
Avenue and 6th Street per the Improvement Agreement Related to Case No. DRC201800553,
as Complete, File the Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY)
D9.Consideration of License Agreements for Public Improvements Adjacent to the Railroad Spur
Track on 8th Street West of Haven Avenue with BNSF Railway Company Related to Case No.
DRC201800546, Located at 10415 8th Street. (CITY)
D10.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Superior Pavement Markings, Inc. for
Annual Citywide Striping and Pavement Marking Services in an Amount not to exceed
$150,000. (CITY)
D11.Consideration of a Contract with Onyx Paving Company, Inc., in an Amount of $1,727,000, Plus
10% Contingency for the Rochester Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation Project. (CITY)
D12.Consideration of a Resolution Authorizing the Acceptance of the Conveyance of Property from
the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and Authorizing the Appropriation of
Funds for the Purchase. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021134) (CITY)
D13.Consideration of Resolution No. 2021135, Authorizing the City to Enter into the Settlement
Agreements with McKesson Corporation, Cardinal Health, Inc., AmerisourceBergen
Corporation, Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., OrthoMcNeilJanssen
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Janssen Pharmaceutica, Inc., Agree to the Terms of the
Memorandum of Understanding Allocating Settlement Proceeds, and Authorize Entry into the
Memorandum of Understanding with the Attorney General; and authorize the City Attorney to
take all actions necessary and convenient to implement the settlements. (RESOLUTION NO.
2021135) (CITY)
D14.Consideration to Reappoint William Wittkopf, Public Works Services Director, as
representative of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on the West Valley Mosquito and Vector
Control (WVMVC) District Board of Trustees. (CITY)
D15.Consideration to Approve the Housing Successor Fiscal Year 2020/2021 Annual Report.
(HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY)
E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTION
F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)
G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) CITY/FIRE DISTRICT
G1.Consideration of Resolutions to Certify the Environmental Impact Report (SCH 2021050261) and
Adopt the PlanRC General Plan Update, 20212029 Housing Element, and Climate Action Plan.
(RESOLUTION NOS. 2021132 AND 2021133) (CITY)
G2.Continued Public Hearing to Consider First Reading of Ordinance 991, to be Read by Title Only and
Waive Further Reading, Adding Chapter 3.76 to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to Establish
a NonResidential Affordable Housing Development Impact Fee, and Resolution 2021131,
Establishing NonResidential Affordable Housing Development Impact Fees. (ORDINANCE NO. 991)
(RESOLUTION NO. 2021131) (Continued Public Hearing from December 1, 2021 City Council
Meeting) (CITY)
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)
I. COUNCIL BUSINESS
I1.Consideration to Approve the Reappointments of Three Public Members to the Public Art
Committee. (CITY)
I2.COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
(Comments to be limited to three minutes per Council Member.)
I3.INTERAGENCY UPDATES
(Update by the City Council to the community on the meetings that were attended.)
J. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS
K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING – JANUARY 5, 2022
L. ADJOURNMENT
CERTIFICATION
I, Linda A. Troyan, MMC, City Clerk Services Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby
certify under penalty of perjury that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on at least
twentyfour (24) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California; 12505 Cultural Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA, 91739; and on the City's website.
LINDA A. TROYAN, MMC
CITY CLERK SERVICES DIRECTOR
If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's
office at (909) 4772700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.
CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT
“Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community,to create
an equitable,sustainable,and vibrant city,rich in opportunity for all to thrive.”
Page 2
MayorL. Dennis MichaelMayor Pro TemLynne B. KennedyMembers of the CityCouncil:Ryan A. HutchisonKristine D. ScottSam Spagnolo CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAREGULAR MEETING AGENDADecember 15, 202110500 Civic Center DriveRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD – CITY COUNCILHOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY SUCCESSOR AGENCY – PUBLICFINANCE AUTHORITYCLOSED SESSION TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM 4:30 P.M.REGULAR MEETINGS COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M.The City Council meets regularly on the first and third Wednesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. in theCouncil Chambers located at 10500 Civic Center Drive. It Is the Intent to conclude the meeting by 10:00p.m. unless extended by the concurrence of the City Council. Agendas, minutes, and recordings ofmeetings can be found at www.cityofrc.us or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 9097742023. LiveBroadcast available on Channel 3 (RCTV 3).CLOSED SESSION – 4:30 P.M. TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM ROLL CALL: Mayor Michael Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)C. CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTSD. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSIOND1.CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR ROBERT NEIUBER, HUMAN RESOURCESDIRECTOR PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54954.2 REGARDING LABOR NEGOTIATIONSWITH THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION (RCCEA), TEAMSTERSLOCAL 1932, RANCHO CUCAMONGA MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENTGROUP, RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIREFIGHTERS LOCAL 2274, FIRE SUPPORT SERVICES ANDFIRE MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES GROUP – (CITY/FIRE)D2.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL ANTICIPATED LITIGATION: INITIATION OF LITIGATIONPURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.9: 1 CASE – (CITY)D3.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE TERMINUS OF SMOKESTONE STREET, EAST OFTORREY PINE COURT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91739, IDENTIFIED AS COUNTYASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER 022804424, NEGOTIATING PARTIES JOHN GILLISON, CITYMANAGER REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND CHAO PING YANG;REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS. – (CITY)D4.PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957(TITLE: CITY MANAGER)D5.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: PEPE’S INC. V. CITY OFRANCHO CUCAMONGA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OFCALIFORNIA, CASE NO. 5:20CV02506JGBSP – (CITY)D6.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: HIMNEL USA, INC. d/b/a ST.MARY'S MONTESSORI SCHOOL AND GLOBAL PROPERTY HOLDINGS LLC VS. CITY OFRANCHO CUCAMONGA, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 2014554. – (CITY)D7.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHOCUCAMONGA V. DR LANDMARK, INC.; POWER MEDIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; HOFERPROPERTIES, LLC; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 5 INCLUSIVE, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 1904713 –(CITY)D8.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8949 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022916222; NEGOTIATINGPARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE.
NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH
ABOVE. – (CITY)
D9.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9333 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022916223; NEGOTIATING
PARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,
REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,
OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE.
NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTH
ABOVE. – (CITY)
E. RECESS – Closed Session to Recess to the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:00 P.M. in the Council
Chambers at City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.
REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL:Mayor Michael
Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy
Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo
A. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA
B. ANNOUNCEMENT / PRESENTATIONS
B1.Administration of Oath of Office to Reappointed Planning/Historical Preservation Commissioner Tony
Morales and Newly Appointed Planning/Historical Preservation Commissioners James Daniels and Al
Boling.
B2.Presentation of a Proclamation Recognizing Santa Claus for his Choice to be Vaccinated Against the
COVID19 Virus, and Providing Santa with Two Paid Floating Holidays Off in Accordance with the
City's Vaccine Incentive Program.
C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor
Agency, and Public Finance Authority. This is the time and place for the general public to address
the Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing
Authority Board, and City Council on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the
Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board,
and City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Fire Protection
District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board, and City Council
may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting.
Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the
Mayor, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be
addressed directly to the Fire Board, Agencies, Successor Agency, Authority Board, or City Council not to the
members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected.
Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any
activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting.
The public communications period will not exceed one hour prior to the commencement of the
business portion of the agenda. During this one hour period, all those who wish to speak on a topic
contained in the business portion of the agenda will be given priority, and no further speaker cards for these
business items (with the exception of public hearing items) will be accepted once the business portion of the
agenda commences. Any other public communications which have not concluded during this one hour period
may resume after the regular business portion of the agenda has been completed.
CONSENT CALENDARS:
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and noncontroversial. They will be acted
upon without discussion unless an item is removed by Council Member for discussion.
Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, and
Public Finance Authority and may act on the consent calendar for those bodies as part of a single motion with
the City Council consent calendar.
D. CONSENT CALENDAR
D1.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District BiWeekly Payroll in the Total Amount of
$2,158,297.81 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $1,604,931.89 Dated November 19,
2021 Through December 05, 2021 and City and Fire District Electronic Debit Registers for the
Month of November in the Total Amount of $1,198,638.17. (CITY/FIRE)
D2.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company in the Total Amount of $5,122.49 Dated November 19, 2021
Through December 05, 2021. (CITY/FIRE)
D3.Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of November 30, 2021 for
the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.
(CITY/FIRE)
D4.Consideration of a Resolution Adopting the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Salary
Schedules for Fiscal Year 202122. (RESOLUTION NO. FD 2021033) (FIRE)
D5.Consideration of a Resolution Repealing Resolution FD 2020023 Concerning a Declaration of
Surplus Land Pursuant to Government Code Section 54221 for Real Property Located at 8340
Utica Avenue. (RESOLUTION NO. FD2021034) (FIRE)
D6.Consideration of the Purchase of Body Armor from Safariland, LLC Utilizing a Piggyback
Opportunity Through a Competitively Bid Contract from the State of California, Contract 118
8407, in the Amount of $116,543. (FIRE)
D7.Consideration of the Final Map for Tract 20118, Improvement Agreement and Improvement
Securities for Street Improvements for Case No. SUBTT20118, Located South of 6th Street
and West of the Resort Parkway. (CITY)
D8.Consideration to Accept Public Improvements Located at the Northeast Corner of Center
Avenue and 6th Street per the Improvement Agreement Related to Case No. DRC201800553,
as Complete, File the Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY)
D9.Consideration of License Agreements for Public Improvements Adjacent to the Railroad Spur
Track on 8th Street West of Haven Avenue with BNSF Railway Company Related to Case No.
DRC201800546, Located at 10415 8th Street. (CITY)
D10.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Superior Pavement Markings, Inc. for
Annual Citywide Striping and Pavement Marking Services in an Amount not to exceed
$150,000. (CITY)
D11.Consideration of a Contract with Onyx Paving Company, Inc., in an Amount of $1,727,000, Plus
10% Contingency for the Rochester Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation Project. (CITY)
D12.Consideration of a Resolution Authorizing the Acceptance of the Conveyance of Property from
the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and Authorizing the Appropriation of
Funds for the Purchase. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021134) (CITY)
D13.Consideration of Resolution No. 2021135, Authorizing the City to Enter into the Settlement
Agreements with McKesson Corporation, Cardinal Health, Inc., AmerisourceBergen
Corporation, Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., OrthoMcNeilJanssen
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Janssen Pharmaceutica, Inc., Agree to the Terms of the
Memorandum of Understanding Allocating Settlement Proceeds, and Authorize Entry into the
Memorandum of Understanding with the Attorney General; and authorize the City Attorney to
take all actions necessary and convenient to implement the settlements. (RESOLUTION NO.
2021135) (CITY)
D14.Consideration to Reappoint William Wittkopf, Public Works Services Director, as
representative of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on the West Valley Mosquito and Vector
Control (WVMVC) District Board of Trustees. (CITY)
D15.Consideration to Approve the Housing Successor Fiscal Year 2020/2021 Annual Report.
(HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY)
E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTION
F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)
G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) CITY/FIRE DISTRICT
G1.Consideration of Resolutions to Certify the Environmental Impact Report (SCH 2021050261) and
Adopt the PlanRC General Plan Update, 20212029 Housing Element, and Climate Action Plan.
(RESOLUTION NOS. 2021132 AND 2021133) (CITY)
G2.Continued Public Hearing to Consider First Reading of Ordinance 991, to be Read by Title Only and
Waive Further Reading, Adding Chapter 3.76 to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to Establish
a NonResidential Affordable Housing Development Impact Fee, and Resolution 2021131,
Establishing NonResidential Affordable Housing Development Impact Fees. (ORDINANCE NO. 991)
(RESOLUTION NO. 2021131) (Continued Public Hearing from December 1, 2021 City Council
Meeting) (CITY)
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)
I. COUNCIL BUSINESS
I1.Consideration to Approve the Reappointments of Three Public Members to the Public Art
Committee. (CITY)
I2.COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
(Comments to be limited to three minutes per Council Member.)
I3.INTERAGENCY UPDATES
(Update by the City Council to the community on the meetings that were attended.)
J. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS
K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING – JANUARY 5, 2022
L. ADJOURNMENT
CERTIFICATION
I, Linda A. Troyan, MMC, City Clerk Services Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby
certify under penalty of perjury that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on at least
twentyfour (24) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California; 12505 Cultural Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA, 91739; and on the City's website.
LINDA A. TROYAN, MMC
CITY CLERK SERVICES DIRECTOR
If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's
office at (909) 4772700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.
CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT
“Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community,to create
an equitable,sustainable,and vibrant city,rich in opportunity for all to thrive.”
Page 3
MayorL. Dennis MichaelMayor Pro TemLynne B. KennedyMembers of the CityCouncil:Ryan A. HutchisonKristine D. ScottSam Spagnolo CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAREGULAR MEETING AGENDADecember 15, 202110500 Civic Center DriveRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD – CITY COUNCILHOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY SUCCESSOR AGENCY – PUBLICFINANCE AUTHORITYCLOSED SESSION TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM 4:30 P.M.REGULAR MEETINGS COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M.The City Council meets regularly on the first and third Wednesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. in theCouncil Chambers located at 10500 Civic Center Drive. It Is the Intent to conclude the meeting by 10:00p.m. unless extended by the concurrence of the City Council. Agendas, minutes, and recordings ofmeetings can be found at www.cityofrc.us or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 9097742023. LiveBroadcast available on Channel 3 (RCTV 3).CLOSED SESSION – 4:30 P.M. TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM ROLL CALL: Mayor Michael Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)C. CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTSD. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSIOND1.CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR ROBERT NEIUBER, HUMAN RESOURCESDIRECTOR PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54954.2 REGARDING LABOR NEGOTIATIONSWITH THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION (RCCEA), TEAMSTERSLOCAL 1932, RANCHO CUCAMONGA MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENTGROUP, RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIREFIGHTERS LOCAL 2274, FIRE SUPPORT SERVICES ANDFIRE MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES GROUP – (CITY/FIRE)D2.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL ANTICIPATED LITIGATION: INITIATION OF LITIGATIONPURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.9: 1 CASE – (CITY)D3.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE TERMINUS OF SMOKESTONE STREET, EAST OFTORREY PINE COURT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91739, IDENTIFIED AS COUNTYASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER 022804424, NEGOTIATING PARTIES JOHN GILLISON, CITYMANAGER REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND CHAO PING YANG;REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS. – (CITY)D4.PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957(TITLE: CITY MANAGER)D5.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: PEPE’S INC. V. CITY OFRANCHO CUCAMONGA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OFCALIFORNIA, CASE NO. 5:20CV02506JGBSP – (CITY)D6.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: HIMNEL USA, INC. d/b/a ST.MARY'S MONTESSORI SCHOOL AND GLOBAL PROPERTY HOLDINGS LLC VS. CITY OFRANCHO CUCAMONGA, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 2014554. – (CITY)D7.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHOCUCAMONGA V. DR LANDMARK, INC.; POWER MEDIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; HOFERPROPERTIES, LLC; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 5 INCLUSIVE, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 1904713 –(CITY)D8.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8949 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022916222; NEGOTIATINGPARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTHABOVE. – (CITY)D9.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9333 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022916223; NEGOTIATINGPARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTHABOVE. – (CITY)E. RECESS – Closed Session to Recess to the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:00 P.M. in the Council
Chambers at City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.
REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL:Mayor Michael
Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy
Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo
A. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA
B. ANNOUNCEMENT / PRESENTATIONS
B1.Administration of Oath of Office to Reappointed Planning/Historical Preservation Commissioner Tony
Morales and Newly Appointed Planning/Historical Preservation Commissioners James Daniels and Al
Boling.
B2.Presentation of a Proclamation Recognizing Santa Claus for his Choice to be Vaccinated Against the
COVID19 Virus, and Providing Santa with Two Paid Floating Holidays Off in Accordance with the
City's Vaccine Incentive Program.
C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor
Agency, and Public Finance Authority. This is the time and place for the general public to address
the Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing
Authority Board, and City Council on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the
Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board,
and City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Fire Protection
District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board, and City Council
may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting.
Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the
Mayor, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be
addressed directly to the Fire Board, Agencies, Successor Agency, Authority Board, or City Council not to the
members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected.
Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any
activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting.
The public communications period will not exceed one hour prior to the commencement of the
business portion of the agenda. During this one hour period, all those who wish to speak on a topic
contained in the business portion of the agenda will be given priority, and no further speaker cards for these
business items (with the exception of public hearing items) will be accepted once the business portion of the
agenda commences. Any other public communications which have not concluded during this one hour period
may resume after the regular business portion of the agenda has been completed.
CONSENT CALENDARS:
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and noncontroversial. They will be acted
upon without discussion unless an item is removed by Council Member for discussion.
Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, and
Public Finance Authority and may act on the consent calendar for those bodies as part of a single motion with
the City Council consent calendar.
D. CONSENT CALENDAR
D1.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District BiWeekly Payroll in the Total Amount of
$2,158,297.81 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $1,604,931.89 Dated November 19,
2021 Through December 05, 2021 and City and Fire District Electronic Debit Registers for the
Month of November in the Total Amount of $1,198,638.17. (CITY/FIRE)
D2.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company in the Total Amount of $5,122.49 Dated November 19, 2021
Through December 05, 2021. (CITY/FIRE)
D3.Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of November 30, 2021 for
the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.
(CITY/FIRE)
D4.Consideration of a Resolution Adopting the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Salary
Schedules for Fiscal Year 202122. (RESOLUTION NO. FD 2021033) (FIRE)
D5.Consideration of a Resolution Repealing Resolution FD 2020023 Concerning a Declaration of
Surplus Land Pursuant to Government Code Section 54221 for Real Property Located at 8340
Utica Avenue. (RESOLUTION NO. FD2021034) (FIRE)
D6.Consideration of the Purchase of Body Armor from Safariland, LLC Utilizing a Piggyback
Opportunity Through a Competitively Bid Contract from the State of California, Contract 118
8407, in the Amount of $116,543. (FIRE)
D7.Consideration of the Final Map for Tract 20118, Improvement Agreement and Improvement
Securities for Street Improvements for Case No. SUBTT20118, Located South of 6th Street
and West of the Resort Parkway. (CITY)
D8.Consideration to Accept Public Improvements Located at the Northeast Corner of Center
Avenue and 6th Street per the Improvement Agreement Related to Case No. DRC201800553,
as Complete, File the Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY)
D9.Consideration of License Agreements for Public Improvements Adjacent to the Railroad Spur
Track on 8th Street West of Haven Avenue with BNSF Railway Company Related to Case No.
DRC201800546, Located at 10415 8th Street. (CITY)
D10.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Superior Pavement Markings, Inc. for
Annual Citywide Striping and Pavement Marking Services in an Amount not to exceed
$150,000. (CITY)
D11.Consideration of a Contract with Onyx Paving Company, Inc., in an Amount of $1,727,000, Plus
10% Contingency for the Rochester Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation Project. (CITY)
D12.Consideration of a Resolution Authorizing the Acceptance of the Conveyance of Property from
the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and Authorizing the Appropriation of
Funds for the Purchase. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021134) (CITY)
D13.Consideration of Resolution No. 2021135, Authorizing the City to Enter into the Settlement
Agreements with McKesson Corporation, Cardinal Health, Inc., AmerisourceBergen
Corporation, Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., OrthoMcNeilJanssen
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Janssen Pharmaceutica, Inc., Agree to the Terms of the
Memorandum of Understanding Allocating Settlement Proceeds, and Authorize Entry into the
Memorandum of Understanding with the Attorney General; and authorize the City Attorney to
take all actions necessary and convenient to implement the settlements. (RESOLUTION NO.
2021135) (CITY)
D14.Consideration to Reappoint William Wittkopf, Public Works Services Director, as
representative of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on the West Valley Mosquito and Vector
Control (WVMVC) District Board of Trustees. (CITY)
D15.Consideration to Approve the Housing Successor Fiscal Year 2020/2021 Annual Report.
(HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY)
E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTION
F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)
G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) CITY/FIRE DISTRICT
G1.Consideration of Resolutions to Certify the Environmental Impact Report (SCH 2021050261) and
Adopt the PlanRC General Plan Update, 20212029 Housing Element, and Climate Action Plan.
(RESOLUTION NOS. 2021132 AND 2021133) (CITY)
G2.Continued Public Hearing to Consider First Reading of Ordinance 991, to be Read by Title Only and
Waive Further Reading, Adding Chapter 3.76 to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to Establish
a NonResidential Affordable Housing Development Impact Fee, and Resolution 2021131,
Establishing NonResidential Affordable Housing Development Impact Fees. (ORDINANCE NO. 991)
(RESOLUTION NO. 2021131) (Continued Public Hearing from December 1, 2021 City Council
Meeting) (CITY)
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)
I. COUNCIL BUSINESS
I1.Consideration to Approve the Reappointments of Three Public Members to the Public Art
Committee. (CITY)
I2.COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
(Comments to be limited to three minutes per Council Member.)
I3.INTERAGENCY UPDATES
(Update by the City Council to the community on the meetings that were attended.)
J. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS
K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING – JANUARY 5, 2022
L. ADJOURNMENT
CERTIFICATION
I, Linda A. Troyan, MMC, City Clerk Services Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby
certify under penalty of perjury that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on at least
twentyfour (24) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California; 12505 Cultural Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA, 91739; and on the City's website.
LINDA A. TROYAN, MMC
CITY CLERK SERVICES DIRECTOR
If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's
office at (909) 4772700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.
CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT
“Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community,to create
an equitable,sustainable,and vibrant city,rich in opportunity for all to thrive.”
Page 4
---
---
MayorL. Dennis MichaelMayor Pro TemLynne B. KennedyMembers of the CityCouncil:Ryan A. HutchisonKristine D. ScottSam Spagnolo CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAREGULAR MEETING AGENDADecember 15, 202110500 Civic Center DriveRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD – CITY COUNCILHOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY SUCCESSOR AGENCY – PUBLICFINANCE AUTHORITYCLOSED SESSION TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM 4:30 P.M.REGULAR MEETINGS COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M.The City Council meets regularly on the first and third Wednesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. in theCouncil Chambers located at 10500 Civic Center Drive. It Is the Intent to conclude the meeting by 10:00p.m. unless extended by the concurrence of the City Council. Agendas, minutes, and recordings ofmeetings can be found at www.cityofrc.us or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 9097742023. LiveBroadcast available on Channel 3 (RCTV 3).CLOSED SESSION – 4:30 P.M. TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM ROLL CALL: Mayor Michael Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)C. CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTSD. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSIOND1.CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR ROBERT NEIUBER, HUMAN RESOURCESDIRECTOR PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54954.2 REGARDING LABOR NEGOTIATIONSWITH THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION (RCCEA), TEAMSTERSLOCAL 1932, RANCHO CUCAMONGA MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENTGROUP, RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIREFIGHTERS LOCAL 2274, FIRE SUPPORT SERVICES ANDFIRE MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES GROUP – (CITY/FIRE)D2.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL ANTICIPATED LITIGATION: INITIATION OF LITIGATIONPURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.9: 1 CASE – (CITY)D3.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE TERMINUS OF SMOKESTONE STREET, EAST OFTORREY PINE COURT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91739, IDENTIFIED AS COUNTYASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER 022804424, NEGOTIATING PARTIES JOHN GILLISON, CITYMANAGER REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND CHAO PING YANG;REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS. – (CITY)D4.PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957(TITLE: CITY MANAGER)D5.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: PEPE’S INC. V. CITY OFRANCHO CUCAMONGA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OFCALIFORNIA, CASE NO. 5:20CV02506JGBSP – (CITY)D6.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: HIMNEL USA, INC. d/b/a ST.MARY'S MONTESSORI SCHOOL AND GLOBAL PROPERTY HOLDINGS LLC VS. CITY OFRANCHO CUCAMONGA, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 2014554. – (CITY)D7.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHOCUCAMONGA V. DR LANDMARK, INC.; POWER MEDIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; HOFERPROPERTIES, LLC; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 5 INCLUSIVE, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 1904713 –(CITY)D8.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8949 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022916222; NEGOTIATINGPARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTHABOVE. – (CITY)D9.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9333 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022916223; NEGOTIATINGPARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTHABOVE. – (CITY)E. RECESS – Closed Session to Recess to the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:00 P.M. in the CouncilChambers at City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M.COUNCIL CHAMBERSPLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCEROLL CALL:Mayor MichaelMayor Pro Tem KennedyCouncil Members Hutchison, Scott, and SpagnoloA. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDAB. ANNOUNCEMENT / PRESENTATIONSB1.Administration of Oath of Office to Reappointed Planning/Historical Preservation Commissioner TonyMorales and Newly Appointed Planning/Historical Preservation Commissioners James Daniels and AlBoling.B2.Presentation of a Proclamation Recognizing Santa Claus for his Choice to be Vaccinated Against theCOVID19 Virus, and Providing Santa with Two Paid Floating Holidays Off in Accordance with theCity's Vaccine Incentive Program.C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONSMembers of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, SuccessorAgency, and Public Finance Authority. This is the time and place for the general public to addressthe Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public FinancingAuthority Board, and City Council on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits theFire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board,and City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Fire ProtectionDistrict, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board, and City Councilmay receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting.Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by theMayor, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to beaddressed directly to the Fire Board, Agencies, Successor Agency, Authority Board, or City Council not to themembers of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected.Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in anyactivity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting.The public communications period will not exceed one hour prior to the commencement of thebusiness portion of the agenda. During this one hour period, all those who wish to speak on a topiccontained in the business portion of the agenda will be given priority, and no further speaker cards for thesebusiness items (with the exception of public hearing items) will be accepted once the business portion of theagenda commences. Any other public communications which have not concluded during this one hour periodmay resume after the regular business portion of the agenda has been completed.
CONSENT CALENDARS:
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and noncontroversial. They will be acted
upon without discussion unless an item is removed by Council Member for discussion.
Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, and
Public Finance Authority and may act on the consent calendar for those bodies as part of a single motion with
the City Council consent calendar.
D. CONSENT CALENDAR
D1.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District BiWeekly Payroll in the Total Amount of
$2,158,297.81 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $1,604,931.89 Dated November 19,
2021 Through December 05, 2021 and City and Fire District Electronic Debit Registers for the
Month of November in the Total Amount of $1,198,638.17. (CITY/FIRE)
D2.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued to
Southern California Gas Company in the Total Amount of $5,122.49 Dated November 19, 2021
Through December 05, 2021. (CITY/FIRE)
D3.Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of November 30, 2021 for
the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.
(CITY/FIRE)
D4.Consideration of a Resolution Adopting the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Salary
Schedules for Fiscal Year 202122. (RESOLUTION NO. FD 2021033) (FIRE)
D5.Consideration of a Resolution Repealing Resolution FD 2020023 Concerning a Declaration of
Surplus Land Pursuant to Government Code Section 54221 for Real Property Located at 8340
Utica Avenue. (RESOLUTION NO. FD2021034) (FIRE)
D6.Consideration of the Purchase of Body Armor from Safariland, LLC Utilizing a Piggyback
Opportunity Through a Competitively Bid Contract from the State of California, Contract 118
8407, in the Amount of $116,543. (FIRE)
D7.Consideration of the Final Map for Tract 20118, Improvement Agreement and Improvement
Securities for Street Improvements for Case No. SUBTT20118, Located South of 6th Street
and West of the Resort Parkway. (CITY)
D8.Consideration to Accept Public Improvements Located at the Northeast Corner of Center
Avenue and 6th Street per the Improvement Agreement Related to Case No. DRC201800553,
as Complete, File the Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY)
D9.Consideration of License Agreements for Public Improvements Adjacent to the Railroad Spur
Track on 8th Street West of Haven Avenue with BNSF Railway Company Related to Case No.
DRC201800546, Located at 10415 8th Street. (CITY)
D10.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Superior Pavement Markings, Inc. for
Annual Citywide Striping and Pavement Marking Services in an Amount not to exceed
$150,000. (CITY)
D11.Consideration of a Contract with Onyx Paving Company, Inc., in an Amount of $1,727,000, Plus
10% Contingency for the Rochester Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation Project. (CITY)
D12.Consideration of a Resolution Authorizing the Acceptance of the Conveyance of Property from
the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and Authorizing the Appropriation of
Funds for the Purchase. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021134) (CITY)
D13.Consideration of Resolution No. 2021135, Authorizing the City to Enter into the Settlement
Agreements with McKesson Corporation, Cardinal Health, Inc., AmerisourceBergen
Corporation, Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., OrthoMcNeilJanssen
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Janssen Pharmaceutica, Inc., Agree to the Terms of the
Memorandum of Understanding Allocating Settlement Proceeds, and Authorize Entry into the
Memorandum of Understanding with the Attorney General; and authorize the City Attorney to
take all actions necessary and convenient to implement the settlements. (RESOLUTION NO.
2021135) (CITY)
D14.Consideration to Reappoint William Wittkopf, Public Works Services Director, as
representative of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on the West Valley Mosquito and Vector
Control (WVMVC) District Board of Trustees. (CITY)
D15.Consideration to Approve the Housing Successor Fiscal Year 2020/2021 Annual Report.
(HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY)
E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTION
F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)
G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) CITY/FIRE DISTRICT
G1.Consideration of Resolutions to Certify the Environmental Impact Report (SCH 2021050261) and
Adopt the PlanRC General Plan Update, 20212029 Housing Element, and Climate Action Plan.
(RESOLUTION NOS. 2021132 AND 2021133) (CITY)
G2.Continued Public Hearing to Consider First Reading of Ordinance 991, to be Read by Title Only and
Waive Further Reading, Adding Chapter 3.76 to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to Establish
a NonResidential Affordable Housing Development Impact Fee, and Resolution 2021131,
Establishing NonResidential Affordable Housing Development Impact Fees. (ORDINANCE NO. 991)
(RESOLUTION NO. 2021131) (Continued Public Hearing from December 1, 2021 City Council
Meeting) (CITY)
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)
I. COUNCIL BUSINESS
I1.Consideration to Approve the Reappointments of Three Public Members to the Public Art
Committee. (CITY)
I2.COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
(Comments to be limited to three minutes per Council Member.)
I3.INTERAGENCY UPDATES
(Update by the City Council to the community on the meetings that were attended.)
J. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS
K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING – JANUARY 5, 2022
L. ADJOURNMENT
CERTIFICATION
I, Linda A. Troyan, MMC, City Clerk Services Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby
certify under penalty of perjury that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on at least
twentyfour (24) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California; 12505 Cultural Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA, 91739; and on the City's website.
LINDA A. TROYAN, MMC
CITY CLERK SERVICES DIRECTOR
If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's
office at (909) 4772700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.
CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT
“Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community,to create
an equitable,sustainable,and vibrant city,rich in opportunity for all to thrive.”
Page 5
8
18
20
64
73
77
79
82
85
MayorL. Dennis MichaelMayor Pro TemLynne B. KennedyMembers of the CityCouncil:Ryan A. HutchisonKristine D. ScottSam Spagnolo CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAREGULAR MEETING AGENDADecember 15, 202110500 Civic Center DriveRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD – CITY COUNCILHOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY SUCCESSOR AGENCY – PUBLICFINANCE AUTHORITYCLOSED SESSION TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM 4:30 P.M.REGULAR MEETINGS COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M.The City Council meets regularly on the first and third Wednesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. in theCouncil Chambers located at 10500 Civic Center Drive. It Is the Intent to conclude the meeting by 10:00p.m. unless extended by the concurrence of the City Council. Agendas, minutes, and recordings ofmeetings can be found at www.cityofrc.us or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 9097742023. LiveBroadcast available on Channel 3 (RCTV 3).CLOSED SESSION – 4:30 P.M. TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM ROLL CALL: Mayor Michael Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)C. CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTSD. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSIOND1.CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR ROBERT NEIUBER, HUMAN RESOURCESDIRECTOR PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54954.2 REGARDING LABOR NEGOTIATIONSWITH THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION (RCCEA), TEAMSTERSLOCAL 1932, RANCHO CUCAMONGA MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENTGROUP, RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIREFIGHTERS LOCAL 2274, FIRE SUPPORT SERVICES ANDFIRE MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES GROUP – (CITY/FIRE)D2.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL ANTICIPATED LITIGATION: INITIATION OF LITIGATIONPURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.9: 1 CASE – (CITY)D3.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE TERMINUS OF SMOKESTONE STREET, EAST OFTORREY PINE COURT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91739, IDENTIFIED AS COUNTYASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER 022804424, NEGOTIATING PARTIES JOHN GILLISON, CITYMANAGER REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND CHAO PING YANG;REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS. – (CITY)D4.PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957(TITLE: CITY MANAGER)D5.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: PEPE’S INC. V. CITY OFRANCHO CUCAMONGA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OFCALIFORNIA, CASE NO. 5:20CV02506JGBSP – (CITY)D6.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: HIMNEL USA, INC. d/b/a ST.MARY'S MONTESSORI SCHOOL AND GLOBAL PROPERTY HOLDINGS LLC VS. CITY OFRANCHO CUCAMONGA, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 2014554. – (CITY)D7.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHOCUCAMONGA V. DR LANDMARK, INC.; POWER MEDIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; HOFERPROPERTIES, LLC; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 5 INCLUSIVE, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 1904713 –(CITY)D8.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8949 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022916222; NEGOTIATINGPARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTHABOVE. – (CITY)D9.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9333 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022916223; NEGOTIATINGPARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTHABOVE. – (CITY)E. RECESS – Closed Session to Recess to the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:00 P.M. in the CouncilChambers at City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M.COUNCIL CHAMBERSPLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCEROLL CALL:Mayor MichaelMayor Pro Tem KennedyCouncil Members Hutchison, Scott, and SpagnoloA. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDAB. ANNOUNCEMENT / PRESENTATIONSB1.Administration of Oath of Office to Reappointed Planning/Historical Preservation Commissioner TonyMorales and Newly Appointed Planning/Historical Preservation Commissioners James Daniels and AlBoling.B2.Presentation of a Proclamation Recognizing Santa Claus for his Choice to be Vaccinated Against theCOVID19 Virus, and Providing Santa with Two Paid Floating Holidays Off in Accordance with theCity's Vaccine Incentive Program.C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONSMembers of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, SuccessorAgency, and Public Finance Authority. This is the time and place for the general public to addressthe Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public FinancingAuthority Board, and City Council on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits theFire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board,and City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Fire ProtectionDistrict, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board, and City Councilmay receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting.Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by theMayor, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to beaddressed directly to the Fire Board, Agencies, Successor Agency, Authority Board, or City Council not to themembers of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected.Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in anyactivity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting.The public communications period will not exceed one hour prior to the commencement of thebusiness portion of the agenda. During this one hour period, all those who wish to speak on a topiccontained in the business portion of the agenda will be given priority, and no further speaker cards for thesebusiness items (with the exception of public hearing items) will be accepted once the business portion of theagenda commences. Any other public communications which have not concluded during this one hour periodmay resume after the regular business portion of the agenda has been completed.CONSENT CALENDARS:The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and noncontroversial. They will be actedupon without discussion unless an item is removed by Council Member for discussion.Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, andPublic Finance Authority and may act on the consent calendar for those bodies as part of a single motion withthe City Council consent calendar.D. CONSENT CALENDARD1.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District BiWeekly Payroll in the Total Amount of$2,158,297.81 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued toSouthern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $1,604,931.89 Dated November 19,2021 Through December 05, 2021 and City and Fire District Electronic Debit Registers for theMonth of November in the Total Amount of $1,198,638.17. (CITY/FIRE)D2.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued toSouthern California Gas Company in the Total Amount of $5,122.49 Dated November 19, 2021Through December 05, 2021. (CITY/FIRE)D3.Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of November 30, 2021 forthe City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.(CITY/FIRE)D4.Consideration of a Resolution Adopting the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District SalarySchedules for Fiscal Year 202122. (RESOLUTION NO. FD 2021033) (FIRE)D5.Consideration of a Resolution Repealing Resolution FD 2020023 Concerning a Declaration ofSurplus Land Pursuant to Government Code Section 54221 for Real Property Located at 8340Utica Avenue. (RESOLUTION NO. FD2021034) (FIRE)D6.Consideration of the Purchase of Body Armor from Safariland, LLC Utilizing a PiggybackOpportunity Through a Competitively Bid Contract from the State of California, Contract 1188407, in the Amount of $116,543. (FIRE)D7.Consideration of the Final Map for Tract 20118, Improvement Agreement and ImprovementSecurities for Street Improvements for Case No. SUBTT20118, Located South of 6th Streetand West of the Resort Parkway. (CITY)D8.Consideration to Accept Public Improvements Located at the Northeast Corner of CenterAvenue and 6th Street per the Improvement Agreement Related to Case No. DRC201800553,as Complete, File the Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY)D9.Consideration of License Agreements for Public Improvements Adjacent to the Railroad Spur
Track on 8th Street West of Haven Avenue with BNSF Railway Company Related to Case No.
DRC201800546, Located at 10415 8th Street. (CITY)
D10.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Superior Pavement Markings, Inc. for
Annual Citywide Striping and Pavement Marking Services in an Amount not to exceed
$150,000. (CITY)
D11.Consideration of a Contract with Onyx Paving Company, Inc., in an Amount of $1,727,000, Plus
10% Contingency for the Rochester Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation Project. (CITY)
D12.Consideration of a Resolution Authorizing the Acceptance of the Conveyance of Property from
the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and Authorizing the Appropriation of
Funds for the Purchase. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021134) (CITY)
D13.Consideration of Resolution No. 2021135, Authorizing the City to Enter into the Settlement
Agreements with McKesson Corporation, Cardinal Health, Inc., AmerisourceBergen
Corporation, Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., OrthoMcNeilJanssen
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Janssen Pharmaceutica, Inc., Agree to the Terms of the
Memorandum of Understanding Allocating Settlement Proceeds, and Authorize Entry into the
Memorandum of Understanding with the Attorney General; and authorize the City Attorney to
take all actions necessary and convenient to implement the settlements. (RESOLUTION NO.
2021135) (CITY)
D14.Consideration to Reappoint William Wittkopf, Public Works Services Director, as
representative of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on the West Valley Mosquito and Vector
Control (WVMVC) District Board of Trustees. (CITY)
D15.Consideration to Approve the Housing Successor Fiscal Year 2020/2021 Annual Report.
(HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY)
E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTION
F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)
G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) CITY/FIRE DISTRICT
G1.Consideration of Resolutions to Certify the Environmental Impact Report (SCH 2021050261) and
Adopt the PlanRC General Plan Update, 20212029 Housing Element, and Climate Action Plan.
(RESOLUTION NOS. 2021132 AND 2021133) (CITY)
G2.Continued Public Hearing to Consider First Reading of Ordinance 991, to be Read by Title Only and
Waive Further Reading, Adding Chapter 3.76 to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to Establish
a NonResidential Affordable Housing Development Impact Fee, and Resolution 2021131,
Establishing NonResidential Affordable Housing Development Impact Fees. (ORDINANCE NO. 991)
(RESOLUTION NO. 2021131) (Continued Public Hearing from December 1, 2021 City Council
Meeting) (CITY)
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)
I. COUNCIL BUSINESS
I1.Consideration to Approve the Reappointments of Three Public Members to the Public Art
Committee. (CITY)
I2.COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
(Comments to be limited to three minutes per Council Member.)
I3.INTERAGENCY UPDATES
(Update by the City Council to the community on the meetings that were attended.)
J. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS
K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING – JANUARY 5, 2022
L. ADJOURNMENT
CERTIFICATION
I, Linda A. Troyan, MMC, City Clerk Services Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby
certify under penalty of perjury that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on at least
twentyfour (24) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California; 12505 Cultural Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA, 91739; and on the City's website.
LINDA A. TROYAN, MMC
CITY CLERK SERVICES DIRECTOR
If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's
office at (909) 4772700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.
CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT
“Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community,to create
an equitable,sustainable,and vibrant city,rich in opportunity for all to thrive.”
Page 6
131
133
138
155
176
177
185
426
MayorL. Dennis MichaelMayor Pro TemLynne B. KennedyMembers of the CityCouncil:Ryan A. HutchisonKristine D. ScottSam Spagnolo CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAREGULAR MEETING AGENDADecember 15, 202110500 Civic Center DriveRancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD – CITY COUNCILHOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY SUCCESSOR AGENCY – PUBLICFINANCE AUTHORITYCLOSED SESSION TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM 4:30 P.M.REGULAR MEETINGS COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M.The City Council meets regularly on the first and third Wednesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. in theCouncil Chambers located at 10500 Civic Center Drive. It Is the Intent to conclude the meeting by 10:00p.m. unless extended by the concurrence of the City Council. Agendas, minutes, and recordings ofmeetings can be found at www.cityofrc.us or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 9097742023. LiveBroadcast available on Channel 3 (RCTV 3).CLOSED SESSION – 4:30 P.M. TRICOMMUNITIES ROOM ROLL CALL: Mayor Michael Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy Council Members Hutchison, Scott, and Spagnolo A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)C. CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTSD. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSIOND1.CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR ROBERT NEIUBER, HUMAN RESOURCESDIRECTOR PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54954.2 REGARDING LABOR NEGOTIATIONSWITH THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION (RCCEA), TEAMSTERSLOCAL 1932, RANCHO CUCAMONGA MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENTGROUP, RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIREFIGHTERS LOCAL 2274, FIRE SUPPORT SERVICES ANDFIRE MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES GROUP – (CITY/FIRE)D2.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL ANTICIPATED LITIGATION: INITIATION OF LITIGATIONPURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.9: 1 CASE – (CITY)D3.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE TERMINUS OF SMOKESTONE STREET, EAST OFTORREY PINE COURT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91739, IDENTIFIED AS COUNTYASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER 022804424, NEGOTIATING PARTIES JOHN GILLISON, CITYMANAGER REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND CHAO PING YANG;REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS. – (CITY)D4.PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957(TITLE: CITY MANAGER)D5.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: PEPE’S INC. V. CITY OFRANCHO CUCAMONGA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OFCALIFORNIA, CASE NO. 5:20CV02506JGBSP – (CITY)D6.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: HIMNEL USA, INC. d/b/a ST.MARY'S MONTESSORI SCHOOL AND GLOBAL PROPERTY HOLDINGS LLC VS. CITY OFRANCHO CUCAMONGA, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 2014554. – (CITY)D7.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHOCUCAMONGA V. DR LANDMARK, INC.; POWER MEDIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; HOFERPROPERTIES, LLC; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 5 INCLUSIVE, SBSC CASE NO.: CIVDS 1904713 –(CITY)D8.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8949 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022916222; NEGOTIATINGPARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTHABOVE. – (CITY)D9.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9333 ETIWANDA AVENUE, FURTHER IDENTIFIED ASSAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 022916223; NEGOTIATINGPARTIES, JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER, AND OVERLAND, PACIFIC AND CUTLER,REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON,OWNER; REGARDING INSTRUCTIONS TO NEGOTIATORS CONCERNING PRICE. NEGOTIATING PARTIES MAY NEGOTIATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SET FORTHABOVE. – (CITY)E. RECESS – Closed Session to Recess to the Regular City Council Meeting at 7:00 P.M. in the CouncilChambers at City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M.COUNCIL CHAMBERSPLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCEROLL CALL:Mayor MichaelMayor Pro Tem KennedyCouncil Members Hutchison, Scott, and SpagnoloA. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDAB. ANNOUNCEMENT / PRESENTATIONSB1.Administration of Oath of Office to Reappointed Planning/Historical Preservation Commissioner TonyMorales and Newly Appointed Planning/Historical Preservation Commissioners James Daniels and AlBoling.B2.Presentation of a Proclamation Recognizing Santa Claus for his Choice to be Vaccinated Against theCOVID19 Virus, and Providing Santa with Two Paid Floating Holidays Off in Accordance with theCity's Vaccine Incentive Program.C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONSMembers of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, SuccessorAgency, and Public Finance Authority. This is the time and place for the general public to addressthe Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public FinancingAuthority Board, and City Council on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits theFire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board,and City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Fire ProtectionDistrict, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board, and City Councilmay receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting.Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by theMayor, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to beaddressed directly to the Fire Board, Agencies, Successor Agency, Authority Board, or City Council not to themembers of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected.Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in anyactivity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting.The public communications period will not exceed one hour prior to the commencement of thebusiness portion of the agenda. During this one hour period, all those who wish to speak on a topiccontained in the business portion of the agenda will be given priority, and no further speaker cards for thesebusiness items (with the exception of public hearing items) will be accepted once the business portion of theagenda commences. Any other public communications which have not concluded during this one hour periodmay resume after the regular business portion of the agenda has been completed.CONSENT CALENDARS:The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and noncontroversial. They will be actedupon without discussion unless an item is removed by Council Member for discussion.Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, andPublic Finance Authority and may act on the consent calendar for those bodies as part of a single motion withthe City Council consent calendar.D. CONSENT CALENDARD1.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District BiWeekly Payroll in the Total Amount of$2,158,297.81 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued toSouthern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $1,604,931.89 Dated November 19,2021 Through December 05, 2021 and City and Fire District Electronic Debit Registers for theMonth of November in the Total Amount of $1,198,638.17. (CITY/FIRE)D2.Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued toSouthern California Gas Company in the Total Amount of $5,122.49 Dated November 19, 2021Through December 05, 2021. (CITY/FIRE)D3.Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of November 30, 2021 forthe City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.(CITY/FIRE)D4.Consideration of a Resolution Adopting the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District SalarySchedules for Fiscal Year 202122. (RESOLUTION NO. FD 2021033) (FIRE)D5.Consideration of a Resolution Repealing Resolution FD 2020023 Concerning a Declaration ofSurplus Land Pursuant to Government Code Section 54221 for Real Property Located at 8340Utica Avenue. (RESOLUTION NO. FD2021034) (FIRE)D6.Consideration of the Purchase of Body Armor from Safariland, LLC Utilizing a PiggybackOpportunity Through a Competitively Bid Contract from the State of California, Contract 1188407, in the Amount of $116,543. (FIRE)D7.Consideration of the Final Map for Tract 20118, Improvement Agreement and ImprovementSecurities for Street Improvements for Case No. SUBTT20118, Located South of 6th Streetand West of the Resort Parkway. (CITY)D8.Consideration to Accept Public Improvements Located at the Northeast Corner of CenterAvenue and 6th Street per the Improvement Agreement Related to Case No. DRC201800553,as Complete, File the Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY)D9.Consideration of License Agreements for Public Improvements Adjacent to the Railroad SpurTrack on 8th Street West of Haven Avenue with BNSF Railway Company Related to Case No.DRC201800546, Located at 10415 8th Street. (CITY)D10.Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Superior Pavement Markings, Inc. forAnnual Citywide Striping and Pavement Marking Services in an Amount not to exceed$150,000. (CITY)D11.Consideration of a Contract with Onyx Paving Company, Inc., in an Amount of $1,727,000, Plus10% Contingency for the Rochester Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation Project. (CITY)D12.Consideration of a Resolution Authorizing the Acceptance of the Conveyance of Property fromthe California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and Authorizing the Appropriation ofFunds for the Purchase. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021134) (CITY)D13.Consideration of Resolution No. 2021135, Authorizing the City to Enter into the SettlementAgreements with McKesson Corporation, Cardinal Health, Inc., AmerisourceBergenCorporation, Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., OrthoMcNeilJanssenPharmaceuticals, Inc., and Janssen Pharmaceutica, Inc., Agree to the Terms of theMemorandum of Understanding Allocating Settlement Proceeds, and Authorize Entry into theMemorandum of Understanding with the Attorney General; and authorize the City Attorney totake all actions necessary and convenient to implement the settlements. (RESOLUTION NO.2021135) (CITY)D14.Consideration to Reappoint William Wittkopf, Public Works Services Director, asrepresentative of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on the West Valley Mosquito and VectorControl (WVMVC) District Board of Trustees. (CITY)D15.Consideration to Approve the Housing Successor Fiscal Year 2020/2021 Annual Report.(HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY)E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) SECOND READING/ADOPTIONF. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) CITY/FIRE DISTRICTG1.Consideration of Resolutions to Certify the Environmental Impact Report (SCH 2021050261) andAdopt the PlanRC General Plan Update, 20212029 Housing Element, and Climate Action Plan.(RESOLUTION NOS. 2021132 AND 2021133) (CITY)G2.Continued Public Hearing to Consider First Reading of Ordinance 991, to be Read by Title Only andWaive Further Reading, Adding Chapter 3.76 to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to Establisha NonResidential Affordable Housing Development Impact Fee, and Resolution 2021131,Establishing NonResidential Affordable Housing Development Impact Fees. (ORDINANCE NO. 991)(RESOLUTION NO. 2021131) (Continued Public Hearing from December 1, 2021 City CouncilMeeting) (CITY)
H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)
I. COUNCIL BUSINESS
I1.Consideration to Approve the Reappointments of Three Public Members to the Public Art
Committee. (CITY)
I2.COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
(Comments to be limited to three minutes per Council Member.)
I3.INTERAGENCY UPDATES
(Update by the City Council to the community on the meetings that were attended.)
J. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS
K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING – JANUARY 5, 2022
L. ADJOURNMENT
CERTIFICATION
I, Linda A. Troyan, MMC, City Clerk Services Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby
certify under penalty of perjury that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on at least
twentyfour (24) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California; 12505 Cultural Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA, 91739; and on the City's website.
LINDA A. TROYAN, MMC
CITY CLERK SERVICES DIRECTOR
If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's
office at (909) 4772700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable
arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.
CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT
“Our Vision is to build on our success as a world class community,to create
an equitable,sustainable,and vibrant city,rich in opportunity for all to thrive.”
Page 7
634
---
---
DATE:December 15, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
President and Members of the Boards of Directors
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Tamara L. Oatman, Finance Director
Veronica Lopez, Accounts Payable Supervisor
SUBJECT:Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Bi-Weekly Payroll in the
Total Amount of $2,158,297.81 and City and Fire District Weekly Check
Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to Southern California Gas
Company) in the Total Amount of $1,604,931.89 Dated November 19,
2021 Through December 05, 2021 and City and Fire District Electronic
Debit Registers for the Month of November in the Total Amount of
$1,198,638.17. (CITY/FIRE)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends City Council/Board of Directors of the Fire Protection District approve payment
of demands as presented. Bi-weekly payroll is $1,039,840.26 and $1,118,457.55 for the City and
the Fire District, respectively. Weekly check register amounts are $1,360,037.50 and
$244,894.39 for the City and the Fire District, respectively. Electronic Debit Register amounts are
$590,786.38 and $607,851.79 for the City and the Fire District, respectively.
BACKGROUND:
N/A
ANALYSIS:
N/A
FISCAL IMPACT:
Adequate budgeted funds are available for the payment of demands per the attached listing.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 - Weekly Check Register
Attachment 2 - Electronic Check Register
Page 8
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
11/19/2021 through 12/5/2021
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00013381 11/22/2021 AHUMADA, ALEXANDER R 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013382 11/22/2021 ALMAND, LLOYD 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013383 11/22/2021 BANTAU, VICTORIA 0.00 505.96 505.96
AP 00013384 11/22/2021 BAZAL, SUSAN 0.00 865.08 865.08
AP 00013385 11/22/2021 BELL, MICHAEL L 0.00 1,929.14 1,929.14
AP 00013386 11/22/2021 BERRY, DAVID 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013387 11/22/2021 BROCK, ROBIN 0.00 1,274.32 1,274.32
AP 00013388 11/22/2021 CAMPBELL, GERALD 0.00 851.32 851.32
AP 00013389 11/22/2021 CAMPBELL, STEVEN 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013390 11/22/2021 CARNES, KENNETH 0.00 505.96 505.96
AP 00013391 11/22/2021 CLABBY, RICHARD 0.00 1,196.68 1,196.68
AP 00013392 11/22/2021 CLOUGHESY, DONALD R 0.00 2,550.78 2,550.78
AP 00013393 11/22/2021 CORCORAN, ROBERT ANTHONY 0.00 893.07 893.07
AP 00013394 11/22/2021 COSTELLO, DENNIS M 0.00 2,550.78 2,550.78
AP 00013395 11/22/2021 COX, KARL 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013396 11/22/2021 CRANE, RALPH 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013397 11/22/2021 CROSSLAND, WILBUR 0.00 505.96 505.96
AP 00013398 11/22/2021 CURATALO, JAMES 0.00 1,274.32 1,274.32
AP 00013399 11/22/2021 DAGUE, JAMES 0.00 1,246.33 1,246.33
AP 00013400 11/22/2021 DE ANTONIO, SUSAN 0.00 893.07 893.07
AP 00013401 11/22/2021 DEANS, JACKIE 0.00 238.25 238.25
AP 00013402 11/22/2021 DOMINICK, SAMUEL A 0.00 1,274.32 1,274.32
AP 00013403 11/22/2021 EAGLESON, MICHAEL 0.00 1,929.14 1,929.14
AP 00013404 11/22/2021 EGGERS, BOB 0.00 1,246.33 1,246.33
AP 00013405 11/22/2021 FEJERAN, TIM 0.00 1,598.58 1,598.58
AP 00013406 11/22/2021 FRITCHEY, JOHN D 0.00 505.96 505.96
AP 00013407 11/22/2021 HEYDE, DONALD 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013408 11/22/2021 INTERLICCHIA, ROSALYN 0.00 238.25 238.25
AP 00013409 11/22/2021 JERKINS, PATRICK 0.00 1,598.58 1,598.58
AP 00013410 11/22/2021 KILMER, STEPHEN 0.00 1,196.68 1,196.68
AP 00013411 11/22/2021 KIRKPATRICK, WILLIAM M 0.00 903.04 903.04
AP 00013412 11/22/2021 LANE, WILLIAM 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013413 11/22/2021 LARKIN, DAVID W 0.00 1,598.58 1,598.58
AP 00013414 11/22/2021 LEE, ALLAN J 0.00 238.25 238.25
AP 00013415 11/22/2021 LENZE, PAUL E 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013416 11/22/2021 LONCAR, PHILIP 0.00 1,873.16 1,873.16
AP 00013417 11/22/2021 LONGO, JOE 0.00 181.48 181.48
AP 00013418 11/22/2021 LUTTRULL, DARRELL 0.00 505.96 505.96
AP 00013419 11/22/2021 MACKALL, BEVERLY 0.00 181.48 181.48
AP 00013420 11/22/2021 MAYFIELD, RON 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013421 11/22/2021 MCKEE, JOHN 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013422 11/22/2021 MCNEIL, KENNETH 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013423 11/22/2021 MICHAEL, L. DENNIS 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013424 11/22/2021 MORGAN, BYRON 0.00 1,838.72 1,838.72
AP 00013425 11/22/2021 MYSKOW, DENNIS 0.00 1,196.68 1,196.68
AP 00013426 11/22/2021 NAUMAN, MICHAEL 0.00 505.96 505.96
AP 00013427 11/22/2021 NEE, RON 0.00 865.08 865.08
07:45:03
12/06/2021Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:1
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 9
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
11/19/2021 through 12/5/2021
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00013428 11/22/2021 NELSON, MARY JANE 0.00 181.48 181.48
AP 00013429 11/22/2021 NOREEN, ERIC 0.00 2,550.78 2,550.78
AP 00013430 11/22/2021 O'BRIEN, TOM 0.00 1,379.46 1,379.46
AP 00013431 11/22/2021 PLOUNG, MICHAEL J 0.00 556.94 556.94
AP 00013432 11/22/2021 POST, MICHAEL R 0.00 1,377.34 1,377.34
AP 00013433 11/22/2021 PROULX, PATRICK 0.00 1,274.32 1,274.32
AP 00013434 11/22/2021 REDMOND, MIKE 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013435 11/22/2021 ROBERTS, BRENT 0.00 893.07 893.07
AP 00013436 11/22/2021 ROBERTS, CHERYL L 0.00 2,550.78 2,550.78
AP 00013437 11/22/2021 ROEDER, JEFF 0.00 1,929.14 1,929.14
AP 00013438 11/22/2021 SALISBURY, THOMAS 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013439 11/22/2021 SMITH, RONALD 0.00 505.96 505.96
AP 00013440 11/22/2021 SORENSEN, SCOTT D 0.00 1,873.16 1,873.16
AP 00013441 11/22/2021 SPAGNOLO, SAM 0.00 505.96 505.96
AP 00013442 11/22/2021 SPAIN, WILLIAM 0.00 851.32 851.32
AP 00013443 11/22/2021 SULLIVAN, JAMES 0.00 505.96 505.96
AP 00013444 11/22/2021 TAYLOR, STEVEN 0.00 2,027.69 2,027.69
AP 00013445 11/22/2021 TULEY, TERRY 0.00 1,929.14 1,929.14
AP 00013446 11/22/2021 VANDERKALLEN, FRANCIS 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013447 11/22/2021 VARNEY, ANTHONY 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013448 11/22/2021 WALTON, KEVIN 0.00 1,598.58 1,598.58
AP 00013449 11/22/2021 YOWELL, TIMOTHY A 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00013450 11/23/2021 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC 12,913.19 0.00 12,913.19
AP 00013451 11/23/2021 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 1,130.25 0.00 1,130.25
AP 00013452 11/23/2021 MINUTEMAN PRESS 1,028.12 0.00 1,028.12
AP 00013453 11/23/2021 OC TANNER RECOGNITION COMPANY 12,101.01 0.00 12,101.01
AP 00013454 11/23/2021 OFFICE DEPOT 1,973.73 0.00 1,973.73
AP 00013455 11/23/2021 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 303.55 0.00 303.55
AP 00013456 12/01/2021 AIR EXCHANGE INC 0.00 6,800.68 6,800.68
AP 00013457 12/01/2021 CALIF GOVERNMENT VEBA / RANCHO CUCAMONGA 25,951.96 0.00 25,951.96
AP 00013458 12/01/2021 CHAFFEY JOINT UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT 576.12 0.00 576.12
AP 00013459 12/01/2021 RCCEA 1,530.75 0.00 1,530.75
AP 00013460 12/01/2021 RCPFA 14,360.87 0.00 14,360.87
AP 00013461 12/01/2021 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 2,030.99 0.00 2,030.99
AP 00013462 12/01/2021 RIVERSIDE, CITY OF 6,909.00 0.00 6,909.00
***AP 00013463 12/02/2021 AIRGAS USA LLC 247.33 2,753.59 3,000.92
AP 00013464 12/02/2021 BIBLIOTHECA LLC 8,209.76 0.00 8,209.76
AP 00013466 12/02/2021 BRODART BOOKS CO 9,115.79 0.00 9,115.79
AP 00013467 12/02/2021 DIAMOND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 204.66 0.00 204.66
***AP 00013468 12/02/2021 EMCOR SERVICES 1,454.00 973.75 2,427.75
AP 00013469 12/02/2021 HOSE MAN INC 0.00 474.19 474.19
AP 00013470 12/02/2021 KME FIRE APPARATUS 0.00 115.69 115.69
AP 00013471 12/02/2021 LN CURTIS AND SONS 0.00 4,253.76 4,253.76
***AP 00013472 12/02/2021 MINUTEMAN PRESS 345.01 512.16 857.17
***AP 00013474 12/02/2021 OFFICE DEPOT 2,439.16 767.29 3,206.45
AP 00013475 12/02/2021 PSA PRINT GROUP 38.79 0.00 38.79
AP 00013476 12/02/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA NEWS GROUP 4,628.72 0.00 4,628.72
07:45:03
12/06/2021Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:2
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 10
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
11/19/2021 through 12/5/2021
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00013477 12/02/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA NEWS GROUP 384.00 0.00 384.00
AP 00421420 11/22/2021 RODRIGUEZ, VICTOR 0.00 619.50 619.50
AP 00421421 11/22/2021 TOWNSEND, JAMES 0.00 2,550.78 2,550.78
AP 00421422 11/22/2021 WALKER, KENNETH 0.00 238.25 238.25
AP 00421423 11/23/2021 ADVANCED CHEMICAL TRANSPORT INC 1,439.50 0.00 1,439.50
AP 00421424 11/23/2021 AGWU, CHINNY 57.00 0.00 57.00
AP 00421425 11/23/2021 ASCENT ENVIRONMENTAL INC 626.25 0.00 626.25
AP 00421426 11/23/2021 ATLAS PLANNING SOLUTIONS 2,890.00 0.00 2,890.00
AP 00421427 11/23/2021 AUFBAU CORPORATION 30,000.00 0.00 30,000.00
AP 00421428 11/23/2021 AUTOLIFT SERVICES INC 971.47 0.00 971.47
AP 00421429 11/23/2021 BERNELL HYDRAULICS INC 0.00 1.68 1.68
AP 00421430 11/23/2021 BISHOP COMPANY 296.08 0.00 296.08
***AP 00421436 11/23/2021 C V W D 67,071.28 1,084.05 68,155.33
AP 00421437 11/23/2021 CAL QUEST INVESTIGATIONS 2,849.05 0.00 2,849.05
***AP 00421438 11/23/2021 CALIFORNIA DEPT OF TAX & FEE ADMINISTRATION 303.55 125.48 429.03
AP 00421439 11/23/2021 CALIX INC 2,495.00 0.00 2,495.00
AP 00421440 11/23/2021 CHAMPION AWARDS & SPECIALTIES 172.40 0.00 172.40
AP 00421441 11/23/2021 CINTAS CORPORATION #150 0.00 338.08 338.08
AP 00421442 11/23/2021 CONSERVE LANDCARE LLC 152,722.43 0.00 152,722.43
AP 00421443 11/23/2021 CORE STRENGTHS INC 5,000.00 0.00 5,000.00
AP 00421444 11/23/2021 CURTIS J DAHLE ARCHITECT 9,177.00 0.00 9,177.00
AP 00421445 11/23/2021 DAISYECO INC 77.00 0.00 77.00
AP 00421446 11/23/2021 DIAZ, RICK 250.00 0.00 250.00
AP 00421447 11/23/2021 DIGBY, SARA 14.60 0.00 14.60
AP 00421448 11/23/2021 EAN SERVICES LLC 0.00 7,170.87 7,170.87
AP 00421449 11/23/2021 ECORP CONSULTING INC 0.00 75.00 75.00
AP 00421450 11/23/2021 ELITE CUSTOMS CONSTRUCTION 625.00 0.00 625.00
AP 00421451 11/23/2021 ESTRADA, KEVIN 74.09 0.00 74.09
AP 00421452 11/23/2021 EVERDE GROWERS 842.77 0.00 842.77
AP 00421453 11/23/2021 EXECUTIVE DETAIL SERVICES 0.00 320.00 320.00
AP 00421454 11/23/2021 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS 0.00 1,674.22 1,674.22
AP 00421455 11/23/2021 FIREFIGHTERS' SAFETY CENTER INC 0.00 261.00 261.00
AP 00421456 11/23/2021 FITNESS REPAIR SHOP 0.00 700.00 700.00
AP 00421457 11/23/2021 FLEETPRIDE 0.00 1,539.01 1,539.01
AP 00421458 11/23/2021 FORTIN LAW GROUP 1,985.50 0.00 1,985.50
***AP 00421459 11/23/2021 FRONTIER COMM 1,128.55 1,178.18 2,306.73
AP 00421460 11/23/2021 FRONTIER COMM 4,050.19 0.00 4,050.19
AP 00421461 11/23/2021 GLOBALSTAR USA 156.92 0.00 156.92
AP 00421462 11/23/2021 GONSALVES & SON, JOE A 3,045.00 0.00 3,045.00
AP 00421463 11/23/2021 GOTCHANOUGH LLC 3,165.68 0.00 3,165.68
AP 00421464 11/23/2021 GRAINGER 1,727.19 0.00 1,727.19
AP 00421465 11/23/2021 GRAPHICS FACTORY PRINTING INC 296.31 0.00 296.31
AP 00421466 11/23/2021 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC COMPANY INC 763.04 0.00 763.04
AP 00421467 11/23/2021 HONDA YAMAHA HUSQVARNA OF REDLANDS 14.12 0.00 14.12
AP 00421468 11/23/2021 HOYT LUMBER CO, S M 0.00 10.84 10.84
AP 00421469 11/23/2021 HR GREEN PACIFIC INC 11,483.39 0.00 11,483.39
AP 00421470 11/23/2021 INTERWEST CONSULTING GROUP INC 0.00 1,116.42 1,116.42
07:45:03
12/06/2021Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:3
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 11
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
11/19/2021 through 12/5/2021
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00421471 11/23/2021 JOHNNY ALLEN TENNIS ACADEMY 1,383.60 0.00 1,383.60
AP 00421472 11/23/2021 KEEL, KYLE 11,000.00 0.00 11,000.00
AP 00421473 11/23/2021 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES INC 13,569.38 0.00 13,569.38
AP 00421474 11/23/2021 LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS LLC 5,482.10 0.00 5,482.10
AP 00421475 11/23/2021 LIFE-ASSIST INC 0.00 578.51 578.51
AP 00421476 11/23/2021 LILLARD, MICHAEL 56.89 0.00 56.89
***AP 00421478 11/23/2021 LOWES COMPANIES INC 2,224.30 608.68 2,832.98
AP 00421479 11/23/2021 MARSH, KIMBERLY 387.50 0.00 387.50
***AP 00421480 11/23/2021 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY COMPANY 99.06 130.84 229.90
AP 00421481 11/23/2021 MEDIWASTE DISPOSAL LLC 5,136.87 0.00 5,136.87
AP 00421482 11/23/2021 MIDWEST TAPE 2,679.36 0.00 2,679.36
AP 00421483 11/23/2021 NAPA AUTO PARTS 0.00 992.17 992.17
AP 00421484 11/23/2021 NEW COLOR SILK SCREEN & GRAPHICS 750.29 0.00 750.29
AP 00421485 11/23/2021 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CTRS OF CA 0.00 361.75 361.75
AP 00421486 11/23/2021 PACIFIC UTILITY INSTALLATION INC 10,132.00 0.00 10,132.00
AP 00421487 11/23/2021 PARKHOUSE TIRE INC 1,344.87 0.00 1,344.87
AP 00421488 11/23/2021 PARS 3,500.00 0.00 3,500.00
***AP 00421489 11/23/2021 PFM ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC 12,648.88 1,170.79 13,819.67
AP 00421490 11/23/2021 PLACEWORKS 10,590.01 0.00 10,590.01
AP 00421491 11/23/2021 PRISTINE UNIFORMS LLC 0.00 394.38 394.38
AP 00421492 11/23/2021 RANCHO CUCAMONGA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 3,166.00 0.00 3,166.00
AP 00421493 11/23/2021 RANCHO MALL LLC 44.80 0.00 44.80
AP 00421494 11/23/2021 REACH MEDIA NETWORK 2,000.00 0.00 2,000.00
AP 00421495 11/23/2021 RHA LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS-PLANNERS INC 856.80 0.00 856.80
AP 00421496 11/23/2021 SAN BERNARDINO CTY SHERIFF'S DEPT 0.00 753.00 753.00
AP 00421497 11/23/2021 SHEN, HONGJUN 56.75 0.00 56.75
AP 00421498 11/23/2021 SHRED PROS 0.00 63.00 63.00
AP 00421500 11/23/2021 SOUND IMAGE INC 82,280.00 0.00 82,280.00
AP 00421502 11/23/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 4,069.53 0.00 4,069.53
AP 00421503 11/23/2021 STERLING COFFEE SERVICE 789.70 0.00 789.70
***AP 00421504 11/23/2021 SYSTEMS SOURCE INC 7,669.35 12,131.93 19,801.28
AP 00421505 11/23/2021 TIREHUB LLC 2,125.63 0.00 2,125.63
AP 00421506 11/23/2021 TOWN SQUARE CLEANERS 554.40 0.00 554.40
AP 00421507 11/23/2021 UNIVERSAL FLEET SUPPLY 0.00 588.15 588.15
AP 00421508 11/23/2021 UPS 66.00 0.00 66.00
AP 00421509 11/23/2021 VERIZON WIRELESS - LA 259.22 0.00 259.22
AP 00421510 11/23/2021 VULCAN MATERIALS COMPANY 268.62 0.00 268.62
AP 00421511 11/23/2021 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 64.65 0.00 64.65
AP 00421512 11/23/2021 WARREN, MICHELLE 302.00 0.00 302.00
***AP 00421513 11/23/2021 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY -407.49 1,513.39 1,105.90
AP 00421514 11/23/2021 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC 8,544.90 0.00 8,544.90
AP 00421515 11/23/2021 WESTLAND GROUP INC 23,006.25 0.00 23,006.25
AP 00421516 11/23/2021 WHITTIER FERTILIZER 2,670.05 0.00 2,670.05
AP 00421517 11/23/2021 WINDWARD SCHOOL 500.00 0.00 500.00
AP 00421518 12/01/2021 ADOBE ANIMAL HOSPITAL 50.00 0.00 50.00
AP 00421519 12/01/2021 AFLAC GROUP INSURANCE 24.58 0.00 24.58
AP 00421520 12/01/2021 ALTA VISTA MOBILE HOME PARK 297.59 0.00 297.59
07:45:03
12/06/2021Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:4
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 12
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
11/19/2021 through 12/5/2021
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00421521 12/01/2021 AMTECH ELEVATOR SERVICES 51.00 0.00 51.00
AP 00421522 12/01/2021 ANALYZE CORPORATION 4,665.00 0.00 4,665.00
AP 00421523 12/01/2021 AUFBAU CORPORATION 25,260.00 0.00 25,260.00
AP 00421524 12/01/2021 AVILA, DENISE 84.05 0.00 84.05
AP 00421525 12/01/2021 BARBARA'S ANSWERING SERVICE 552.00 0.00 552.00
AP 00421526 12/01/2021 BISHOP COMPANY 1,360.15 0.00 1,360.15
AP 00421527 12/01/2021 BMK VENTURES INC 0.00 16,650.00 16,650.00
AP 00421528 12/01/2021 BP ENTERPRISE 739.59 0.00 739.59
AP 00421529 12/01/2021 C V W D 167.71 0.00 167.71
***AP 00421530 12/01/2021 C V W D 43.56 101.64 145.20
***AP 00421531 12/01/2021 C V W D 8.28 19.32 27.60
***AP 00421536 12/01/2021 C V W D 50,221.52 347.96 50,569.48
AP 00421537 12/01/2021 CA LLC - ALTA LAGUNA MHP 400.00 0.00 400.00
AP 00421538 12/01/2021 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 314.11 0.00 314.11
AP 00421539 12/01/2021 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 791.30 0.00 791.30
AP 00421540 12/01/2021 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 32.26 0.00 32.26
AP 00421541 12/01/2021 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 342.73 0.00 342.73
AP 00421542 12/01/2021 CalPERS LONG-TERM CARE PROGRAM 177.08 0.00 177.08
AP 00421543 12/01/2021 CASA VOLANTE MOBILE HOME PARK 600.00 0.00 600.00
AP 00421544 12/01/2021 CASTRO, AMANDA INEZ 2,000.00 0.00 2,000.00
AP 00421545 12/01/2021 CHAMPION FIRE SYSTEMS INC 748.88 0.00 748.88
AP 00421546 12/01/2021 CHAPARRAL HEIGHTS MOBILE HOME PARK 300.00 0.00 300.00
***AP 00421547 12/01/2021 CINTAS CORPORATION #150 3,420.93 398.73 3,819.66
AP 00421548 12/01/2021 COMMUNITY WORKS DESIGN GROUP 4,360.50 0.00 4,360.50
AP 00421549 12/01/2021 COVETRUS NORTH AMERICA 1,377.50 0.00 1,377.50
AP 00421550 12/01/2021 CR&A CUSTOM INC 37,399.26 0.00 37,399.26
AP 00421551 12/01/2021 CRIME SCENE STERI-CLEAN LLC 540.00 0.00 540.00
AP 00421552 12/01/2021 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 379.42 0.00 379.42
AP 00421553 12/01/2021 DAVID TAUSSIG & ASSOCIATES INC 1,500.00 0.00 1,500.00
AP 00421554 12/01/2021 DECKER, STEVEN 338.39 0.00 338.39
AP 00421555 12/01/2021 DGO AUTO DETAILING 560.00 0.00 560.00
AP 00421556 12/01/2021 ECORP CONSULTING INC 1,100.00 0.00 1,100.00
AP 00421557 12/01/2021 EMCOR SERVICES 19,195.80 0.00 19,195.80
AP 00421558 12/01/2021 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS 0.00 106.28 106.28
AP 00421559 12/01/2021 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 226.28 0.00 226.28
AP 00421560 12/01/2021 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 25.37 0.00 25.37
AP 00421561 12/01/2021 FRONTIER COMM 8,093.23 0.00 8,093.23
AP 00421562 12/01/2021 GATEWAY PET CEMETERY & CREMATORY 905.00 0.00 905.00
AP 00421563 12/01/2021 GLOBAL MUSIC RIGHTS LLC 2,000.00 0.00 2,000.00
AP 00421564 12/01/2021 GOLDEN OAKS VET HOSPITAL 150.00 0.00 150.00
AP 00421565 12/01/2021 GRAINGER 19.92 0.00 19.92
AP 00421566 12/01/2021 GRAPHICS FACTORY PRINTING INC 113.14 0.00 113.14
AP 00421567 12/01/2021 GROVES ON FOOTHILL, THE 200.00 0.00 200.00
AP 00421568 12/01/2021 HERITAGE WELLNESS COLLECTIVE 942.00 0.00 942.00
AP 00421569 12/01/2021 HI-LINE ELECTRIC COMPANY 34.06 0.00 34.06
AP 00421570 12/01/2021 HOMETOWN AMERICA RAMONA VILLA 500.00 0.00 500.00
AP 00421571 12/01/2021 HR GREEN PACIFIC INC 75,842.40 0.00 75,842.40
07:45:03
12/06/2021Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:5
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 13
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
11/19/2021 through 12/5/2021
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00421573 12/01/2021 INLAND EMPIRE PROPERTY SERVICES INC 0.00 14,527.50 14,527.50
AP 00421574 12/01/2021 INYO NETWORKS 11,119.50 0.00 11,119.50
AP 00421575 12/01/2021 JACOBY IE INC, ERIC 165.53 0.00 165.53
AP 00421576 12/01/2021 KIMLEY HORN & ASSOCIATES INC 11,291.00 0.00 11,291.00
AP 00421577 12/01/2021 LISA WISE CONSULTING 30,742.50 0.00 30,742.50
AP 00421578 12/01/2021 LOZANO SMITH LLP 2,729.25 0.00 2,729.25
AP 00421579 12/01/2021 MARIPOSA LANDSCAPES INC 659.91 0.00 659.91
AP 00421580 12/01/2021 MEDLINE INDUSTRIES INC 1,367.48 0.00 1,367.48
***AP 00421581 12/01/2021 NAPA AUTO PARTS 5.78 220.93 226.71
AP 00421582 12/01/2021 NUTRIEN AG SOLUTIONS 420.23 0.00 420.23
AP 00421583 12/01/2021 ONTRAC 79.78 0.00 79.78
AP 00421584 12/01/2021 PACIFIC UTILITY INSTALLATION INC 26,960.00 0.00 26,960.00
AP 00421585 12/01/2021 PINES MOBILE HOME PARK, THE 100.00 0.00 100.00
AP 00421586 12/01/2021 PINNACLE PETROLEUM INC 0.00 28,622.26 28,622.26
AP 00421587 12/01/2021 PRE-PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC 60.17 0.00 60.17
AP 00421588 12/01/2021 RANCHO CUCAMONGA TOWN SQUARE 92,421.82 0.00 92,421.82
AP 00421589 12/01/2021 RED WING BUSINESS ADVANTAGE ACCOUNT 200.00 0.00 200.00
AP 00421590 12/01/2021 RINGO, PAUL 47.93 0.00 47.93
AP 00421591 12/01/2021 ROOMS N'COVERS ETC 595.54 0.00 595.54
AP 00421592 12/01/2021 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION 170,681.00 0.00 170,681.00
AP 00421593 12/01/2021 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION 17,713.00 0.00 17,713.00
AP 00421594 12/01/2021 SBPEA 2,286.21 0.00 2,286.21
AP 00421595 12/01/2021 SHARPLINE SOLUTIONS INC 1,937.59 0.00 1,937.59
AP 00421596 12/01/2021 SHERIFFS COURT SERVICES 100.00 0.00 100.00
AP 00421597 12/01/2021 SHRED PROS 68.00 0.00 68.00
AP 00421598 12/01/2021 SHUM, SARAH 82.96 0.00 82.96
***AP 00421599 12/01/2021 SIDEPATH INC 52,032.44 50,000.00 102,032.44
AP 00421600 12/01/2021 SMUGGLER INC 3,112.50 0.00 3,112.50
***AP 00421606 12/01/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 18,979.22 1,370.38 20,349.60
AP 00421607 12/01/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.66 0.00 15.66
AP 00421608 12/01/2021 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2,744.73 0.00 2,744.73
AP 00421609 12/01/2021 SOUTHERN COMFORT POOLS & SPAS 415.11 0.00 415.11
AP 00421610 12/01/2021 STONE, LAURI 97.00 0.00 97.00
AP 00421611 12/01/2021 STOTZ EQUIPMENT 630.42 0.00 630.42
AP 00421612 12/01/2021 SYCAMORE VILLA MOBILE HOME PARK 400.00 0.00 400.00
AP 00421613 12/01/2021 TARIGOPULA, RAJIV 59.27 0.00 59.27
AP 00421614 12/01/2021 THE COUNSELING TEAM INTERNATIONAL 0.00 1,125.00 1,125.00
AP 00421615 12/01/2021 U.S. BANK PARS ACCT #6746022500 20,193.32 0.00 20,193.32
AP 00421616 12/01/2021 U.S. BANK PARS ACCT #6746022500 1,124.60 0.00 1,124.60
AP 00421617 12/01/2021 ULINE 647.73 0.00 647.73
AP 00421618 12/01/2021 UNITED WAY 45.00 0.00 45.00
AP 00421619 12/01/2021 UNIVERSAL FLEET SUPPLY 0.00 160.15 160.15
AP 00421620 12/01/2021 UPS 44.91 0.00 44.91
AP 00421621 12/01/2021 VCA CALIFORNIA VETERINARY SPECIALISTS 112.32 0.00 112.32
AP 00421622 12/01/2021 VELOCITY TRUCK CENTERS 967.05 0.00 967.05
AP 00421623 12/01/2021 VERIZON WIRELESS - LA 0.00 5,583.85 5,583.85
AP 00421624 12/01/2021 VICTOR MEDICAL COMPANY 768.61 0.00 768.61
07:45:03
12/06/2021Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:6
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 14
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
11/19/2021 through 12/5/2021
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
AP 00421625 12/01/2021 VIRGIN PULSE INC 1,087.20 0.00 1,087.20
AP 00421626 12/01/2021 WEST END MATERIAL SUPPLY 305.54 0.00 305.54
AP 00421627 12/01/2021 WT.COX INFORMATION SERVICES 1,225.65 0.00 1,225.65
AP 00421628 12/01/2021 XEROX FINANCIAL SERVICES 298.38 0.00 298.38
AP 00421629 12/01/2021 ZBINDEN, JONATHAN 0.00 320.00 320.00
AP 00421630 12/01/2021 ZEP SALES AND SERVICE 392.59 0.00 392.59
AP 00421631 12/01/2021 ZOETIS US LLC 529.09 0.00 529.09
$1,360,037.50
$1,604,931.89
$244,894.39
Note:
Grand Total:
Total Fire:
Total City:
*** Check Number includes both City and Fire District expenditures
07:45:03
12/06/2021Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:7
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 15
DATE DESCRIPTION CITY FIRE AMOUNT
11/1 WIRE PAYMENT - RCMU CAISO 6,759.92 6,759.92
11/1 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 3,496.79 3,496.79
11/2 Bank Fee 94.40 94.40
11/2 U.S. BANK - Purchasing Card, Corporate Card and Costco Card Payment 56,528.40 46,866.28 103,394.68
11/2 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 116.66 116.66
11/2 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 754.96 754.96
11/3 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 137.59 137.59
11/3 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 1,494.00 1,494.00
11/4 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 3,293.04 3,293.04
11/4 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 3,434.45 3,434.45
11/4 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 4,902.91 4,902.91
11/4 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 9,977.46 9,977.46
11/4 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 32,315.70 32,315.70
11/4 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 114,805.45 114,805.45
11/4 STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT - Child Support Payments 3,700.60 3,700.60
11/4 STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT - Child Support Payments 1,296.50 1,296.50
11/4 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 439.74 439.74
11/5 CALPERS - City - Retirement Account Deposit 55,893.97 55,893.97
11/5 CALPERS - City - Retirement Account Deposit 105,621.01 105,621.01
11/5 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 580.00 580.00
11/8 WIRE PAYMENT - RCMU CAISO 16,142.97 16,142.97
11/8 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 463.88 463.88
11/9 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 19.08 19.08
11/9 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 250.78 250.78
11/10 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 446.78 446.78
11/10 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 436.32 436.32
11/12 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 231.59 231.59
11/12 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 3,627.82 3,627.82
11/15 WIRE PAYMENT - RCMU CAISO 19,794.69 19,794.69
11/15 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 175.03 175.03
11/15 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 2,626.00 2,626.00
11/16 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 1,158.88 1,158.88
11/17 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 817.10 817.10
11/17 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 1,638.37 1,638.37
11/18 CALPERS - City - Retirement Account Deposit 55,643.68 55,643.68
11/18 CALPERS - City - Retirement Account Deposit 105,686.86 105,686.86
11/18 STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT - Child Support Payments 3,700.60 3,700.60
11/18 STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT - Child Support Payments 1,296.50 1,296.50
11/18 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 819.37 819.37
11/18 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 539.09 539.09
11/19 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 3,293.04 3,293.04
11/19 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 3,436.12 3,436.12
11/19 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 4,905.12 4,905.12
11/19 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 9,940.62 9,940.62
11/19 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 35,857.86 35,857.86
11/19 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 112,478.98 112,478.98
11/19 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 250.00 250.00
11/19 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 223.27 223.27
11/22 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 507.21 507.21
11/22 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 1,330.54 1,330.54
11/23 WIRE PAYMENT - RCMU CAISO 143,209.70 143,209.70
11/23 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 711.91 711.91
11/23 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 638.87 638.87
11/24 CALPERS - Fire - Retirement Account Deposit 193,944.35 193,944.35
11/24 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 10,617.75 10,617.75
11/24 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 460.04 460.04
11/26 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 268.75 268.75
11/26 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 49.50 49.50
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Electronic Debit Register
NOVEMBER 1, 2021 to NOVEMBER 30, 2021
1 Page 16
DATE DESCRIPTION CITY FIRE AMOUNT
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Electronic Debit Register
NOVEMBER 1, 2021 to NOVEMBER 30, 2021
11/29 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 2,538.70 2,538.70
11/30 Workers Comp - City Account Transfer 5,160.26 5,160.26
11/30 Workers Comp - Fire Account Transfer 790.36 790.36
TOTAL CITY 590,786.38
TOTAL FIRE 607,851.79
GRAND TOTAL 1,198,638.17
2 Page 17
DATE:December 15, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
President and Members of the Boards of Directors
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Tamara L. Oatman, Finance Director
Veronica Lopez, Accounts Payable Supervisor
SUBJECT:Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers
for Checks Issued to Southern California Gas Company in the Total
Amount of $5,122.49 Dated November 19, 2021 Through December 05,
2021. (CITY/FIRE)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends City Council/Board of Directors of the Fire Protection District approve payment
of demands as presented. Weekly check register amounts are $4,646.33 and $476.16 for the City
and the Fire District, respectively.
BACKGROUND:
N/A
ANALYSIS:
N/A
FISCAL IMPACT:
Adequate budgeted funds are available for the payment of demands per the attached listing.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 - Weekly Check Register
Page 18
Agenda Check Register
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
So Calif Gas Company Only.
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
11/19/2021 through 12/5/2021
Check No.Check Date Vendor Name City Fire Amount
***AP 00421499 11/23/2021 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 15.78 476.16 491.94
AP 00421601 12/01/2021 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 4,630.55 0.00 4,630.55
$4,646.33
$5,122.49
$476.16
Note:
Grand Total:
Total Fire:
Total City:
*** Check Number includes both City and Fire District expenditures
07:49:09
12/06/2021Current Date:VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez Page:1
Time:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout
User:
Report:Page 19
DATE:December 15, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
President and Members of the Boards of Directors
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Lori E. Sassoon, Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services
Tamara L. Oatman, Finance Director
SUBJECT:Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of
November 30, 2021 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho
Cucamonga Fire Protection District. (CITY/FIRE)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council/Board of Directors of the Fire Protection District receive
and file the attached current investment schedules for the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City) and
the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (District) as of November 30, 2021.
BACKGROUND:
The attached investment schedules as of November 30, 2021 reflect cash and investments
managed by the Finance Department/Revenue Management Division and are in conformity with
the requirements of California Government Code Section 53601 and the City of Rancho
Cucamonga’s and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District’s adopted Investment Policies
as approved on June 28, 2021.
ANALYSIS:
The City’s and District’s Treasurers are each required to submit a quarterly investment report to
the City Council and the Fire Board, respectively, in accordance with California Government Code
Section 53646. The quarterly investment report is required to be submitted within 30 days
following the end of the quarter covered by the report. However, the City and District Treasurers
have each elected to provide this report on a monthly basis.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
The monthly investment schedule supports the City Council’s core value of providing and
nurturing a high quality of life for all by demonstrating the active, prudent fiscal management of
the City’s investment portfolio to ensure that financial resources are available to support the
various services the City provides to all Rancho Cucamonga stakeholders.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 - Investment Schedule (City)
Attachment 2 - Investment Schedule (Fire)
Page 20
Page 21
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021
Account Statement
Consolidated Summary Statement
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Investment Allocation
Investment Type Closing Market Value Percent
8,376,294.07 2.49 Asset-Backed Security
38,204,265.59 11.34 Federal Agency Bond / Note
37,167,228.50 11.03 Corporate Note
1,225,107.08 0.36 Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
1,008,255.00 0.30 Municipal Bond / Note
8,377,086.97 2.49 Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
176,121,256.81 52.29 U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
59,532,150.94 17.68 Local Agency Investment Fund
6,803,689.13 2.02 Passbook/Checking Accounts
$336,815,334.09 Total 100.00%
Portfolio Summary
and Income
Closing
Market ValuePortfolio Holdings
Cash Dividends
PFM Managed Account 262,576.80 270,479,494.02
Local Agency Investment Fund 0.00 59,532,150.94
Passbook/Checking Accounts 0.00 6,803,689.13
$262,576.80 $336,815,334.09 Total
Maturity Distribution (Fixed Income Holdings)
Portfolio Holdings Closing Market Value Percent
66,335,840.07
0.00
0.00
0.00
19,116,031.67
87,816,284.13
53,152,817.76
64,731,546.99
45,662,813.47
0.00
19.69
0.00
0.00
0.00
5.68
26.07
15.78
19.22
13.56
0.00
Under 30 days
31 to 60 days
61 to 90 days
91 to 180 days
181 days to 1 year
1 to 2 years
2 to 3 years
3 to 4 years
4 to 5 years
Over 5 years
Total $336,815,334.09
778
100.00%
Weighted Average Days to Maturity
Sector Allocation
2.49%
ABS
11.34%
Fed Agy Bond /
Note
11.03%
Corporate Note
0.36%
Cert of Deposit -
FDIC
0.30%
Muni Bond / Note
2.49%
Supra-National
Agency Bond / Note
52.29%
US TSY Bond / Note
17.68%
Local Agency
Investment Fund
2.02%
Passbook/Checking
Accounts
Summary Page 1
Page 22
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Summary Statement
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Total Cash Basis Earnings
Plus Net Realized Gains/Losses
Less Purchased Interest Related to Interest/Coupons
Interest/Dividends/Coupons Received
Earnings Reconciliation (Cash Basis) - Managed Account
Less Beginning Accrued Interest
Less Beginning Amortized Value of Securities
Less Cost of New Purchases
Plus Coupons/Dividends Received
Plus Proceeds of Maturities/Calls/Principal Payments
Plus Proceeds from Sales
Ending Accrued Interest
Ending Amortized Value of Securities
Earnings Reconciliation (Accrual Basis)
$267,923,902.96
0.00
(13,329,659.96)
16,277,370.96
0.00
(392,119.94)
$270,479,494.02
395,803.75
(27,122.34)
(106,104.61)
$262,576.80
Total
272,864,223.22
599,477.62
13,361,491.88
0.00
363,971.83
(16,304,493.30)
(270,037,301.88)
(725,896.81)
Total Accrual Basis Earnings $121,472.56
Closing Market Value
Change in Current Value
Unsettled Trades
Principal Acquisitions
Principal Dispositions
Maturities/Calls
Opening Market Value
Transaction Summary - Managed Account
_________________
_________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________Reconciling Transactions
Net Cash Contribution
Security Purchases
Principal Payments
Coupon/Interest/Dividend Income
Sale Proceeds
Maturities/Calls
Cash Transactions Summary - Managed Account
0.00
13,361,491.88
363,971.83
0.00
(16,304,493.30)
3,000,000.00
0.00
Cash Balance
$617,050.54 Closing Cash Balance
Account 73340000 Page 1
Page 23
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Portfolio Summary and Statistics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Account Summary
Percent Par Value Market ValueDescription
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note 175,335,000.00 176,121,256.81 65.12
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note 8,410,000.00 8,377,086.97 3.10
Municipal Bond / Note 1,000,000.00 1,008,255.00 0.37
Federal Agency Bond / Note 38,745,000.00 38,204,265.59 14.12
Corporate Note 36,475,000.00 37,167,228.50 13.74
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured 1,225,000.00 1,225,107.08 0.45
Asset-Backed Security 8,415,000.00 8,376,294.07 3.10
Managed Account Sub-Total 269,605,000.00 270,479,494.02 100.00%
Accrued Interest 599,477.62
Total Portfolio 269,605,000.00 271,078,971.64
Unsettled Trades 0.00 0.00
Sector Allocation
3.10%
ABS
0.45%
Cert of Deposit -
FDIC
13.74%
Corporate Note
14.12%
Fed Agy Bond /
Note
0.37%
Muni Bond / Note
3.10%
Supra-National
Agency Bond / Note
65.12%
US TSY Bond / Note
0 - 6 Months 6 - 12 Months 1 - 2 Years 2 - 3 Years 3 - 4 Years 4 - 5 Years Over 5 Years
0.00%
7.07%
32.47%
19.65%
23.93%
16.88%
0.00%
Maturity Distribution Characteristics
Yield to Maturity at Cost
Yield to Maturity at Market
Weighted Average Days to Maturity 969
0.51%
0.76%
Account 73340000 Page 2
Page 24
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Issuer Summary
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Credit Quality (S&P Ratings)
1.04%
A
0.56%
A+
3.14%
A-
1.66%
AA
82.59%
AA+
2.07%
AA-
5.20%
AAA
2.29%
BBB+
1.45%
NR
Issuer Summary
Percentof HoldingsIssuer
Market Value
1,438,023.06 0.53 AMAZON.COM INC
1,781,500.65 0.66 AMERICAN EXPRESS CO
8,043,351.36 2.97 APPLE INC
1,652,216.65 0.61 ASTRAZENECA PLC
510,100.81 0.19 BMW FINANCIAL SERVICES NA LLC
1,865,368.38 0.69 CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORP
2,443,110.66 0.90 CARMAX AUTO OWNER TRUST
656,575.26 0.24 CHARLES SCHWAB
241,399.24 0.09 CHIPPEWA VALLEY BANK
1,495,864.50 0.55 CITIGROUP INC
242,966.75 0.09 ENERBANK USA
26,544,931.19 9.82 FANNIE MAE
2,948,706.00 1.09 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS
8,710,628.40 3.22 FREDDIE MAC
1,714,604.80 0.63 GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP
373,476.75 0.14 GM FINANCIAL CONSUMER AUTOMOBILE TRUST
512,795.39 0.19 GM FINANCIAL LEASINGTRUST
1,858,994.20 0.69 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC
1,273,129.52 0.47 HONDA AUTO RECEIVABLES
279,257.27 0.10 HYUNDAI AUTO LEASE SECURITIZATION TRUST
536,946.19 0.20 HYUNDAI AUTO RECEIVABLES
1,793,328.70 0.66 IBM CORP
5,243,253.24 1.94 INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK
3,133,833.73 1.16 INTL BANK OF RECONSTRUCTION AND DEV
1,656,217.98 0.61 JP MORGAN CHASE & CO
912,487.25 0.34 KUBOTA CREDIT OWNER TRUST
1,681,569.60 0.62 LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP
241,835.58 0.09 MEDALLION BANK UTAH
179,722.66 0.07 MERCEDES-BENZ AUTO LEASE TRUST
1,309,050.37 0.48 MORGAN STANLEY
3,044,604.00 1.13 NOVARTIS AG
1,008,255.00 0.37 SAN MATEO-FOSTER CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT
Account 73340000 Page 3
Page 25
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Issuer Summary
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Percentof HoldingsIssuer
Market Value
1,639,980.17 0.61 THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORPORATION
1,088,044.88 0.40 TOYOTA MOTOR CORP
436,293.88 0.16 UNILEVER PLC
176,121,256.81 65.12 UNITED STATES TREASURY
2,561,765.00 0.95 US BANCORP
3,054,510.00 1.13 WAL-MART STORES INC
249,538.14 0.09 WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
$270,479,494.02 Total 100.00%
Account 73340000 Page 4
Page 26
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/15/2019 1.375% 10/15/2022
4,242,000.00 4,245,257.53 7,456.73 4,306,312.50 09/28/2009/24/20AaaAA+ 4,200,000.00 912828YK0 0.14
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/15/2012 1.625% 11/15/2022
5,825,468.75 5,830,719.14 4,129.83 5,921,152.34 11/05/2010/30/20AaaAA+ 5,750,000.00 912828TY6 0.15
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2015 2.000% 11/30/2022
8,545,687.92 8,555,562.59 461.54 8,695,312.50 01/08/2101/06/21AaaAA+ 8,400,000.00 912828M80 0.14
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 12/31/2015 2.125% 12/31/2022
5,099,219.00 5,105,613.90 44,463.32 5,205,078.13 11/24/2011/23/20AaaAA+ 5,000,000.00 912828N30 0.17
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2018 2.375% 01/31/2023
2,457,750.00 2,461,101.39 19,051.63 2,515,031.25 11/20/2011/17/20AaaAA+ 2,400,000.00 9128283U2 0.19
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2018 2.625% 02/28/2023
1,861,188.97 1,864,707.56 12,075.00 1,910,257.03 11/18/2011/16/20AaaAA+ 1,810,000.00 9128284A5 0.19
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/29/2016 1.500% 02/28/2023
7,102,812.50 7,119,096.90 26,685.08 7,200,156.25 01/26/2101/25/21AaaAA+ 7,000,000.00 912828P79 0.13
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 03/15/2020 0.500% 03/15/2023
5,009,375.00 5,021,622.23 5,317.68 5,039,648.44 11/05/2010/30/20AaaAA+ 5,000,000.00 912828ZD5 0.16
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 04/30/2018 2.750% 04/30/2023
5,166,406.00 5,181,700.16 11,774.86 5,329,882.81 10/07/2010/06/20AaaAA+ 5,000,000.00 9128284L1 0.17
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2016 1.625% 05/31/2023
3,563,437.50 3,576,002.79 156.25 3,630,429.69 11/05/2010/30/20AaaAA+ 3,500,000.00 912828R69 0.17
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 06/15/2020 0.250% 06/15/2023
6,482,734.70 6,510,359.38 7,503.42 6,518,281.25 09/28/2009/24/20AaaAA+ 6,500,000.00 912828ZU7 0.15
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.125% 07/31/2023
5,967,187.20 5,991,712.68 2,506.79 5,990,156.25 08/09/2108/06/21AaaAA+ 6,000,000.00 91282CCN9 0.21
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 08/15/2020 0.125% 08/15/2023
4,970,312.50 4,995,103.32 1,834.24 4,991,796.88 10/07/2010/06/20AaaAA+ 5,000,000.00 91282CAF8 0.18
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 09/15/2020 0.125% 09/15/2023
4,967,187.50 4,992,658.73 1,329.42 4,988,476.56 11/24/2011/23/20AaaAA+ 5,000,000.00 91282CAK7 0.21
Account 73340000 Page 5
Page 27
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 09/30/2021 0.250% 09/30/2023
1,990,937.60 1,999,207.10 851.65 1,999,140.63 10/06/2110/04/21AaaAA+ 2,000,000.00 91282CDA6 0.27
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 0.375% 10/31/2023
5,983,125.00 5,983,774.93 1,926.80 5,983,125.00 11/03/2111/01/21AaaAA+ 6,000,000.00 91282CDD0 0.52
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2019 2.375% 02/29/2024
8,307,500.00 8,394,120.30 48,287.29 8,600,312.50 09/28/2009/24/20AaaAA+ 8,000,000.00 9128286G0 0.18
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/01/2017 2.000% 04/30/2024
3,727,968.75 3,768,748.07 6,191.44 3,836,983.59 11/05/2010/30/20AaaAA+ 3,615,000.00 912828X70 0.23
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/15/2021 0.250% 05/15/2024
1,878,625.00 1,879,560.61 209.94 1,878,921.88 11/03/2111/01/21AaaAA+ 1,900,000.00 91282CCC3 0.69
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/15/2021 0.375% 07/15/2024
4,951,562.50 5,005,900.73 7,082.20 5,006,640.63 08/03/2108/02/21AaaAA+ 5,000,000.00 91282CCL3 0.33
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 07/31/2019 1.750% 07/31/2024
5,820,609.38 5,897,107.18 33,164.88 5,995,139.06 10/07/2010/06/20AaaAA+ 5,670,000.00 912828Y87 0.24
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 08/15/2021 0.375% 08/15/2024
3,958,124.80 3,996,559.89 4,402.17 3,996,250.00 09/03/2109/01/21AaaAA+ 4,000,000.00 91282CCT6 0.41
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 08/31/2019 1.250% 08/31/2024
2,273,062.50 2,306,893.79 7,131.91 2,325,942.78 01/26/2101/25/21AaaAA+ 2,245,000.00 912828YE4 0.24
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 09/15/2021 0.375% 09/15/2024
1,384,031.32 1,395,179.00 1,116.71 1,394,914.06 10/06/2110/04/21AaaAA+ 1,400,000.00 91282CCX7 0.50
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/02/2017 2.125% 09/30/2024
6,222,187.20 6,323,677.16 21,717.03 6,457,968.75 09/28/2009/24/20AaaAA+ 6,000,000.00 9128282Y5 0.21
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/31/2019 1.500% 10/31/2024
2,548,437.50 2,586,201.44 3,211.33 2,616,796.88 11/18/2011/16/20AaaAA+ 2,500,000.00 912828YM6 0.31
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2019 1.500% 11/30/2024
5,096,094.00 5,179,024.48 206.04 5,239,843.75 11/24/2011/23/20AaaAA+ 5,000,000.00 912828YV6 0.30
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2018 2.750% 02/28/2025
6,354,375.00 6,487,325.74 41,933.70 6,663,750.00 09/28/2009/24/20AaaAA+ 6,000,000.00 9128283Z1 0.23
Account 73340000 Page 6
Page 28
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 03/31/2020 0.500% 03/31/2025
2,711,328.13 2,764,769.16 2,342.03 2,769,335.94 11/20/2011/17/20AaaAA+ 2,750,000.00 912828ZF0 0.34
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 07/31/2020 0.250% 07/31/2025
4,377,656.25 4,482,720.93 3,760.19 4,478,730.47 01/26/2101/25/21AaaAA+ 4,500,000.00 91282CAB7 0.36
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 07/31/2020 0.250% 07/31/2025
6,809,687.50 6,964,842.34 5,849.19 6,956,250.00 01/08/2101/06/21AaaAA+ 7,000,000.00 91282CAB7 0.39
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 12/31/2020 0.375% 12/31/2025
3,791,531.25 3,844,784.76 6,120.24 3,837,082.03 05/07/2105/06/21AaaAA+ 3,900,000.00 91282CBC4 0.73
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2021 0.375% 01/31/2026
4,024,535.94 4,082,838.00 5,195.33 4,076,834.18 07/07/2107/06/21AaaAA+ 4,145,000.00 91282CBH3 0.74
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2021 0.375% 01/31/2026
5,825,625.00 5,918,669.87 7,520.38 5,912,578.13 08/09/2108/06/21AaaAA+ 6,000,000.00 91282CBH3 0.71
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2021 0.500% 02/28/2026
2,584,578.13 2,627,732.50 3,367.40 2,623,810.55 03/03/2103/02/21AaaAA+ 2,650,000.00 91282CBQ3 0.70
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 03/31/2021 0.750% 03/31/2026
2,955,000.00 2,977,095.31 3,832.42 2,973,632.81 04/06/2104/02/21AaaAA+ 3,000,000.00 91282CBT7 0.93
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/31/2021 0.750% 05/31/2026
6,000,875.00 6,087,974.51 125.69 6,086,656.25 06/04/2106/02/21AaaAA+ 6,100,000.00 91282CCF6 0.79
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.625% 07/31/2026
1,953,437.60 1,986,893.02 4,177.99 1,986,015.63 08/09/2108/06/21AaaAA+ 2,000,000.00 91282CCP4 0.77
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.625% 07/31/2026
2,930,156.40 2,992,555.80 6,266.98 2,992,031.25 08/03/2108/02/21AaaAA+ 3,000,000.00 91282CCP4 0.68
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 1.125% 10/31/2026
399,437.52 397,595.54 385.36 397,578.13 11/18/2111/17/21AaaAA+ 400,000.00 91282CDG3 1.25
371,122.08 176,121,256.81 177,782,970.46 0.33 179,328,236.76 175,335,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
INTL BK OF RECON AND DEV NOTE
DTD 04/20/2021 0.126% 04/20/2023
1,735,866.67 1,742,501.18 250.41 1,741,387.85 04/20/2104/13/21AaaAAA 1,745,000.00 459058JV6 0.23
Account 73340000 Page 7
Page 29
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
INTL BK RECON & DEVELOP NOTES
DTD 11/24/2020 0.250% 11/24/2023
1,397,967.06 1,407,998.38 68.54 1,406,968.50 11/24/2011/17/20AaaAAA 1,410,000.00 459058JM6 0.32
INTER-AMERICAN DEVEL BK NOTES
DTD 09/23/2021 0.500% 09/23/2024
3,709,744.74 3,752,396.24 3,546.39 3,752,221.30 09/23/2109/15/21AaaAAA 3,755,000.00 4581X0DZ8 0.52
INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK
NOTES
DTD 01/16/2020 1.750% 03/14/2025
1,533,508.50 1,562,339.90 5,614.58 1,576,950.00 02/23/2102/19/21AaaAAA 1,500,000.00 4581X0DK1 0.47
9,479.92 8,377,086.97 8,465,235.70 0.42 8,477,527.65 8,410,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Municipal Bond / Note
SAN MATEO-FOSTER SCH DIST, CA TXBL GO
BO
DTD 05/19/2020 1.162% 08/01/2022
502,875.00 500,695.15 1,936.67 502,300.00 05/19/2005/19/20AaaAA+ 500,000.00 799055QR2 0.95
SAN MATEO-FOSTER SCH DIST, CA TXBL GO
BO
DTD 05/19/2020 1.266% 08/01/2023
505,380.00 501,760.55 2,110.00 503,385.00 05/19/2005/19/20AaaAA+ 500,000.00 799055QS0 1.05
4,046.67 1,008,255.00 1,002,455.70 1.00 1,005,685.00 1,000,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Federal Agency Bond / Note
FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 07/10/2020 0.250% 07/10/2023
4,245,328.56 4,260,688.65 4,171.25 4,261,192.80 09/28/2009/24/20AaaAA+ 4,260,000.00 3135G05G4 0.24
FREDDIE MAC NOTES
DTD 09/04/2020 0.250% 09/08/2023
4,777,608.00 4,801,759.52 2,766.67 4,802,928.00 09/28/2009/24/20AaaAA+ 4,800,000.00 3137EAEW5 0.23
FREDDIE MAC NOTES
DTD 11/05/2020 0.250% 11/06/2023
1,689,726.90 1,699,015.83 295.14 1,698,470.00 11/05/2011/03/20AaaAA+ 1,700,000.00 3137EAEZ8 0.28
FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 11/25/2020 0.250% 11/27/2023
4,371,747.60 4,396,680.39 122.22 4,394,984.00 11/25/2011/23/20AaaAA+ 4,400,000.00 3135G06H1 0.29
FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 06/19/2020 0.500% 06/17/2025
2,841,155.90 2,899,912.61 6,594.17 2,901,803.25 07/21/2007/21/20AaaAA+ 2,895,000.00 3135G04Z3 0.45
Account 73340000 Page 8
Page 30
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
Federal Agency Bond / Note
FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 06/19/2020 0.500% 06/17/2025
4,907,005.00 5,013,368.08 11,388.89 5,017,800.00 09/28/2009/24/20AaaAA+ 5,000,000.00 3135G04Z3 0.42
FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK NOTES
DTD 07/02/2020 0.500% 07/02/2025
2,948,706.00 3,005,150.52 6,208.33 3,007,110.00 07/21/2007/21/20AaaAA+ 3,000,000.00 3133ELR71 0.45
FANNIE MAE NOTES (CALLABLE)
DTD 07/21/2020 0.625% 07/21/2025
2,462,520.00 2,499,272.73 5,642.36 2,499,000.00 07/21/2007/21/20AaaAA+ 2,500,000.00 3136G4ZJ5 0.63
FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 08/27/2020 0.375% 08/25/2025
1,953,120.00 1,991,063.57 2,000.00 1,988,500.00 11/05/2010/30/20AaaAA+ 2,000,000.00 3135G05X7 0.50
FREDDIE MAC NOTES
DTD 09/25/2020 0.375% 09/23/2025
2,243,293.50 2,294,716.66 1,629.17 2,293,077.00 09/25/2009/23/20AaaAA+ 2,300,000.00 3137EAEX3 0.44
FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 11/12/2020 0.500% 11/07/2025
1,360,277.63 1,388,200.12 463.33 1,387,720.40 11/13/2011/12/20AaaAA+ 1,390,000.00 3135G06G3 0.53
FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 11/12/2020 0.500% 11/07/2025
4,403,776.50 4,495,578.77 1,500.00 4,494,465.00 12/04/2012/02/20AaaAA+ 4,500,000.00 3135G06G3 0.53
42,781.53 38,204,265.59 38,745,407.45 0.39 38,747,050.45 38,745,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Corporate Note
WAL-MART STORES INC CORP (CALLABLE)
NOTE
DTD 10/20/2017 2.350% 12/15/2022
3,054,510.00 2,980,064.32 32,508.33 2,913,840.00 06/21/1806/21/18Aa2AA 3,000,000.00 931142DU4 3.04
APPLE INC GLOBAL NOTES
DTD 05/03/2013 2.400% 05/03/2023
3,473,597.40 3,375,282.19 6,328.00 3,348,574.20 05/06/1905/06/19Aa1AA+ 3,390,000.00 037833AK6 2.73
APPLE INC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 05/11/2020 0.750% 05/11/2023
1,443,972.96 1,442,275.78 600.00 1,444,737.60 05/11/2005/11/20Aa1AA+ 1,440,000.00 037833DV9 0.64
APPLE INC (CALLABLE) BONDS
DTD 02/09/2017 3.000% 02/09/2024
3,125,781.00 3,008,016.64 28,000.00 3,019,140.00 02/11/1902/11/19Aa1AA+ 3,000,000.00 037833CG3 2.86
CHARLES SCHWAB CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 03/18/2021 0.750% 03/18/2024
656,575.26 659,747.68 1,003.75 659,670.00 03/18/2103/16/21A2A 660,000.00 808513BN4 0.77
Account 73340000 Page 9
Page 31
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
Corporate Note
AMAZON.COM INC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 05/12/2021 0.450% 05/12/2024
1,438,023.06 1,453,269.16 345.56 1,452,875.70 05/12/2105/10/21A1AA 1,455,000.00 023135BW5 0.50
AMERICAN EXPRESS CO CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE
DTD 07/30/2019 2.500% 07/30/2024
1,781,500.65 1,786,234.96 14,494.79 1,786,755.00 11/23/2111/19/21A3BBB+ 1,725,000.00 025816CG2 1.14
UNILEVER CAPITAL CORP (CALLABLE)
CORPORA
DTD 08/12/2021 0.626% 08/12/2024
436,293.88 440,000.00 833.97 440,000.00 08/12/2108/09/21A1A+ 440,000.00 904764BN6 0.63
BMW US CAPITAL LLC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 08/12/2021 0.750% 08/12/2024
510,100.81 514,958.34 1,169.48 514,953.65 08/12/2108/09/21A2A 515,000.00 05565EBU8 0.75
US BANK NA CINCINNATI (CALLABLE)
CORPORA
DTD 01/21/2020 2.050% 01/21/2025
2,561,765.00 2,603,985.23 18,506.94 2,640,450.00 11/05/2010/30/20A1AA- 2,500,000.00 90331HPL1 0.69
NOVARTIS CAPITAL CORP
DTD 02/14/2020 1.750% 02/14/2025
3,044,604.00 3,105,172.08 15,604.17 3,144,750.00 09/28/2009/24/20A1AA- 3,000,000.00 66989HAP3 0.63
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE
DTD 02/16/2021 0.563% 02/16/2025
604,215.98 610,000.00 1,001.67 610,000.00 02/16/2102/09/21A2A- 610,000.00 46647PBY1 0.56
LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 02/20/2015 2.900% 03/01/2025
1,681,569.60 1,692,363.13 11,600.00 1,714,864.00 03/09/2103/05/21A3A- 1,600,000.00 539830BE8 1.05
GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP (CALLABLE)
CORP NO
DTD 05/11/2018 3.500% 05/15/2025
1,714,604.80 1,728,667.48 2,488.89 1,757,296.00 03/09/2103/05/21A3A- 1,600,000.00 369550BG2 1.09
CITIGROUP INC CORP NOTE (CALLABLE)
DTD 11/03/2021 1.281% 11/03/2025
1,495,864.50 1,501,505.53 1,494.50 1,501,545.00 11/03/2111/01/21A3BBB+ 1,500,000.00 172967ND9 1.25
BANK OF NY MELLON CORP (CALLABLE)
CORPOR
DTD 01/28/2021 0.750% 01/28/2026
1,639,980.17 1,684,171.18 4,317.81 1,684,005.85 02/01/2101/28/21A1A 1,685,000.00 06406RAQ0 0.76
Account 73340000 Page 10
Page 32
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
Corporate Note
GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 02/12/2021 0.855% 02/12/2026
1,858,994.20 1,903,265.12 4,918.63 1,903,876.00 02/17/2102/12/21A2BBB+ 1,900,000.00 38141GXS8 0.81
IBM CORP
DTD 05/15/2019 3.300% 05/15/2026
1,793,328.70 1,836,046.77 2,456.67 1,844,861.75 09/03/2109/01/21A3A- 1,675,000.00 459200JZ5 1.08
ASTRAZENECA FINANCE LLC (CALLABLE)
CORP
DTD 05/28/2021 1.200% 05/28/2026
1,652,216.65 1,683,618.53 167.50 1,684,095.25 09/03/2109/01/21A3A- 1,675,000.00 04636NAA1 1.08
TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 06/18/2021 1.125% 06/18/2026
1,088,044.88 1,102,658.34 5,628.59 1,102,546.90 09/13/2109/08/21A1A+ 1,105,000.00 89236TJK2 1.17
MORGAN STANLEY CORP NOTES
DTD 07/25/2016 3.125% 07/27/2026
1,059,683.00 1,061,309.60 10,763.89 1,062,320.00 11/03/2111/01/21A1BBB+ 1,000,000.00 61761J3R8 1.75
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO CORP NOTES
DTD 07/21/2016 2.950% 10/01/2026
1,052,002.00 1,056,592.84 4,916.67 1,057,540.00 11/03/2111/01/21A2A- 1,000,000.00 46625HRV4 1.72
169,149.81 37,167,228.50 37,229,204.90 1.44 37,288,696.90 36,475,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
WELLS FARGO BANK NA
DTD 01/29/2020 1.900% 01/30/2023
249,538.14 245,000.00 25.51 245,000.00 01/29/2001/29/20NRNR 245,000.00 949763S64 1.90
MORGAN STANLEY PVT BANK
DTD 01/30/2020 1.850% 01/30/2023
249,367.37 245,000.00 1,539.81 245,000.00 01/30/2001/30/20NRNR 245,000.00 61760A6Q7 1.85
ENERBANK USA
DTD 07/24/2020 0.450% 07/24/2024
242,966.75 245,000.00 21.14 245,000.00 07/24/2007/24/20NRNR 245,000.00 29278TQD5 0.45
CHIPPEWA VALLEY BANK
DTD 07/29/2020 0.500% 07/29/2025
241,399.24 245,000.00 6.71 245,000.00 07/29/2007/29/20NRNR 245,000.00 169894AT9 0.50
MEDALLION BANK UTAH
DTD 07/30/2020 0.550% 07/30/2025
241,835.58 245,000.00 3.69 245,000.00 07/30/2007/30/20NRNR 245,000.00 58404DHQ7 0.55
1,596.86 1,225,107.08 1,225,000.00 1.06 1,225,000.00 1,225,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Account 73340000 Page 11
Page 33
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
Asset-Backed Security
MBALT 2021-A A3
DTD 01/27/2021 0.250% 01/16/2024
179,722.66 179,986.97 20.00 179,981.80 01/27/2101/20/21AaaAAA 180,000.00 58770GAC4 0.25
HALST 2021-A A4
DTD 01/20/2021 0.420% 12/16/2024
279,257.27 279,981.85 52.27 279,976.70 01/20/2101/12/21AaaAAA 280,000.00 44891TAD8 0.42
GMALT 2021-1 A4
DTD 02/24/2021 0.330% 02/20/2025
512,795.39 514,937.18 51.93 514,922.24 02/24/2102/17/21AaaNR 515,000.00 36261RAD0 0.33
HAROT 2021-1 A3
DTD 02/24/2021 0.270% 04/21/2025
528,221.53 529,992.09 39.75 529,990.30 02/24/2102/17/21AaaNR 530,000.00 43813GAC5 0.27
HART 2021-A A3
DTD 04/28/2021 0.380% 09/15/2025
536,946.19 539,950.89 91.20 539,943.19 04/28/2104/20/21NRAAA 540,000.00 44933LAC7 0.38
GMCAR 2021-1 A3
DTD 01/20/2021 0.350% 10/16/2025
373,476.75 374,951.17 54.69 374,940.30 01/20/2101/12/21AaaAAA 375,000.00 36261LAC5 0.35
KCOT 2021-2A A3
DTD 07/28/2021 0.560% 11/17/2025
912,487.25 924,967.92 230.22 924,965.13 07/28/2107/20/21AaaNR 925,000.00 50117XAE2 0.56
CARMX 2021-1 A3
DTD 01/27/2021 0.340% 12/15/2025
119,346.86 119,980.39 18.13 119,976.29 01/27/2101/20/21NRAAA 120,000.00 14316NAC3 0.34
HAROT 2021-4 A3
DTD 11/24/2021 0.880% 01/21/2026
744,907.99 744,843.67 127.48 744,842.95 11/24/2111/16/21AaaNR 745,000.00 43815GAC3 0.89
CARMX 2021-2 A3
DTD 04/21/2021 0.520% 02/17/2026
805,801.69 809,847.63 187.20 809,825.45 04/21/2104/13/21NRAAA 810,000.00 14314QAC8 0.52
CARMX 2021-3 A3
DTD 07/28/2021 0.550% 06/15/2026
1,517,962.11 1,529,766.11 374.00 1,529,748.32 07/28/2107/21/21AaaAAA 1,530,000.00 14317DAC4 0.55
COMET 2021-A3 A3
DTD 11/30/2021 1.040% 11/16/2026
1,865,368.38 1,864,743.14 53.88 1,864,743.00 11/30/2111/18/21NRAAA 1,865,000.00 14041NFY2 1.04
1,300.75 8,376,294.07 8,413,949.01 0.62 8,413,855.67 8,415,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
269,605,000.00 274,486,052.43 0.51 599,477.62 272,864,223.22 270,479,494.02 Managed Account Sub-Total
Account 73340000 Page 12
Page 34
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
$269,605,000.00 $274,486,052.43 $599,477.62 $272,864,223.22 $270,479,494.02 0.51%
$271,078,971.64
$599,477.62
Total Investments
Accrued Interest
Securities Sub-Total
Account 73340000 Page 13
Page 35
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
(3,257.53)(64,312.50) 4,242,000.00 101.00 CITIGRP 4,200,000.00 912828YK0US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/15/2019 1.375% 10/15/2022
0.23 0.87
(5,250.39)(95,683.59) 5,825,468.75 101.31 CITIGRP 5,750,000.00 912828TY6US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/15/2012 1.625% 11/15/2022
0.25 0.95
(9,874.67)(149,624.58) 8,545,687.92 101.73 CITIGRP 8,400,000.00 912828M80US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2015 2.000% 11/30/2022
0.26 1.00
(6,394.90)(105,859.13) 5,099,219.00 101.98 NOMURA 5,000,000.00 912828N30US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 12/31/2015 2.125% 12/31/2022
0.29 1.07
(3,351.39)(57,281.25) 2,457,750.00 102.41 CITIGRP 2,400,000.00 9128283U2US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2018 2.375% 01/31/2023
0.31 1.15
(3,518.59)(49,068.06) 1,861,188.97 102.83 CITIGRP 1,810,000.00 9128284A5US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2018 2.625% 02/28/2023
0.35 1.23
(16,284.40)(97,343.75) 7,102,812.50 101.47 BNP_PAR 7,000,000.00 912828P79US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/29/2016 1.500% 02/28/2023
0.32 1.24
(12,247.23)(30,273.44) 5,009,375.00 100.19 WELLS_F 5,000,000.00 912828ZD5US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 03/15/2020 0.500% 03/15/2023
0.35 1.29
(15,294.16)(163,476.81) 5,166,406.00 103.33 CITIGRP 5,000,000.00 9128284L1US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 04/30/2018 2.750% 04/30/2023
0.39 1.40
(12,565.29)(66,992.19) 3,563,437.50 101.81 NOMURA 3,500,000.00 912828R69US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2016 1.625% 05/31/2023
0.41 1.49
(27,624.68)(35,546.55) 6,482,734.70 99.73 WELLS_F 6,500,000.00 912828ZU7US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 06/15/2020 0.250% 06/15/2023
0.42 1.54
(24,525.48)(22,969.05) 5,967,187.20 99.45 MERRILL 6,000,000.00 91282CCN9US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.125% 07/31/2023
0.45 1.67
(24,790.82)(21,484.38) 4,970,312.50 99.41 HSBC 5,000,000.00 91282CAF8US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 08/15/2020 0.125% 08/15/2023
0.47 1.71
(25,471.23)(21,289.06) 4,967,187.50 99.34 NOMURA 5,000,000.00 91282CAK7US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 09/15/2020 0.125% 09/15/2023
0.49 1.79
(8,269.50)(8,203.03) 1,990,937.60 99.55 NOMURA 2,000,000.00 91282CDA6US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 09/30/2021 0.250% 09/30/2023
0.50 1.83
(649.93) 0.00 5,983,125.00 99.72 CITIGRP 6,000,000.00 91282CDD0US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 0.375% 10/31/2023
0.52 1.91
(86,620.30)(292,812.50) 8,307,500.00 103.84 RBS 8,000,000.00 9128286G0US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2019 2.375% 02/29/2024
0.65 2.19
Account 73340000 Page 14
Page 36
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
(40,779.32)(109,014.84) 3,727,968.75 103.13 MORGAN_ 3,615,000.00 912828X70US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/01/2017 2.000% 04/30/2024
0.69 2.37
(935.61)(296.88) 1,878,625.00 98.88 CITIGRP 1,900,000.00 91282CCC3US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/15/2021 0.250% 05/15/2024
0.71 2.45
(54,338.23)(55,078.13) 4,951,562.50 99.03 NOMURA 5,000,000.00 91282CCL3US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/15/2021 0.375% 07/15/2024
0.75 2.61
(76,497.80)(174,529.68) 5,820,609.38 102.66 WELLS_F 5,670,000.00 912828Y87US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 07/31/2019 1.750% 07/31/2024
0.74 2.61
(38,435.09)(38,125.20) 3,958,124.80 98.95 NOMURA 4,000,000.00 91282CCT6US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 08/15/2021 0.375% 08/15/2024
0.77 2.70
(33,831.29)(52,880.28) 2,273,062.50 101.25 BNP_PAR 2,245,000.00 912828YE4US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 08/31/2019 1.250% 08/31/2024
0.79 2.70
(11,147.68)(10,882.74) 1,384,031.32 98.86 MERRILL 1,400,000.00 91282CCX7US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 09/15/2021 0.375% 09/15/2024
0.79 2.78
(101,489.96)(235,781.55) 6,222,187.20 103.70 CITIGRP 6,000,000.00 9128282Y5US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/02/2017 2.125% 09/30/2024
0.80 2.76
(37,763.94)(68,359.38) 2,548,437.50 101.94 CITIGRP 2,500,000.00 912828YM6US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/31/2019 1.500% 10/31/2024
0.83 2.86
(82,930.48)(143,749.75) 5,096,094.00 101.92 NOMURA 5,000,000.00 912828YV6US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2019 1.500% 11/30/2024
0.85 2.95
(132,950.74)(309,375.00) 6,354,375.00 105.91 MERRILL 6,000,000.00 9128283Z1US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2018 2.750% 02/28/2025
0.90 3.11
(53,441.03)(58,007.81) 2,711,328.13 98.59 MORGAN_ 2,750,000.00 912828ZF0US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 03/31/2020 0.500% 03/31/2025
0.93 3.31
(105,064.68)(101,074.22) 4,377,656.25 97.28 BNP_PAR 4,500,000.00 91282CAB7US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 07/31/2020 0.250% 07/31/2025
1.01 3.65
(155,154.84)(146,562.50) 6,809,687.50 97.28 JPM_CHA 7,000,000.00 91282CAB7US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 07/31/2020 0.250% 07/31/2025
1.01 3.65
(53,253.51)(45,550.78) 3,791,531.25 97.22 HSBC 3,900,000.00 91282CBC4US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 12/31/2020 0.375% 12/31/2025
1.07 4.05
(58,302.06)(52,298.24) 4,024,535.94 97.09 CITIGRP 4,145,000.00 91282CBH3US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2021 0.375% 01/31/2026
1.09 4.13
(93,044.87)(86,953.13) 5,825,625.00 97.09 RBS 6,000,000.00 91282CBH3US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2021 0.375% 01/31/2026
1.09 4.13
Account 73340000 Page 15
Page 37
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
(43,154.37)(39,232.42) 2,584,578.13 97.53 CITIGRP 2,650,000.00 91282CBQ3US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 02/28/2021 0.500% 02/28/2026
1.10 4.20
(22,095.31)(18,632.81) 2,955,000.00 98.50 NOMURA 3,000,000.00 91282CBT7US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 03/31/2021 0.750% 03/31/2026
1.11 4.27
(87,099.51)(85,781.25) 6,000,875.00 98.38 RBC 6,100,000.00 91282CCF6US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/31/2021 0.750% 05/31/2026
1.12 4.43
(33,455.42)(32,578.03) 1,953,437.60 97.67 CITIGRP 2,000,000.00 91282CCP4US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.625% 07/31/2026
1.14 4.60
(62,399.40)(61,874.85) 2,930,156.40 97.67 CITIGRP 3,000,000.00 91282CCP4US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.625% 07/31/2026
1.14 4.60
1,841.98 1,859.39 399,437.52 99.86 CITIGRP 400,000.00 91282CDG3US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 1.125% 10/31/2026
1.15 4.79
(3,206,979.95) 0.67 (1,661,713.65) 176,121,256.81 175,335,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.43
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
(6,634.51)(5,521.18) 1,735,866.67 99.48 TD 1,745,000.00 459058JV6INTL BK OF RECON AND DEV NOTE
DTD 04/20/2021 0.126% 04/20/2023
0.50 1.39
(10,031.32)(9,001.44) 1,397,967.06 99.15 TD 1,410,000.00 459058JM6INTL BK RECON & DEVELOP NOTES
DTD 11/24/2020 0.250% 11/24/2023
0.68 1.98
(42,651.50)(42,476.56) 3,709,744.74 98.79 JPM_CHA 3,755,000.00 4581X0DZ8INTER-AMERICAN DEVEL BK NOTES
DTD 09/23/2021 0.500% 09/23/2024
0.93 2.80
(28,831.40)(43,441.50) 1,533,508.50 102.23 MORGAN_ 1,500,000.00 4581X0DK1INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK
NOTES
DTD 01/16/2020 1.750% 03/14/2025
1.06 3.20
(100,440.68) 0.82 (88,148.73) 8,377,086.97 8,410,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.44
Municipal Bond / Note
2,179.85 575.00 502,875.00 100.58 NEW ACC 500,000.00 799055QR2SAN MATEO-FOSTER SCH DIST, CA TXBL
GO BO
DTD 05/19/2020 1.162% 08/01/2022
0.30 0.67
Account 73340000 Page 16
Page 38
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
Municipal Bond / Note
3,619.45 1,995.00 505,380.00 101.08 NEW ACC 500,000.00 799055QS0SAN MATEO-FOSTER SCH DIST, CA TXBL
GO BO
DTD 05/19/2020 1.266% 08/01/2023
0.62 1.65
2,570.00 0.46 5,799.30 1,008,255.00 1,000,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 1.16
Federal Agency Bond / Note
(15,360.09)(15,864.24) 4,245,328.56 99.66 MORGAN_ 4,260,000.00 3135G05G4FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 07/10/2020 0.250% 07/10/2023
0.46 1.61
(24,151.52)(25,320.00) 4,777,608.00 99.53 KEYBANC 4,800,000.00 3137EAEW5FREDDIE MAC NOTES
DTD 09/04/2020 0.250% 09/08/2023
0.51 1.77
(9,288.93)(8,743.10) 1,689,726.90 99.40 CITIGRP 1,700,000.00 3137EAEZ8FREDDIE MAC NOTES
DTD 11/05/2020 0.250% 11/06/2023
0.56 1.93
(24,932.79)(23,236.40) 4,371,747.60 99.36 NOMURA 4,400,000.00 3135G06H1FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 11/25/2020 0.250% 11/27/2023
0.57 1.99
(58,756.71)(60,647.35) 2,841,155.90 98.14 NEW ACC 2,895,000.00 3135G04Z3FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 06/19/2020 0.500% 06/17/2025
1.04 3.51
(106,363.08)(110,795.00) 4,907,005.00 98.14 HSBC 5,000,000.00 3135G04Z3FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 06/19/2020 0.500% 06/17/2025
1.04 3.51
(56,444.52)(58,404.00) 2,948,706.00 98.29 NEW ACC 3,000,000.00 3133ELR71FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK NOTES
DTD 07/02/2020 0.500% 07/02/2025
0.99 3.55
(36,752.73)(36,480.00) 2,462,520.00 98.50 07/21/22NEW ACC 2,500,000.00 3136G4ZJ5FANNIE MAE NOTES (CALLABLE)
DTD 07/21/2020 0.625% 07/21/2025
1.05 0.64
(37,943.57)(35,380.00) 1,953,120.00 97.66 NOMURA 2,000,000.00 3135G05X7FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 08/27/2020 0.375% 08/25/2025
1.02 3.71
(51,423.16)(49,783.50) 2,243,293.50 97.53 CITIGRP 2,300,000.00 3137EAEX3FREDDIE MAC NOTES
DTD 09/25/2020 0.375% 09/23/2025
1.04 3.79
(27,922.49)(27,442.77) 1,360,277.63 97.86 BMO 1,390,000.00 3135G06G3FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 11/12/2020 0.500% 11/07/2025
1.06 3.90
(91,802.27)(90,688.50) 4,403,776.50 97.86 JEFFERI 4,500,000.00 3135G06G3FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 11/12/2020 0.500% 11/07/2025
1.06 3.90
(542,784.86) 0.83 (541,141.86) 38,204,265.59 38,745,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.74
Account 73340000 Page 17
Page 39
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
Corporate Note
74,445.68 140,670.00 3,054,510.00 101.82 11/15/22NEW ACC 3,000,000.00 931142DU4WAL-MART STORES INC CORP (CALLABLE)
NOTE
DTD 10/20/2017 2.350% 12/15/2022
0.60 0.94
98,315.21 125,023.20 3,473,597.40 102.47 NEW ACC 3,390,000.00 037833AK6APPLE INC GLOBAL NOTES
DTD 05/03/2013 2.400% 05/03/2023
0.66 1.41
1,697.18 (764.64) 1,443,972.96 100.28 NEW ACC 1,440,000.00 037833DV9APPLE INC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 05/11/2020 0.750% 05/11/2023
0.56 1.44
117,764.36 106,641.00 3,125,781.00 104.19 12/09/23NEW ACC 3,000,000.00 037833CG3APPLE INC (CALLABLE) BONDS
DTD 02/09/2017 3.000% 02/09/2024
1.06 1.96
(3,172.42)(3,094.74) 656,575.26 99.48 02/18/24CSFB 660,000.00 808513BN4CHARLES SCHWAB CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 03/18/2021 0.750% 03/18/2024
0.98 2.20
(15,246.10)(14,852.64) 1,438,023.06 98.83 JPM_CHA 1,455,000.00 023135BW5AMAZON.COM INC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 05/12/2021 0.450% 05/12/2024
0.93 2.44
(4,734.31)(5,254.35) 1,781,500.65 103.28 06/30/24MORGAN_ 1,725,000.00 025816CG2AMERICAN EXPRESS CO CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE
DTD 07/30/2019 2.500% 07/30/2024
1.25 2.50
(3,706.12)(3,706.12) 436,293.88 99.16 08/12/22DEUTSCH 440,000.00 904764BN6UNILEVER CAPITAL CORP (CALLABLE)
CORPORA
DTD 08/12/2021 0.626% 08/12/2024
0.94 0.70
(4,857.53)(4,852.84) 510,100.81 99.05 GOLDMAN 515,000.00 05565EBU8BMW US CAPITAL LLC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 08/12/2021 0.750% 08/12/2024
1.11 2.67
(42,220.23)(78,685.00) 2,561,765.00 102.47 12/20/24US_BANC 2,500,000.00 90331HPL1US BANK NA CINCINNATI (CALLABLE)
CORPORA
DTD 01/21/2020 2.050% 01/21/2025
1.25 2.96
(60,568.08)(100,146.00) 3,044,604.00 101.49 01/14/25US_BANC 3,000,000.00 66989HAP3NOVARTIS CAPITAL CORP
DTD 02/14/2020 1.750% 02/14/2025
1.27 3.04
(5,784.02)(5,784.02) 604,215.98 99.05 02/16/24JPM_CHA 610,000.00 46647PBY1JPMORGAN CHASE & CO CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE
DTD 02/16/2021 0.563% 02/16/2025
0.86 2.20
(10,793.53)(33,294.40) 1,681,569.60 105.10 12/01/24MERRILL 1,600,000.00 539830BE8LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 02/20/2015 2.900% 03/01/2025
1.29 2.88
Account 73340000 Page 18
Page 40
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
Corporate Note
(14,062.68)(42,691.20) 1,714,604.80 107.16 03/15/25SUSQ 1,600,000.00 369550BG2GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP (CALLABLE)
CORP NO
DTD 05/11/2018 3.500% 05/15/2025
1.37 3.14
(5,641.03)(5,680.50) 1,495,864.50 99.72 11/03/24MORGAN_ 1,500,000.00 172967ND9CITIGROUP INC CORP NOTE (CALLABLE)
DTD 11/03/2021 1.281% 11/03/2025
1.35 2.88
(44,191.01)(44,025.68) 1,639,980.17 97.33 12/28/25MITSU 1,685,000.00 06406RAQ0BANK OF NY MELLON CORP (CALLABLE)
CORPOR
DTD 01/28/2021 0.750% 01/28/2026
1.41 4.01
(44,270.92)(44,881.80) 1,858,994.20 97.84 MERRILL 1,900,000.00 38141GXS8GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 02/12/2021 0.855% 02/12/2026
1.39 4.12
(42,718.07)(51,533.05) 1,793,328.70 107.06 MORGAN_ 1,675,000.00 459200JZ5IBM CORP
DTD 05/15/2019 3.300% 05/15/2026
1.65 4.19
(31,401.88)(31,878.60) 1,652,216.65 98.64 04/28/26MORGAN_ 1,675,000.00 04636NAA1ASTRAZENECA FINANCE LLC (CALLABLE)
CORP
DTD 05/28/2021 1.200% 05/28/2026
1.51 4.31
(14,613.46)(14,502.02) 1,088,044.88 98.47 JPM_CHA 1,105,000.00 89236TJK2TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP
CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 06/18/2021 1.125% 06/18/2026
1.47 4.42
(1,626.60)(2,637.00) 1,059,683.00 105.97 SUSQ 1,000,000.00 61761J3R8MORGAN STANLEY CORP NOTES
DTD 07/25/2016 3.125% 07/27/2026
1.78 4.34
(4,590.84)(5,538.00) 1,052,002.00 105.20 07/01/26SUSQ 1,000,000.00 46625HRV4JPMORGAN CHASE & CO CORP NOTES
DTD 07/21/2016 2.950% 10/01/2026
1.82 4.31
(121,468.40) 1.17 (61,976.40) 37,167,228.50 36,475,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.76
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
4,538.14 4,538.14 249,538.14 101.85 NEW ACC 245,000.00 949763S64WELLS FARGO BANK NA
DTD 01/29/2020 1.900% 01/30/2023
0.31 1.15
4,367.37 4,367.37 249,367.37 101.78 NEW ACC 245,000.00 61760A6Q7MORGAN STANLEY PVT BANK
DTD 01/30/2020 1.850% 01/30/2023
0.32 1.15
(2,033.25)(2,033.25) 242,966.75 99.17 NEW ACC 245,000.00 29278TQD5ENERBANK USA
DTD 07/24/2020 0.450% 07/24/2024
0.77 2.63
Account 73340000 Page 19
Page 41
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
(3,600.76)(3,600.76) 241,399.24 98.53 NEW ACC 245,000.00 169894AT9CHIPPEWA VALLEY BANK
DTD 07/29/2020 0.500% 07/29/2025
0.91 3.63
(3,164.42)(3,164.42) 241,835.58 98.71 NEW ACC 245,000.00 58404DHQ7MEDALLION BANK UTAH
DTD 07/30/2020 0.550% 07/30/2025
0.91 3.63
107.08 0.64 107.08 1,225,107.08 1,225,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.42
Asset-Backed Security
(264.31)(259.14) 179,722.66 99.85 MITSU 180,000.00 58770GAC4MBALT 2021-A A3
DTD 01/27/2021 0.250% 01/16/2024
0.32 1.05
(724.58)(719.43) 279,257.27 99.73 SOCGEN 280,000.00 44891TAD8HALST 2021-A A4
DTD 01/20/2021 0.420% 12/16/2024
0.51 1.46
(2,141.79)(2,126.85) 512,795.39 99.57 RBC 515,000.00 36261RAD0GMALT 2021-1 A4
DTD 02/24/2021 0.330% 02/20/2025
0.46 1.58
(1,770.56)(1,768.77) 528,221.53 99.66 JPM_CHA 530,000.00 43813GAC5HAROT 2021-1 A3
DTD 02/24/2021 0.270% 04/21/2025
0.37 1.26
(3,004.70)(2,997.00) 536,946.19 99.43 BARCLAY 540,000.00 44933LAC7HART 2021-A A3
DTD 04/28/2021 0.380% 09/15/2025
0.53 1.62
(1,474.42)(1,463.55) 373,476.75 99.59 DEUTSCH 375,000.00 36261LAC5GMCAR 2021-1 A3
DTD 01/20/2021 0.350% 10/16/2025
0.46 1.26
(12,480.67)(12,477.88) 912,487.25 98.65 MITSU 925,000.00 50117XAE2KCOT 2021-2A A3
DTD 07/28/2021 0.560% 11/17/2025
0.91 2.46
(633.53)(629.43) 119,346.86 99.46 MITSU 120,000.00 14316NAC3CARMX 2021-1 A3
DTD 01/27/2021 0.340% 12/15/2025
0.48 1.28
64.32 65.04 744,907.99 99.99 MERRILL 745,000.00 43815GAC3HAROT 2021-4 A3
DTD 11/24/2021 0.880% 01/21/2026
0.88 2.25
(4,045.94)(4,023.76) 805,801.69 99.48 MERRILL 810,000.00 14314QAC8CARMX 2021-2 A3
DTD 04/21/2021 0.520% 02/17/2026
0.64 1.39
(11,804.00)(11,786.21) 1,517,962.11 99.21 RBC 1,530,000.00 14317DAC4CARMX 2021-3 A3
DTD 07/28/2021 0.550% 06/15/2026
0.73 2.25
625.24 625.38 1,865,368.38 100.02 BARCLAY 1,865,000.00 14041NFY2COMET 2021-A3 A3
DTD 11/30/2021 1.040% 11/16/2026
1.04 2.90
(37,561.60) 0.74 (37,654.94) 8,376,294.07 8,415,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.08
Account 73340000 Page 20
Page 42
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
269,605,000.00 270,479,494.02 (4,006,558.41)(2,384,729.20) 0.76 Managed Account Sub-Total 2.51
Total Investments $271,078,971.64
$599,477.62
$270,479,494.02
Accrued Interest
Securities Sub-Total $269,605,000.00 ($4,006,558.41)($2,384,729.20) 0.76% 2.51
Account 73340000 Page 21
Page 43
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Transaction Type
Trade CUSIPSecurity DescriptionSettle Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method
BUY
11/03/21 US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/15/2021 0.250% 05/15/2024
91282CCC3 (1,878,921.88)(2,220.11)(1,881,141.99) 1,900,000.00 11/01/21
11/03/21 US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 0.375% 10/31/2023
91282CDD0 (5,983,125.00)(186.46)(5,983,311.46) 6,000,000.00 11/01/21
11/03/21 CITIGROUP INC CORP NOTE
(CALLABLE)
DTD 11/03/2021 1.281% 11/03/2025
172967ND9 (1,501,545.00) 0.00 (1,501,545.00) 1,500,000.00 11/01/21
11/03/21 JPMORGAN CHASE & CO CORP NOTES
DTD 07/21/2016 2.950% 10/01/2026
46625HRV4 (1,057,540.00)(2,622.22)(1,060,162.22) 1,000,000.00 11/01/21
11/03/21 MORGAN STANLEY CORP NOTES
DTD 07/25/2016 3.125% 07/27/2026
61761J3R8 (1,062,320.00)(8,333.33)(1,070,653.33) 1,000,000.00 11/01/21
11/24/21 HAROT 2021-4 A3
DTD 11/24/2021 0.880% 01/21/2026
43815GAC3 (744,842.95) 0.00 (744,842.95) 745,000.00 11/16/21
11/18/21 US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 1.125% 10/31/2026
91282CDG3 (397,578.13)(223.76)(397,801.89) 400,000.00 11/17/21
11/30/21 COMET 2021-A3 A3
DTD 11/30/2021 1.040% 11/16/2026
14041NFY2 (1,864,743.00) 0.00 (1,864,743.00) 1,865,000.00 11/18/21
11/23/21 AMERICAN EXPRESS CO CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE
DTD 07/30/2019 2.500% 07/30/2024
025816CG2 (1,786,755.00)(13,536.46)(1,800,291.46) 1,725,000.00 11/19/21
(27,122.34)(16,304,493.30)(16,277,370.96) 16,135,000.00 Transaction Type Sub-Total
INTEREST
11/01/21 MONEY MARKET FUND MONEY0002 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.00 11/01/21
11/03/21 APPLE INC GLOBAL NOTES
DTD 05/03/2013 2.400% 05/03/2023
037833AK6 0.00 40,680.00 40,680.00 3,390,000.00 11/03/21
11/06/21 FREDDIE MAC NOTES
DTD 11/05/2020 0.250% 11/06/2023
3137EAEZ8 0.00 2,125.00 2,125.00 1,700,000.00 11/06/21
11/07/21 FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 11/12/2020 0.500% 11/07/2025
3135G06G3 0.00 14,725.00 14,725.00 5,890,000.00 11/07/21
11/11/21 APPLE INC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 05/11/2020 0.750% 05/11/2023
037833DV9 0.00 5,400.00 5,400.00 1,440,000.00 11/11/21
11/12/21 AMAZON.COM INC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 05/12/2021 0.450% 05/12/2024
023135BW5 0.00 3,273.75 3,273.75 1,455,000.00 11/12/21
Account 73340000 Page 22
Page 44
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Transaction Type
Trade CUSIPSecurity DescriptionSettle Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method
INTEREST
11/15/21 US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/15/2021 0.250% 05/15/2024
91282CCC3 0.00 2,375.00 2,375.00 1,900,000.00 11/15/21
11/15/21 HALST 2021-A A4
DTD 01/20/2021 0.420% 12/16/2024
44891TAD8 0.00 98.00 98.00 280,000.00 11/15/21
11/15/21 CARMX 2021-3 A3
DTD 07/28/2021 0.550% 06/15/2026
14317DAC4 0.00 701.25 701.25 1,530,000.00 11/15/21
11/15/21 HART 2021-A A3
DTD 04/28/2021 0.380% 09/15/2025
44933LAC7 0.00 171.00 171.00 540,000.00 11/15/21
11/15/21 CARMX 2021-1 A3
DTD 01/27/2021 0.340% 12/15/2025
14316NAC3 0.00 34.00 34.00 120,000.00 11/15/21
11/15/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/15/2012 1.625% 11/15/2022
912828TY6 0.00 46,718.75 46,718.75 5,750,000.00 11/15/21
11/15/21 IBM CORP
DTD 05/15/2019 3.300% 05/15/2026
459200JZ5 0.00 27,637.50 27,637.50 1,675,000.00 11/15/21
11/15/21 KCOT 2021-2A A3
DTD 07/28/2021 0.560% 11/17/2025
50117XAE2 0.00 431.67 431.67 925,000.00 11/15/21
11/15/21 CARMX 2021-2 A3
DTD 04/21/2021 0.520% 02/17/2026
14314QAC8 0.00 351.00 351.00 810,000.00 11/15/21
11/15/21 GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP (CALLABLE)
CORP NO
DTD 05/11/2018 3.500% 05/15/2025
369550BG2 0.00 28,000.00 28,000.00 1,600,000.00 11/15/21
11/15/21 MBALT 2021-A A3
DTD 01/27/2021 0.250% 01/16/2024
58770GAC4 0.00 37.50 37.50 180,000.00 11/15/21
11/16/21 GMCAR 2021-1 A3
DTD 01/20/2021 0.350% 10/16/2025
36261LAC5 0.00 109.38 109.38 375,000.00 11/16/21
11/17/21 INTL BK OF RECON AND DEV NOTE
DTD 04/20/2021 0.126% 04/20/2023
459058JV6 0.00 8.72 8.72 0.00 11/17/21
11/20/21 GMALT 2021-1 A4
DTD 02/24/2021 0.330% 02/20/2025
36261RAD0 0.00 141.63 141.63 515,000.00 11/20/21
11/21/21 HAROT 2021-1 A3
DTD 02/24/2021 0.270% 04/21/2025
43813GAC5 0.00 119.25 119.25 530,000.00 11/21/21
11/24/21 ENERBANK USA
DTD 07/24/2020 0.450% 07/24/2024
29278TQD5 0.00 93.64 93.64 245,000.00 11/24/21
Account 73340000 Page 23
Page 45
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Transaction Type
Trade CUSIPSecurity DescriptionSettle Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method
INTEREST
11/24/21 INTL BK RECON & DEVELOP NOTES
DTD 11/24/2020 0.250% 11/24/2023
459058JM6 0.00 1,762.50 1,762.50 1,410,000.00 11/24/21
11/27/21 FANNIE MAE NOTES
DTD 11/25/2020 0.250% 11/27/2023
3135G06H1 0.00 5,500.00 5,500.00 4,400,000.00 11/27/21
11/28/21 ASTRAZENECA FINANCE LLC
(CALLABLE) CORP
DTD 05/28/2021 1.200% 05/28/2026
04636NAA1 0.00 10,050.00 10,050.00 1,675,000.00 11/28/21
11/29/21 CHIPPEWA VALLEY BANK
DTD 07/29/2020 0.500% 07/29/2025
169894AT9 0.00 104.04 104.04 245,000.00 11/29/21
11/29/21 WELLS FARGO BANK NA
DTD 01/29/2020 1.900% 01/30/2023
949763S64 0.00 395.36 395.36 245,000.00 11/29/21
11/30/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2019 1.500% 11/30/2024
912828YV6 0.00 37,500.00 37,500.00 5,000,000.00 11/30/21
11/30/21 US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/31/2021 0.750% 05/31/2026
91282CCF6 0.00 22,875.00 22,875.00 6,100,000.00 11/30/21
11/30/21 MEDALLION BANK UTAH
DTD 07/30/2020 0.550% 07/30/2025
58404DHQ7 0.00 114.45 114.45 245,000.00 11/30/21
11/30/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2016 1.625% 05/31/2023
912828R69 0.00 28,437.50 28,437.50 3,500,000.00 11/30/21
11/30/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2015 2.000% 11/30/2022
912828M80 0.00 84,000.00 84,000.00 8,400,000.00 11/30/21
363,971.83 363,971.83 0.00 62,070,000.00 Transaction Type Sub-Total
SELL
11/03/21 INTL BANK OF RECONSTRUCTION AND
DEV NOTE
DTD 01/26/2017 2.000% 01/26/2022
459058FY4 2,008,600.00 10,777.78 2,019,377.78 3,920.00 8,361.02 FIFO 2,000,000.00 11/01/21
11/03/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 07/31/2015 2.000% 07/31/2022
912828XQ8 2,976,388.09 15,153.53 2,991,541.62 (59,387.89) 837.40 FIFO 2,935,000.00 11/01/21
11/03/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/15/2019 1.375% 10/15/2022
912828YK0 2,023,437.50 1,435.44 2,024,872.94 (27,187.50)(11.30)FIFO 2,000,000.00 11/01/21
11/03/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 06/30/2020 0.125% 06/30/2022
912828ZX1 4,501,406.25 1,925.95 4,503,332.20 2,285.16 1,734.47 FIFO 4,500,000.00 11/01/21
Account 73340000 Page 24
Page 46
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - 73340000
Transaction Type
Trade CUSIPSecurity DescriptionSettle Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method
SELL
11/19/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/15/2019 1.375% 10/15/2022
912828YK0 753,206.64 984.98 754,191.62 (10,651.17)(124.12)FIFO 745,000.00 11/16/21
11/23/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 10/15/2019 1.375% 10/15/2022
912828YK0 1,066,621.48 1,554.24 1,068,175.72 (15,083.21)(32.78)FIFO 1,055,000.00 11/19/21
31,831.92 10,764.69 (106,104.61) 13,361,491.88 13,329,659.96 13,235,000.00 Transaction Type Sub-Total
(2,947,711.00) 368,681.41 (2,579,029.59)(106,104.61) 10,764.69 Managed Account Sub-Total
Total Security Transactions ($106,104.61)($2,579,029.59)$368,681.41 ($2,947,711.00)$10,764.69
Account 73340000 Page 25
Page 47
Trustee and/orPurchase Maturity CostBond Issue/DescriptionPaying AgentAccount NameTrust Account #FundInvestmentDateDate*YieldValueCFD 2003-01 Improvement Area 1 (2013) Wells Fargo Reserve Fund 46571801 865 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 1,417,028.87$ Agency Project 46571807 614 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 77,813.36$ Cultural Center Fund 46571808 615 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 191,848.11$ Bond Fund 46571800 864 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 4.51$ Developer Project 46571806 614 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 98,094.59$ Special Tax 46571805 864 Money Market Fund 9/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 77.15$ 1,784,866.59$ CFD 2003-01 Improvement Area 2 (2013) Wells Fargo Bond Fund 46659800 866 Money Market Fund 12/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 0.85$ Reserve Fund 46659801 867 Money Market Fund 12/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 132,476.41$ Special Tax Fund 46659805 866 Money Market Fund 12/1/2013 N/A 0.01% 7.23$ 132,484.49$ CFD No 2004-01 Rancho Etiwanda Series Wells Fargo Admin Expense Fund 48436802 Money Market Fund N/A 0.01% -$ Bond Fund 48436800 820 Money Market Fund N/A 0.01% 9.88Reserve Fund 48436801 821 Money Market Fund N/A 0.01% 1,187,390.11Special Tax Fund 48436807 820 Money Market Fund N/A 64.73Project Fund 48436809 617 Money Market Fund N/A 44,981.861,232,446.58$ 2014 Rancho Summit Wells Fargo Cost of Issuance Fund 48709906 Money Market Fund N/A -$ Bond Fund 48709900 858 Money Market Fund N/A 3.25 Reserve Fund 48709901 859 Money Market Fund N/A 260,758.78 Sepcial Tax Fund 48709907 858 Money Market Fund N/A 14.19 Rebate Fund 48709908 Money Market Fund N/A - Redemption Fund 48709903 Money Market Fund N/A - Prepayment Fund 48709904 Money Market Fund N/A - 260,776.22$ 2019 Lease Revenue Bonds Wells Fargo Bond Fund 82631600 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A 1.16$ Interest 82631601 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A - Principal 82631602 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A 1.71 Acquisition and Construciton - Series A 82631605 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A 7,633,054.68 Acquisition and Construciton - Series B 82631606 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A 2,294,284.03 Cost of Issuance 82631607 711 Money Market Fund 2/28/2019 N/A - 9,927,341.58$ CFD No. 2000-01 South Etiwanda Union Bank Rancho Cucamonga 2015 CFD2000-1 AGY 6712140200 7/30/2015 N/A -$ Special Tax Fund 6712140201 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 10,652.50 Bond Fund 6712140202 852 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.10 Prepayment Fund 6712140203 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A - Reserve Fund 6712140204 853 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.00% 12,100.19 22,752.79$ City of Rancho Cucamonga Summary of Cash and Investments with Fiscal AgentsFor the Month Ended11/30/2021\\RCV00117\Departments\FINANCE\KATHERINE\Fiscal Agent Stmts\FY 2021-22\11-2021\November 2021 Fiscal Agent Statements Workbook.xlsx Summary ReportPage 1 Page 48
Trustee and/orPurchase Maturity CostBond Issue/DescriptionPaying AgentAccount NameTrust Account #FundInvestmentDateDate*YieldValueCity of Rancho Cucamonga Summary of Cash and Investments with Fiscal AgentsFor the Month Ended11/30/2021CFD No. 2000-02 Rancho Cucamonga Corporate Park Union Bank Rancho Cucamonga 2015 CFD2000-2 AGY 6712140300 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A -$ Special Tax Fund 6712140301 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 91,570.73$ Bond Fund 6712140302 856 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.96$ Prepayment Fund 6712140303 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A -$ Reserve Fund 6712140304 857 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.00% 117,351.83 208,923.52$ CFD No. 2001-01 IA 1&2, Series A Union Bank Rancho Cucamonga 2015 CFD2001-1 AGY 6712140400 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A -$ Special Tax Fund 6712140401 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 186,191.58 Bond Fund 6712140402 860 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 1.06 Prepayment Fund 6712140403 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A - Reserve Fund 6712140404 861 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.00% 117,352.16 303,544.80$ CFD No. 2001-01 IA3, Series B Union Bank Rancho Cucamonga 2015 CFD2001-1 AGY 6712140500 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A -$ Special Tax Fund 6712140501 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 3,223.11 Bond Fund 6712140502 862 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.10 Prepayment Fund 6712140503 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A - Reserve Fund 6712140504 863 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.00% 26,250.34 29,473.55$ CFD No. 2006-01 Vintner's Grove Union Bank Rancho Cucamonga 2015 CFD2006-1 AGY 6712140600 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A -$ Special Tax Fund 6712140601 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 304.45 Bond Fund 6712140602 869 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.41 Prepayment Fund 6712140603 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A - Reserve Fund 6712140604 870 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.00% 130,468.48 130,773.34$ CFD No. 2006-02 Amador on Rt. 66 Union Bank Rancho Cucamonga 2015 CFD2006-2 AGY 6712140700 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A -$ Special Tax Fund 6712140701 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 1,190.57 Bond Fund 6712140702 871 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.25 Prepayment Fund 6712140703 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A - Reserve Fund 6712140704 872 Money Market Fund 7/30/2015 N/A 0.00% 78,282.61 79,473.43$ 14,112,856.89 TOTAL CASH AND INVESTMENTS WITH FISCAL AGENTS14,112,856.89$ * Note: These investments are money market accounts which have no stated maturity date as they may be liquidated upon demand.\\RCV00117\Departments\FINANCE\KATHERINE\Fiscal Agent Stmts\FY 2021-22\11-2021\November 2021 Fiscal Agent Statements Workbook.xlsx Summary ReportPage 2 Page 49
Page 50
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021
Account Statement
Consolidated Summary Statement
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Investment Allocation
Investment Type Closing Market Value Percent
250,026.91 0.38 Asset-Backed Security
2,149,908.31 3.28 Corporate Note
484,802.33 0.74 Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
794,771.04 1.21 Commercial Paper
2,721,869.55 4.15 Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
21,502,843.20 32.79 U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
36,651,018.92 55.88 Local Agency Investment Fund
1,031,524.88 1.57 Passbook/Checking Accounts
$65,586,765.14 Total 100.00%
Portfolio Summary
and Income
Closing
Market ValuePortfolio Holdings
Cash Dividends
PFM Managed Account 95,258.05 27,904,221.34
Local Agency Investment Fund 0.00 36,651,018.92
Passbook/Checking Accounts 0.00 1,031,524.88
$95,258.05 $65,586,765.14 Total
Maturity Distribution (Fixed Income Holdings)
Portfolio Holdings Closing Market Value Percent
37,682,543.80
794,771.04
0.00
0.00
2,362,043.75
7,316,235.96
5,156,212.62
4,205,898.18
8,069,059.79
0.00
57.46
1.21
0.00
0.00
3.60
11.16
7.86
6.41
12.30
0.00
Under 30 days
31 to 60 days
61 to 90 days
91 to 180 days
181 days to 1 year
1 to 2 years
2 to 3 years
3 to 4 years
4 to 5 years
Over 5 years
Total $65,586,765.14
433
100.00%
Weighted Average Days to Maturity
Sector Allocation
0.38%
ABS
3.28%
Corporate Note
0.74%
Cert of Deposit -
FDIC
1.21%
Commercial Paper
4.15%
Supra-National
Agency Bond / Note
32.79%
US TSY Bond / Note
55.88%
Local Agency
Investment Fund
1.57%
Passbook/Checking
Accounts
Summary Page 1
Page 51
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Summary Statement
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Total Cash Basis Earnings
Plus Net Realized Gains/Losses
Less Purchased Interest Related to Interest/Coupons
Interest/Dividends/Coupons Received
Earnings Reconciliation (Cash Basis) - Managed Account
Less Beginning Accrued Interest
Less Beginning Amortized Value of Securities
Less Cost of New Purchases
Plus Coupons/Dividends Received
Plus Proceeds of Maturities/Calls/Principal Payments
Plus Proceeds from Sales
Ending Accrued Interest
Ending Amortized Value of Securities
Earnings Reconciliation (Accrual Basis)
$24,697,048.13
0.00
(1,429,072.35)
4,674,112.47
0.00
(37,866.91)
$27,904,221.34
106,913.52
(4,489.01)
(7,166.46)
$95,258.05
Total
28,153,398.67
21,808.92
1,431,553.09
0.00
104,432.78
(4,678,601.48)
(24,927,578.80)
(100,661.29)
Total Accrual Basis Earnings $4,351.89
Closing Market Value
Change in Current Value
Unsettled Trades
Principal Acquisitions
Principal Dispositions
Maturities/Calls
Opening Market Value
Transaction Summary - Managed Account
_________________
_________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________Reconciling Transactions
Net Cash Contribution
Security Purchases
Principal Payments
Coupon/Interest/Dividend Income
Sale Proceeds
Maturities/Calls
Cash Transactions Summary - Managed Account
0.00
1,431,553.09
104,432.78
0.00
(4,678,601.48)
3,250,000.00
0.00
Cash Balance
$158,028.02 Closing Cash Balance
Account 73340100 Page 1
Page 52
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Portfolio Summary and Statistics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Account Summary
Percent Par Value Market ValueDescription
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note 21,375,000.00 21,502,843.20 77.06
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note 2,810,000.00 2,721,869.55 9.75
Corporate Note 2,065,000.00 2,149,908.31 7.70
Commercial Paper 795,000.00 794,771.04 2.85
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured 490,000.00 484,802.33 1.74
Asset-Backed Security 250,000.00 250,026.91 0.90
Managed Account Sub-Total 27,785,000.00 27,904,221.34 100.00%
Accrued Interest 21,808.92
Total Portfolio 27,785,000.00 27,926,030.26
Unsettled Trades 0.00 0.00
Sector Allocation
0.90%
ABS
1.74%
Cert of Deposit -
FDIC
2.85%
Commercial Paper
7.70%
Corporate Note
9.75%
Supra-National
Agency Bond / Note
77.06%
US TSY Bond / Note
0 - 6 Months 6 - 12 Months 1 - 2 Years 2 - 3 Years 3 - 4 Years 4 - 5 Years Over 5 Years
2.85%
8.46%
26.22%
18.48%
15.07%
28.92%
0.00%
Maturity Distribution Characteristics
Yield to Maturity at Cost
Yield to Maturity at Market
Weighted Average Days to Maturity 1016
0.52%
0.82%
Account 73340100 Page 2
Page 53
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Issuer Summary
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Credit Quality (S&P Ratings)
0.39%
A+
3.04%
A-
2.85%
A-1
1.33%
AA
77.05%
AA+
10.40%
AAA
2.95%
BBB+
1.99%
NR
Issuer Summary
Percentof HoldingsIssuer
Market Value
370,227.00 1.33 AMAZON.COM INC
284,007.35 1.02 AMERICAN EXPRESS CO
147,959.70 0.53 ASTRAZENECA PLC
177,701.70 0.64 BANK OF AMERICA CO
180,035.55 0.65 CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORP
181,767.57 0.65 CITIGROUP INC
242,966.75 0.87 ENERBANK USA
178,144.56 0.64 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC
69,991.36 0.25 HONDA AUTO RECEIVABLES
160,596.60 0.58 IBM CORP
360,601.02 1.29 INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK
2,361,268.53 8.45 INTL BANK OF RECONSTRUCTION AND DEV
362,442.38 1.30 JP MORGAN CHASE & CO
794,771.04 2.85 LMA AMERICAS LLC
241,835.58 0.87 MEDALLION BANK UTAH
178,749.29 0.64 MORGAN STANLEY
108,312.16 0.39 TOYOTA MOTOR CORP
21,502,843.20 77.05 UNITED STATES TREASURY
$27,904,221.34 Total 100.00%
Account 73340100 Page 3
Page 54
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2020 0.125% 11/30/2022
2,362,043.75 2,365,304.04 8.12 2,365,461.91 05/26/2105/25/21AaaAA+ 2,365,000.00 91282CAX9 0.11
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2018 2.750% 05/31/2023
2,374,966.52 2,383,839.04 173.39 2,414,591.02 05/26/2105/25/21AaaAA+ 2,295,000.00 9128284S6 0.16
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.125% 07/31/2023
994,531.20 998,618.78 417.80 998,359.38 08/09/2108/06/21AaaAA+ 1,000,000.00 91282CCN9 0.21
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 08/31/2021 0.125% 08/31/2023
790,155.43 793,855.37 252.56 793,695.70 09/03/2109/02/21AaaAA+ 795,000.00 91282CCU3 0.21
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 0.375% 10/31/2023
792,764.06 792,850.18 255.30 792,764.06 11/03/2111/01/21AaaAA+ 795,000.00 91282CDD0 0.52
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2018 2.875% 11/30/2023
2,363,818.75 2,379,390.01 178.50 2,410,342.97 05/26/2105/25/21AaaAA+ 2,260,000.00 9128285P1 0.22
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/15/2021 0.125% 01/15/2024
989,687.50 989,665.54 472.15 989,492.19 11/18/2111/17/21AaaAA+ 1,000,000.00 91282CBE0 0.62
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/15/2021 0.250% 05/15/2024
1,952,781.25 1,971,878.23 218.23 1,971,219.73 05/26/2105/25/21AaaAA+ 1,975,000.00 91282CCC3 0.31
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 06/15/2021 0.250% 06/15/2024
335,856.25 339,111.41 392.49 338,990.63 07/28/2107/26/21AaaAA+ 340,000.00 91282CCG4 0.35
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/15/2021 0.375% 07/15/2024
990,312.50 989,941.33 1,416.44 989,804.69 11/18/2111/17/21AaaAA+ 1,000,000.00 91282CCL3 0.76
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2019 1.500% 11/30/2024
2,038,437.60 2,062,960.91 82.42 2,073,828.13 05/26/2105/25/21AaaAA+ 2,000,000.00 912828YV6 0.44
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2020 0.250% 05/31/2025
1,925,625.00 1,953,159.26 13.56 1,949,926.76 05/26/2105/25/21AaaAA+ 1,975,000.00 912828ZT0 0.57
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2021 0.375% 01/31/2026
485,468.75 493,301.84 626.70 492,910.16 09/03/2109/01/21AaaAA+ 500,000.00 91282CBH3 0.70
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 04/30/2021 0.750% 04/30/2026
688,953.16 698,800.18 449.59 698,660.16 05/27/2105/25/21AaaAA+ 700,000.00 91282CBW0 0.79
Account 73340100 Page 4
Page 55
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2019 2.125% 05/31/2026
1,044,375.00 1,063,015.99 58.38 1,067,851.56 07/28/2107/26/21AaaAA+ 1,000,000.00 9128286X3 0.70
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 1.125% 10/31/2026
374,472.68 373,326.88 361.27 373,300.78 11/03/2111/01/21AaaAA+ 375,000.00 91282CDG3 1.22
US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 1.125% 10/31/2026
998,593.80 993,988.84 963.40 993,945.31 11/18/2111/17/21AaaAA+ 1,000,000.00 91282CDG3 1.25
6,340.30 21,502,843.20 21,643,007.83 0.43 21,715,145.14 21,375,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
INTER-AMERICAN DEVEL BK NOTES
DTD 09/23/2021 0.500% 09/23/2024
360,601.02 364,746.90 344.72 364,729.90 09/23/2109/15/21AaaAAA 365,000.00 4581X0DZ8 0.52
INTL BK RECON & DEVELOP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 02/10/2021 0.650% 02/10/2026
2,361,268.53 2,425,389.82 4,900.19 2,422,970.55 05/26/2105/25/21AaaAAA 2,445,000.00 459058JS3 0.85
5,244.91 2,721,869.55 2,790,136.72 0.80 2,787,700.45 2,810,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Corporate Note
AMERICAN EXPRESS CO CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE
DTD 07/30/2019 2.500% 07/30/2024
284,007.35 284,762.09 2,310.76 284,845.00 11/23/2111/19/21A3BBB+ 275,000.00 025816CG2 1.14
MORGAN STANLEY CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 01/27/2016 3.875% 01/27/2026
178,749.29 182,826.53 2,202.29 185,034.30 05/27/2105/25/21A1BBB+ 165,000.00 61746BDZ6 1.19
GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC CORP NOTES
(CALL
DTD 02/25/2016 3.750% 02/25/2026
178,144.56 181,445.80 1,650.00 183,570.75 05/27/2105/25/21A2BBB+ 165,000.00 38143U8H7 1.30
JP MORGAN CORP (CALLABLE) NOTES
DTD 03/23/2016 3.300% 04/01/2026
362,442.38 369,826.86 1,870.00 373,585.20 05/27/2105/25/21A2A- 340,000.00 46625HQW3 1.20
BANK OF AMERICA CORP NOTES
DTD 04/19/2016 3.500% 04/19/2026
177,701.70 181,020.13 673.75 182,902.50 05/27/2105/25/21A2A- 165,000.00 06051GFX2 1.21
Account 73340100 Page 5
Page 56
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
Corporate Note
CITIGROUP CORP NOTES
DTD 05/02/2016 3.400% 05/01/2026
181,767.57 185,326.45 481.67 187,113.90 05/27/2105/25/21A3BBB+ 170,000.00 172967KN0 1.29
AMAZON.COM INC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 05/12/2021 1.000% 05/12/2026
370,227.00 375,319.27 197.92 375,356.25 05/27/2105/25/21A1AA 375,000.00 023135BX3 0.98
IBM CORP
DTD 05/15/2019 3.300% 05/15/2026
160,596.60 164,422.10 220.00 165,211.50 09/03/2109/01/21A3A- 150,000.00 459200JZ5 1.08
ASTRAZENECA FINANCE LLC (CALLABLE)
CORP
DTD 05/28/2021 1.200% 05/28/2026
147,959.70 150,771.81 15.00 150,814.50 09/03/2109/01/21A3A- 150,000.00 04636NAA1 1.08
TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP CORPORATE
NOTES
DTD 06/18/2021 1.125% 06/18/2026
108,312.16 109,766.89 560.31 109,755.80 09/13/2109/08/21A1A+ 110,000.00 89236TJK2 1.17
10,181.70 2,149,908.31 2,185,487.93 1.15 2,198,189.70 2,065,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Commercial Paper
LMA AMERICAS LLC COMM PAPER
DTD 05/25/2021 0.000% 01/25/2022
794,771.04 794,805.67 0.00 794,137.87 05/26/2105/25/21P-1A-1 795,000.00 53944RAR9 0.16
0.00 794,771.04 794,805.67 0.16 794,137.87 795,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
ENERBANK USA
DTD 07/24/2020 0.450% 07/24/2024
242,966.75 245,000.00 21.14 245,000.00 07/24/2007/24/20NRNR 245,000.00 29278TQD5 0.45
MEDALLION BANK UTAH
DTD 07/30/2020 0.550% 07/30/2025
241,835.58 245,000.00 3.69 245,000.00 07/30/2007/30/20NRNR 245,000.00 58404DHQ7 0.55
24.83 484,802.33 490,000.00 0.50 490,000.00 490,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
Asset-Backed Security
HAROT 2021-4 A3
DTD 11/24/2021 0.880% 01/21/2026
69,991.36 69,985.31 11.98 69,985.24 11/24/2111/16/21AaaNR 70,000.00 43815GAC3 0.89
Account 73340100 Page 6
Page 57
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Detail of Securities Held
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value
Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Original YTM Accrued Amortized MarketTradeSettle
Par
Asset-Backed Security
COMET 2021-A3 A3
DTD 11/30/2021 1.040% 11/16/2026
180,035.55 179,975.21 5.20 179,975.20 11/30/2111/18/21NRAAA 180,000.00 14041NFY2 1.04
17.18 250,026.91 249,960.52 1.00 249,960.44 250,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total
27,785,000.00 28,235,133.60 0.52 21,808.92 28,153,398.67 27,904,221.34 Managed Account Sub-Total
$27,785,000.00 $28,235,133.60 $21,808.92 $28,153,398.67 $27,904,221.34 0.52%
$27,926,030.26
$21,808.92
Total Investments
Accrued Interest
Securities Sub-Total
Account 73340100 Page 7
Page 58
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
(3,260.29)(3,418.16) 2,362,043.75 99.88 HSBC 2,365,000.00 91282CAX9US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2020 0.125% 11/30/2022
0.25 1.00
(8,872.52)(39,624.50) 2,374,966.52 103.48 HSBC 2,295,000.00 9128284S6US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2018 2.750% 05/31/2023
0.42 1.48
(4,087.58)(3,828.18) 994,531.20 99.45 MERRILL 1,000,000.00 91282CCN9US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/31/2021 0.125% 07/31/2023
0.45 1.67
(3,699.94)(3,540.27) 790,155.43 99.39 CITIGRP 795,000.00 91282CCU3US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 08/31/2021 0.125% 08/31/2023
0.48 1.75
(86.12) 0.00 792,764.06 99.72 CITIGRP 795,000.00 91282CDD0US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 0.375% 10/31/2023
0.52 1.91
(15,571.26)(46,524.22) 2,363,818.75 104.59 CITIGRP 2,260,000.00 9128285P1US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2018 2.875% 11/30/2023
0.56 1.96
21.96 195.31 989,687.50 98.97 JPM_CHA 1,000,000.00 91282CBE0US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/15/2021 0.125% 01/15/2024
0.61 2.12
(19,096.98)(18,438.48) 1,952,781.25 98.88 BARCLAY 1,975,000.00 91282CCC3US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/15/2021 0.250% 05/15/2024
0.71 2.45
(3,255.16)(3,134.38) 335,856.25 98.78 MERRILL 340,000.00 91282CCG4US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 06/15/2021 0.250% 06/15/2024
0.73 2.53
371.17 507.81 990,312.50 99.03 JPM_CHA 1,000,000.00 91282CCL3US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/15/2021 0.375% 07/15/2024
0.75 2.61
(24,523.31)(35,390.53) 2,038,437.60 101.92 GOLDMAN 2,000,000.00 912828YV6US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2019 1.500% 11/30/2024
0.85 2.95
(27,534.26)(24,301.76) 1,925,625.00 97.50 WELLS_F 1,975,000.00 912828ZT0US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2020 0.250% 05/31/2025
0.98 3.49
(7,833.09)(7,441.41) 485,468.75 97.09 NOMURA 500,000.00 91282CBH3US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/31/2021 0.375% 01/31/2026
1.09 4.13
(9,847.02)(9,707.00) 688,953.16 98.42 BNP_PAR 700,000.00 91282CBW0US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 04/30/2021 0.750% 04/30/2026
1.12 4.35
(18,640.99)(23,476.56) 1,044,375.00 104.44 CITIGRP 1,000,000.00 9128286X3US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2019 2.125% 05/31/2026
1.11 4.32
1,145.80 1,171.90 374,472.68 99.86 MORGAN_ 375,000.00 91282CDG3US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 1.125% 10/31/2026
1.15 4.79
4,604.96 4,648.49 998,593.80 99.86 CITIGRP 1,000,000.00 91282CDG3US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 1.125% 10/31/2026
1.15 4.79
Account 73340100 Page 8
Page 59
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
(212,301.94) 0.69 (140,164.63) 21,502,843.20 21,375,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.52
Supra-National Agency Bond / Note
(4,145.88)(4,128.88) 360,601.02 98.79 JPM_CHA 365,000.00 4581X0DZ8INTER-AMERICAN DEVEL BK NOTES
DTD 09/23/2021 0.500% 09/23/2024
0.93 2.80
(64,121.29)(61,702.02) 2,361,268.53 96.58 02/10/22KEYBANC 2,445,000.00 459058JS3INTL BK RECON & DEVELOP NOTES
(CALLABLE)
DTD 02/10/2021 0.650% 02/10/2026
1.50 0.21
(65,830.90) 1.42 (68,267.17) 2,721,869.55 2,810,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 0.55
Corporate Note
(754.74)(837.65) 284,007.35 103.28 06/30/24MORGAN_ 275,000.00 025816CG2AMERICAN EXPRESS CO CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE
DTD 07/30/2019 2.500% 07/30/2024
1.25 2.50
(4,077.24)(6,285.01) 178,749.29 108.33 BNP_PAR 165,000.00 61746BDZ6MORGAN STANLEY CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 01/27/2016 3.875% 01/27/2026
1.79 3.85
(3,301.24)(5,426.19) 178,144.56 107.97 11/25/25JPM_CHA 165,000.00 38143U8H7GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC CORP NOTES
(CALL
DTD 02/25/2016 3.750% 02/25/2026
1.79 3.72
(7,384.48)(11,142.82) 362,442.38 106.60 01/01/26JSEB 340,000.00 46625HQW3JP MORGAN CORP (CALLABLE) NOTES
DTD 03/23/2016 3.300% 04/01/2026
1.71 3.85
(3,318.43)(5,200.80) 177,701.70 107.70 FIFTH_3 165,000.00 06051GFX2BANK OF AMERICA CORP NOTES
DTD 04/19/2016 3.500% 04/19/2026
1.67 4.10
(3,558.88)(5,346.33) 181,767.57 106.92 JPM_CHA 170,000.00 172967KN0CITIGROUP CORP NOTES
DTD 05/02/2016 3.400% 05/01/2026
1.76 4.14
(5,092.27)(5,129.25) 370,227.00 98.73 UBS 375,000.00 023135BX3AMAZON.COM INC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 05/12/2021 1.000% 05/12/2026
1.30 4.36
(3,825.50)(4,614.90) 160,596.60 107.06 MORGAN_ 150,000.00 459200JZ5IBM CORP
DTD 05/15/2019 3.300% 05/15/2026
1.65 4.19
(2,812.11)(2,854.80) 147,959.70 98.64 04/28/26MORGAN_ 150,000.00 04636NAA1ASTRAZENECA FINANCE LLC (CALLABLE)
CORP
DTD 05/28/2021 1.200% 05/28/2026
1.51 4.31
Account 73340100 Page 9
Page 60
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Value On Cost Amort CostCUSIPBrokerDatePriceDated Date/Coupon/Maturity Par at Mkt
Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/LNext Call MarketSecurity Type/Description YTMEffective
Duration
Corporate Note
(1,454.73)(1,443.64) 108,312.16 98.47 JPM_CHA 110,000.00 89236TJK2TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP
CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 06/18/2021 1.125% 06/18/2026
1.47 4.42
(48,281.39) 1.56 (35,579.62) 2,149,908.31 2,065,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 3.88
Commercial Paper
(34.63) 633.17 794,771.04 99.97 JPM_CHA 795,000.00 53944RAR9LMA AMERICAS LLC COMM PAPER
DTD 05/25/2021 0.000% 01/25/2022
0.19 0.16
633.17 0.19 (34.63) 794,771.04 795,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 0.16
Certificate of Deposit - FDIC Insured
(2,033.25)(2,033.25) 242,966.75 99.17 NEW ACC 245,000.00 29278TQD5ENERBANK USA
DTD 07/24/2020 0.450% 07/24/2024
0.77 2.63
(3,164.42)(3,164.42) 241,835.58 98.71 NEW ACC 245,000.00 58404DHQ7MEDALLION BANK UTAH
DTD 07/30/2020 0.550% 07/30/2025
0.91 3.63
(5,197.67) 0.84 (5,197.67) 484,802.33 490,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 3.13
Asset-Backed Security
6.05 6.12 69,991.36 99.99 MERRILL 70,000.00 43815GAC3HAROT 2021-4 A3
DTD 11/24/2021 0.880% 01/21/2026
0.88 2.25
60.34 60.35 180,035.55 100.02 BARCLAY 180,000.00 14041NFY2COMET 2021-A3 A3
DTD 11/30/2021 1.040% 11/16/2026
1.04 2.90
66.47 1.00 66.39 250,026.91 250,000.00 Security Type Sub-Total 2.72
27,785,000.00 27,904,221.34 (330,912.26)(249,177.33) 0.82 Managed Account Sub-Total 2.38
Total Investments $27,926,030.26
$21,808.92
$27,904,221.34
Accrued Interest
Securities Sub-Total $27,785,000.00 ($330,912.26)($249,177.33) 0.82% 2.38
Account 73340100 Page 10
Page 61
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Transaction Type
Trade CUSIPSecurity DescriptionSettle Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method
BUY
11/03/21 US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 1.125% 10/31/2026
91282CDG3 (373,300.78)(34.96)(373,335.74) 375,000.00 11/01/21
11/03/21 US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 0.375% 10/31/2023
91282CDD0 (792,764.06)(24.71)(792,788.77) 795,000.00 11/01/21
11/24/21 HAROT 2021-4 A3
DTD 11/24/2021 0.880% 01/21/2026
43815GAC3 (69,985.24) 0.00 (69,985.24) 70,000.00 11/16/21
11/18/21 US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 10/31/2021 1.125% 10/31/2026
91282CDG3 (993,945.31)(559.39)(994,504.70) 1,000,000.00 11/17/21
11/18/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 01/15/2021 0.125% 01/15/2024
91282CBE0 (989,492.19)(427.99)(989,920.18) 1,000,000.00 11/17/21
11/18/21 US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 07/15/2021 0.375% 07/15/2024
91282CCL3 (989,804.69)(1,283.97)(991,088.66) 1,000,000.00 11/17/21
11/30/21 COMET 2021-A3 A3
DTD 11/30/2021 1.040% 11/16/2026
14041NFY2 (179,975.20) 0.00 (179,975.20) 180,000.00 11/18/21
11/23/21 AMERICAN EXPRESS CO CORP NOTES
(CALLABLE
DTD 07/30/2019 2.500% 07/30/2024
025816CG2 (284,845.00)(2,157.99)(287,002.99) 275,000.00 11/19/21
(4,489.01)(4,678,601.48)(4,674,112.47) 4,695,000.00 Transaction Type Sub-Total
INTEREST
11/01/21 CITIGROUP CORP NOTES
DTD 05/02/2016 3.400% 05/01/2026
172967KN0 0.00 2,890.00 2,890.00 170,000.00 11/01/21
11/01/21 MONEY MARKET FUND MONEY0002 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.00 11/01/21
11/12/21 AMAZON.COM INC CORPORATE NOTES
DTD 05/12/2021 1.000% 05/12/2026
023135BX3 0.00 1,875.00 1,875.00 375,000.00 11/12/21
11/15/21 IBM CORP
DTD 05/15/2019 3.300% 05/15/2026
459200JZ5 0.00 2,475.00 2,475.00 150,000.00 11/15/21
11/15/21 US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 05/15/2021 0.250% 05/15/2024
91282CCC3 0.00 2,468.75 2,468.75 1,975,000.00 11/15/21
11/24/21 ENERBANK USA
DTD 07/24/2020 0.450% 07/24/2024
29278TQD5 0.00 93.64 93.64 245,000.00 11/24/21
11/28/21 ASTRAZENECA FINANCE LLC
(CALLABLE) CORP
DTD 05/28/2021 1.200% 05/28/2026
04636NAA1 0.00 900.00 900.00 150,000.00 11/28/21
Account 73340100 Page 11
Page 62
For the Month Ending November 30, 2021Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, FIRE PROT DIST - 73340100
Transaction Type
Trade CUSIPSecurity DescriptionSettle Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method
INTEREST
11/30/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2019 2.125% 05/31/2026
9128286X3 0.00 10,625.00 10,625.00 1,000,000.00 11/30/21
11/30/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2018 2.750% 05/31/2023
9128284S6 0.00 31,556.25 31,556.25 2,295,000.00 11/30/21
11/30/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 05/31/2020 0.250% 05/31/2025
912828ZT0 0.00 2,468.75 2,468.75 1,975,000.00 11/30/21
11/30/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2019 1.500% 11/30/2024
912828YV6 0.00 15,000.00 15,000.00 2,000,000.00 11/30/21
11/30/21 MEDALLION BANK UTAH
DTD 07/30/2020 0.550% 07/30/2025
58404DHQ7 0.00 114.45 114.45 245,000.00 11/30/21
11/30/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2018 2.875% 11/30/2023
9128285P1 0.00 32,487.50 32,487.50 2,260,000.00 11/30/21
11/30/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2020 0.125% 11/30/2022
91282CAX9 0.00 1,478.13 1,478.13 2,365,000.00 11/30/21
104,432.78 104,432.78 0.00 15,205,000.00 Transaction Type Sub-Total
SELL
11/03/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2019 1.500% 11/30/2024
912828YV6 352,183.01 2,205.74 354,388.75 (5,552.34)(3,955.46)FIFO 345,000.00 11/01/21
11/03/21 MUFG BANK LTD/NY COMM PAPER
DTD 05/25/2021 0.000% 02/18/2022
62479MBJ1 794,503.79 0.00 794,503.79 391.54 (141.77)FIFO 795,000.00 11/01/21
11/19/21 US TREASURY NOTES
DTD 11/30/2020 0.125% 11/30/2022
91282CAX9 74,953.13 44.06 74,997.19 (61.52)(56.83)FIFO 75,000.00 11/16/21
11/23/21 US TREASURY N/B NOTES
DTD 06/15/2021 0.250% 06/15/2024
91282CCG4 207,432.42 230.94 207,663.36 (1,944.14)(2,014.00)FIFO 210,000.00 11/19/21
2,480.74 (6,168.06)(7,166.46) 1,431,553.09 1,429,072.35 1,425,000.00 Transaction Type Sub-Total
(3,245,040.12) 102,424.51 (3,142,615.61)(7,166.46)(6,168.06)Managed Account Sub-Total
Total Security Transactions ($7,166.46)($3,142,615.61)$102,424.51 ($3,245,040.12)($6,168.06)
Account 73340100 Page 12
Page 63
DATE:December 15, 2021
TO:President and Members of the Board of Directors
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Robert Neiuber, Human Resources Director
Lucy Alvarez-Nunez, Management Analyst I
SUBJECT:Consideration of a Resolution Adopting the Rancho Cucamonga Fire
Protection District Salary Schedules for Fiscal Year 2021-22.
(RESOLUTION NO. FD 2021-033) (FIRE)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Fire Board adopt the attached resolution approving the salary schedules
for job classifications employed by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District for fiscal year
2021-22.
BACKGROUND:
The Fire Board traditionally adopts salary resolutions for those classifications employed by the
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District. These resolutions are updated twice a year to reflect changes
in salaries, additions, and deletions of classifications, changes in job titles and other terms of
employment.
Effective January 1, 2022, the State of California minimum wage will increase from $14.00 to
$15.00 per hour.
ANALYSIS:
In order to comply with the State of California minimum wage law, the attached resolution adopts
changes to the part-time Fire Support salary schedule increasing the bottom steps of the Fire
Prevention Assistant and Fire Clerk position to $15.00 per hour.
All other Fire salary schedules, classifications, job titles, and other terms of employment remain
the same.
Staff recommends that the Fire Board approve the resolution updating the Fire District’s salary
schedules for fiscal year 2021-22 to include the aforementioned changes.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Adjustments to the part-time salary ranges were accounted for in the current fiscal year budget.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item addresses the Council’s Vision to build on our success as a world class community,
create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant City, rich in opportunity for all to thrive.
Page 64
Page 2
1
0
5
0
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Resolution No. FD 2021-033
Attachment 2 – Fire Management Employee Group Salary Schedule
Attachment 3 – Fire Union Salary Schedule
Attachment 4 – Fire Support Services Association Salary Schedule
Attachment 5 – Part Time Fire Salary Schedule
Page 65
1
9
1
4
RESOLUTION NO. FD 2021-033
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT,
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
SALARY SCHEDULES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021-2022.
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District has
determined that it is necessary for the efficient operation and management of the District that
policies be established prescribing salary ranges, benefits and holidays and other policies for
employees of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District has
previously adopted salary resolutions that established salary ranges, benefits and other terms of
employment for employees of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District
recognizes that it is necessary from time to time to amend the salary resolution to accommodate
changes in position titles, classifications salary ranges, additions and deletions of classifications,
benefits and other terms of employment; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Rancho
Cucamonga Fire Protection District, Rancho Cucamonga, California to approve the attached
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Salary Schedules (Attachment 2 - 5) effective
January 1, 2022.
PASSED, APROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of December 2021.
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 66
Resolution No. FD 2021-XXX
A B C D E F
FIRE CHIEF 92.21 96.82 101.66 106.73 112.07 117.68 Hourly
7,376.45 7,745.60 8,132.88 8,538.29 8,965.94 9,414.20 Bi-Weekly
15,982.30 16,782.13 17,621.24 18,499.62 19,426.21 20,397.43 Monthly
FIRE DEPUTY CHIEF 75.65 79.43 83.40 87.58 91.95 96.55 Hourly
6,052.28 6,354.69 6,671.93 7,006.47 7,355.85 7,724.18 Bi-Weekly
13,113.27 13,768.49 14,455.84 15,180.69 15,937.67 16,735.71 Monthly
FIRE BATTALION CHIEF 47.10 49.45 51.92 54.52 57.24 Hourly
(56 Hour Workweek)5,274.87 5,538.71 5,814.98 6,106.34 6,411.04 Bi-Weekly
11,428.89 12,000.53 12,599.12 13,230.41 13,890.58 Monthly
FIRE BATTALION CHIEF 65.94 69.23 72.69 76.33 80.14 Hourly
(40 Hour Workweek)5,274.87 5,538.71 5,814.98 6,106.34 6,411.04 Bi-Weekly
11,428.89 12,000.53 12,599.11 13,230.41 13,890.58 Monthly
FIRE MARSHAL 70.72 74.25 77.97 81.87 85.95 Hourly
5,657.58 5,940.22 6,237.68 6,549.98 6,876.28 Bi-Weekly
12,258.10 12,870.47 13,514.97 14,191.61 14,898.61 Monthly
BC TRAINING OFFICER STIPEND (7.26% of 40 hr BC Current Step)
40 Hour Workweek 4.79 5.03 5.28 5.54 5.82 Hourly
56 Hour Workweek 3.42 3.59 3.77 3.96 4.16 Hourly
382.96 402.11 422.17 443.32 465.44 Bi-Weekly
829.74 871.24 914.70 960.53 1,008.46 Monthly
SALARY SCHEDULE
AS OF JANUARY 1, 2022
FIRE MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES GROUP
ATTACHMENT 2
Fire Management Employees Group
Salary Schedule
January 1, 2022Page67
Resolution No. FD 2021-XXX
A B C D E
FIRE CAPTAIN 34.53 36.26 38.06 39.96 41.96 Hourly
3,866.87 4,060.67 4,262.55 4,475.97 4,699.77 Bi-Weekly
8,378.21 8,798.12 9,235.53 9,697.93 10,182.83 Monthly
FIRE CAPTAIN 34.53 36.26 38.06 39.96 41.96 Hourly
SPECIALIST 3,866.87 4,060.67 4,262.55 4,475.97 4,699.77 Bi-Weekly
8,378.21 8,798.12 9,235.53 9,697.93 10,182.83 Monthly
FIRE ENGINEER 29.43 30.89 32.45 34.06 35.77 Hourly
3,295.84 3,459.65 3,633.84 3,814.96 4,006.45 Bi-Weekly
7,140.98 7,495.90 7,873.32 8,265.74 8,680.65 Monthly
FIREFIGHTER 25.72 27.01 28.36 29.78 31.26 Hourly
2,880.54 3,024.74 3,175.86 3,335.06 3,501.18 Bi-Weekly
6,241.17 6,553.60 6,881.03 7,225.96 7,585.88 Monthly
FIELD TRAINING OFFICER 48.33 50.75 53.28 55.95 58.74 Hourly
(40 hour Workweek)3,866.21 4,059.85 4,262.55 4,475.97 4,699.27 Bi-Weekly
8,376.78 8,796.34 9,235.53 9,697.93 10,181.76 Monthly
HAZARDOUS MATERIAL STIPEND (5% of Fire Engr. Step E)
(40 Hour Workweek)2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 Hourly
(56 Hour Workweek)1.79 1.79 1.79 1.79 1.79 Hourly
200.32 200.32 200.32 200.32 200.32 Bi-Weekly
434.03 434.03 434.03 434.03 434.03 Monthly
PARAMEDIC STIPEND (13.92% of Fire Engr. Step E)
(40 Hour Workweek)6.97 6.97 6.97 6.97 6.97 Hourly
(56 Hour Workweek)4.98 4.98 4.98 4.98 4.98 Hourly
557.70 557.70 557.70 557.70 557.70 Bi-Weekly
1,208.35 1,208.35 1,208.35 1,208.35 1,208.35 Monthly
FIELD TRAINING OFFICER STIPEND (9.3% of Fire Capt. Step E)
(40 Hour Workweek)5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 5.46 Hourly
(56 Hour Workweek)3.90 3.90 3.90 3.90 3.90 Hourly
437.08 437.08 437.08 437.08 437.08 Bi-Weekly
947.00 947.00 947.00 947.00 947.00 Monthly
TECHNICAL RESCUE STIPEND (5% of Fire Engr. Step E)
(40 Hour Workweek)2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 Hourly
(56 Hour Workweek)1.79 1.79 1.79 1.79 1.79 Hourly
200.32 200.32 200.32 200.32 200.32 Bi-Weekly
434.03 434.03 434.03 434.03 434.03 Monthly
.
TERRORISM LIAISON OFFICER STIPEND (2.5% of Fire Engr. Step E)
(40 Hour Workweek)1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 Hourly
(56 Hour Workweek)0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Hourly
100.16 100.16 100.16 100.16 100.16 Bi-Weekly
217.02 217.02 217.02 217.02 217.02 Monthly
BA, BS, or Fire Officer Certification
(40 Hour Workweek)1.83 1.83 1.83 1.83 1.83 Hourly
(56 Hour Workweek)1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 Hourly
146.31 146.31 146.31 146.31 146.31 Bi-Weekly
317.00 317.00 317.00 317.00 317.00 Monthly
MA, MS or Chief Officer Certification
(40 Hour Workweek)2.74 2.74 2.74 2.74 2.74 Hourly
(56 Hour Workweek)1.96 1.96 1.96 1.96 1.96 Hourly
219.23 219.23 219.23 219.23 219.23 Bi-Weekly
475.00 475.00 475.00 475.00 475.00 Monthly
FIRE UNION
JANUARY 1, 2022
ASSIGNMENTS OF CLASSIFICATIONS TO PAY RANGES
ATTACHMENT 3
Fire Union Salary Schedule
January 1, 2022Page68
Resolution No. FD 2021-XXX
A B C D E F
COMMUNICATIONS TECHNICIAN 25.37 26.64 27.97 29.37 30.83 32.38 Hourly
2,029.39 2,130.86 2,237.40 2,349.27 2,466.74 2,590.07 Bi-Weekly
4,397.01 4,616.86 4,847.70 5,090.09 5,344.59 5,611.82 Monthly
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS SENIOR 30.46 31.98 33.58 35.26 37.02 38.88 Hourly
COORDINATOR 2,436.77 2,558.61 2,686.54 2,820.86 2,961.91 3,110.00 Bi-Weekly
5,279.66 5,543.65 5,820.83 6,111.87 6,417.46 6,738.34 Monthly
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 38.00 39.90 41.89 43.99 46.19 48.50 Hourly
COORDINATOR 3,039.81 3,191.80 3,351.39 3,518.96 3,694.91 3,879.65 Bi-Weekly
6,586.25 6,915.56 7,261.34 7,624.41 8,005.63 8,405.91 Monthly
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES 49.38 51.85 54.44 57.16 60.02 63.02 Hourly
ADMINISTRATOR 3,950.49 4,148.01 4,355.41 4,573.18 4,801.84 5,041.93 Bi-Weekly
8,559.39 8,987.36 9,436.73 9,908.56 10,403.99 10,924.19 Monthly
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES 41.14 43.20 45.36 47.63 50.01 52.51 Hourly
QUALITY IMPROVEMENT NURSE 3,291.69 3,456.28 3,629.10 3,810.56 4,001.09 4,201.15 Bi-Weekly
7,132.01 7,488.62 7,863.06 8,256.22 8,669.04 9,102.50 Monthly
FIRE BUSINESS MANAGER 43.05 45.20 47.46 49.83 52.33 54.94 Hourly
3,443.90 3,616.09 3,796.90 3,986.74 4,186.08 4,395.38 Bi-Weekly
7,461.78 7,834.87 8,226.61 8,637.94 9,069.84 9,523.33 Monthly
FIRE EQUIPMENT APPRENTICE 19.79 20.78 21.82 22.91 24.06 25.26 Hourly
MECHANIC 1,583.51 1,662.69 1,745.82 1,833.11 1,924.77 2,021.01 Bi-Weekly
3,430.95 3,602.49 3,782.62 3,971.75 4,170.34 4,378.85 Monthly
FIRE EQUIPMENT LEAD 27.28 28.64 30.08 31.58 33.16 34.82 Hourly
MECHANIC 2,182.35 2,291.47 2,406.04 2,526.34 2,652.66 2,785.29 Bi-Weekly
4,728.42 4,964.84 5,213.09 5,473.74 5,747.43 6,034.80 Monthly
FIRE EQUIPMENT MECHANIC 24.74 25.98 27.28 28.64 30.07 31.58 Hourly
1,979.19 2,078.15 2,182.05 2,291.16 2,405.71 2,526.00 Bi-Weekly
4,288.24 4,502.65 4,727.78 4,964.17 5,212.38 5,473.00 Monthly
FIRE INFORMATION SYSTEMS 24.07 25.27 26.54 27.87 29.26 30.72 Hourly
TECHNICIAN 1,925.70 2,021.99 2,123.08 2,229.24 2,340.70 2,457.74 Bi-Weekly
4,172.35 4,380.97 4,600.02 4,830.02 5,071.52 5,325.09 Monthly
FIRE SUPPORT SERVICES ASSOCIATION
SALARY SCHEDULE
AS OF JANUARY 1, 2022
ATTACHMENT 4
Fire Support Services Association Salary Schedule
January 1, 2022Page69
Resolution No. FD 2021-XXX
A B C D E F
FIRE PREVENTION SPECIALIST 27.16 28.52 29.95 31.44 33.02 34.67 Hourly
INSPECTION I 2,172.93 2,281.58 2,395.66 2,515.44 2,641.22 2,773.28 Bi-Weekly
4,708.02 4,943.43 5,190.60 5,450.13 5,722.63 6,008.76 Monthly
FIRE PREVENTION SPECIALIST 29.94 31.44 33.01 34.66 36.40 38.22 Hourly
INSPECTION II 2,395.52 2,515.29 2,641.06 2,773.11 2,911.76 3,057.35 Bi-Weekly
5,190.28 5,449.80 5,722.29 6,008.40 6,308.82 6,624.26 Monthly
FIRE PREVENTION SUPERVISOR 34.07 35.77 37.56 39.44 41.41 43.48 Hourly
2,725.55 2,861.83 3,004.92 3,155.16 3,312.92 3,478.57 Bi-Weekly
5,905.36 6,200.62 6,510.65 6,836.19 7,178.00 7,536.90 Monthly
FIRE SHOP SUPERVISOR 32.73 34.36 36.08 37.89 39.78 41.77 Hourly
2,618.16 2,749.07 2,886.52 3,030.85 3,182.39 3,341.51 Bi-Weekly
5,672.69 5,956.32 6,254.14 6,566.84 6,895.19 7,239.95 Monthly
MAINTENANCE OFFICER 36.33 38.15 40.05 42.06 44.16 46.37 Hourly
2,906.43 3,051.75 3,204.34 3,364.56 3,532.79 3,709.43 Bi-Weekly
6,297.27 6,612.13 6,942.74 7,289.88 7,654.37 8,037.09 Monthly
MANAGEMENT AIDE 24.99 26.24 27.56 28.93 30.38 31.90 Hourly
1,999.49 2,099.47 2,204.44 2,314.66 2,430.39 2,551.91 Bi-Weekly
4,332.23 4,548.84 4,776.28 5,015.10 5,265.85 5,529.15 Monthly
MANAGEMENT ANALYST I 29.01 30.46 31.98 33.58 35.26 37.02 Hourly
2,320.73 2,436.77 2,558.61 2,686.54 2,820.86 2,961.91 Bi-Weekly
5,028.25 5,279.66 5,543.65 5,820.83 6,111.87 6,417.46 Monthly
MANAGEMENT ANALYST II 33.34 35.00 36.75 38.59 40.52 42.55 Hourly
2,666.98 2,800.33 2,940.34 3,087.36 3,241.73 3,403.81 Bi-Weekly
5,778.45 6,067.37 6,370.74 6,689.28 7,023.74 7,374.93 Monthly
MANAGEMENT ANALYST III 36.31 38.12 40.03 42.03 44.13 46.34 Hourly
2,904.64 3,049.87 3,202.36 3,362.48 3,530.60 3,707.13 Bi-Weekly
6,293.38 6,608.05 6,938.45 7,285.37 7,649.64 8,032.12 Monthly
PLANS EXAMINER - FIRE 33.37 35.04 36.79 38.63 40.57 42.59 Hourly
2,669.90 2,803.39 2,943.56 3,090.74 3,245.28 3,407.54 Bi-Weekly
5,784.78 6,074.02 6,377.72 6,696.61 7,031.44 7,383.01 Monthly
AS OF JANUARY 1, 2022
FIRE SUPPORT SERVICES ASSOCIATION
SALARY SCHEDULE
ATTACHMENT 4
Fire Support Services Association Salary Schedule
January 1, 2022Page70
Resolution No. FD 2021-XXX
A B C D E F
PUBLIC EDUCATION 28.09 29.50 30.97 32.52 34.15 35.85 Hourly
SPECIALIST 2,247.45 2,359.82 2,477.82 2,601.71 2,731.79 2,868.38 Bi-Weekly
4,869.48 5,112.95 5,368.60 5,637.03 5,918.88 6,214.83 Monthly
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 17.85 18.79 19.78 20.82 21.92 23.07 Hourly
1,428.16 1,503.33 1,582.45 1,665.74 1,753.41 1,845.69 Bi-Weekly
3,094.35 3,257.21 3,428.64 3,609.10 3,799.05 3,999.00 Monthly
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT 22.31 23.48 24.72 26.02 28.83 30.35 Hourly
1,784.58 1,878.50 1,977.37 2,081.44 2,306.38 2,427.69 Bi-Weekly
3,866.58 4,070.08 4,284.30 4,509.79 4,997.15 5,260.00 Monthly
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT II 25.95 27.31 28.75 30.26 31.85 33.53 Hourly
2,075.64 2,184.88 2,299.87 2,420.92 2,548.34 2,682.46 Bi-Weekly
4,497.21 4,733.91 4,983.06 5,245.33 5,521.40 5,812.00 Monthly
FIRE SUPPORT SERVICES ASSOCIATION
SALARY SCHEDULE
AS OF JANUARY 1, 2022
ATTACHMENT 4
Fire Support Services Association Salary Schedule
January 1, 2022Page71
Resolution No. FD 2021-XXX
A B C D E F
COMMUNICATIONS TECHNICIAN 24.38 25.60 26.88 28.23 29.64 31.12 Hourly
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES 41.14 43.20 45.36 47.62 50.01 52.51 Hourly
QUALITY IMPROVEMENT NURSE
FIRE CLERK (one step)15.00 Hourly
FIRE EQUIPMENT MECHANIC 23.22 24.38 25.60 26.88 28.23 29.64 Hourly
FIRE INFORMATION SYSTEMS 23.14 24.29 25.51 26.78 28.12 29.53 Hourly
TECHNICIAN
FIRE PREVENTION ASSISTANT (one step)15.00 Hourly
TEMPORARY/PART-TIME
FIRE PREVENTION SPECIALIST 24.49 25.72 27.00 28.35 29.77 31.26 Hourly
INSPECTION I
MANAGEMENT AIDE 24.01 25.24 26.53 27.88 29.16 30.62 Hourly
MANAGEMENT ANALYST I 27.88 29.31 30.81 32.39 33.87 35.56 Hourly
OFFICE SERVICES CLERK 16.85 17.71 18.62 19.57 20.47 21.49 Hourly
OFFICE SPECIALIST I 15.25 16.03 16.85 17.71 18.52 19.45 Hourly
OFFICE SPECIALIST II 16.85 17.71 18.62 19.57 20.47 21.49 Hourly
PLANS EXAMINER - FIRE 32.08 33.68 35.37 37.13 38.99 40.94 Hourly
QUALITY IMPROVEMENT 27.79 29.18 30.64 32.17 33.78 35.47 Hourly
SPECIALIST
FIRE DISTRICT PART-TIME HOURLY
SALARY SCHEDULE AS OF JANUARY 1, 2022
ATTACHMENT 5
Fire District Part-Time Hourly Salary Schedule
January 1, 2022Page72
DATE:December 15, 2021
TO:President and Members of the Board of Directors
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Lori Sassoon, Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services
SUBJECT:Consideration of a Resolution Repealing Resolution FD 2020-023
Concerning a Declaration of Surplus Land Pursuant to Government Code
Section 54221 for Real Property Located at 8340 Utica Avenue.
(RESOLUTION NO. FD2021-034) (FIRE)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Fire Board adopt the resolution repealing the declaration of surplus
land for 8340 Utica Avenue.
BACKGROUND:
The Fire District is the owner in fee simple of a property located at 8340 Utica Avenue.
Under the Surplus Land Act, Government Code Sections 54220-54233 (“Act”), surplus land is
land owned in fee simple by the District for which the Fire Board takes formal action in a regular
public meeting declaring the land is surplus and not necessary for the agency’s use. The Act
provides that land shall be declared either surplus land or exempt surplus land before the agency
may take action to dispose of it consistent with the agency’s policies or procedures.
In December of 2020, the Board adopted Resolution FD 2020-023, declaring this property to be
surplus land, along with several other parcels owned by the District.
ANALYSIS:
Subsequent to the adoption of the resolution to declare the Utica parcel as surplus land, a number
of significant regional transportation projects have come into fruition, most notably the planned
high speed rail from Las Vegas to Cucamonga Station, and the tunnel link from Cucamonga
Station to Ontario International Airport that is currently being studied.
These transportation initiatives, along with the other changes in land use in the Haven/Foothill
focus area in the proposed General Plan and the HART District as a whole, make the Utica parcel
a potentially important site for the District’s use in the future as this area of the city grows and
creates demand for additional services.
The proposed resolution would repeal Resolution FD 2020-023’s declaration of surplus for this
parcel.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
Page 73
Page 2
1
0
5
9
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This action is in keeping with the Council’s vision to creating an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant
city, and its core value of intentionally embracing the future.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Resolution No. FD 2021-034
Page 74
99999-9999\2398948v1.doc
RESOLUTION NO. ______
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO
CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, REPEALING RESOLUTION FD 2020-023 CONCERNING
A DECLARATION OF SURPLUS LAND PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT
CODE SECTION 54221 FOR REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8340
UTICA AVENUE
WHEREAS, the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (“District”) is the
owner in fee simple of that certain real property located at 8340 Utica Avenue, further
described in Exhibit “A,” attached hereto and made a part of hereof (“Property”); and
WHEREAS, under the Surplus Property Land Act, Government Code Sections
54220-54233 (“Act”), surplus land is land owned in fee simple by the District for which the
City Council takes formal action in a regular public meeting declaring the land is surplus
and not necessary for the District’s use; and
WHEREAS, the Property is the vacant property consisting of a parcel located at
8340 Utica;
WHEREAS, District has previously adopted Resolution FD 2020-023, designating
this parcel as surplus land pursuant to Government Code Section 54221;
WHEREAS, since the time of the adoption of Resolution FD 2020-023, the City’s
General Plan has been largely completed, and new developments involving Cucamonga
Station and the HART District have been proposed, which will require District use of this
parcel in the future; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors no longer desires to declare that the Property
is surplus land, and finds this property necessary for the District’s use; and
WHEREAS, the accompanying staff report provides supporting information upon
which the declaration and findings set forth in this Resolution are based;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE DISTRICT COUNCIL HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.The above recitals are true and correct and are a substantive part of
this Resolution.
Section 2.Resolution FD 2020-023 is hereby repealed.
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 75
-2-
1
9
5
0
Exhibit A – Legal Description and Map:
THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS.
PARCEL MAP 8568 PARCEL 1 PARCEL MAP 8568 PARCEL NO 1
Page 76
DATE:December 15, 2021
TO:President and Members of the Board of Directors
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Ivan Rojer, Fire Chief
Mike McCliman, Deputy Fire Chief
Darryl Polk, Director of Innovation and Technology
Darci Vogel, Fire Business Manager
SUBJECT:Consideration of the Purchase of Body Armor from Safariland, LLC
Utilizing a Piggyback Opportunity Through a Competitively Bid Contract
from the State of California, Contract 1-18-84-07, in the Amount of
$116,543. (FIRE)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Fire Board authorize the purchase of ninety-three (93) sets of body
armor and associated equipment from Safariland, LLC utilizing a piggyback opportunity through
a competitively bid contract from the State of California, Contract 1-18-84-07, in the amount of
$116,543.
BACKGROUND:
The Fire District is an "All-Risk" agency and responds to a wide range of emergencies, including
tactical incidents and other purposeful mass injury incidents. Tactical incidents pose an imminent
threat to public safety and involve deadly weapons, which includes ballistics, explosives, and
potential victims.
As part of our joint rescue mission with our Sheriff partners, when lives are at stake in a tactical
environment, barricaded suspect, hostage situation or terrorist attack, the need for fire personnel
to enter a relatively safe scene under force protection (police escort) may occur. The goal of this
response model is to provide point of wound care to victims that otherwise would have perished
from preventable death injuries. In addition, the Fire District also has tactical mutual aid
agreements with the cities of Ontario and Corona
In order to provide Tactical Emergency Casualty Care (TECC) or the best-practice
recommendations for casualty management during high-threat civilian tactical and rescue
operations, our personnel must be equipped with the appropriate ballistic protection.
The Fire District’s current ballistic panels and plates have a five (5) year life. The majority of this
equipment will expire in February and March of 2022. To ensure the safety of fire personnel
during tactical responses, it is imperative that this equipment be replaced.
ANALYSIS:
In an effort to expedite the purchasing process for the body armor, the Fire District identified a
Page 77
Page 2
1
0
6
4
piggyback opportunity through a competitively bid contract from the State of California, Contract
1-18-84-07, awarded to Safariland, LLC. The Fire District’s Tactical Response Team thoroughly
reviewed the RFP specifications and determined that they were consistent with the Fire District’s
requirements.
The Fire District provided the piggyback opportunity from the State of California to the City’s
Procurement Division. Procurement reviewed the State bid documents and contract and is
satisfied that the solicitation process and terms meet the Fire District and City's requirements. It
has been determined that utilizing the contract as a piggyback is the most advantageous,
expedient method of procurement at this time and is considered to be in the District's best interest
to approve an award to Safariland, LLC for the purchase of body armor in the amount of $116,543.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Safariland contract provides a 45% discount to the current Manufacturer’s Suggested Retail
Price (MSRP) for body armor. Due to COVID related staffing issues and material shortages, the
MSRP for body armor has increased significantly. As a result, the Safariland contract has
experienced three separate price increases since the Fire District budgeted for replacement of
body armor.
The purchase of body armor was approved in the FY 2021-22 budget. A total of $72,200 was
allocated in the Fire Protection Capital Fund under account 3288501-5290 (Specialized Tools &
Equipment). Using the Safariland contract, the total purchase price will be $116,543. There are
sufficient funds within the Fire Protection Capital Fund to cover the increased replacement cost.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item brings together portions of the Council’s vision and core value by providing a sustainable
City and promoting a safe and healthy community for all. This is accomplished by ensuring our
first responders have the resources and tools necessary to respond effectively during emergency
situations.
ATTACHMENTS:
n/a
Page 78
DATE:December 15, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Annette Cano-Soza, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT:Consideration of the Final Map for Tract 20118, Improvement Agreement
and Improvement Securities for Street Improvements for Case No.
SUBTT20118, Located South of 6th Street and West of the Resort
Parkway. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Approve the final map for Tract 20118;
2. Approve an Improvement Agreement and the design for related public improvements and
authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign said agreement; and
3. Accept security in the form of bonds for completion of the related public improvements.
BACKGROUND:
On January 22, 2020, Planning Commission approved Case No. SUBTT20118 for the subdivision
of a vacant 39.68 acre parcel into eight (8) numbered lots for condominium purposes for the
development of 867 for-rent apartments located within Planning Areas S-14 through S-18 and in
S-24 in the Village Neighborhood (VN) District and Core Living (CL) District of the Empire Lakes
Specific Plan, Planning Area 1 located north of 4th Street, south of 6th Street, west of Milliken
Avenue, and east of Utica and Cleveland Avenues. The specific location of the project site is
south of 6th Street and west of the Resort Parkway.
Case No. SUBTT20118 was approved subject to a condition that certain public improvements be
constructed including; curb and gutter, sidewalk, access ramps and street improvements.
ANALYSIS:
The developer, LCD Residential at Rancho Cucamonga, LLC has submitted a final map for
consideration of approval. Staff has determined the final map (on file with the City Engineer) is in
substantial conformity with the approved tentative map and conditions. Further, an Improvement
Agreement and securities to guarantee construction of the off-site public improvements (plans on
file with the City Engineer) in the following amounts have been submitted:
Faithful Performance Bond No. 024255504 $188,600
Labor and Material Bond No. 024255504 $188,600
Monumentation Deposit $3,524
Page 79
Page 2
1
0
5
4
Approval of this item by Council would approve Tract Map 20118 and allow its recordation,
approve the Improvement Agreement, and accept the securities for the construction of certain
public improvements. Copies of the agreement are available in the City Clerk’s Office.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item addresses the City Council’s vision for the City by ensuring the construction of high-
quality improvements that promote a world class community.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
Page 80
ATTACHMENT 1
1
6
0
7
SUBTT20118
Vicinity Map
NOT TO SCALE
Project Site
Page 81
DATE:December 15, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Annette Cano-Soza, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT:Consideration to Accept Public Improvements Located at the Northeast
Corner of Center Avenue and 6th Street per the Improvement Agreement
Related to Case No. DRC2018-00553, as Complete, File the Notice of
Completion, and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Approve and accept the public improvements and their design, required for the
development of Case No. DRC2018-00553 and authorize the City Engineer to file the
appropriate Notice of Completion;
2. Release Faithful Performance Bond No. 100464120 for the associated public
improvements;
3. Release the Labor and Material Bond No. 100464120; and
4. Waive the maintenance bond requirement.
BACKGROUND:
On March 13, 2019, the Planning Commission approved Case No. DRC2018-00553 for the
construction of a new warehouse facility on 5.09 acres of land in the General Industrial (GI) District
located at the northeast corner of Center Avenue and 6th Street. An improvement agreement and
securities were approved by the City Council on December 18, 2019, to ensure construction of
the required public improvements, including curb and gutter, streetlights, sidewalk, an access
ramp, a driveway approach, storm drain and street improvements.
ANALYSIS:
All public improvements required of this development have been completed to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer.
Prior to construction of the public improvements the developer, Sixth & Center Realty Partners,
LLC, submitted the following securities to ensure satisfactory completion of the improvements:
Faithful Performance Bond $121,800 Bond # 100464120
Labor and Material Bond $121,800 Bond # 100464120
Page 82
Page 2
1
0
2
9
City staff conducted a final inspection of the public improvements in December of 2020 and
confirmed all work was completed to City Standards. The developer did not provide a
maintenance bond to the City; therefore, the Faithful Performance Bond was retained for the
satisfactory period (one year from final inspection). City staff has confirmed the improvements
have remained in good workmanship and free of defects. City staff recommends the maintenance
bond requirement be waived.
With completion of the improvements, the Faithful Performance and Labor and Material bonds
are no longer required.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item addresses the City Council’s vision for the City by ensuring the maintenance of high-
quality improvements that promote a world class community.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
Page 83
ATTACHMENT 1
1
6
0
7
DRC2018-00553
Vicinity Map
NOT TO SCALE
Project Site
Page 84
DATE:December 15, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Brian Sandona, Sr. Civil Engineer
Annette Cano-Soza, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT:Consideration of License Agreements for Public Improvements Adjacent
to the Railroad Spur Track on 8th Street West of Haven Avenue with
BNSF Railway Company Related to Case No. DRC2018-00546, Located
at 10415 8th Street. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the following attached License Agreements
(“agreements”) between the City and Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway Company for
the construction of public improvements adjacent to an existing BNSF railroad spur crossing on
8th Street west of Haven Avenue, related to Case No. DRC2018-00546 and authorize the Mayor
and City Clerk to sign said agreements and repeal a previously approved version of agreement
20-67008.
BACKGROUND:
On June 26, 2019, the Planning Commission approved Case No. DRC2018-00546 for the
development of a 120,628 square foot building on 6.00 acres in the General Industrial (GI) District,
Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay District (HAOD), on the west side of Haven
Avenue, South of 8th Street, located at 10415 8th Street.
The project was conditioned to construct certain public improvements, including the installation of
fiber optic infrastructure, electrical lines, and street improvements along the project’s frontages
on 8th Street and Acacia Street. A portion of these improvements fall within the right-of-way owned
and operated by BNSF for a spur track that connects to the Metrolink/BNSF mainline on the north
side of 8th Street and serves properties to the south of 8th Street.
ANALYSIS:
For the developer, Duke Realty Limited Partnership, to gain permission to perform the necessary
work within this right-of-way, BNSF is requiring the City to enter into the attached agreements.
The cost of the agreements are as follows, and are to be paid by Duke Realty Limited Partnership:
License Agreement No.One-Time Fee Public Improvement Type
21W-11124 $7,400 Fiber Installation
21W-11057 $3,700 Electrical Power Installation
20-67008 $0 Street Improvements
Page 85
Page 2
9
9
7
On April 7, 2021, City Council approved the execution of License Agreement 20-67008
(agreement) for Street Improvements however, BNSF discovered the agreement template
provided was incorrect and thus did not execute said agreement. At the request of BNSF the
correct agreement template has been provided as Attachment 4. City staff is recommending
approval of this new version of agreement no. 20-67008, therefore the agreement approved by
the City Council in April would be repealed and is not effective.
The agreements have been reviewed by the City Attorney’s office as to form.
FISCAL IMPACT:
All costs related to the public improvements within BNSF’s right-of-way along with the one-time
agreement fees will be paid by the developer. Therefore, no funding is required in relation to the
recommended action.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item addresses the City Council’s vision for the City by ensuring the construction of high-
quality public improvements that promote a world class community.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
Attachment 2 – License Agreement No. 21W-11124
Attachment 3 – License Agreement No. 21W-11057
Attachment 4 – License Agreement No. 20-67008
Page 86
ATTACHMENT 1
1
6
0
7
DRC2018-00546
Vicinity Map
NOT TO SCALE
Project Site
Page 87
Jones Lang LaSalle Brokerage, Inc.
4200 Buckingham Rd., Suite 110
Fort Worth, Texas 76155
tel +1 817-230-2600, fax +1 817 306-8265
October 7, 2021
City of Rancho Cucamonga 21W-11124
Attention: Mr. Matthew Addington
10500 Civic Center Dr
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
Dear Mr. Addington:
Attached please find a copy of the requested contract for execution by an official authorized to execute contract agreements
on behalf of your company. Please print one (1) copy, execute, and return with original signature for completion on part
of BNSF Railway Company (“BNSF”) to this office, along with the following requirements:
•A check in the amount of $7,400.00 payable to BNSF Railway Company which covers the contract fee.
Please note the agreements cannot be executed by BNSF without an approved insurance certificate. If there are any issues
with your insurance, you will be contacted by a member of the Risk Management team of BNSF Railway.
1.A Certificate of Insurance as required in the agreement.
2.A separate policy for Railroad Protective Liability Insurance as required in the agreement (ORIGINAL POLICY
MUST BE PROVIDED). BNSF Railway Company will be the only insured party; OR;
In lieu of providing a separate policy for Railroad Protective Liability Insurance, you may participate in the BNSF’s
Railroad Protective Policy by checking the appropriate box in the contract and including an additional $506.00 with your
check.
PLEASE ADVISE IF THIS PROJECT IS ARRA FUNDED.
Licensee must ensure that each of its employees, contractors, agents or invitees entering upon the premises completes
the safety orientation program at the website www.BNSFcontractor.com prior to entering upon the premises. The
certification is good for one year, and each person entering the premises must possess the card certifying completion.
Acceptance and deposit of any check by BNSF does not constitute an agreement between BNSF and Licensee for the
requested license. BNSF shall not be obligated to hold the check in a separate fund, but may commingle the funds with
other funds of BNSF, and in no event shall BNSF be responsible for interest on said funds.
The enclosed permit is not a binding agreement and shall become binding only when, and if, it is executed by you and fully
approved and executed by BNSF Railway Company. Upon completion on behalf of BNSF, one fully executed counterpart
will be returned for your records.
The specifications/plans you provided may differ from BNSF’s minimum specification requirements. Therefore,
prior to your installation, please review the Exhibit A to determine the specifications necessary for your installation.
Please be informed that if contracts, fees, and insurance are not returned within sixty (60) days, the processing fee will
increase to $1,600.00.
Sincerely,
Amanda Reyna
Manager - Permits
Attachment
ATTACHMENT 2Page88
Tracking #21W-11124
- 1 - Form 420; Rev.20190916
LICENSE FOR COMMUNICATION LINE, TELEVISION CABLE,
AND/OR FIBER OPTIC LINE ACROSS OR ALONG RAILWAY PROPERTY
THIS LICENSE FOR COMMUNICATION LINE, TELEVISION CABLE AND/OR FIBER OPTIC LINE ("License")
is made to be effective ____________, 2021 (the "Effective Date") by and between BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY, a
Delaware corporation ("Licensor") and City of Rancho Cucamonga, a California municipality ("Licensee").
In consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree to the following:
GENERAL
1. Grant of License. Licensor hereby grants Licensee a non-exclusive license, subject to all rights, interests, and
estates of third parties, including, without limitation, any leases, use rights, easements, liens, or other
encumbrances, and upon the terms and conditions set forth below, to construct and maintain in strict accordance
with the drawings and specifications approved by Licensor as part of Licensee's application process (the "Drawings
and Specifications") a communication line, television cable, and/or a fiber optic line containing a maximum of Two
(2) conduits, together with all conductors and their supporting or containing structures (collectively, the
"Communication Line"), across or along Licensor's rail corridor at or near the station of Rancho Cucamonga,
County of San Bernardino, State of California, Line Segment 7608, Mile Post 41.41 as shown on the attached
Drawing No. 82080, dated July 19, 2021, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference
(the "Premises"). Licensee warrants that it has exercised due care in establishing the Drawings and Specifications
and has conducted testing and carefully assessed the design process to conclude that the risks associated with
using and operating the Communication Line as intended by Licensee will not pose any unreasonable risks to
Licensor or to the Premises.
2. Term. This License shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue for a period of twenty (20) years,
subject to prior termination as hereinafter described.
3. Existing Improvements. Licensee shall not disturb any improvements of Licensor or Licensor's existing lessees,
licensees, easement beneficiaries or lien holders, if any, or interfere with the use, repair, maintenance or
replacement of such improvements.
4. Use of the Premises. Licensee shall use the Premises solely for construction, maintenance, and use of the
Communication Line in accordance with the Drawings and Specifications. Licensee shall not use the Premises for
any other purpose.
5. Alterations. Except as set forth in this License, Licensee may not make any alterations to the Premises or
permanently affix anything to the Premises or any buildings or other structures adjacent to the Premises without
Licensor's prior written consent.
COMPENSATION
6. License Fee. Licensee shall pay Licensor, prior to the Effective Date, the sum of Seven Thousand Four Hundred
and No/100 Dollars ($7,400.00) as compensation for the use of the Premises.
7. Costs and Expenses.
7.1 For the purpose of this License, "cost" or "costs" and "expense" or "expenses" includes, but is not limited
to, actual labor and material costs including all assignable additives, and material and supply costs at
current value where used.
7.2 Licensee agrees to reimburse Licensor (pursuant to the terms of Section 8 below) for all costs and
expenses incurred by Licensor in connection with Licensee's use of the Premises or the presence,
construction and maintenance of the Communication Line, including but not limited to the furnishing of
Licensor's flaggers and any vehicle rental costs incurred, inspection coordination, safety, mobilization
Page 89
Tracking #21W-11124
- 2 - Form 420; Rev.20190916
and/or other observation services described in this License (collectively, the "Services"). Licensee shall
bear the cost of the Services, when deemed necessary by Licensor's representative. Flagging costs shall
include, but not be limited to, the following: pay for at least an eight (8) hour basic day with time and one-
half or double time for overtime, rest days and holidays (as applicable); vacation allowance; paid holidays
(as applicable); railway and unemployment insurance; public liability and property damage insurance;
health and welfare benefits; transportation; meals; lodging and supervision. Negotiations for railway labor
or collective bargaining agreements and rate changes authorized by appropriate Federal authorities may
increase flagging rates. Flagging rates in effect at the time of performance by the flaggers will be used to
calculate the flagging costs pursuant to this Section 7.
7.3 Licensor, at is sole discretion, may elect to designate a third party (the "Scheduling Agent"), to perform
and/or arrange for the performance of the Services.
8. Payment Terms. All invoices are due thirty (30) days after the date of invoice. If Licensee fails to pay any monies
due to Licensor within thirty (30) days after the invoice date, then Licensee shall pay interest on such unpaid sum
from the due date until paid at an annual rate equal to the lesser of (i) the prime rate last published in The Wall
Street Journal in the preceding December plus two and one-half percent (2-1/2%), or (ii) the maximum rate permitted
by law.
LICENSOR’S RESERVED RIGHTS
9. Reserved Rights of Use. Licensor excepts and reserves the right, to be exercised by Licensor and any other parties
who may obtain written permission or authority from Licensor:
9.1 to maintain, use, operate, repair, replace, modify and relocate any utility, power or communication
pipe/lines/cables and appurtenances (other than the Communication Line) and other facilities or structures
of like character upon, over, under or across the Premises existing as of the Effective Date;
9.2 to construct, maintain, renew, use, operate, change, modify and relocate any tracks or additional facilities,
structures and related appurtenances upon, over, under or across the Premises; or
9.3 to use the Premises in any manner as Licensor in its sole discretion deems appropriate, provided Licensor
uses all commercially reasonable efforts to avoid material interference with the use of the Premises by
Licensee for the purpose specified in Section 4 above.
10. Right to Require Relocation. If at any time during the term of this License, Licensor desires the use of its rail corridor
in such a manner as would, in Licensor's reasonable opinion, be interfered with by the Communication Line,
Licensee shall, at its sole expense, within thirty (30) days after receiving written notice from Licensor to such effect,
make such changes in the Communication Line as in the sole discretion of Licensor may be necessary to avoid
interference with the proposed use of Licensor's rail corridor, including, without limitation, the relocation of the
Communication Line, or the construction of a new line to replace the Communication Line. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, Licensee agrees to make all emergency changes and minor adjustments, as determined by Licensor in
its sole discretion, to the Communication Line promptly upon Licensor's request.
LICENSEE'S OPERATIONS
11. Construction and Maintenance of the Communication Line.
11.1 Licensee shall not enter the Premises or commence construction unless accompanied by Licensor's
representative, the Scheduling Agent or its designee. Licensee shall notify Licensor's Roadmaster, Andrew
Trevizo, at andrew.trevizo@bnsf.com or 323-864-3852, at least ten (10) business days prior to installation
of the Communication Line and prior to entering the Premises for any subsequent maintenance thereon.
In the event of emergency, Licensee shall notify Licensor of Licensee's entry onto the Premises at the
telephone number above as soon as practicable and shall promptly thereafter follow up with written notice
of such entry.
11.2 Licensee's on-site supervisors shall retain/maintain a fully executed copy of this License at all times while
on the Premises.
Page 90
Tracking #21W-11124
- 3 - Form 420; Rev.20190916
11.3 While on the Premises, Licensee shall use only public roadways to cross from one side of Licensor's tracks
to the other.
11.4 Any contractors or subcontractors performing work on the Communication Line or entering the Premises
on behalf of Licensee shall be deemed servants and agents of Licensee for purposes of this License.
11.5 Under no conditions shall Licensee be permitted to conduct any tests, investigations or any other activity
using mechanized equipment and/or machinery, or place or store any mechanized equipment, tools or other
materials, within twenty-five (25) feet of the centerline of any railroad track on the Premises unless Licensee
has obtained prior written approval from Licensor. Licensee shall, at its sole cost and expense, perform all
activities on and about the Premises, including without limitation all construction and maintenance of the
Electric Supply Line, in such a manner and of such materials as not at any time to endanger or interfere
with (i) the existence or use of present or future tracks, roadbeds or property of Licensor, (ii) the safe
operation and activities of Licensor or existing third parties, or (iii) the rights or interests of third parties. If
ordered to cease using the Premises at any time by Licensor's personnel due to any hazardous condition,
Licensee shall immediately do so. Notwithstanding the foregoing right of Licensor, the parties agree that
Licensor has no duty or obligation to monitor Licensee's use of the Premises to determine the safe nature
thereof, it being solely Licensee's responsibility to ensure that Licensee's use of the Premises is safe.
Neither the exercise nor the failure by Licensor to exercise any rights granted in this Section will alter the
liability allocation provided by this License.
11.6 Licensee shall, at its sole cost and expense, construct and maintain the Communication Line in such a
manner and of such material that the Communication Line will not at any time endanger or interfere with (i)
the existence or use of present or future tracks, roadbeds, or property of Licensor, (ii) the safe operation
and activities of Licensor or existing third parties, or (iii) the rights or interests of third parties. The
construction of the Communication Line shall be completed within one (1) year of the Effective Date, and
any subsequent maintenance shall be completed within one (1) year of initiation. Within fifteen (15) days
after completion of the construction of the Communication Line or the performance of any subsequent
maintenance thereon, Licensee shall, at Licensee's own cost and expense, restore the Premises to
substantially their state as of the Effective Date, unless otherwise approved in advance by Licensor in
writing. On or before expiration or termination of this License for any reason, Licensee shall, at its sole cost
and expense, surrender the Premises to Licensor pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in Section
24 hereof.
11.7 Licensor may direct one or more of its field engineers or inspectors to observe or inspect the construction
and/or maintenance of the Communication Line at any time for compliance with the Drawings and
Specifications and Legal Requirements (defined below). Licensee shall reimburse Licensor for the cost of
such observation or inspection related services pursuant to Section 8. If ordered at any time to halt
construction or maintenance of the Communication Line by Licensor's personnel due to non-compliance
with the Drawings and Specifications or any other hazardous condition, Licensee shall immediately do so.
Notwithstanding the foregoing right of Licensor, the parties agree that Licensor has no duty or obligation to
observe or inspect, or to halt work on, the Communication Line, it being solely Licensee's responsibility to
ensure that the Communication Line is constructed and maintained in strict accordance with the Drawings
and Specifications and in a safe and workmanlike manner in compliance with all terms hereof. Neither the
exercise of, nor the failure by Licensor to exercise, any right granted by this Section will alter in any way
the liability allocation provided by this License. If at any time Licensee shall, in the sole judgment of
Licensor, fail to properly perform its obligations under this Section 11, Licensor may, at its option and at
Licensee's sole expense, arrange for the performance of such work as it deems necessary for the safety of
its operations and activities. Licensee shall promptly reimburse Licensor for all costs and expenses of such
work, pursuant to the terms of Section 8. Licensor's failure to perform any obligations of Licensee shall
not alter the liability allocation hereunder.
11.8 Licensee shall, at its sole cost and expense, remove all combustible material from around wooden poles
on the Premises, if any, and will at all times keep the space around such poles free of such material, and if
removal of such combustible material shall not be attended to with fifteen (15) days after having been
requested by Licensor to do so, Licensor shall have the right itself to perform the work and Licensee hereby
agrees to reimburse Licensor for the expense so incurred.
Page 91
Tracking #21W-11124
- 4 - Form 420; Rev.20190916
11.9 Licensee shall, at its sole cost and expense, construct and at all times maintain the Communication Line in
accordance with the National Electric Code. The use of a rail mounted cable plow to install the
Communication Line is strictly prohibited unless advance written approval is granted by Licensor, which
approval Licensor may grant or withhold in its sole and absolute discretion. Unless otherwise specified, all
underground line shall be installed at least forty-eight (48) inches below grade level.
11.10 Cutting head must travel at 0.0% grade (or downward) beginning 25’ (minimum) from centerline of track
until it reaches a point 25’ (minimum) from the centerline of track. Minimum pressure must be applied to
pumping the slurry to the cutting head during drilling. This will deter the bentonite slurry used for lubrication
from seeping up and fouling the track roadbed. A Flagman must be present during installation and will
monitor the ballast and roadbed.
12. Boring and Excavation.
12.1 Prior to Licensee conducting any boring, excavation, or similar work on or about any portion of the Premises,
Licensee shall contact the applicable State's call-before-you-dig utility location service to have 3rd parties
mark the location of utilities. Licensee shall explore the proposed location for such work with hand tools
to a depth of at least three (3) feet below the surface of the ground to determine whether pipelines
or other structures exist below the surface, provided, however, that in lieu of the foregoing hand-tool
exploration, Licensee shall have the right to use suitable detection equipment or other generally accepted
industry practice (e.g., consulting with the United States Infrastructure Corporation) to determine the
existence or location of pipelines and other subsurface structures prior to drilling or excavating with
mechanized equipment. Licensee shall request information from Licensor concerning the existence and
approximate location of Licensor's underground lines, utilities, and pipelines at or near the vicinity of the
proposed Communication Line by contacting Licensor's Telecommunications, currently at 1-800-533-2891,
option 1, then option7, Helpdesk at least thirty (30) business days prior to installation of the Communication
Line. Upon receiving Licensee's timely request, Licensor will provide Licensee with the information Licensor
has in its possession regarding any existing underground lines, utilities, and pipelines at or near the vicinity
of the proposed Communication Line and, if applicable, identify the location of such lines on the Premises
pursuant to Licensor's standard procedures. Licensor does not warrant the accuracy or completeness of
information relating to subsurface conditions of the Premises and Licensee's operations will be subject at
all times to the liability provisions herein.
12.2 For all bores greater than 26-inch diameter and at a depth less than 10.0 feet below bottom of rail, a soil
investigation must be performed by Licensee and reviewed by Licensor prior to construction. This study is
to determine if granular material is present, and to prevent subsidence during the installation process. If
the investigation determines in Licensor's reasonable opinion that granular material is present, Licensor
may select a new location for Licensee's use, or may require Licensee to furnish for Licensor's review and
approval, in Licensor's sole discretion, a remedial plan to deal with the granular material. Once Licensor
has approved any such remedial plan in writing, Licensee shall, at Licensee's sole cost and expense, carry
out the approved plan in accordance with all terms thereof and hereof.
12.3 Any open hole, boring, or well constructed on the Premises by Licensee shall be safely covered and secured
at all times when Licensee is not working in the actual vicinity thereof. Following completion of that portion
of the work, all holes or borings constructed on the Premises by Licensee shall be:
12.3.1 filled in to surrounding ground level with compacted bentonite grout; or
12.3.2 otherwise secured or retired in accordance with any applicable Legal Requirement. No excavated
materials may remain on Licensor's property for more than ten (10) days, but must be properly
disposed of by Licensee in accordance with applicable Legal Requirements.
Page 92
Tracking #21W-11124
- 5 - Form 420; Rev.20190916
LIABILITY AND INSURANCE
13. Liability and Indemnification.
13.1 For purposes of this License: (a) "Indemnitees" means Licensor and Licensor's affiliated companies,
partners, successors, assigns, legal representatives, officers, directors, shareholders, employees, and
agents; (b) "Liabilities" means all claims, liabilities, fines, penalties, costs, damages, losses, liens, causes
of action, suits, demands, judgments, and expenses (including, without limitation, court costs, reasonable
attorneys' fees, costs of investigation, removal and remediation, and governmental oversight costs)
environmental or otherwise; and (c) "Licensee Parties" means Licensee and Licensee's officers, agents,
invitees, licensees, employees, or contractors, or any party directly or indirectly employed by any of them,
or any party they control or exercise control over.
13.2 TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, LICENSEE SHALL, AND SHALL CAUSE ITS
CONTRACTOR TO, RELEASE, INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS INDEMNITEES FOR,
FROM, AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL LIABILITIES OF ANY NATURE, KIND, OR DESCRIPTION
DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ARISING OUT OF, RESULTING FROM, OR RELATED TO (IN WHOLE OR
IN PART):
13.2.1 THIS LICENSE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ITS ENVIRONMENTAL PROVISIONS,
13.2.2 ANY RIGHTS OR INTERESTS GRANTED PURSUANT TO THIS LICENSE,
13.2.3 LICENSEE'S OCCUPATION AND USE OF THE PREMISES,
13.2.4 THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITION AND STATUS OF THE PREMISES CAUSED BY OR
CONTRIBUTED TO BY LICENSEE, OR
13.2.5 ANY ACT OR OMISSION OF ANY LICENSEE PARTY.
13.3 TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, LICENSEE NOW AND FOREVER WAIVES AND
WILL INDEMNIFY, DEFEND, AND HOLD THE INDEMNITEES HARMLESS FROM ANY AND ALL
CLAIMS THAT BY VIRTUE OF ENTERING INTO THIS LICENSE, LICENSOR IS A GENERATOR,
OWNER, OPERATOR, ARRANGER, OR TRANSPORTER FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE
COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT, AS
AMENDED ("CERCLA") OR OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS (DEFINED BELOW). NOTHING IN THIS
LICENSE IS MEANT BY EITHER PARTY TO CONSTITUTE A WAIVER OF ANY INDEMNITEE'S
COMMON CARRIER DEFENSES AND THIS LICENSE SHOULD NOT BE SO CONSTRUED. IF ANY
AGENCY OR COURT CONSTRUES THIS LICENSE TO BE A WAIVER OF ANY INDEMNITEE'S
COMMON CARRIER DEFENSES, LICENSEE AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, HOLD HARMLESS, AND
DEFEND INDEMNITEES FOR ANY LIABILITIES RELATED TO THAT CONSTRUCTION OF THIS
LICENSE. IN NO EVENT AS BETWEEN LICENSOR AND LICENSEE AS TO USE OF THE PREMISES
AS CONTEMPLATED BY THIS LICENSE SHALL LICENSOR BE RESPONSIBLE TO LICENSEE FOR
THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITION OF THE PREMISES.
13.4 IF ANY EMPLOYEE OF ANY LICENSEE PARTY ASSERTS THAT HE OR SHE IS AN EMPLOYEE OF
ANY INDEMNITEE, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, LICENSEE SHALL, AND SHALL
CAUSE ITS CONTRACTOR TO, RELEASE, INDEMNIFY, DEFEND, AND HOLD THE INDEMNITEES
HARMLESS FROM AND AGAINST ANY LIABILITIES ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO (IN WHOLE
OR IN PART) ANY SUCH ASSERTION INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ASSERTIONS OF
EMPLOYMENT BY AN INDEMNITEE RELATED TO THE FOLLOWING OR ANY PROCEEDINGS
THEREUNDER: THE FEDERAL EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ACT, THE SAFETY APPLIANCE ACT, THE
LOCOMOTIVE INSPECTION ACT, THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT, THE
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT, AND ANY SIMILAR STATE OR FEDERAL
STATUTE.
13.5 THE FOREGOING OBLIGATIONS OF LICENSEE SHALL NOT APPLY TO THE EXTENT LIABILITIES
ARE PROXIMATELY CAUSED BY THE GROSS NEGLIGENCE OR WILLFUL MISCONDUCT OF ANY
Page 93
Tracking #21W-11124
- 6 - Form 420; Rev.20190916
INDEMNITEE, BUT SHALL APPLY TO ALL OTHER LIABILITIES, INCLUDING THOSE ARISING FROM
OR ATTRIBUTED TO ANY OTHER ALLEGED OR ACTUAL NEGLIGENCE, INTENTIONAL ACTS, OR
STRICT LIABILITY OF ANY INDEMNITEE.
13.6 Upon written notice from Licensor, Licensee agrees to assume the defense of any lawsuit or other
proceeding brought against any Indemnitee by any entity, relating to any matter covered by this License for
which Licensee has an obligation to assume liability for and/or save and hold harmless any Indemnitee.
Licensee shall pay all costs and expenses incident to such defense, including, but not limited to, reasonable
attorneys' fees, investigators' fees, litigation and appeal expenses, settlement payments, and amounts paid
in satisfaction of judgments.
14. Personal Property Risk of Loss. ALL PERSONAL PROPERTY, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, FIXTURES,
EQUIPMENT, OR RELATED MATERIALS UPON THE PREMISES WILL BE AT THE RISK OF LICENSEE ONLY,
AND NO INDEMNITEE WILL BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGE THERETO OR THEFT THEREOF, WHETHER OR
NOT DUE IN WHOLE OR IN PART TO THE NEGLIGENCE OF ANY INDEMNITEE.
15. Insurance. Licensee shall, at its sole cost and expense, procure and maintain during the term of this License the
following insurance coverage:
15.1 Commercial General Liability “CGL” Insurance.
a. The policy will provide a minimum of $2,000,000 per occurrence and an aggregate limit of at least
$4,000,000 but in no event will the coverage be in an amount less than the amount otherwise carried
by Licensee. Coverage must be purchased on a post 2004 ISO occurrence form or equivalent and
include coverage for, but not limited to, the following:
Bodily Injury and Property Damage
Personal Injury and Advertising Injury
Fire legal liability
Products and completed operations
Contractual Liability for an “Insured Contract” consistent with the definition under the standard ISO
general liability policy form.
b. This policy will include the following endorsements or language, which shall be indicated on or attached
to the certificate of insurance:
The definition of “Insured Contract” will be amended to remove any exclusion or other limitation for
any work being done within 50 feet of Licensor’s property;
Waiver of subrogation in favor of and acceptable to Licensor;
Additional insured endorsement in favor of and acceptable to Licensor and Jones Lang LaSalle
Brokerage, Inc.to include coverage for ongoing operations and completed operations;
Separation of insureds;
The policy shall be primary and non-contributing with respect to any insurance carried by Licensor.
c. The parties agree that the workers’ compensation and employers’ liability related exclusions in the CGL
policy(s) are intended to apply to employees of the policyholder and will not apply to Licensor’s
employees.
d. No other endorsements that limit coverage with respect to Licensee’s obligations under this agreement
may be included on the policy.
15.2 Business Automobile Insurance
a. The insurance will provide minimum coverage with a combined single limit of at least $1,000,000 per
accident, and include coverage for, but not limited to the following:
Bodily injury and property damage.
Any and all vehicles owned, used or hired.
b. The policy will include the following endorsements or language, which will be indicated on or attached
to the certificate of insurance:
Page 94
Tracking #21W-11124
- 7 - Form 420; Rev.20190916
Waiver of subrogation in favor of and acceptable to Licensor;
Additional insured endorsement in favor of and acceptable to Licensor;
Separation of insureds;
The policy shall be primary and non-contributing with respect to any insurance carried by Licensor.
15.3 Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability Insurance
a. The policy will provide coverage of all employees performing any part of the work or services
including coverage for, but not limited to:
Licensee's statutory liability under the workers' compensation laws of the state(s) in which the work
or services are to be performed. The policy will cover all of Licensee’s employees, regardless of
whether such coverage is optional under the law of that state(s).
Employers' Liability (Part B) with limits of at least $500,000 each accident, $500,000 by disease
policy limit, $500,000 by disease each employee.
b. The policy will include contain the following endorsements or language, which shall be indicated on or
attached to the certificate of insurance:
Waiver of subrogation in favor of and acceptable to Licensor.
15.4 Railroad Protective Liability Insurance. The policy will name only Licensor as the Insured and will provide
coverage of at least $2,000,000 per occurrence and $6,000,000 in the aggregate. The coverage obtained
under this policy shall only be effective during the initial installation and/or construction of the Electric Supply
Line. THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ELECTRIC SUPPLY LINE SHALL BE COMPLETED WITHIN ONE
(1) YEAR OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE. If further maintenance of the Electric Supply Line is needed at a
later date, an additional Railroad Protective Liability Insurance Policy shall be required. The policy will be
issued on a standard ISO form CG 00 35 12 04 and include the following:
Endorsed to include the Pollution Exclusion Amendment.
Endorsed to include the Limited Seepage and Pollution Endorsement.
Endorsed to remove any exclusion for punitive damages.
Endorsed to include Evacuation Expense Coverage Endorsement.
No other endorsements restricting coverage may be added.
The original policy must be provided to Licensor and Licensee shall not perform any work or services
of any kind under this agreement until Licensor has reviewed and approved the policy.
The definition of "Physical Damage to Property" will be endorsed to read: "means direct and accidental
loss of or damage to all property owned by any named insured and all property in any named insured's
care, custody and control (including, but not limited to rolling stock and their contents, mechanical
construction equipment or motive power equipment, railroad tracks, roadbeds, catenaries, signals,
tunnels, bridges and buildings) arising out of the acts or omissions of the contractor named on the
Declarations."
In lieu of providing a Railroad Protective Liability Policy, for a period of one (1) year from the Effective Date,
Licensee may participate in Licensor's Blanket Railroad Protective Liability Insurance Policy available to
Licensee or its contractor. The limits of coverage are the same as above. The cost is $506.00.
Licensee elects to participate in Licensor's Blanket Policy;
Licensee declines to participate in Licensor's Blanket Policy.
15.5 Other Requirements:
15.5.1 Where allowable by law, no exclusion for punitive damages may be included in any policy.
15.5.2 Licensee agrees to waive its right of recovery against Licensor for all claims and suits against
Licensor. In addition, Licensee's insurers, through the terms of the policy or policy endorsement,
waive their right of subrogation against Licensor for all claims and suits. Licensee further waives
its right of recovery, and its insurers also waive their right of subrogation against Licensor for loss
of Licensee's owned or leased property or property under Licensee's care, custody, or control.
Page 95
Tracking #21W-11124
- 8 - Form 420; Rev.20190916
15.5.3 Allocated Loss Expense, including but not limited to defense costs and expenses, will be in addition
to all policy limits for coverage under the insurance requirements.
15.5.4 Licensee is not allowed to self-insure without the prior written consent of Licensor. If Licensor
allows Licensee to self-insure, Licensee shall directly cover any self-insured retention or other
financial responsibility for claims in lieu of insurance. Any and all Licensor liabilities that would
otherwise be covered by Licensee's insurance in accordance with the provisions of this agreement,
will be covered as if Licensee elected not to include a self-insured retention or other financial
responsibility for claims.
15.5.5 Prior to entering the Premises or commencing the services or work, Licensee shall furnish to
Licensor an acceptable certificate(s) of insurance from an authorized representative evidencing the
required coverage(s), endorsements, and amendments.
15.5.6 Licensee agrees to provide evidence to Licensor that it has the required coverage in place at least
annually or in the event of a renewal or material change of coverage.
15.5.7 Any insurance policy shall be written by a reputable insurance company acceptable to Licensor or
with a current Best's Guide Rating of A- and Class VII or better, and authorized to do business in
the state(s) in which the service is to be provided.
15.5.8 If the coverage provided by any of the insurance policies required by this agreement is purchased
on a "claims made" basis, Licensee hereby agrees to maintain coverage in force for a minimum of
three years after expiration, cancellation or termination of this agreement.
15.5.9 Licensee agrees to provide evidence to Licensor that it has the required coverage in place at least
annually or in the event of a renewal or material change of coverage.
15.5.10 Licensee represents that this License has been thoroughly reviewed by Licensee's insurance
agent(s)/broker(s), and that Licensee has instructed them to procure the insurance coverage
required by this License.
15.5.11 Not more frequently than once every five years, Licensor may, at its discretion, reasonably modify
the insurance requirements to reflect the then-current risk management practices in the railroad
industry and underwriting practices in the insurance industry.
15.5.12 If Licensee will subcontract any portion of the operation, Licensee shall require that the
subcontractor provide and maintain insurance coverage(s) as set forth herein, naming Licensor as
an additional insured. In addition, Licensee shall require that the subcontractor shall release,
defend and indemnify Licensee to the same extent and under the same terms and conditions as
Licensee is required to release, defend and indemnify Licensor under this agreement.
15.5.13 Failure to provide evidence as required by this section shall entitle, but not require, Licensor to
terminate this License immediately. Acceptance of a certificate that does not comply with this
section shall not operate as a waiver of Licensee's obligations hereunder.
15.5.14 The fact that Licensee obtains insurance (including, without limitation, self-insurance) shall not
release or diminish Licensee’s liabilities or obligations including, without limitation, the liabilities and
obligations under the indemnity provisions of the License. Damages recoverable by Licensor shall
not be limited by the amount of the required insurance coverage.
15.5.15 In the event of a claim or lawsuit involving Licensor arising out of this Agreement, Licensee will
make the policy covering such claims or lawsuits available to Licensor.
15.5.16 If Licensee maintains broader coverage and/or higher limits than the minimum
requirements in this Agreement, Licensor requires and shall be entitled to the broader coverage
Page 96
Tracking #21W-11124
- 9 - Form 420; Rev.20190916
and/or the higher limits. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum
limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to Licensor.
15.5.17 These insurance provisions are intended to be a separate and distinct obligation on the part of the
Licensee. Therefore, these provisions shall be enforceable and Licensee shall be bound thereby
regardless of whether or not indemnity provisions are determined to be enforceable in the
jurisdiction in which the work or services performed under this License is performed.
15.5.18 For purposes of this Section 15, Licensor shall mean "Burlington Northern Santa Fe, LLC", "BNSF
Railway Company" and the subsidiaries, successors, assigns and affiliates of each.
COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS, REGULATIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS
16. Compliance with Laws, Rules, and Regulations.
16.1 Licensee shall observe and comply with any and all applicable federal, state, local and tribal laws, statutes,
regulations, ordinances, orders, covenants, restrictions, or decisions of any court of competent jurisdiction
("Legal Requirements") relating to the construction, maintenance and use of the Communication Line and
the use of the Premises.
16.2 Prior to entering the Premises, Licensee shall and shall cause its contractor(s) to comply with all of
Licensor's applicable safety rules and regulations. Licensee must ensure that each of its employees,
contractors, agents or invitees entering upon the Premises completes the safety orientation program at the
Website "www.BNSFcontractor.com" (the "Safety Orientation") within one year prior to entering upon the
Premises. Additionally, Licensee must ensure that each and every employee of Licensee, its contractors,
agents and invitees possess a card certifying completion of the Safety Orientation prior to entering upon
the Premises. Licensee must renew (and ensure that its contractors, agents or invitees, as applicable
renew) the Safety Orientation annually.
16.3 Licensee shall obtain on or before the date it or its contractor enters the Premises, any and all additional
rights-of way, easements, licenses and other agreements relating to the grant of rights and interests in
and/or access to the Premises (collectively, the "Rights") and such other rights, licenses, permits,
authorizations, and approvals (including without limitation, any necessary local, state, federal or tribal
authorizations and environmental permits) that are necessary in order to permit Licensee to construct,
maintain, own and operate the Communication Line and otherwise to perform its obligations hereunder in
accordance with the terms and conditions hereof.
16.4 Licensee shall either require that the initial stated term of each such Rights be for a period that does not
expire, in accordance with its ordinary terms, prior to the last day of the term of this License or, if the initial
stated term of any such Right expires in accordance with its ordinary terms on a date earlier than the last
day of the term of this License, Licensee shall, at its cost, exercise any renewal rights thereunder, or
otherwise acquire such extensions, additions and/or replacements as may be necessary, in order to cause
the stated term thereof to be continued until a date that is not earlier than the last day of the term of this
License.
16.5 Upon the expiration or termination of any Right that is necessary in order for Licensee to own, operate or
use the Communication Line in accordance with the terms and conditions of this License, this License
thereby shall automatically expire upon such expiration or termination of the Right.
17. Environmental.
17.1 Licensee shall strictly comply with all federal, state and local environmental Legal Requirements and
regulations in its use of the Premises, including, but not limited to, the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act, as amended (RCRA), the Clean Water Act, the Oil Pollution Act, the Hazardous Materials
Transportation Act, and CERCLA (collectively referred to as the "Environmental Laws"). Licensee shall
not maintain a treatment, storage, transfer or disposal facility, or underground storage tank, as defined by
Environmental Laws on the Premises. Licensee shall not release or suffer the release of oil or hazardous
substances, as defined by Environmental Laws on or about the Premises.
Page 97
Tracking #21W-11124
- 10 - Form 420; Rev.20190916
17.2 Licensee covenants that it will not handle or transport "hazardous waste" or "hazardous substances", as
"hazardous waste" and "hazardous substances" may now or in the future be defined by any federal, state,
or local governmental agency or body on the Premises. Licensee agrees periodically to furnish Licensor
with proof, satisfactory to Licensor that Licensee is in compliance with the provisions of this Section 17.2.
17.3 Licensee shall give Licensor immediate notice to Licensor's Resource Operations Center at (800) 832-5452
of any known (i) release of hazardous substances on, from, or affecting the Premises, (ii) violation of
Environmental Laws, or (iii) inspection or inquiry by governmental authorities charged with enforcing
Environmental Laws with respect to Licensee's use of the Premises. Licensee shall use the best efforts to
promptly respond to any release on, from, or affecting the Premises. Licensee also shall give Licensor
immediate notice of all measures undertaken on behalf of Licensee to investigate, remediate, respond to
or otherwise cure such release or violation.
17.4 If Licensor has notice from Licensee or otherwise of a release or violation of Environmental Laws arising in
any way with respect to the Communication Line which occurred or may occur during the term of this
License, Licensor may require Licensee, at Licensee's sole risk and expense, to take timely measures to
investigate, remediate, respond to or otherwise cure such release or violation affecting the Premises or
Licensor's right-of-way.
17.5 Licensee shall promptly report to Licensor in writing any conditions or activities upon the Premises known
to Licensee which create a risk of harm to persons, property or the environment and shall take whatever
action is necessary to prevent injury to persons, property, or the environment arising out of such conditions
or activities; provided, however, that Licensee's reporting to Licensor shall not relieve Licensee of any
obligation whatsoever imposed on it by this License. Licensee shall promptly respond to Licensor's request
for information regarding said conditions or activities.
DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES
18. No Warranties.
18.1 LICENSOR'S DUTIES AND WARRANTIES ARE LIMITED TO THOSE EXPRESSLY STATED IN THIS
LICENSE AND SHALL NOT INCLUDE ANY IMPLIED DUTIES OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, NOW OR
IN THE FUTURE. NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES HAVE BEEN MADE BY LICENSOR
OTHER THAN THOSE CONTAINED IN THIS LICENSE. LICENSEE HEREBY WAIVES ANY AND ALL
WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THE PREMISES OR WHICH MAY EXIST
BY OPERATION OF LAW OR IN EQUITY, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTY OF
MERCHANTABILITY, HABITABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
18.2 LICENSOR MAKES NO WARRANTY, REPRESENTATION OR CONDITION OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, CONCERNING (A) THE SCOPE OF THE LICENSE OR OTHER RIGHTS GRANTED
HEREUNDER TO LICENSEE OR (B) WHETHER OR NOT LICENSEE’S
CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, OWNERSHIP, USE OR OPERATION OF THE COMMUNICATION
LINE WILL VIOLATE OR INFRINGE UPON THE RIGHTS, INTERESTS AND ESTATES OF THIRD
PARTIES, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY LEASES, USE RIGHTS, EASEMENTS AND
LIENS OF ANY THIRD PARTY.
19. Disclaimer of Warranty for Quiet Enjoyment. LICENSOR DOES NOT WARRANT ITS TITLE TO THE PREMISES
NOR UNDERTAKE TO DEFEND LICENSEE IN THE PEACEABLE POSSESSION OR USE THEREOF. NO
COVENANT OF QUIET ENJOYMENT IS MADE.
20. Eviction at Risk of Licensee. In case of the eviction of Licensee by anyone owning, claiming title to, or claiming any
interest in the Premises, or by the abandonment by Licensor of the affected rail corridor, Licensor shall not be liable
(i) to refund Licensee any compensation paid hereunder, except for the pro-rata part of any recurring charge paid
in advance, or (ii) for any damages or costs Licensee sustains in connection with the eviction.
Page 98
Tracking #21W-11124
- 11 - Form 420; Rev.20190916
LIENS AND TAXES
21. Liens and Charges. Licensee shall promptly pay and discharge any and all liens arising out of any construction,
alterations or repairs done, suffered or permitted to be done by Licensee on the Premises. Licensor is hereby
authorized to post any notices or take any other action upon or with respect to the Premises that is or may be
permitted by law to prevent the attachment of any such liens to the Premises; provided, however, that failure of
Licensor to take any such action shall not relieve Licensee of any obligation or liability under this Section 21 or any
other Section of this License.
22. Taxes. Licensee shall pay when due any taxes, assessments or other charges (collectively, "Taxes") levied or
assessed by any governmental or quasi-governmental body upon the Communication Line or any other
improvements constructed or installed on the Premises by or for Licensee (collectively, the "Improvements") or
any Taxes levied or assessed against Licensor or the Premises that are attributable to the Improvements.
DEFAULT, TERMINATION, AND SURRENDER
23. Default and Termination. In addition to and not in limitation of Licensor's right to terminate for failure to provide
evidence of insurance as required pursuant to the terms of Section 15, the following events are also deemed to be
events of default pursuant to which Licensor has the right to terminate as set forth below:
23.1 If default shall be made in any of Licensee's covenants, agreements, or obligations contained in this License
and Licensee fails to cure said default within thirty (30) days after written notice is provided to Licensee by
Licensor, or in case of any assignment or transfer of this License in violation of Section 26 below, Licensor
may, at its option, terminate this License by serving five (5) days' notice in writing upon Licensee.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, Licensor shall have the right to terminate this License immediately if
Licensee fails to provide evidence of insurance as required in Section 15.
23.2 Should Licensee not comply fully with the obligations of Section 17 regarding the handling or transporting
of hazardous waste or hazardous material, notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of
this License, Licensor may, at its option, terminate this License by serving five (5) days' notice of termination
upon Licensee.
23.3 Any waiver by Licensor of any default or defaults shall not constitute a waiver of the right to terminate this
License for any subsequent default or defaults, nor shall any such waiver in any way affect Licensor's ability
to enforce any Section of this License. The remedies set forth in this Section 23 shall be in addition to,
and not in limitation of, any other remedies that Licensor may have at law or in equity.
23.4 In addition to and not in limitation of Licensor's rights to terminate this License for failure to provide evidence
of insurance or occurrence of defaults as described above, this License may be terminated by either party,
at any time, by serving thirty (30) days' written notice of termination upon the other party. Such termination
shall not release either party hereto from any liability or obligation under the License, whether of indemnity
or otherwise, resulting from any acts, omissions or events happening prior to the date of termination or
thereafter in case by the terms of the License it is provided that anything shall or may be done after
termination hereof.
23.5 Licensee agrees not to assert that termination of this License is a discontinuance in service that requires
prior approval by the FCC and represents and warrants that it has redundant facilities that would allow it to
continue the provision of service after termination of this License.
24. Surrender of the Premises.
24.1 On or before expiration or termination of this License for any reason, Licensee shall, at its sole cost and
expense:
24.1.1 if so directed by Licensor in writing, remove the Improvements, the Communication Line and all
appurtenances thereto, or, at the sole discretion of Licensor, appropriately decommission the
Communication Line with a method satisfactory to Licensor;
Page 99
Tracking #21W-11124
- 12 - Form 420; Rev.20190916
24.1.2 report and restore any damage to the Premises or Licensor's other property arising from, growing
out of, or connected with Licensee's use of the Premises;
24.1.3 remedy any unsafe conditions on the Premises created or aggravated by Licensee; and
24.1.4 leave the Premises in substantially the condition which existed as of the Effective Date or as
otherwise agreed to by Licensor.
24.2 Upon any expiration or termination of this License, if Licensee fails to surrender the Premises to Licensor
or if Licensee fails to complete its obligations under Section 24.1 above (the "Restoration Obligations"),
Licensee shall have a limited license to enter upon the Premises solely to the extent necessary for Licensee
to complete the Restoration Obligations, and all liabilities and obligations of Licensee hereunder shall
continue in effect until the Premises are surrendered and the Restoration Obligations are completed.
Neither termination nor expiration shall release Licensee from any liability or obligation under this License,
whether of indemnity or otherwise, resulting from any acts, omissions or events happening prior to the date
of termination, or, if later, the date when Licensee surrenders the Premises and all of the Restoration
Obligations are completed.
24.3 If Licensee fails to complete the Restoration Obligations within thirty (30) days after the date of such
termination of its tenancy, then Licensor may, at its election, either: (i) remove the Communication Line and
the other Improvements or otherwise restore the Premises, and in such event Licensee shall, within thirty
(30) days after receipt of bill therefor, reimburse Licensor for cost incurred, (ii) upon written notice to
Licensee, take and hold the Communication Line and the other Improvements and personal property as its
sole property, without payment or obligation to Licensee therefor, or (iii) specifically enforce Licensee's
obligation to restore and/or pursue any remedy at law or in equity against Licensee for failure to so restore.
Further, if Licensor has consented to the Communication Line and the other Improvements remaining on
the Premises following termination, Licensee shall, upon request by Licensor, provide a bill of sale in a form
acceptable to Licensor conveying the Communication Line and the other Improvements to Licensor for no
additional consideration at no additional cost.
MISCELLANEOUS
25. Successors and Assigns. All provisions contained in this License shall be binding upon, inure to the benefit of, and
be enforceable by the respective successors and assigns of Licensor and Licensee to the same extent as if each
such successor and assign was named a party to this License.
26. Assignment.
26.1 Licensee may not sell, assign, transfer, or hypothecate this License or any right, obligation, or interest
herein (either voluntarily or by operation of law, merger, or otherwise) without the prior written consent of
Licensor, which consent may not be unreasonably withheld or delayed by Licensor. Any attempted
assignment by Licensee in violation of this Section 26 shall be a breach of this License and, in addition,
shall be voidable by Licensor in its sole and absolute discretion.
26.2 For purposes of this Section 26, the word "assign" shall include without limitation (a) any sale of the equity
interests of Licensee following which the equity interest holders of Licensee immediately prior to such sale
own, directly or indirectly, less than 50% of the combined voting power of the outstanding voting equity
interests of Licensee, (b) any sale of all or substantially all of the assets of (i) Licensee and (ii) to the extent
such entities exist, Licensee's parent and subsidiaries, taken as a whole, or (c) any reorganization,
recapitalization, merger or consolidation involving Licensee. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any
reorganization, recapitalization, merger or consolidation following which the equity interest holders of
Licensee immediately prior to such reorganization, recapitalization, merger or consolidation own, directly
or indirectly, at least 50% of the combined voting power of the outstanding voting equity interests of
Licensee or any successor thereto or the entity resulting from such reorganization, recapitalization, merger
or consolidation shall not be deemed an assignment. THIS LICENSE SHALL NOT RUN WITH THE LAND
WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF LICENSOR, SUCH CONSENT TO BE IN
LICENSOR'S SOLE DISCRETION.
Page 100
Tracking #21W-11124
-13 - Form 420; Rev.20190916
26.3 Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 26.1 above or anything contained in this License to the contrary,
if Licensee sells, assigns, transfers, or hypothecates this License or any interest herein in contravention of
the provisions of this License (a "Purported Assignment") to another party (a "Purported Transferee"), the
Purported Transferee's enjoyment of the rights and privileges granted under this License shall be deemed
to be the Purported Transferee's agreement to be bound by all of the terms and provisions of this License,
including but not limited to the obligation to comply with the provisions of Section 15 above concerning
insurance requirements. In addition to and not in limitation of the foregoing, Licensee, for itself, its
successors and assigns, shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Licensor for all Liabilities of any nature,
kind or description of any person or entity directly or indirectly arising out of, resulting from or related to (in
whole or in part) a Purported Assignment. The provisions of this Section 26.3 shall survive the expiration
or earlier termination of this License.
26.4 Licensor shall have the right to transfer or assign, in whole or part, all of its rights and obligations under this
License, and upon any such transfer or assignment, Licensor shall be released from any further obligations
hereunder, and Licensee agrees to look solely to the successor in interest of Licensor for the performance
of such obligations.
27.Notices. Any notice, invoice, or other writing required or permitted to be given hereunder by one party to the other
shall be in writing and the same shall be given and shall be deemed to have been served and given if (i) placed in
the United States mail, certified, return receipt requested, or (ii) deposited into the custody of a nationally recognized
overnight delivery service, addressed to the party to be notified at the address for such party specified below, or to
such other address as the party to be notified may designate by giving the other party no less than thirty (30) days'
advance written notice of such change in address.
If to Licensor: Jones Lang LaSalle Brokerage, Inc.
4200 Buckingham Rd., Suite 110
Fort Worth, TX 76155
Attn: Permits/Licenses
with a copy to: BNSF Railway Company
2650 Lou Menk Dr.
Fort Worth, TX 76131-2830
Attn: Senior Manager Real Estate
If to Licensee: City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Dr
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
28.Survival. Neither termination nor expiration will release either party from any liability or obligation under this License,
whether of indemnity or otherwise, resulting from any acts, omissions or events happening prior to the date of
termination or expiration, or, if later, the date when the Communication Line and the other Improvements are
removed and the Restoration Obligations are completed in accordance with the terms hereof.
29.Recordation. It is understood and agreed that this License shall not be placed or allowed to be placed on public
record.
30.Applicable Law. All questions concerning the interpretation or application of provisions of this License shall be
decided according to the substantive laws of the State of California without regard to conflicts of law provisions.
31.Severability. To the maximum extent possible, each provision of this License shall be interpreted in such manner
as to be effective and valid under applicable law, but if any provision of this License shall be prohibited by, or held
to be invalid under, applicable law, such provision shall be ineffective solely to the extent of such prohibition or
invalidity, and this shall not invalidate the remainder of such provision or any other provision of this License.
32.Integration. This License is the full and complete agreement between Licensor and Licensee with respect to all
matters relating to Licensee's use of the Premises, and supersedes any and all other agreements between the
parties hereto relating to Licensee's use of the Premises as described herein. However, nothing herein is intended
Page 101
Tracking #21W-11124
- 14 - Form 420; Rev.20190916
to terminate any surviving obligation of Licensee or Licensee's obligation to defend and hold Licensor harmless in
any prior written agreement between the parties.
33. Joint and Several Liability. If Licensee consists of two or more parties, all the covenants and agreements of
Licensee herein contained shall be the joint and several covenants and agreements of such parties.
34. Waiver. The waiver by Licensor of the breach of any provision herein by Licensee shall in no way impair the right
of Licensor to enforce that provision for any subsequent breach thereof.
35. Interpretation.
35.1 This License shall be interpreted in a neutral manner, and not more strongly for or against any party based
upon the source of the draftsmanship; both parties hereby agree that this License shall not be subject to
the principle that a contract would be construed against the party which drafted the same. Article titles,
headings to sections and paragraphs and the table of contents (if any) are inserted for convenience of
reference only and are not intended to be a part or to affect the meaning or interpretation hereof. The
exhibit or exhibits referred to herein shall be construed with and as an integral part of this License to the
same extent as if they were set forth verbatim herein.
35.2 As used herein, "include", "includes" and "including" are deemed to be followed by "without limitation"
whether or not they are in fact followed by such words or words of like import; "writing", "written" and
comparable terms refer to printing, typing, lithography and other means of reproducing words in a visible
form; references to any person are also to that person's successors and permitted assigns; "hereof",
"herein", "hereunder" and comparable terms refer to the entirety hereof and not to any particular article,
section, or other subdivision hereof or attachment hereto; references to any gender include references to
the masculine or feminine as the context requires; references to the plural include the singular and vice
versa; and references to this License or other documents are as amended, modified or supplemented from
time to time.
36. Counterparts. This License may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall, for all purposes, be
deemed an original but which together shall constitute one and the same instrument, and the signature pages from
any counterpart may be appended to any other counterpart to assemble fully executed documents, and counterparts
of this License may also be exchanged electronically and any electronic version of any party's signature shall be
deemed to be an original signature for all purposes.
37. Licensor's Representative. Jones Lang LaSalle Brokerage, Inc. is acting as representative for BNSF Railway
Company.
END OF PAGE – SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS
Page 102
Tracking #21W-11124
- 15 - Form 420; Rev.20190916
This License has been duly executed by the parties hereto as of the Effective Date.
LICENSOR:
BNSF Railway Company, a Delaware corporation
By: Jones Lang LaSalle Brokerage, Inc.
4200 Buckingham Road, Suite 110
Fort Worth, TX 76155
By:
Title:
Date:
LICENSEE:
City of Rancho Cucamonga, a California municipality
By:
Title:
Date:
Page 103
Jones Lang LaSalle Brokerage, Inc.
4200 Buckingham Rd., Suite 110
Fort Worth, Texas 76155
tel +1 817-230-2600, fax +1 817 306-8265
October 14, 2021
City of Rancho Cucamonga 21W-11057
Attention: Mr. Matthew Addington
10500 Civic Center Dr.
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
Dear Mr. Addington:
Attached please find a copy of the requested contract for execution by an official authorized to execute contract
agreements on behalf of your company. Please print one (1) copy, execute, and return with original signature
for completion on part of BNSF Railway Company (“BNSF”) to this office, along with the following requirements:
•A check in the amount of $3,700.00 payable to BNSF Railway Company which covers the contract fee.
Please note the agreements cannot be executed by BNSF without an approved insurance certificate. If there are
any issues with your insurance, you will be contacted by a member of the Risk Management team of BNSF
Railway.
1.A Certificate of Insurance as required in the agreement.
2.A separate policy for Railroad Protective Liability Insurance as required in the agreement (ORIGINAL
POLICY MUST BE PROVIDED). BNSF Railway Company will be the only insured party; OR;
In lieu of providing a separate policy for Railroad Protective Liability Insurance, you may participate in the
BNSF’s Railroad Protective Policy by checking the appropriate box in the contract and including an additional
$506.00 with your check.
PLEASE ADVISE IF THIS PROJECT IS ARRA FUNDED.
Licensee must ensure that each of its employees, contractors, agents or invitees entering upon the premises
completes the safety orientation program at the website www.BNSFcontractor.com prior to entering upon the
premises. The certification is good for one year, and each person entering the premises must possess the card
certifying completion.
Acceptance and deposit of any check by BNSF does not constitute an agreement between BNSF and Licensee
for the requested license. BNSF shall not be obligated to hold the check in a separate fund, but may commingle
the funds with other funds of BNSF, and in no event shall BNSF be responsible for interest on said funds.
The enclosed permit is not a binding agreement and shall become binding only when, and if, it is executed by you
and fully approved and executed by BNSF Railway Company. Upon completion on behalf of BNSF, one fully
executed counterpart will be returned for your records.
The specifications/plans you provided may differ from BNSF’s minimum specification
requirements. Therefore, prior to your installation, please review the Exhibit A to determine the
specifications necessary for your installation.
Please be informed that if contracts, fees, and insurance are not returned within sixty (60) days, the processing
fee will increase to $1,600.00.
Sincerely,
Amanda Reyna
Manager - Permits
Attachment
ATTACHMENT 3Page104
Tracking #21W-11057
- 1 - Form 421; Rev. 20200605
LICENSE FOR ELECTRIC SUPPLY LINE
ACROSS OR ALONG RAILWAY PROPERTY
(Electric Light, Power Supply, Irrespective of Voltage, Overhead or Underground)
THIS LICENSE FOR ELECTRIC SUPPLY LINE ("License") is made to be effective ____________, 2021 (the
"Effective Date") by and between BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY, a Delaware corporation ("Licensor") and CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a California municipality ("Licensee").
In consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree to the following:
GENERAL
1. Grant of License. Licensor hereby grants Licensee a non-exclusive license, subject to all rights, interests, and
estates of third parties, including, without limitation, any leases, use rights, easements, liens, or other
encumbrances, and upon the terms and conditions set forth below, to construct and maintain, in strict accordance
with the drawings and specifications approved by Licensor as part of Licensee's application process (the "Drawings
and Specifications"), an electric supply line containing a maximum of Three (3) conductors, together with its
supporting or containing structures (collectively, the "Electric Supply Line"), across or along Licensor's rail corridor
at or near the station of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, Line Segment
7608, Mile Post 41.41 as shown on the attached Drawing No. 82085, dated September 24, 2021, attached
hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference (the "Premises").
2. Term. This License shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue for a period of twenty-five (25) years,
subject to prior termination as hereinafter described.
3. Existing Improvements. Licensee shall not disturb any improvements of Licensor or Licensor's existing lessees,
licensees, easement beneficiaries or lien holders, if any, or interfere with the use, repair, maintenance or
replacement of such improvements.
4. Use of the Premises. Licensee shall use the Premises solely for construction, maintenance, and use of the Electric
Supply Line in accordance with the Drawings and Specifications. Licensee shall not use the Premises for any other
purpose and Licensee is expressly prohibited from using or allowing any telecommunication facilities or equipment
within the Premises or using or allowing the use of the Premises for any other purpose.
5. Alterations. Except as set forth in this License, Licensee may not make any alterations to the Premises or
permanently affix anything to the Premises or any buildings or other structures adjacent to the Premises without
Licensor's prior written consent.
COMPENSATION
6. License Fee. Licensee shall pay Licensor, prior to the Effective Date, the sum of Three Thousand Seven
Hundred and No/100 Dollars ($3,700) as compensation for the use of the Premises.
7. Costs and Expenses.
7.1 For the purpose of this License, "cost" or "costs" and "expense" or "expenses" includes, but is not limited
to, actual labor and material costs including all assignable additives, and material and supply costs at
current value where used.
7.2 Licensee agrees to reimburse Licensor (pursuant to the terms of Section 8 below) for all costs and
expenses incurred by Licensor in connection with Licensee's use of the Premises or the presence,
construction and maintenance of the Electric Supply Line, including but not limited to the furnishing of
Licensor's flaggers and any vehicle rental costs incurred, inspection coordination, safety, mobilization
and/or other observation services described in this License (collectively, the "Services"). Licensee shall
Page 105
Tracking #21W-11057
- 2 - Form 421; Rev. 20200605
bear the cost of the Services when deemed necessary by Licensor's representative. Flagging costs shall
include, but not be limited to, the following: pay for at least an eight (8) hour basic day with time and one-
half or double time for overtime, rest days and holidays (as applicable); vacation allowance; paid holidays
(as applicable); railway and unemployment insurance; public liability and property damage insurance;
health and welfare benefits; transportation; meals; lodging and supervision. Negotiations for railway labor
or collective bargaining agreements and rate changes authorized by appropriate Federal authorities may
increase flagging rates. Flagging rates in effect at the time of performance by the flaggers will be used to
calculate the flagging costs pursuant to this Section 7.
7.3 Licensor, at its sole discretion, may elect to designate a third party (the "Scheduling Agent"), to perform
and/or arrange for the performance of the Services.
8. Payment Terms. All invoices are due thirty (30) days after the date of invoice. If Licensee fails to pay any monies
due to Licensor within thirty (30) days after the invoice date, then Licensee shall pay interest on such unpaid sum
from the due date until paid at an annual rate equal to the lesser of (i) the prime rate last published in The Wall
Street Journal in the preceding December plus two and one-half percent (2-1/2%), or (ii) the maximum rate permitted
by law.
LICENSOR'S RESERVED RIGHTS
9. Reserved Rights of Use. Licensor excepts and reserves the right, to be exercised by Licensor and any other parties
who may obtain written permission or authority from Licensor:
9.1 to maintain, use, operate, repair, replace, modify and relocate any utility, power or communication
pipe/lines/cables and appurtenances (other than the Electric Supply Line) and other facilities or structures
of like character upon, over, under or across the Premises existing as of the Effective Date;
9.2 to construct, maintain, renew, use, operate, change, modify and relocate any tracks or additional facilities,
structures and related appurtenances upon, over, under or across the Premises; or
9.3 to use the Premises in any manner as Licensor in its sole discretion deems appropriate, provided Licensor
uses all commercially reasonable efforts to avoid material interference with the use of the Premises by
Licensee for the purpose specified in Section 4 above.
10. Right to Require Relocation. If at any time during the term of this License, Licensor desires the use of its rail corridor
in such a manner as would, in Licensor's reasonable opinion, be interfered with by the Electric Supply Line, Licensee
shall, at its sole expense, within thirty (30) days after receiving written notice from Licensor to such effect, make
such changes in the Electric Supply Line as in the sole discretion of Licensor may be necessary to avoid interference
with the proposed use of Licensor's rail corridor, including, without limitation, the relocation of the Electric Supply
Line, or the construction of a new electric line to replace the Electric Supply Line. Notwithstanding the foregoing,
Licensee agrees to make all emergency changes and minor adjustments, as determined by Licensor in its sole
discretion, to the Electric Supply Line promptly upon Licensor's request.
LICENSEE'S OPERATIONS
11. Construction and Maintenance of the Electric Supply Line.
11.1 Licensee shall not enter the Premises or commence construction unless accompanied by Licensor's
representative, the Scheduling Agent or its designee. Licensee shall notify Licensor's Roadmaster, at ,
telephone , at least ten (10) business days prior to installation of the Electric Supply Line and prior to
entering the Premises for any subsequent maintenance thereon. In the event of emergency, Licensee shall
notify Licensor of Licensee's entry onto the Premises at the telephone number above as soon as practicable
and shall promptly thereafter follow up with written notice of such entry.
Page 106
Tracking #21W-11057
- 3 - Form 421; Rev. 20200605
11.2 Licensee's on-site supervisors shall retain/maintain a fully executed copy of this License at all times while
on the Premises.
11.3 While on the Premises, Licensee shall use only public roadways to cross from one side of Licensor's tracks
to the other.
11.4 Any contractors or subcontractors performing work on the Electric Supply Line or entering the Premises on
behalf of Licensee shall be deemed servants and agents of Licensee for purposes of this License.
11.5 Under no conditions shall Licensee be permitted to conduct any tests, investigations or any other activity
using mechanized equipment and/or machinery, or place or store any mechanized equipment, tools or other
materials, within twenty-five (25) feet of the centerline of any railroad track on the Premises unless Licensee
has obtained prior written approval from Licensor. Licensee shall, at its sole cost and expense, perform all
activities on and about the Premises, including without limitation all construction and maintenance of the
Electric Supply Line, in such a manner and of such materials as not at any time to endanger or interfere
with (i) the existence or use of present or future tracks, roadbeds, or property of Licensor, (ii) the safe
operation and activities of Licensor or existing third parties, or (iii) the rights or interests of third parties. If
ordered to cease using the Premises at any time by Licensor's personnel due to any hazardous condition,
Licensee shall immediately do so. Notwithstanding the foregoing right of Licensor, the parties agree that
Licensor has no duty or obligation to monitor Licensee's use of the Premises to determine the safe nature
thereof, it being solely Licensee's responsibility to ensure that Licensee's use of the Premises is safe.
Neither the exercise nor the failure by Licensor to exercise any rights granted in this Section will alter the
liability allocation provided by this License.
11.6 Licensee shall, at its sole cost and expense, construct and maintain the Electric Supply Line in such a
manner and of such material that the Electric Supply Line will not at any time endanger or interfere with (i)
the existence or use of present or future tracks, roadbeds, or property of Licensor, (ii) the safe operation
and activities of Licensor or existing third parties, or (iii) the rights or interests of third parties. The
construction of the Electric Supply Line shall be completed within one (1) year of the Effective Date, and
any subsequent maintenance shall be completed within one (1) year of initiation. Within fifteen (15) days
after completion of the construction of the Electric Supply Line or the performance of any subsequent
maintenance thereon, Licensee shall, at Licensee's own cost and expense, restore the Premises to
substantially their state as of the Effective Date, unless otherwise approved in advance by Licensor in
writing. On or before expiration or termination of this License for any reason, Licensee shall, at its sole cost
and expense, surrender the Premises to Licensor pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in Section
24 hereof.
11.7 Licensor may direct one or more of its field engineers or inspectors to observe or inspect the construction
and/or maintenance of the Electric Supply Line at any time for compliance with the Drawings and
Specifications and Legal Requirements (defined below). Licensee shall reimburse Licensor for the cost of
such observation or inspection related services pursuant to Section 8. If ordered at any time to halt
construction or maintenance of the Electric Supply Line by Licensor's personnel due to non-compliance
with the Drawings and Specifications or any other hazardous condition, Licensee shall immediately do so.
Notwithstanding the foregoing right of Licensor, the parties agree that Licensor has no duty or obligation to
observe or inspect, or to halt work on, the Electric Supply Line, it being solely Licensee's responsibility to
ensure that the Electric Supply Line is constructed and maintained in strict accordance with the Drawings
and Specifications and in a safe and workmanlike manner in compliance with all terms hereof. Neither the
exercise of, nor the failure by Licensor to exercise, any right granted by this Section will alter in any way
the liability allocation provided by this License. If at any time Licensee shall, in the sole judgment of
Licensor, fail to properly perform its obligations under this Section 11, Licensor may, at its option and at
Licensee's sole expense, arrange for the performance of such work as it deems necessary for the safety of
its operations and activities. Licensee shall promptly reimburse Licensor for all costs and expenses of such
work, pursuant to the terms of Section 8. Licensor's failure to perform any obligations of Licensee shall
not alter the liability allocation hereunder.
Page 107
Tracking #21W-11057
- 4 - Form 421; Rev. 20200605
11.8 Licensee shall, at its sole cost and expense, construct and at all times maintain the Electric Supply Line in
accordance with the National Electric Safety Code.
11.9 If the operation or maintenance of the Electric Supply Line at any time causes interference, including but
not limited to physical interference from electromagnetic induction, electrostatic induction, or from stray or
other currents, with the facilities of Licensor or of any lessee or licensee of Licensor, or in any manner
interfere with the operation, maintenance, or use by Licensor of its right-of-way, tracks, structures, pole
lines, signal and communication lines, radio, or other equipment, devices, other property or appurtenances
thereto, Licensee agrees immediately to make such changes in the Electric Supply Line and furnish such
protective devices and/or replacement equipment to Licensor and its lessees or licensees as shall be
necessary, in the judgment of Licensor's representative, to eliminate such interference. The cost of such
protective devices and their installations shall be borne solely by Licensee. If any of the interference
covered by this Section 11.9 shall be, in the judgment of Licensor, of such importance to the safety of
Licensor's operations as to require immediate corrective action, Licensee, upon notice from Licensor, shall
either, at Licensor's election, cease using the Electric Supply Line for any purpose whatsoever and remove
same, or reduce the voltage or load on the Electric Supply Line, or take such other interim protective
measures as Licensor may deem advisable, until the protective devices and/or replacement equipment
required by this Section 11.9 have been installed, put in operation, tested, and found to be satisfactory to
correct the interference.
11.10 Licensee shall, at its sole cost and expense, remove all combustible material from around wooden poles
on the Premises, if any, and will at all times keep the space around such poles free of such material, and if
removal of such combustible material shall not be attended to with fifteen (15) days after having been
requested by Licensor to do so, Licensor shall have the right itself to perform the work and Licensee hereby
agrees to reimburse Licensor for the expense so incurred.
11.11 Cutting head must travel at 0.0% grade (or downward) beginning 25’ (minimum) from centerline of track
until it reaches a point 25’ (minimum) from the centerline of track. Minimum pressure must be applied to
pumping the slurry to the cutting head during drilling. This will deter the bentonite slurry used for lubrication
from seeping up and fouling the track roadbed. A BNSF Flagman must be present during installation and
will monitor the ballast and roadbed.
12. Boring and Excavation.
12.1 Prior to Licensee conducting any boring, excavation, or similar work on or about any portion of the Premises,
Licensee shall contact the applicable State's call-before-you-dig utility location service to have 3rd parties
mark the location of utilities. Licensee shall explore the proposed location for such work with hand tools to
a depth of at least three (3) feet below the surface of the ground to determine whether pipelines or other
structures exist below the surface, provided, however, that in lieu of the foregoing hand-tool exploration,
Licensee shall have the right to use suitable detection equipment or other generally accepted industry
practice (e.g., consulting with the State Infrastructure Corporation) to determine the existence or location
of pipelines and other subsurface structures prior to drilling or excavating with mechanized equipment.
Licensee shall request information from Licensor concerning the existence and approximate location of
Licensor's underground lines, utilities, and pipelines at or near the vicinity of the proposed Electric Supply
Line by contacting Licensor's Telecommunications Helpdesk, currently at 1-800-533-2891 (option 1, then
option 7), at least ten (10) business days prior to installation of the Electric Supply Line. Upon receiving
Licensee's timely request, Licensor will provide Licensee with the information Licensor has in its possession
regarding any existing underground lines, utilities, and pipelines at or near the vicinity of the proposed
Electric Supply Line and, if applicable, identify the location of such lines on the Premises pursuant to
Licensor's standard procedures. Licensor does not warrant the accuracy or completeness of information
relating to subsurface conditions of the Premises and Licensee's operations will be subject at all times to
the liability provisions herein.
12.2 For all bores greater than 26-inch diameter and at a depth less than 10.0 feet below bottom of rail, a soil
investigation must be performed by Licensee and reviewed by Licensor prior to construction. This study is
to determine if granular material is present, and to prevent subsidence during the installation process. If
Page 108
Tracking #21W-11057
- 5 - Form 421; Rev. 20200605
the investigation determines in Licensor's reasonable opinion that granular material is present, Licensor
may select a new location for Licensee's use, or may require Licensee to furnish for Licensor's review and
approval, in Licensor's sole discretion, a remedial plan to deal with the granular material. Once Licensor
has approved any such remedial plan in writing, Licensee shall, at Licensee's sole cost and expense, carry
out the approved plan in accordance with all terms thereof and hereof.
12.3 Any open hole, boring, or well constructed on the Premises by Licensee shall be safely covered and secured
at all times when Licensee is not working in the actual vicinity thereof. Following completion of that portion
of the work, all holes or borings constructed on the Premises by Licensee shall be:
12.3.1 filled in to surrounding ground level with compacted bentonite grout; or
12.3.2 otherwise secured or retired in accordance with any applicable Legal Requirement. No excavated
materials may remain on Licensor's property for more than ten (10) days, but must be properly
disposed of by Licensee in accordance with applicable Legal Requirements.
LIABILITY AND INSURANCE
13. Liability and Indemnification.
13.1 For purposes of this License: (a) "Indemnitees" means Licensor and Licensor's affiliated companies,
partners, successors, assigns, legal representatives, officers, directors, shareholders, employees, and
agents; (b) "Liabilities" means all claims, liabilities, fines, penalties, costs, damages, losses, liens, causes
of action, suits, demands, judgments, and expenses (including, without limitation, court costs, reasonable
attorneys' fees, costs of investigation, removal and remediation, and governmental oversight costs)
environmental or otherwise; and (c) "Licensee Parties" means Licensee and Licensee's officers, agents,
invitees, licensees, employees, or contractors, or any party directly or indirectly employed by any of them,
or any party they control or exercise control over.
13.2 TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, LICENSEE SHALL, AND SHALL CAUSE ITS
CONTRACTOR TO, RELEASE, INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS INDEMNITEES FOR,
FROM, AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL LIABILITIES OF ANY NATURE, KIND, OR DESCRIPTION
DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ARISING OUT OF, RESULTING FROM, OR RELATED TO (IN WHOLE OR
IN PART):
13.2.1 THIS LICENSE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ITS ENVIRONMENTAL PROVISIONS,
13.2.2 ANY RIGHTS OR INTERESTS GRANTED PURSUANT TO THIS LICENSE,
13.2.3 LICENSEE'S OCCUPATION AND USE OF THE PREMISES,
13.2.4 THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITION AND STATUS OF THE PREMISES CAUSED BY OR
CONTRIBUTED TO BY LICENSEE, OR
13.2.5 ANY ACT OR OMISSION OF ANY LICENSEE PARTY.
13.3 TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, LICENSEE NOW AND FOREVER WAIVES, AND
WILL INDEMNIFY, DEFEND, AND HOLD THE INDEMNITEES HARMLESS FROM ANY AND ALL
CLAIMS THAT BY VIRTUE OF ENTERING INTO THIS LICENSE, LICENSOR IS A GENERATOR,
OWNER, OPERATOR, ARRANGER, OR TRANSPORTER FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE
COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT, AS
AMENDED ("CERCLA") OR OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS (DEFINED BELOW). NOTHING IN
THIS LICENSE IS MEANT BY EITHER PARTY TO CONSTITUTE A WAIVER OF ANY INDEMNITEE'S
COMMON CARRIER DEFENSES AND THIS LICENSE SHOULD NOT BE SO CONSTRUED. IF ANY
AGENCY OR COURT CONSTRUES THIS LICENSE TO BE A WAIVER OF ANY INDEMNITEE'S
COMMON CARRIER DEFENSES, LICENSEE AGREES TO INDEMNIFY, HOLD HARMLESS, AND
Page 109
Tracking #21W-11057
- 6 - Form 421; Rev. 20200605
DEFEND INDEMNITEES FOR ANY LIABILITIES RELATED TO THAT CONSTRUCTION OF THIS
LICENSE. IN NO EVENT AS BETWEEN LICENSOR AND LICENSEE AS TO USE OF THE PREMISES
AS CONTEMPLATED BY THIS LICENSE SHALL LICENSOR BE RESPONSIBLE TO LICENSEE FOR
THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITION OF THE PREMISES.
13.4 IF ANY EMPLOYEE OF ANY LICENSEE PARTY ASSERTS THAT HE OR SHE IS AN EMPLOYEE OF
ANY INDEMNITEE, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, LICENSEE SHALL, AND SHALL
CAUSE ITS CONTRACTOR TO, RELEASE, INDEMNIFY, DEFEND, AND HOLD THE INDEMNITEES
HARMLESS FROM AND AGAINST ANY LIABILITIES ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO (IN WHOLE
OR IN PART) ANY SUCH ASSERTION INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ASSERTIONS OF
EMPLOYMENT BY AN INDEMNITEE RELATED TO THE FOLLOWING OR ANY PROCEEDINGS
THEREUNDER: THE FEDERAL EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ACT, THE SAFETY APPLIANCE ACT, THE
LOCOMOTIVE INSPECTION ACT, THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT, THE
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT, AND ANY SIMILAR STATE OR FEDERAL
STATUTE.
13.5 THE FOREGOING OBLIGATIONS OF LICENSEE SHALL NOT APPLY TO THE EXTENT LIABILITIES
ARE PROXIMATELY CAUSED BY THE GROSS NEGLIGENCE OR WILLFUL MISCONDUCT OF ANY
INDEMNITEE, BUT SHALL APPLY TO ALL OTHER LIABILITIES, INCLUDING THOSE ARISING FROM
OR ATTRIBUTED TO ANY OTHER ALLEGED OR ACTUAL NEGLIGENCE, INTENTIONAL ACTS, OR
STRICT LIABILITY OF ANY INDEMNITEE.
13.6 Upon written notice from Licensor, Licensee agrees to assume the defense of any lawsuit or other
proceeding brought against any Indemnitee by any entity, relating to any matter covered by this License for
which Licensee has an obligation to assume liability for and/or save and hold harmless any Indemnitee.
Licensee shall pay all costs and expenses incident to such defense, including, but not limited to, reasonable
attorneys' fees, investigators' fees, litigation and appeal expenses, settlement payments, and amounts paid
in satisfaction of judgments.
14. Personal Property Risk of Loss. ALL PERSONAL PROPERTY, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, FIXTURES,
EQUIPMENT, OR RELATED MATERIALS UPON THE PREMISES WILL BE AT THE RISK OF LICENSEE ONLY,
AND NO INDEMNITEE WILL BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGE THERETO OR THEFT THEREOF, WHETHER OR
NOT DUE IN WHOLE OR IN PART TO THE NEGLIGENCE OF ANY INDEMNITEE.
15. Insurance. Licensee shall, at its sole cost and expense, procure and maintain during the term of this License the
following insurance coverage:
15.1 Commercial General Liability “CGL” Insurance.
a. The policy will provide a minimum of $2,000,000 per occurrence and an aggregate limit of at least
$4,000,000 but in no event will the coverage be in an amount less than the amount otherwise carried
by Licensee. Coverage must be purchased on a post 2004 ISO occurrence form or equivalent and
include coverage for, but not limited to, the following:
Bodily Injury and Property Damage
Personal Injury and Advertising Injury
Fire legal liability
Products and completed operations
Contractual Liability for an “Insured Contract” consistent with the definition under the standard ISO
general liability policy form.
b. This policy will include the following endorsements or language, which shall be indicated on or attached
to the certificate of insurance:
The definition of “Insured Contract” will be amended to remove any exclusion or other limitation for
any work being done within 50 feet of Licensor’s property;
Waiver of subrogation in favor of and acceptable to Licensor;
Page 110
Tracking #21W-11057
- 7 - Form 421; Rev. 20200605
Additional insured endorsement in favor of and acceptable to Licensor and Jones Lang LaSalle
Brokerage, Inc.to include coverage for ongoing operations and completed operations;
Separation of insureds;
The policy shall be primary and non-contributing with respect to any insurance carried by Licensor.
c. The parties agree that the workers’ compensation and employers’ liability related exclusions in the CGL
policy(s) are intended to apply to employees of the policyholder and will not apply to Licensor’s
employees.
d. No other endorsements that limit coverage with respect to Licensee’s obligations under this agreement
may be included on the policy.
15.2 Business Automobile Insurance
a. The insurance will provide minimum coverage with a combined single limit of at least $1,000,000 per
accident, and include coverage for, but not limited to the following:
Bodily injury and property damage.
Any and all vehicles owned, used or hired.
b. The policy will include the following endorsements or language, which will be indicated on or attached
to the certificate of insurance:
Waiver of subrogation in favor of and acceptable to Licensor;
Additional insured endorsement in favor of and acceptable to Licensor;
Separation of insureds;
The policy shall be primary and non-contributing with respect to any insurance carried by Licensor.
15.3 Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability Insurance
a. The policy will provide coverage of all employees performing any part of the work or services
including coverage for, but not limited to:
Licensee's statutory liability under the workers' compensation laws of the state(s) in which the work
or services are to be performed. The policy will cover all of Licensee’s employees, regardless of
whether such coverage is optional under the law of that state(s).
Employers' Liability (Part B) with limits of at least $500,000 each accident, $500,000 by disease
policy limit, $500,000 by disease each employee.
b. The policy will include contain the following endorsements or language, which shall be indicated on or
attached to the certificate of insurance:
Waiver of subrogation in favor of and acceptable to Licensor.
15.4 Railroad Protective Liability Insurance. The policy will name only Licensor as the Insured and will provide
coverage of at least $2,000,000 per occurrence and $6,000,000 in the aggregate. The coverage obtained
under this policy shall only be effective during the initial installation and/or construction of the Electric Supply
Line. THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ELECTRIC SUPPLY LINE SHALL BE COMPLETED WITHIN ONE
(1) YEAR OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE. If further maintenance of the Electric Supply Line is needed at a
later date, an additional Railroad Protective Liability Insurance Policy shall be required. The policy will be
issued on a standard ISO form CG 00 35 12 04 and include the following:
Endorsed to include the Pollution Exclusion Amendment.
Endorsed to include the Limited Seepage and Pollution Endorsement.
Endorsed to remove any exclusion for punitive damages.
Endorsed to include Evacuation Expense Coverage Endorsement.
No other endorsements restricting coverage may be added.
The original policy must be provided to Licensor and Licensee shall not perform any work or services
of any kind under this agreement until Licensor has reviewed and approved the policy.
The definition of "Physical Damage to Property" will be endorsed to read: "means direct and accidental
loss of or damage to all property owned by any named insured and all property in any named insured's
Page 111
Tracking #21W-11057
- 8 - Form 421; Rev. 20200605
care, custody and control (including, but not limited to rolling stock and their contents, mechanical
construction equipment or motive power equipment, railroad tracks, roadbeds, catenaries, signals,
tunnels, bridges and buildings) arising out of the acts or omissions of the contractor named on the
Declarations."
In lieu of providing a Railroad Protective Liability Policy, for a period of one (1) year from the Effective Date,
Licensee may participate in Licensor's Blanket Railroad Protective Liability Insurance Policy available to
Licensee or its contractor. The limits of coverage are the same as above. The cost is $506.00.
Licensee elects to participate in Licensor's Blanket Policy;
Licensee declines to participate in Licensor's Blanket Policy.
15.5 Other Requirements:
15.5.1 Where allowable by law, no exclusion for punitive damages may be included in any policy.
15.5.2 Licensee agrees to waive its right of recovery against Licensor for all claims and suits against
Licensor. In addition, Licensee's insurers, through the terms of the policy or policy endorsement,
waive their right of subrogation against Licensor for all claims and suits. Licensee further waives
its right of recovery, and its insurers also waive their right of subrogation against Licensor for loss
of Licensee's owned or leased property or property under Licensee's care, custody, or control.
15.5.3 Allocated Loss Expense, including but not limited to defense costs and expenses, will be in addition
to all policy limits for coverage under the insurance requirements.
15.5.4 Licensee is not allowed to self-insure without the prior written consent of Licensor. If Licensor
allows Licensee to self-insure, Licensee shall directly cover any self-insured retention or other
financial responsibility for claims in lieu of insurance. Any and all Licensor liabilities that would
otherwise be covered by Licensee's insurance in accordance with the provisions of this agreement,
will be covered as if Licensee elected not to include a self-insured retention or other financial
responsibility for claims.
15.5.5 Prior to entering the Premises or commencing the services or work, Licensee shall furnish to
Licensor an acceptable certificate(s) of insurance from an authorized representative evidencing the
required coverage(s), endorsements, and amendments.
15.5.6 Licensee shall notify BNSF in writing at least 30 days prior to any cancellation, non-renewal,
substitution or material alteration of any insurance requirement.
15.5.7 Any insurance policy shall be written by a reputable insurance company acceptable to Licensor or
with a current Best's Guide Rating of A- and Class VII or better, and authorized to do business in
the state(s) in which the service is to be provided.
15.5.8 If the coverage provided by any of the insurance policies required by this agreement is purchased
on a "claims made" basis, Licensee hereby agrees to maintain coverage in force for a minimum of
three years after expiration, cancellation or termination of this agreement.
15.5.9 Licensee agrees to provide evidence to Licensor that it has the required coverage in place at least
annually or in the event of a renewal or material change of coverage.
15.5.10 Licensee represents that this License has been thoroughly reviewed by Licensee's insurance
agent(s)/broker(s), and that Licensee has instructed them to procure the insurance coverage
required by this License.
Page 112
Tracking #21W-11057
- 9 - Form 421; Rev. 20200605
15.5.11 Not more frequently than once every five years, Licensor may, at its discretion, reasonably modify
the insurance requirements to reflect the then-current risk management practices in the railroad
industry and underwriting practices in the insurance industry.
15.5.12 If Licensee will subcontract any portion of the operation, Licensee shall require that the
subcontractor provide and maintain insurance coverage(s) as set forth herein, naming Licensor as
an additional insured. In addition, Licensee shall require that the subcontractor shall release,
defend and indemnify Licensee to the same extent and under the same terms and conditions as
Licensee is required to release, defend and indemnify Licensor under this agreement.
15.5.13 Failure to provide evidence as required by this section shall entitle, but not require, Licensor to
terminate this License immediately. Acceptance of a certificate that does not comply with this
section shall not operate as a waiver of Licensee's obligations hereunder.
15.5.14 The fact that Licensee obtains insurance (including, without limitation, self-insurance) shall not
release or diminish Licensee’s liabilities or obligations including, without limitation, the liabilities and
obligations under the indemnity provisions of the License. Damages recoverable by Licensor shall
not be limited by the amount of the required insurance coverage.
15.5.15 In the event of a claim or lawsuit involving Licensor arising out of this Agreement, Licensee will
make the policy covering such claims or lawsuits available to Licensor.
15.5.16 If Licensee maintains broader coverage and/or higher limits than the minimum
requirements in this Agreement, Licensor requires and shall be entitled to the broader coverage
and/or the higher limits. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum
limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to Licensor.
15.5.17 These insurance provisions are intended to be a separate and distinct obligation on the part of the
Licensee. Therefore, these provisions shall be enforceable and Licensee shall be bound thereby
regardless of whether or not indemnity provisions are determined to be enforceable in the
jurisdiction in which the work or services performed under this License is performed.
15.5.18 For purposes of this Section 15, Licensor shall mean "Burlington Northern Santa Fe, LLC", "BNSF
Railway Company" and the subsidiaries, successors, assigns and affiliates of each.
COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS
16. Compliance with Laws, Rules, and Regulations.
16.1 Licensee shall observe and comply with any and all applicable federal, state, local and tribal laws, statutes,
regulations, ordinances, orders, covenants, restrictions, or decisions of any court of competent jurisdiction
("Legal Requirements") relating to the construction, maintenance, and use of the Electric Supply Line and
the use of the Premises.
16.2 Prior to entering the Premises, Licensee shall and shall cause its contractor(s) to comply with all of
Licensor's applicable safety rules and regulations. Licensee must ensure that each of its employees,
contractors, agents or invitees entering upon the Premises completes the safety orientation program at the
Website "www.BNSFcontractor.com" (the "Safety Orientation") within one year prior to entering upon the
Premises. Additionally, Licensee must ensure that each and every employee of Licensee, its contractors,
agents and invitees possess a card certifying completion of the Safety Orientation prior to entering upon
the Premises. Licensee must renew (and ensure that its contractors, agents or invitees, as applicable,
renew) the Safety Orientation annually.
16.3 Licensee shall obtain on or before the date it or its contractor enters the Premises, any and all additional
rights-of way, easements, licenses and other agreements relating to the grant of rights and interests in
Page 113
Tracking #21W-11057
- 10 - Form 421; Rev. 20200605
and/or access to the Premises (collectively, the "Rights") and such other rights, licenses, permits,
authorizations, and approvals (including without limitation, any necessary local, state, federal or tribal
authorizations and environmental permits) that are necessary in order to permit Licensee to construct,
maintain, own and operate the Electric Supply Line and otherwise to perform its obligations hereunder in
accordance with the terms and conditions hereof.
16.4 Licensee shall either require that the initial stated term of each such Rights be for a period that does not
expire, in accordance with its ordinary terms, prior to the last day of the term of this License or, if the initial
stated term of any such Right expires in accordance with its ordinary terms on a date earlier than the last
day of the term of this License, Licensee shall, at its cost, exercise any renewal rights thereunder, or
otherwise acquire such extensions, additions and/or replacements as may be necessary, in order to cause
the stated term thereof to be continued until a date that is not earlier than the last day of the term of this
License.
16.5 Upon the expiration or termination of any Right that is necessary in order for Licensee to own, operate or
use the Electric Supply Line in accordance with the terms and conditions of this License, this License
thereby shall automatically expire upon such expiration or termination of the Right.
17. Environmental.
17.1 Licensee shall strictly comply with all federal, state and local environmental Legal Requirements and
regulations in its use of the Premises, including, but not limited to, the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act, as amended (RCRA), the Clean Water Act, the Oil Pollution Act, the Hazardous Materials
Transportation Act, and CERCLA (collectively referred to as the "Environmental Laws"). Licensee shall
not maintain a treatment, storage, transfer or disposal facility, or underground storage tank, as defined by
Environmental Laws on the Premises. Licensee shall not release or suffer the release of oil or hazardous
substances, as defined by Environmental Laws on or about the Premises.
17.2 Licensee covenants that it will not handle or transport "hazardous waste" or "hazardous substances", as
"hazardous waste" and "hazardous substances" may now or in the future be defined by any federal, state,
or local governmental agency or body on the Premises. Licensee agrees periodically to furnish Licensor
with proof, satisfactory to Licensor that Licensee is in compliance with the provisions of this Section 17.2.
17.3 Licensee shall give Licensor immediate notice to Licensor's Resource Operations Center at (800) 832-5452
of any known (i) release of hazardous substances on, from, or affecting the Premises, (ii) violation of
Environmental Laws, or (iii) inspection or inquiry by governmental authorities charged with enforcing
Environmental Laws with respect to Licensee's use of the Premises. Licensee shall use the best efforts to
promptly respond to any release on, from, or affecting the Premises. Licensee also shall give Licensor
immediate notice of all measures undertaken on behalf of Licensee to investigate, remediate, respond to
or otherwise cure such release or violation.
17.4 If Licensor has notice from Licensee or otherwise of a release or violation of Environmental Laws arising in
any way with respect to the Electric Supply Line which occurred or may occur during the term of this
License, Licensor may require Licensee, at Licensee's sole risk and expense, to take timely measures to
investigate, remediate, respond to or otherwise cure such release or violation affecting the Premises or
Licensor's right-of-way.
17.5 Licensee shall promptly report to Licensor in writing any conditions or activities upon the Premises known
to Licensee which create a risk of harm to persons, property or the environment and shall take whatever
action is necessary to prevent injury to persons, property, or the environment arising out of such conditions
or activities; provided, however, that Licensee's reporting to Licensor shall not relieve Licensee of any
obligation whatsoever imposed on it by this License. Licensee shall promptly respond to Licensor's request
for information regarding said conditions or activities.
Page 114
Tracking #21W-11057
- 11 - Form 421; Rev. 20200605
DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES
18. No Warranties.
18.1 LICENSOR'S DUTIES AND WARRANTIES ARE LIMITED TO THOSE EXPRESSLY STATED IN THIS
LICENSE AND SHALL NOT INCLUDE ANY IMPLIED DUTIES OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, NOW OR
IN THE FUTURE. NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES HAVE BEEN MADE BY LICENSOR
OTHER THAN THOSE CONTAINED IN THIS LICENSE. LICENSEE HEREBY WAIVES ANY AND ALL
WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THE PREMISES OR WHICH MAY EXIST
BY OPERATION OF LAW OR IN EQUITY, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTY OF
MERCHANTABILITY, HABITABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
18.2 LICENSOR MAKES NO WARRANTY, REPRESENTATION OR CONDITION OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, CONCERNING (A) THE SCOPE OF THE LICENSE OR OTHER RIGHTS GRANTED
HEREUNDER TO LICENSEE OR (B) WHETHER OR NOT LICENSEE'S CONSTRUCTION,
MAINTENANCE, OWNERSHIP, USE OR OPERATION OF THE ELECTRIC SUPPLY LINE WILL
VIOLATE OR INFRINGE UPON THE RIGHTS, INTERESTS AND ESTATES OF THIRD PARTIES,
INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY LEASES, USE RIGHTS, EASEMENTS AND LIENS OF ANY
THIRD PARTY.
19. Disclaimer of Warranty for Quiet Enjoyment. LICENSOR DOES NOT WARRANT ITS TITLE TO THE PREMISES
NOR UNDERTAKE TO DEFEND LICENSEE IN THE PEACEABLE POSSESSION OR USE THEREOF. NO
COVENANT OF QUIET ENJOYMENT IS MADE.
20. Eviction at Risk of Licensee. In case of the eviction of Licensee by anyone owning, claiming title to, or claiming any
interest in the Premises, or by the abandonment by Licensor of the affected rail corridor, Licensor shall not be liable
(i) to refund Licensee any compensation paid hereunder, except for the pro-rata part of any recurring charge paid
in advance, or (ii) for any damages or costs Licensee sustains in connection with the eviction.
LIENS AND TAXES
21. Liens and Charges. Licensee shall promptly pay and discharge any and all liens arising out of any construction,
alterations or repairs done, suffered or permitted to be done by Licensee on the Premises. Licensor is hereby
authorized to post any notices or take any other action upon or with respect to the Premises that is or may be
permitted by law to prevent the attachment of any such liens to the Premises; provided, however, that failure of
Licensor to take any such action shall not relieve Licensee of any obligation or liability under this Section 21 or any
other Section of this License.
22. Taxes. Licensee shall pay when due any taxes, assessments or other charges (collectively, "Taxes") levied or
assessed by any governmental or quasi-governmental body upon the Electric Supply Line or any other
improvements constructed or installed on the Premises by or for Licensee (collectively, the "Improvements") or
any Taxes levied or assessed against Licensor or the Premises that are attributable to the Improvements.
DEFAULT, TERMINATION, AND SURRENDER
23. Default and Termination. In addition to and not in limitation of Licensor's right to terminate for failure to provide
evidence of insurance as required pursuant to the terms of Section 15, the following events are also deemed to be
events of default pursuant to which Licensor has the right to terminate as set forth below:
23.1 If default shall be made in any of Licensee's covenants, agreements, or obligations contained in this License
and Licensee fails to cure said default within thirty (30) days after written notice is provided to Licensee by
Licensor, or in case of any assignment or transfer of this License in violation of Section 26 below, Licensor
may, at its option, terminate this License by serving five (5) days' notice in writing upon Licensee.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, Licensor shall have the right to terminate this License immediately if
Licensee fails to provide evidence of insurance as required in Section 15.
Page 115
Tracking #21W-11057
- 12 - Form 421; Rev. 20200605
23.2 Should Licensee not comply fully with the obligations of Section 17 regarding the handling or transporting
of hazardous waste or hazardous material, notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of
this License, Licensor may, at its option, terminate this License by serving five (5) days' notice of termination
upon Licensee.
23.3 Any waiver by Licensor of any default or defaults shall not constitute a waiver of the right to terminate this
License for any subsequent default or defaults, nor shall any such waiver in any way affect Licensor's ability
to enforce any Section of this License. The remedies set forth in this Section 23 shall be in addition to,
and not in limitation of, any other remedies that Licensor may have at law or in equity.
23.4 In addition to and not in limitation of Licensor's rights to terminate this License for failure to provide evidence
of insurance or occurrence of defaults as described above, this License may be terminated by either party,
at any time, by serving thirty (30) days' written notice of termination upon the other party. Such termination
shall not release either party hereto from any liability or obligation under the License, whether of indemnity
or otherwise, resulting from any acts, omissions or events happening prior to the date of termination or
thereafter in case by the terms of the License it is provided that anything shall or may be done after
termination hereof.
24. Surrender of the Premises.
24.1 On or before expiration or termination of this License for any reason, Licensee shall, at its sole cost and
expense:
24.1.1 if so directed by Licensor in writing, remove the Improvements, the Electric Supply Line and all
appurtenances thereto, or, at the sole discretion of Licensor, appropriately decommission the
Electric Supply Line with a method satisfactory to Licensor;
24.1.2 report and restore any damage to the Premises or Licensor's other property arising from, growing
out of, or connected with Licensee's use of the Premises;
24.1.3 remedy any unsafe conditions on the Premises created or aggravated by Licensee; and
24.1.4 leave the Premises in substantially the condition which existed as of the Effective Date or as
otherwise agreed to by Licensor.
24.2 Upon any expiration or termination of this License, if Licensee fails to surrender the Premises to Licensor
or if Licensee fails to complete its obligations under Section 24.1 above (the "Restoration Obligations"),
Licensee shall have a limited license to enter upon the Premises solely to the extent necessary for Licensee
to complete the Restoration Obligations, and all liabilities and obligations of Licensee hereunder shall
continue in effect until the Premises are surrendered and the Restoration Obligations are completed.
Neither termination nor expiration shall release Licensee from any liability or obligation under this License,
whether of indemnity or otherwise, resulting from any acts, omissions or events happening prior to the date
of termination, or, if later, the date when Licensee surrenders the Premises and all of the Restoration
Obligations are completed.
24.3 If Licensee fails to complete the Restoration Obligations within thirty (30) days after the date of such
termination of its tenancy, then Licensor may, at its election, either: (i) remove the Electric Supply Line and
the other Improvements or otherwise restore the Premises, and in such event Licensee shall, within thirty
(30) days after receipt of bill therefor, reimburse Licensor for cost incurred, (ii) upon written notice to
Licensee, take and hold the Electric Supply Line and the other Improvements and personal property as its
sole property, without payment or obligation to Licensee therefor, or (iii) specifically enforce Licensee's
obligation to restore and/or pursue any remedy at law or in equity against Licensee for failure to so restore.
Further, if Licensor has consented to the Electric Supply Line and the other Improvements remaining on
the Premises following termination, Licensee shall, upon request by Licensor, provide a bill of sale in a form
acceptable to Licensor conveying the Electric Supply Line and the other Improvements to Licensor for no
additional consideration.
Page 116
Tracking #21W-11057
- 13 - Form 421; Rev. 20200605
MISCELLANEOUS
25. Successors and Assigns. All provisions contained in this License shall be binding upon, inure to the benefit of, and
be enforceable by the respective successors and assigns of Licensor and Licensee to the same extent as if each
such successor and assign was named a party to this License.
26. Assignment.
26.1 Licensee may not sell, assign, transfer, or hypothecate this License or any right, obligation, or interest
herein (either voluntarily or by operation of law, merger, or otherwise) without the prior written consent of
Licensor, which consent may not be unreasonably withheld or delayed by Licensor. Any attempted
assignment by Licensee in violation of this Section 26 shall be a breach of this License and, in addition,
shall be voidable by Licensor in its sole and absolute discretion.
26.2 For purposes of this Section 26, the word "assign" shall include without limitation (a) any sale of the equity
interests of Licensee following which the equity interest holders of Licensee immediately prior to such sale
own, directly or indirectly, less than 50% of the combined voting power of the outstanding voting equity
interests of Licensee, (b) any sale of all or substantially all of the assets of (i) Licensee and (ii) to the extent
such entities exist, Licensee's parent and subsidiaries, taken as a whole, or (c) any reorganization,
recapitalization, merger or consolidation involving Licensee. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any
reorganization, recapitalization, merger or consolidation following which the equity interest holders of
Licensee immediately prior to such reorganization, recapitalization, merger or consolidation own, directly
or indirectly, at least 50% of the combined voting power of the outstanding voting equity interests of
Licensee or any successor thereto or the entity resulting from such reorganization, recapitalization, merger
or consolidation shall not be deemed an assignment. THIS LICENSE SHALL NOT RUN WITH THE LAND
WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF LICENSOR, SUCH CONSENT TO BE IN
LICENSOR'S SOLE DISCRETION.
26.3 Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 26.1 above or anything contained in this License to the contrary,
if Licensee sells, assigns, transfers, or hypothecates this License or any interest herein in contravention of
the provisions of this License (a "Purported Assignment") to another party (a "Purported Transferee"),
the Purported Transferee's enjoyment of the rights and privileges granted under this License shall be
deemed to be the Purported Transferee's agreement to be bound by all of the terms and provisions of this
License, including but not limited to the obligation to comply with the provisions of Section 15 above
concerning insurance requirements. In addition to and not in limitation of the foregoing, Licensee, for itself,
its successors and assigns, shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Licensor for all Liabilities of any
nature, kind or description of any person or entity directly or indirectly arising out of, resulting from or related
to (in whole or in part) a Purported Assignment. The provisions of this Section 26.3 shall survive the
expiration or earlier termination of this License.
26.4 Licensor shall have the right to transfer and assign, in whole or part, all of its rights and obligations under
this License, and upon any such transfer or assignment, Licensor shall be released from any further
obligations hereunder and Licensee agrees to look solely to the successor in interest of Licensor for the
performance of such obligations.
27. Notices. Any notice, invoice, or other writing required or permitted to be given hereunder by one party to the other
shall be in writing and the same shall be given and shall be deemed to have been served and given if (i) placed in
the United States mail, certified, return receipt requested, or (ii) deposited into the custody of a nationally recognized
overnight delivery service, addressed to the party to be notified at the address for such party specified below, or to
such other address as the party to be notified may designate by giving the other party no less than thirty (30) days'
advance written notice of such change in address.
Page 117
Tracking #21W-11057
-14 - Form 421; Rev. 20200605
If to Licensor: Jones Lang LaSalle Brokerage, Inc.
4200 Buckingham Rd., Suite 110
Fort Worth, TX 76155
Attn: Permits/Licenses
with a copy to: BNSF Railway Company
2650 Lou Menk Dr.
Fort Worth, TX 76131
Attn: Senior Manager Real Estate
If to Licensee: City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Dr.
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
Attn:
28. Survival. Neither termination nor expiration will release either party from any liability or obligation under this License,
whether of indemnity or otherwise, resulting from any acts, omissions or events happening prior to the date of
termination or expiration, or, if later, the date when the Electric Supply Line and the other Improvements are
removed and the Restoration Obligations are completed in accordance with the terms hereof.
29. Recordation. It is understood and agreed that this License shall not be placed or allowed to be placed on public
record.
30.Applicable Law. All questions concerning the interpretation or application of provisions of this License shall be
decided according to the substantive laws of the State of California without regard to conflicts of law provisions.
31.Severability. To the maximum extent possible, each provision of this License shall be interpreted in such manner
as to be effective and valid under applicable law, but if any provision of this License shall be prohibited by, or held
to be invalid under, applicable law, such provision shall be ineffective solely to the extent of such prohibition or
invalidity, and this shall not invalidate the remainder of such provision or any other provision of this License.
32.Integration. This License is the full and complete agreement between Licensor and Licensee with respect to all
matters relating to Licensee's use of the Premises, and supersedes any and all other agreements between the
parties hereto relating to Licensee's use of the Premises as described herein. However, nothing herein is intended
to terminate any surviving obligation of Licensee or Licensee's obligation to defend and hold Licensor harmless in
any prior written agreement between the parties.
33.Joint and Several Liability. If Licensee consists of two or more parties, all the covenants and agreements of
Licensee herein contained shall be the joint and several covenants and agreements of such parties.
34.Waiver. The waiver by Licensor of the breach of any provision herein by Licensee shall in no way impair the right
of Licensor to enforce that provision for any subsequent breach thereof.
35.Interpretation.
35.1 This License shall be interpreted in a neutral manner, and not more strongly for or against any party based
upon the source of the draftsmanship; both parties hereby agree that this License shall not be subject to
the principle that a contract would be construed against the party which drafted the same. Article titles,
headings to sections and paragraphs and the table of contents (if any) are inserted for convenience of
reference only and are not intended to be a part or to affect the meaning or interpretation hereof. The
exhibit or exhibits referred to herein shall be construed with and as an integral part of this License to the
same extent as if they were set forth verbatim herein.
35.2 As used herein, "include", "includes" and "including" are deemed to be followed by "without limitation"
whether or not they are in fact followed by such words or words of like import; "writing", "written" and
comparable terms refer to printing, typing, lithography and other means of reproducing words in a visible
Page 118
Tracking #21W-11057
- 15 - Form 421; Rev. 20200605
form; references to any person are also to that person's successors and permitted assigns; "hereof",
"herein", "hereunder" and comparable terms refer to the entirety hereof and not to any particular article,
section, or other subdivision hereof or attachment hereto; references to any gender include references to
the masculine or feminine as the context requires; references to the plural include the singular and vice
versa; and references to this License or other documents are as amended, modified or supplemented from
time to time.
36. Counterparts. This License may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall, for all purposes, be
deemed an original but which together shall constitute one and the same instrument, and the signature pages from
any counterpart may be appended to any other counterpart to assemble fully executed documents, and counterparts
of this License may also be exchanged electronically and any electronic version of any party's signature shall be
deemed to be an original signature for all purposes.
37. Licensor's Representative. Jones Lang LaSalle Brokerage, Inc. is acting as representative for BNSF Railway
Company.
END OF PAGE – SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS
Page 119
Tracking #21W-11057
- 16 - Form 421; Rev. 20200605
This License has been duly executed by the parties hereto as of the Effective Date.
LICENSOR:
BNSF Railway Company, a Delaware corporation
By: Jones Lang LaSalle Brokerage, Inc.
4200 Buckingham Road, Suite 110
Fort Worth, TX 76155
By:
Title: _______________________________________
LICENSEE:
City of Rancho Cucamonga, a California municipality
By:
Title: _______________________________________
Page 120
8 t h S t
Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CN ES/Airbus DS,
USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
DRAWING NO. 82085
JN CSTATE OF CA
VOLTAGE
NUMBER OF COND UITS 1
220V
TYPE ELECTRIC
BASE OF R AIL
TO TOP OF CON DUIT
LENGTH ON R/W
WALL THIC KNESS
CONDUIT MATERIAL STEEL
SIZE OF CONDUIT 20"
0.25"
33'
8.25'
DESCRIPTION OF WIRES UN DER TRAC K
WIRES LOCATED AS SHOWN BOLD
NOTE: CONDUIT TO BE JACKED OR DRY BORED ONLY
COORDINATE SYSTEM: CA_5 TR ACKING NO. 21W-11057
MAP REF. 501419EXHIBIT "A"
ATTACHED TO CONTRACT BETWEENBNSF R A I LWAY C O M PA N Y
AN D
CITY OF RANCH O CUCAMONGA
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
TOWNSHIP & RANGE:
1S 7W
MERIDIAN : SBM
SECTION: 14 CALIFORNIA DIV.
SC AX: SAN GABRIEL SU BD IV.
L.S. 76 08 MP: 41 .41
1 IN = 50 FTSCALE:
DATE: 9/24/2021
³
NOTE:
1-20" STEEL CONDUIT W/
1-2" HDPE INNERDUCT OCCUPIED W/
3 ELEC TRIC CABLES
MP 41.4134.091529 -117.578082
T O : L .S . 7 6 0 8 M A IN
TO: END OF TRACK12.5'
12.5'
33'
30'
NOTE: SHARES 20" CONDUIT W/
TRK 21W-11124 (SEE DRAWING NO. 82080)
Page 121
Jones Lang LaSalle Brokerage, Inc.
4200 Buckingham Rd., Suite 110
Fort Worth, Texas 76155
tel +1 817-230-2600, fax +1 817 306-8265
October 14, 2021
NOTE: This Agreement is contingent upon BNSF Roadmaster Approval
City of Rancho Cucamonga 20-67008
Attention: Mr. Matthew Addington
10500 Civic Center Dr
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
Dear Mr. Addington:
Attached please find a copy of the requested contract for execution by an official authorized to execute contract
agreements on behalf of your company. Please print one (1) copy, execute, and return with original signature for
completion on part of BNSF Railway Company (“BNSF”) to this office.
Please note the agreements cannot be executed by BNSF without an approved insurance certificate. If there are
any issues with your insurance, you will be contacted by a member of the Risk Management team of BNSF Railway.
Please submit the following documents to BNSF@certfocus.com:
1.A Certificate of Insurance as required in the agreement.
2.A separate policy for Railroad Protective Liability Insurance as required in the agreement (ORIGINAL
POLICY MUST BE PROVIDED). BNSF Railway Company will be the only insured party; OR;
In lieu of providing a separate policy for Railroad Protective Liability Insurance, you may participate in the
BNSF’s Railroad Protective Policy by checking the appropriate box in the contract and including an additional
$633.00 with your check and signed agreements.
PLEASE ADVISE IF THIS PROJECT IS ARRA FUNDED.
Acceptance and deposit of any check by BNSF does not constitute an agreement between BNSF and Licensee for
the requested license. BNSF shall not be obligated to hold the check in a separate fund, but may commingle the
funds with other funds of BNSF, and in no event shall BNSF be responsible for interest on said funds.
The enclosed permit is not a binding agreement and shall become binding only when, and if, it is executed by you
and fully approved and executed by BNSF Railway Company. Upon completion on behalf of BNSF, one fully
executed counterpart will be returned for your records.
The specifications/plans you provided may differ from BNSF’s minimum specification
requirements. Therefore, prior to your installation, please review the Exhibit A to determine the
specifications necessary for your installation.
Please be informed that if contracts, fees, and insurance are not returned within sixty (60) days, the processing fee
will increase to $1,600.00.
Sincerely,
Patricia Villegas
Permit Manager
Attachment
ATTACHMENT 4Page122
Law Department Approved Tracking #20-67008
Form 433; Rev. 04/26/05
- 1 -
ROADWAY SURFACING AGREEMENT
This Roadway Surfacing Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into effective as of this the
____ day of ________ 2021, by and between CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, (“Contractor”), a
California corporation, and BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY (“Railway”), a Delaware corporation.
WHEREAS, Railway operates a freight transportation system by rail with operations
throughout the United States and Canada; and
WHEREAS, City of Rancho Cucamonga desires Contractor to surface the roadway adjacent
to and upon Railway’s right of way, and Contractor is willing to perform such services.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration for Railway entering this Agreement with Contractor
and granting Contractor permission to enter upon the Premises (defined herein), Contractor agrees
with Railway as follows:
SECTION 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES
Contractor shall perform the following services, hereinafter described as Work”:
roadway resurfacing, and curb, gutter, sidewalk, replacement
Line Segment 7608 and Mile Post 41.42
Performance of the Work will necessarily require Contractor to enter Railway’s right of way
and property (“Premises”). Contractor agrees that no work shall be commenced on the Premises
until (i) this Agreement is executed by both Contractor and Railway; and (ii) Railway approves the
insurance required to be maintained by Contractor hereunder. Contractor further agrees that if this
Agreement is not executed by the owner, general partner, president, or vice-president of Contractor,
Contractor shall furnish Railway with evidence certifying that the signatory is empowered to execute
this Agreement.
This License shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue for a period one
hundred eighty (180) days, subject to prior termination as hereinafter described.
SECTION 2. PAYMENT OF FEES
City of Rancho Cucamonga shall be responsible for payment to Contractor for the Work
performed under this Agreement.
SECTION 3. RELEASE OF LIABILITY AND INDEMNITY
Contractor hereby waives, releases, indemnifies, defends and holds harmless Railway for all
judgments, awards, claims, demands, and expenses (including attorney's fees), for injury or death
to all persons, including Railway's and Contractor's officers and employees, and for loss and damage
to property belonging to any person, arising in any manner from Contractor's or any of Contractor's
subcontractors' acts or omissions or any work performed on or about Railway’s property or right-of-
way. THE LIABILITY ASSUMED BY CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT BE AFFECTED BY THE FACT,
IF IT IS A FACT, THAT THE DESTRUCTION, DAMAGE, DEATH, OR INJURY WAS
OCCASIONED BY OR CONTRIBUTED TO BY THE NEGLIGENCE OF RAILWAY, ITS AGENTS,
SERVANTS, EMPLOYEES OR OTHERWISE, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THAT SUCH CLAIMS
ARE PROXIMATELY CAUSED BY THE INTENTIONAL MISCONDUCT OR GROSS
NEGLIGENCE OF RAILWAY.
Page 123
Law Department Approved Tracking #20-67008
Form 433; Rev. 04/26/05
- 2 -
THE INDEMNIFICATION OBLIGATION ASSUMED BY CONTRACTOR SHALL INCLUDE
ANY CLAIMS, SUITS OR JUDGMENTS BROUGHT AGAINST RAILWAY UNDER THE FEDERAL
EMPLOYEE'S LIABILITY ACT INCLUDING CLAIMS FOR STRICT LIABILITY UNDER THE
SAFETY APPLIANCE ACT OR THE BOILER INSPECTION ACT, WHENEVER SO CLAIMED.
Contractor further agrees, at its expense, in the name and on behalf of Railway, that it shall
adjust and settle all claims made against Railway, and shall, at Railway's discretion, appear and
defend any suits or actions of law or in equity brought against Railway on any claim or cause of
action arising or growing out of or in any manner connected with any liability assumed by Contractor
under this Agreement for which Railway is liable or is alleged to be liable. Railway shall give notice
to Contractor, in writing, of the receipt or pendency of such claims and thereupon Contractor shall
proceed to adjust and handle to a conclusion such claims, and in the event of a suit brought against
Railway, Railway may forward summons and complaint or other process in connection therewith to
Contractor, and Contractor, at Railway's discretion, shall defend, adjust, or settle such suits and
protect, indemnify, and save harmless Railway from and against all damages, judgments, decrees,
attorney's fees, costs, and expenses growing out of or resulting from or incident to any such claims
or suits.
It is mutually understood and agreed that the assumption of liabilities and indemnification
provided for in this Agreement shall survive any termination of this Agreement.
SECTION 4. INSURANCE.
Contractor shall, at its sole cost and expense, procure and maintain during the life of this
Agreement the following insurance coverage:
A. Commercial General Liability Insurance. This insurance shall contain broad form
contractual liability with a combined single limit of a minimum of $2,000,000 each occurrence
and an aggregate limit of at least $ 4,000,000. Coverage must be purchased on a post 1998
ISO occurrence form or equivalent and include coverage for, but not limited to, the following:
♦ Bodily Injury and Property Damage
♦ Personal Injury and Advertising Injury
♦ Fire legal liability
♦ Products and completed operations
This policy shall also contain the following endorsements, which shall be indicated on the
certificate of insurance:
♦ It is agreed that any workers’ compensation exclusion does not apply to Railroad
payments related to the Federal Employers Liability Act or a Railroad Wage
Continuation Program or similar programs and any payments made are deemed
not to be either payments made or obligations assumed under any Workers
Compensation, disability benefits, or unemployment compensation law or similar
law.
♦ The definition of insured contract shall be amended to remove any exclusion or
other limitation for any work being done within 50 feet of railroad property.
♦ Any exclusions related to the explosion, collapse and underground hazards shall
be removed.
No other endorsements limiting coverage as respects obligations under this Agreement may
Page 124
Law Department Approved Tracking #20-67008
Form 433; Rev. 04/26/05
- 3 -
be included on the policy.
B. Business Automobile Insurance. This insurance shall contain a combined single limit of
at least $1,000,000 per occurrence, and include coverage for, but not limited to the following:
♦ Bodily injury and property damage
♦ Any and all vehicles owned, used or hired
C. Workers Compensation and Employers Liability Insurance. This insurance shall include
coverage for, but not limited to:
♦ Contractor’s statutory liability under the worker’s compensation laws of the
state(s) in which the work is to be performed. If optional under State law, the
insurance must cover all employees anyway.
♦ Employers’ Liability (Part B) with limits of at least $500,000 each accident,
$500,000 by disease policy limit, $500,000 by disease each employee.
D. Railroad Protective Liability Insurance. This insurance shall name only the Railroad as
the Insured with coverage of at least $2,000,000 per occurrence and $6,000,000 in the
aggregate. The policy shall be issued on a standard ISO form CG 00 35 10 93 and include
the following:
♦ Endorsed to include the Pollution Exclusion Amendment (ISO form CG 28 31 10
93)
♦ Endorsed to include the Limited Seepage and Pollution Endorsement
♦ Endorsed to include Evacuation Expense Coverage Endorsement
♦ No other endorsements restricting coverage may be added
♦ The original policy must be provided to the Railroad prior to performing any work
or services under this Agreement
In lieu of providing a Railroad Protective Liability Policy, Licensee may participate in
Licensor’s Blanket Railroad Protective Liability Insurance Policy available to Licensee or its
contractor. The limits of coverage are the same as above. The cost is $ 633.00.
I elect to participate in Licensor’s Blanket Policy;
I elect not to participate in Licensor’s Blanket Policy.
E. Other Requirements:
Where allowable by law, all policies (applying to coverage listed above) shall contain no
exclusion for punitive damages and certificates of insurance shall reflect that no exclusion
exists.
Contractor agrees to waive its right of recovery against Railroad for all claims and suits
against Railroad. In addition, its insurers, through the terms of the policy or policy
endorsement, waive their right of subrogation against Railroad for all claims and suits. The
certificate of insurance must reflect the waiver of subrogation endorsement. Contractor
further waives its right of recovery, and its insurers also waive their right of subrogation
against Railroad for loss of its owned or leased property or property under contractor’s care,
custody or control.
Page 125
Law Department Approved Tracking #20-67008
Form 433; Rev. 04/26/05
- 4 -
Contractor’s insurance policies through policy endorsement, must include wording which
states that the policy shall be primary and non-contributing with respect to any insurance
carried by Railroad. The certificate of insurance must reflect that the above wording is
included in evidenced policies.
All policy(ies) required above (excluding Workers Compensation and if applicable, Railroad
Protective) shall include a severability of interest endorsement and Railroad shall be named
as an additional insured with respect to work performed under this agreement. Severability
of interest and naming Railroad as additional insured shall be indicated on the certificate of
insurance.
Contractor is not allowed to self-insure without the prior written consent of Railroad. If
granted by Railroad, any deductible, self-insured retention or other financial responsibility for
claims shall be covered directly by contractor in lieu of insurance. Any and all Railroad
liabilities that would otherwise, in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, be
covered by contractor’s insurance will be covered as if contractor elected not to include a
deductible, self-insured retention or other financial responsibility for claims.
Prior to commencing the Work, contractor shall furnish to Railroad an acceptable
certificate(s) of insurance including an original signature of the authorized representative
evidencing the required coverage, endorsements, and amendments and referencing the
contract audit/folder number if available. The policy(ies) shall contain a provision that
obligates the insurance company(ies) issuing such policy(ies) to notify Railroad in writing at
least 30 days prior to any cancellation, non-renewal, substitution or material alteration. This
cancellation provision shall be indicated on the certificate of insurance. Upon request from
Railroad, a certified duplicate original of any required policy shall be furnished.
Any insurance policy shall be written by a reputable insurance company acceptable to
Railroad or with a current Best’s Guide Rating of A- and Class VII or better, and authorized
to do business in the state(s) in which the service is to be provide.
Contractor represents that this Agreement has been thoroughly reviewed by contractor’s
insurance agent(s)/broker(s), who have been instructed by contractor to procure the
insurance coverage required by this Agreement. Allocated Loss Expense shall be in addition
to all policy limits for coverages referenced above.
Not more frequently than once every five years, Railroad may reasonably modify the required
insurance coverage to reflect then-current risk management practices in the railroad industry
and underwriting practices in the insurance industry.
If any portion of the operation is to be subcontracted by contractor, contractor shall require
that the subcontractor shall provide and maintain insurance coverages as set forth herein,
naming Railroad as an additional insured, and shall require that the subcontractor shall
release, defend and indemnify Railroad to the same extent and under the same terms and
conditions as contractor is required to release, defend and indemnify Railroad herein.
Failure to provide evidence as required by this section shall entitle, but not require, Railroad
to terminate this Agreement immediately. Acceptance of a certificate that does not comply
with this section shall not operate as a waiver of contractor's obligations hereunder.
Page 126
Law Department Approved Tracking #20-67008
Form 433; Rev. 04/26/05
- 5 -
The fact that insurance (including, without limitation, self-insurance) is obtained by contractor
shall not be deemed to release or diminish the liability of contractor including, without
limitation, liability under the indemnity provisions of this Agreement. Damages recoverable
by Railroad shall not be limited by the amount of the required insurance coverage.
Prior to entering the Premises, Licensee shall and shall cause its contractor to comply with
all Licensor’s applicable safety rules and regulations. Prior to commencing any work on the
Premises, Licensee shall complete and shall require its contractor to complete the safety-
training program at the following Internet Website “http://www.contractororientation.com”.
This training must be completed no more than one year in advance of Licensee’s entry on
the Premises.
For purposes of this section, Railroad shall mean “Burlington Northern Santa Fe
Corporation”, “BNSF Railway Company” and the subsidiaries, successors, assigns and
affiliates of each.
SECTION 5. PROTECTION OF RAILWAY FACILITIES AND RAILWAY FLAGGER SERVICES
A. The Contractor shall give a minimum of at least thirty (30) working days notice to the
roadmaster at , telephone 323-864-3852, in advance of when flagging services will be required to
bulletin the flaggers position and shall provide five (5) working days notice to the Roadmaster to
abolish the position per union requirements.
B. Railway flagger and protective services and devices will be required and furnished
when Contractor's work activities are located over or under of and within twenty-five (25) feet
measured horizontally from center line of the nearest track and when cranes or similar equipment
positioned outside of 25-foot horizontally from track center line that could foul the track in the event
of tip over or other catastrophic occurrence, but not limited thereto for the following conditions:
(1). When in the opinion of the Railway's representative, it is necessary to safeguard the
Premises , employees, trains, engines and facilities.
(2). When any excavation is performed below the bottom of tie elevation, if, in the opinion
of Railway's representative, track or other Railway facilities may be subject to movement or
settlement.
(3). When work in any way interferes with the safe operation of trains at timetable speeds.
(4). When any hazard is presented to Railway track, communications, signal, electrical,
or other facilities either due to persons, material, equipment or blasting in the vicinity.
(5). Special permission must be obtained from the Railway before moving heavy or
cumbersome objects or equipment which might result in making the track impassable.
C. Flagging services will be performed by qualified Railway flaggers. Licensee agrees
to reimburse Licensor (pursuant to the terms of Section 5 (d) below) for all costs and expenses
incurred by Licensor in connection with Licensee's use of the Premises or the presence, construction
and maintenance of the Roadway, including but not limited to the furnishing of Licensor's flaggers
and any vehicle rental costs incurred. Licensee shall bear the cost of flagger services and other
safety measures provided by Licensor, when deemed necessary by Licensor's representative.
Flagging costs shall include, but not be limited to, the following: pay for at least an eight (8) hour
Page 127
Law Department Approved Tracking #20-67008
Form 433; Rev. 04/26/05
- 6 -
basic day with time and one-half or double time for overtime, rest days and holidays (as applicable);
vacation allowance; paid holidays (as applicable); railway and unemployment insurance; public
liability and property damage insurance; health and welfare benefits; transportation; meals; lodging
and supervision. Negotiations for railway labor or collective bargaining agreements and rate
changes authorized by appropriate Federal authorities may increase flagging rates. Flagging rates
in effect at the time of performance by the flaggers will be used to calculate the flagging costs
pursuant to this Section 5.
D. All invoices are due thirty (30) days after the date of invoice. In the event that
Licensee shall fail to pay any monies due to Licensor within thirty (30) days after the invoice date,
then Licensee shall pay interest on such unpaid sum from the due date until paid at an annual rate
equal to the lesser of (i) the prime rate last published in The Wall Street Journal in the preceding
December plus two and one-half percent (2-1/2%), or (ii) the maximum rate permitted by law.
(1) A flagging crew generally consists of one employee. However, additional personnel
may be required to protect the Premises and operations, if deemed necessary by the Railway's
representative.
(2) Each time a flagger is called, the minimum period for billing shall be the eight (8) hour
basic day.
(3) The cost of flagger services provided by the Railway, when deemed necessary by the
Railway's representative, will be borne by the City’s contractor.
SECTION 6. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
In the performance of the Work under this Agreement, Contractor will be considered as an
independent contractor, neither Contractor nor any of its employees, subcontractors, agents or
servants will be considered as employees of Railway in any respect. Contractor shall have the
exclusive right and duty to control the work of its employees. All persons employed by Contractor or
any of its subcontractors in the performance of this Agreement shall be the sole employees of
Contractor or its subcontractors. Contractor will be given general directions and instructions
regarding the Work to be rendered under this Agreement; however, direct supervision of Contractor’s
employees will be Contractor’s responsibility and obligation.
Page 128
Law Department Approved Tracking #20-67008
Form 433; Rev. 04/26/05
- 7 -
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the
day and year first written above.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY
10500 Civic Center Dr
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
Jones Lang LaSalle Brokerage, Inc.,
its Attorney in Fact
4200 Buckingham Rd., Suite 110
Fort Worth, TX 76155
By:
By:
Print
Name:
Title:
Shane Krueger
Vice President - Permits & Special Proj.
Title:
Page 129
8 t h S t
Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
DRAWING NO. 80388
TRIM LINE
COORDINATE SYSTEM: CA_5 TRACKING NO. 20-67008
MAP REF. 501419DRAWN BY:JRG
³
EXHIBIT "A"
ATTACHED TO CONTRACT BETWEENBNSF R A I LWAY C O M PAN Y
AND
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
STATE OF CA
A PARCEL(S) OF LAND CONTAINING A TOTAL OF 1,625 SQ FT.
(0.04 A.C.) MORE OR LESS SHOWN HATCHED. TO BE USED
CONSTRUCTION OF CURB TRANSITION, REMOVAL AND
REPLACEMENT OF AC PAVEMENT, CURB & GUTTER, AND
SIDEWALK.
DESCRIPTION:LEGEND:
PREMISES
RIGHT OF WAY LINE
TRACK
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
TOWNSHIP & RANGE:
1S 7W
MERIDIAN: SBM
SECTION: 14
CALIFORNIA DIV.
SCAX: SAN GABRIEL SUBDIV. L.S. 7608
1 IN = 50 FTSCALE:
DATE: 11/29/2020
MP 41.42
34.091665 -117.577901 TO: FONTANA
TO: END OF TRACK66'
34'62'40'
Page 130
DATE:December 15, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Baldwin Ngai, Associate Engineer
SUBJECT:Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Superior
Pavement Markings, Inc. for Annual Citywide Striping and Pavement
Marking Services in an Amount not to exceed $150,000. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the execution of a Professional Services
Agreement with Superior Pavement Markings, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $150,000, for the
FY2021/2022 citywide striping and pavement marking services and authorize the City Manager
to approve annual extensions of the agreement upon the recommendation of the City Engineer.
BACKGROUND:
There are approximately 1,150 lane miles of existing roadway within the City. Even though the
City periodically resurfaces streets to maintain pavement condition, striping and pavement
markings may become faded over time due to heavy traffic or natural wear. This contract allows
City staff to install new pavement striping and pavement markings for segments of roadway with
such traffic control devices that are worn or in need of updates.
The City’s current contract was awarded in FY2014/2015 and included an annual option to extend
for up to 7 years. With the upcoming contract expiration in mind, City staff solicited bids for a new
striping and pavement marking contract to perform projects on an annual basis across the City to
refresh existing lane line striping and pavement markings on public roadways.
ANALYSIS:
Engineering Staff has worked with the Procurement Division, providing a detailed scope of
services to develop a Request for Bid (RFB) to find a qualified contractor to complete annual
striping and pavement marking work. RFB, #21/22-102 was posted and advertised on the City’s
electronic bidding system, Planet Bids, on August 19, 2021. There were Two Hundred Eighty-
One (281) notified vendors, Twenty-Three (23) prospective vendors, and Five (5) responses were
received. Staff has reviewed all bids received and found all to be complete and in accordance
with the bid requirements. Staff finds that the lowest responsive bidder, Superior Pavement
Markings, Inc., meets the requirement of the bid documents. All applicable solicitation
documentation is on file in Planet Bids.
The agreement term shall be for one (1) year with an option to extend annually for a period of up
to seven (7) years. If approved, authorization for the City Manager to approve annual extensions
to the agreement would be based on a recommendation by the City Engineer that services being
Page 131
Page 2
1
0
5
6
provided continue to meet or exceed City expectations and continue to be of high value to the
City. This authorization would streamline the annual renewal process and aid in ensuring the
continuity of the contracted service.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funding in the amount of $150,000 has been included in the FY2021/22 Annual Budget in the
Measure I 2010-2040 Fund (Fund 177) therefore there is no need for an additional appropriation
of funds at this time.
Work under the proposed agreement will be completed on an as needed work order basis each
year and is initiated by Engineering staff. The amount of work each year shall not exceed
$150,000.
Account No.Funding Source Description Amount
1177303-5300 Measure I 2010-2040
(177)
Striping Contract $150,000
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
The execution of this agreement aligns with the Council’s goal of promoting and enhancing a safe
and healthy community for all by maintaining good visibility of traffic control devices on existing
roadways with the city.
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
Page 132
DATE:December 15, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Romeo M. David, Associate Engineer
SUBJECT:Consideration of a Contract with Onyx Paving Company, Inc., in an
Amount of $1,727,000, Plus 10% Contingency for the Rochester Avenue
Pavement Rehabilitation Project. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Approve the plans and specifications for the Rochester Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation
(Project) on file with the City Engineer;
2. Accept the bids received for the Project;
3. Award and authorize the execution of a contract in the amount of $1,727,000 to the
lowest responsive bidder, Onyx Paving Company, Inc., for the total Bid;
4. Authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $172,700;
5. Authorize a Purchase Order in the amount of $50,638 to Aufbau, Inc. for on-call
construction inspection services;
6. Authorize a Purchase Order in the amount of $46,900 to Leighton, Inc. for on-call
material testing services; and
7. Authorize a Purchase Order in the amount of $39,776 to Huitt-Zollars, Inc. for on-call
construction survey services.
BACKGROUND:
Existing asphalt pavement conditions for sections along Rochester Avenue have deteriorated to
the point that resurfacing is required to extend the life of pavement and improve rideability. The
Rochester Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation Project has been included in the Capital
Improvement Program budget for this fiscal year 2021-22. A Vicinity Map illustrating the limits of
two sections of Rochester Avenue resurfacing project is included as attachment 1.
The City of Rancho Cucamonga uses asphalt rubber hot mix pavement overlay for major arterials
as a paving method to apply a new layer of asphalt to deteriorating roadway surfaces. Instead of
demolishing the old asphalt surface completely, asphalt rubber hot mix overlay will use the
existing layers of asphalt as a base for the new asphalt pavement. An asphalt rubber hot mix
overlay project extends the life of the pavement an additional 15 to 20 years.
Page 133
Page 2
1
0
6
3
ANALYSIS:
The scope of work consists of weed kill, routing and crack sealing, cold milling, asphalt rubber hot
mix overlay, adjusting existing manholes and valves to new grade, restriping and installation of
pavement markings, handicap ramps, video detection, and the installation of green bike lane
thermoplastic striping. The contract documents call for forty-five (45) working days to complete
this project.
The Notice Inviting Bids was released to the general contracting community and was published
in the Daily Bulletin on November 9, and 16, 2021. The City Clerk’s Office facilitated the formal
solicitation for bidding the project.
On November 30, 2021, the City Clerk’s office received six (6) construction bids. The Engineer’s
estimate for the project was $1,864,446. The apparent low bidder Onyx Paving Company, Inc.
submitted a bid in the amount of $1,727,000. A full bid summary is included as Attachment 2.
Engineering staff has reviewed all bids received and found all to be complete and in accordance
with the bid requirements with any irregularities to be inconsequential. Staff has completed the
required background investigation and finds the lowest responsive bidder Onyx Paving Company,
Inc. meets the requirements of the bid documents.
Staff has determined that the project is Categorically Exempt per Section 15301 “Existing
Facilities” subsection (c), Class 1 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
FISCAL IMPACT:
Anticipated construction costs are estimated to be as follows:
Expenditure Category Amount
Construction Contract $1,727,000
Construction Contract Contingency (10%)$172,700
Construction Inspection Services $50,638
Construction Materials Services $46,900
Construction Survey Services $39,776
Bid Noticing Advertisement $1,975
Estimated Construction Costs $2,038,989
A total of $2,617,000 is budgeted, made available and shown in the approved Fiscal Year 2021/22
Budget from the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA) (Fund 179) and Measure
I (Fund 177) Funds to cover the anticipated project construction costs. Funding for this project is
identified under Capital Improvement Project Account No.'s and in the amounts listed below:
Account No.Funding Source Description Amount
11793035650/1935179-0 RMRA SB1 Fund (179)Rochester Avenue $1,700,000
11773035650/2000177-0 Measure I Fund (177)Rochester Avenue $338,989
Total Project
Funding
$2,038,989
Page 134
Page 3
1
0
6
3
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This project meets our City Council core values by promoting and enhancing a safe and healthy
community for all, and by providing continuous improvement through the construction of high-
quality public improvements.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
Attachment 2 - Bid Summary
Page 135
ATTACHMENT 1
PROJECT# 800-2021-06
" ROCHESTER AVENUE PAVEMENT REHABILITATION
6TH STREET TO ARROW ROUTE”
AND
BASE LINE ROAD TO HIGHLAND AVE
NOT TO SCALE
Project Site
Project Site
Project Site
Page 136
UNIT BID UNIT BID UNIT BID UNIT BID UNIT BID UNIT BID UNIT BID
NO QTY UNIT DESCRIPTION COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT
1 1 LS Mobilization $34,986.00 $34,986.00 $34,000.00 $34,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $76,000.00 $76,000.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $45,809.23 $45,809.23
2 1 LS Traffic Control $69,972.00 $69,972.00 $55,000.00 $55,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $55,000.00 $55,000.00 $116,520.49 $116,520.49 $94,200.00 $94,200.00
3 1 LS Clearing and Grubbing - Including all Removal and Disposal $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $11,000.00 $11,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $37,000.00 $37,000.00 $11,500.00 $11,500.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $45,000.00 $45,000.00
4 7,372 SY Variable Pavement Edge Cold Plane (0” – 2”) Per Details $6.75 $49,761.00 $2.52 $18,577.44 $2.60 $19,167.20 $1.90 $14,006.80 $3.20 $23,590.40 $2.75 $20,273.00 $2.12 $15,628.64
5 30,501 SF Grind Heavy Alligator Surface for a Depth of 2” (Width Per Plan)$1.00 $30,501.00 $0.66 $20,130.66 $0.45 $13,725.45 $0.71 $21,655.71 $1.10 $33,551.10 $0.45 $13,725.45 $2.51 $76,557.51
6 2,259 SF Grind Heavy Alligator Surface with Header Cut From 2” – 4” (Width Per Plan)$1.56 $3,514.00 $2.00 $4,518.00 $0.52 $1,174.68 $1.00 $2,259.00 $1.10 $2,484.90 $0.60 $1,355.40 $3.18 $7,183.62
7 410 TN Install 2” D2 PG 64-10 Asphalt Concrete $240.00 $98,400.00 $111.00 $45,510.00 $120.00 $49,200.00 $182.00 $74,620.00 $130.00 $53,300.00 $75.00 $30,750.00 $203.00 $83,230.00
8 3,645 TN Install 2” Thick Asphalt Rubber Hot Mix Overlay (ARHM)$90.00 $328,050.00 $89.89 $327,649.05 $90.00 $328,050.00 $88.00 $320,760.00 $86.25 $314,381.25 $88.00 $320,760.00 $99.00 $360,855.00
9 23 EA Adjust Existing Manhole Frame and Cover to Finish Grade $450.00 $10,350.00 $600.00 $13,800.00 $1,100.00 $25,300.00 $562.00 $12,926.00 $1,100.00 $25,300.00 $600.00 $13,800.00 $1,107.00 $25,461.00
10 64 EA Adjust Existing Water and Gas Valve Frame and Cover to Finish Grade $150.00 $9,600.00 $100.00 $6,400.00 $700.00 $44,800.00 $423.00 $27,072.00 $85.00 $5,440.00 $110.00 $7,040.00 $160.00 $10,240.00
11 1 EA Adjust Sewer Cleanout Cover to Finish Grade $400.00 $400.00 $600.00 $600.00 $900.00 $900.00 $562.00 $562.00 $1,100.00 $1,100.00 $150.00 $150.00 $1,146.00 $1,146.00
12 1 EA Coordinate with Utility Company to Adjust Existing Electrical Vault to Grade by Others $1,200.00 $1,200.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $50.00 $50.00 $1,320.00 $1,320.00 $500.00 $500.00 $200.00 $200.00 $636.00 $636.00
13 3,544 SF Construct PCC Access Ramp Including Truncated Dome Per Plan (Appendix)$12.00 $42,528.00 $9.30 $32,959.20 $11.85 $41,996.40 $11.00 $38,984.00 $9.75 $34,554.00 $10.00 $35,440.00 $21.00 $74,424.00
14 186 LF Construct PCC Curb and Gutter Per Exhibits Including Sawcut, Removal, and Disposal
of Existing Curb and Gutter
$30.00 $5,580.00 $50.00 $9,300.00 $70.00 $13,020.00 $46.00 $8,556.00 $105.00 $19,530.00 $55.00 $10,230.00 $83.00 $15,438.00
15 84 SF Install Truncated Detectable Warning Surfaces $20.00 $1,680.00 $37.00 $3,108.00 $60.00 $5,040.00 $40.00 $3,360.00 $39.00 $3,276.00 $25.00 $2,100.00 $26.00 $2,184.00
16 4 EA Furnish and Install Polara Bulldog Pedestrian Push Button Post Assembly and
Associated Conduit and Cables for a Fully Operational Pedestrian Push Button Per
Caltrans Standard Plan ES-7A Complete in Place
$1,500.00 $6,000.00 $3,500.00 $14,000.00 $3,500.00 $14,000.00 $3,100.00 $12,400.00 $3,200.00 $12,800.00 $2,700.00 $10,800.00 $3,710.00 $14,840.00
17 1 LS Traffic Striping, Signage, Post, Markings, and Markers Per Signing and Striping Plan
Complete in Place (Excluding Green Bike Lane Treatment)
$24,000.00 $24,000.00 $20,015.65 $20,015.65 $18,000.00 $18,000.00 $18,000.00 $18,000.00 $18,300.00 $18,300.00 $35,000.00 $35,000.00 $20,500.00 $20,500.00
18 3,929 SF Green Bike Lane Thermoplastic Per Signing and Striping Plan Complete in Place $12.00 $47,148.00 $8.00 $31,432.00 $7.50 $29,467.50 $7.80 $30,646.20 $8.00 $31,432.00 $9.50 $37,325.50 $8.00 $31,432.00
19 1 LS Furnish and Install Video Detection System for Rochester Avenue at Arrow Route Per
Plan Complete in Place
$45,000.00 $45,000.00 $48,000.00 $48,000.00 $45,000.00 $45,000.00 $47,200.00 $47,200.00 $49,000.00 $49,000.00 $57,000.00 $57,000.00 $51,650.00 $51,650.00
20 1 LS Adjust Video Detection Zone for Rochester Avenue at Jersey Boulevard and 6th Street
Per New Striping Plan Alignment
$1,000.00 $1,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $2,050.00 $2,050.00 $2,200.00 $2,200.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $2,650.00 $2,650.00
TOTAL BID AMOUNT:$819,670.00 $700,000.00 $738,891.23 $743,377.71 $773,239.65 $803,469.84 $979,065.00
UNIT BID UNIT BID UNIT BID UNIT BID UNIT BID UNIT BID UNIT BID
NO QTY UNIT DESCRIPTION COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT
1 1 LS Mobilization $46,717.00 $46,717.00 $48,000.00 $48,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $60,725.00 $60,725.00
2 1 LS Traffic Control $93,433.00 $93,433.00 $66,000.00 $66,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $52,000.00 $52,000.00 $38,000.00 $38,000.00 $149,052.30 $149,052.30 $117,841.14 $117,841.14
3 1 LS Clearing and Grubbing - Including all Removal and Disposal $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $13,000.00 $13,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $46,000.00 $46,000.00 $14,000.00 $14,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $61,500.00 $61,500.00
4 9,394 SY Variable Pavement Edge Cold Plane (0” – 2”) Per Details $6.75 $63,409.50 $2.52 $23,672.88 $2.60 $24,424.40 $1.90 $17,848.60 $2.70 $25,363.80 $2.75 $25,833.50 $2.12 $19,915.28
5 2,558 SF Grind Heavy Alligator Surface for a Depth of 2” (Width Per Plan)$1.00 $2,558.00 $0.66 $1,688.28 $0.45 $1,151.10 $0.71 $1,816.18 $1.60 $4,092.80 $2.00 $5,116.00 $2.51 $6,420.58
6 32 TN Install 2” D2 PG 64-10 Asphalt Concrete $240.00 $7,680.00 $111.00 $3,552.00 $120.00 $3,840.00 $182.00 $5,824.00 $300.00 $9,600.00 $75.00 $2,400.00 $203.00 $6,496.00
7 4,605 TN Install 2” Thick Asphalt Rubber Hot Mix Overlay (ARHM)$90.00 $414,450.00 $89.89 $413,943.45 $90.00 $414,450.00 $88.00 $405,240.00 $89.00 $409,845.00 $88.00 $405,240.00 $99.00 $455,895.00
8 27 EA Adjust Existing Manhole Frame and Cover to Finish Grade $450.00 $12,150.00 $600.00 $16,200.00 $1,100.00 $29,700.00 $563.00 $15,201.00 $1,100.00 $29,700.00 $600.00 $16,200.00 $1,107.00 $29,889.00
9 53 EA Adjust Existing Water and Gas Valve Frame and Cover to Finish Grade $150.00 $7,950.00 $100.00 $5,300.00 $700.00 $37,100.00 $423.00 $22,419.00 $85.00 $4,505.00 $110.00 $5,830.00 $160.00 $8,480.00
10 2 EA Coordinate with Utility Company to Adjust Existing Electrical Vault to Grade by Others $1,200.00 $2,400.00 $1,000.00 $2,000.00 $50.00 $100.00 $1,320.00 $2,640.00 $265.00 $530.00 $300.00 $600.00 $636.00 $1,272.00
11 11,726 SF Construct PCC Access Ramp Including Truncated Dome Per Plan (Appendix)$12.00 $140,712.00 $9.30 $109,051.80 $11.85 $138,953.10 $11.00 $128,986.00 $9.75 $114,328.50 $10.00 $117,260.00 $21.00 $246,246.00
12 806 LF Construct PCC Curb and Gutter Per Exhibits Including Sawcut, Removal, and Disposal
of Existing Curb and Gutter
$30.00 $24,180.00 $50.00 $40,300.00 $62.00 $49,972.00 $45.00 $36,270.00 $80.00 $64,480.00 $55.00 $44,330.00 $83.00 $66,898.00
13 349 LF Construct PCC Retaining Curb Per Exhibits $7.00 $2,443.00 $44.00 $15,356.00 $28.00 $9,772.00 $34.00 $11,866.00 $46.50 $16,228.50 $22.00 $7,678.00 $62.00 $21,638.00
14 701 SF Construct PCC Spandrels Including Sawcut, Removal, and Disposal of Existing PCC
Per City STD. Plan No. 106-A
$14.00 $9,814.00 $22.00 $15,422.00 $20.00 $14,020.00 $33.00 $23,133.00 $23.25 $16,298.25 $13.00 $9,113.00 $33.00 $23,133.00
15 276 SF Install Truncated Detectable Warning Surfaces $20.00 $5,520.00 $37.00 $10,212.00 $60.00 $16,560.00 $30.00 $8,280.00 $39.25 $10,833.00 $22.00 $6,072.00 $26.00 $7,176.00
16 13 EA Furnish and Install Polara Bulldog Pedestrian Push Button Post Assembly and
Associated Conduit and Cables for a Fully Operational Pedestrian Push Button Per
Caltrans Standard Plan ES-7A Complete in Place
$1,500.00 $19,500.00 $3,500.00 $45,500.00 $3,000.00 $39,000.00 $3,100.00 $40,300.00 $3,200.00 $41,600.00 $2,500.00 $32,500.00 $3,710.00 $48,230.00
17 1 LS Traffic Striping, Signage, Post, Markings, and Markers Per Signing and Striping Plan
Complete in Place (Excluding Green Bike Lane Treatment)
$2,000.00 $2,000.00 $20,061.59 $20,061.59 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $19,900.00 $19,900.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $48,000.00 $48,000.00 $18,240.00 $18,240.00
18 3,655 SF Green Bike Lane Thermoplastic Per Signing and Striping Plan Complete in Place $12.00 $43,860.00 $8.00 $29,240.00 $7.50 $27,412.50 $7.73 $28,253.15 $8.00 $29,240.00 $9.00 $32,895.00 $8.00 $29,240.00
19 1 LS Furnish and Install Video Detection System for Rochester Avenue at Highland Avenue
Per Plan Complete in Place
$45,000.00 $45,000.00 $48,500.00 $48,500.00 $45,000.00 $45,000.00 $47,000.00 $47,000.00 $49,000.00 $49,000.00 $57,000.00 $57,000.00 $51,650.00 $51,650.00
20 1 LS Furnish and Install Video Detection System for Rochester Avenue at Lark Drive Per
Plan Complete in Place
$45,000.00 $45,000.00 $48,500.00 $48,500.00 $35,000.00 $35,000.00 $42,000.00 $42,000.00 $44,000.00 $44,000.00 $48,000.00 $48,000.00 $45,000.00 $45,000.00
21 1 LS Furnish and Install Video Detection System for Rochester Avenue at Victoria Park Lane
Per Plan Complete in Place
$45,000.00 $45,000.00 $48,500.00 $48,500.00 $45,000.00 $45,000.00 $47,400.00 $47,400.00 $49,000.00 $49,000.00 $57,000.00 $57,000.00 $51,650.00 $51,650.00
22 1 LS Adjust Video Detection Zone for Rochester Avenue at Base Line Road Per New Striping
Alignment
$1,000.00 $1,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,050.00 $2,050.00 $2,200.00 $2,200.00 $1,100.00 $1,100.00 $2,650.00 $2,650.00
TOTAL BID AMOUNT:$1,044,776.50 $1,027,000.00 $1,023,455.10 $1,044,426.93 $1,032,844.85 $1,171,219.80 $1,380,185.00
TOTAL SCHEDULE A + SCHEDULE B BID AMOUNT:$1,864,446.50 $1,727,000.00 $1,762,346.33 $1,787,804.64 $1,806,084.50 $1,974,689.64 $2,359,250.00
2
SCHEDULE A (6TH STREET TO ARROW ROUTE):
3BID DATE: NOVEMBER 30, 2021
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATERochester Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation - 6th Street to Arrow Route and Base Line Road to
Highland Avenue GENTRY BROTHERS INC.
APPARENT LOW BIDDER
ONYX PAVING COMPANY, INC.SEQUAL CONTRACTOR
4
R.J. NOBLE COMPANY
5
ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT
SCHEDULE B (BASE LINE ROAD TO HIGHLAND AVENUE):
6
HARDY & HARPER, INC.
Rochester Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation - 6th Street to Arrow Route and Base Line Road to
Highland Avenue ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE
ATTACHMENT 2
Page 137
DATE:December 15, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer
Justine Garcia, Deputy Director of Engineering Services
SUBJECT:Consideration of a Resolution Authorizing the Acceptance of the
Conveyance of Property from the California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans) and Authorizing the Appropriation of Funds for the Purchase.
(RESOLUTION NO. 2021-134) (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution authorizing the acceptance of the
conveyance of property from Caltrans and authorize the appropriation of funds for this purchase.
BACKGROUND:
In April of 2021 the City was informed by Caltrans that an excess parcel located at Cherry Avenue
north of I-15, had been made available for purchase and that they were looking to gauge interest
from adjoining property owners, which included the City and a private property owner to the north
of the parcel. Both parties expressed interest in purchasing the property for fair market value
therefore Caltrans scheduled and hosted a virtual sealed bid auction on August 30, 2021.
The City submitted a sealed bid of $230,000 and was ultimately deemed the winning bidder. As
a condition of purchase, the City was required to pay a 10% deposit within five (5) business days
of the sealed bid opening. A check in the amount of $23,000 was provided to Caltrans on
September 2, 2021 and initiated the process to complete the purchase and sale of the excess
parcel.
On December 9, 2021, the Planning Commission made findings that the acquisition of this
property is in conformance with the City’s General Plan.
ANALYSIS:
The parcel located east of Cherry Avenue north of the I-15 freeway is approximately 3.37 acres
and is currently vacant and undeveloped. While a specific project has not been identified as of
yet, the acquisition of this property will allow for the opportunity to develop potential recreation or
green space that would serve both the immediate community and/or be a regional attraction.
The proposed resolution formally accepts the conveyance of the property, establishes General
Plan conformity, determines that the purchase is not subject to CEQA review, and authorizes
various actions by staff to complete the purchase transaction.
Page 138
Page 2
1
0
5
8
FISCAL IMPACT:
The purchase price of this parcel is $230,000, based on the bid that was submitted by the City to
Caltrans during the sealed bid auction. Funding for this purchase will be provided by the City’s
Capital Reserve Fund. An appropriation in the amount of $230,000 is being requested from this
reserve into account number 1025001-5600 (Capital Outlay-Land).
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
Acquisition of this property supports the Council’s vision to build on our success as a world-class
community, by intentionally embracing and anticipating the future, and to create opportunities for
all to thrive.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Resolution No. 2021-134
Page 139
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF
THE CONVEYANCE OF PROPERTY FROM THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CALTRANS)
WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga desires to purchase land described
in the purchase agreement attached hereto (the "Property") for the following public
purpose(s): recreation or other public use;
WHEREAS, pursuant to direction from the City Council, City staff have negotiated
a purchase and sale agreement for the acquisition of such Property from the California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans) ("Seller") in the form attached hereto
("Purchase Agreement").
WHEREAS, the City Manager has executed the Purchase Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA HEREBY FINDS, DETERMINES, RESOLVES, AND ORDERS AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The above recitals are true and correct and are a substantive part of
this Resolution.
Section 2. Subject to the conformity finding described in Section 3 being made
by the Planning Commission of the City, the City accepts the conveyance of the Property
by Seller pursuant to the terms of the Purchase Agreement, the execution of the Purchase
Agreement by the City Manager is hereby ratified, and the City Manager is hereby
authorized and directed to execute and deliver an appropriate certificate of acceptance
with respect to the deed for the Property (and any other documents contemplated or
required by the Purchase Agreement) and cause the deed, and the certificate of
acceptance, to be recorded.
Section 3. Section 65402(a) of the California Government Code requires that
no real property shall be acquired until the location, purpose and extent of such acquisition
has been reviewed for conformity with the general plan. Consequently, the City Council's
approvals and ratification in Section 2 are subject to the Planning Commission making
such conformity finding.
Section 4. This purchase was assessed in accordance with the criteria
contained in the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the State CEQA
Guidelines, and the City's local CEQA Guidelines. Staff has determined that the
Page 140
proposed purchase is exempt from the requirements of CEQA. It can be seen with
certainty that there is no possibility that the transfer and purchase of this property
without any project associated with it will have a significant effect on the environment,
because there is no project contemplated that is associated with the transfer and
purchase. The City Council has reviewed the staff's determination of exemption and,
based on its own independent judgment, concurs in staff's determination that the
proposed purchase is exempt from CEQA and therefore not subject to CEQA review
pursuant to Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Code of
Regulations. A Notice of Exemption will be prepared.
Section 5. The officers and staff of the City are hereby authorized and directed,
jointly and severally, to do any and all things which they may deem necessary or
advisable to effectuate this Resolution and any such actions previously taken by such
officers and staff are hereby ratified and confirmed.
Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 15th day of December, 2021.
Page 141
EXHIBIT "A"
FORM OF PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT
(Attached.)
Page 142
Page 143
Page 144
EXHIBIT "B"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Page 145
Exhibit “A”
Legal Description
Parcel No. DD004461-01-03
That portion of Grant Deed to the State of California recorded November 18, 1974 in
Book 8559, Pages 60 through 65 of Official Records, in the Office of the San Bernardino County
Recorder, in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, lying
northwesterly of the following described line:
BEGINNING at the easterly terminus of Course “P” as described in said Grant Deed; thence
(Course “Z”) South 44°39’44” West 1,776.81 feet to a point 60.00 feet easterly of and parallel with
the West line of the Northwest Quarter of Section 26, Township 1 North, Range 6 West, San
Bernardino Meridian, according to the Official Plat thereof; being the POINT OF TERMINUS of said
reference line.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM all that portion lying northerly of Courses “P” through “T” as
described in said Grant Deed.
There shall be no abutter’s rights, including rights of access, appurtenant to the above
described real property in and to the adjacent State highway along hereinabove said
Course “Z”.
08-SBd-015-PM 8.6 DD004461-01-03
Page 146
e
Professional Land Surveyor
Exhibit “A”
Legal Description
Parcel No. DD004461-01-03
The distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System
of 1983, Zone 5. Multiply all distances used in the above description by 1.00009175 to obtain
ground level distances.
This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in
conformance with the Professional Land Surveyors’ Act.
Signatur _________________________________
Date: March 21, 2020
08-SBd-015-PM 8.6 DD004461-01-03
Page 147
Page 148
Page 149
EXHIBIT "C"
FORM OF GRANT DEED
Page 150
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
When Recorded Mail To
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
464 W. 4th STREET, 6th FLOOR
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92401-1400
Attention: Excess Lands Manager– MS 980
Space above this line for Recorder’s Use
MAIL TAX City of Rancho Cucamonga – John Gillison, City Manager
10500 Civic Center Dr., Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
STATEMENTS TO:
Deed - DD004461-01-03 DJ 10/2015
DIRECTOR’S DEED
GRANT
District County Route Postmile Number
08 SBd 015 8.9-9.2 DD004461-01-03
The State of California, acting by and through its Director of Transportation, hereinafter
called STATE, hereby grants to
__________CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation__________________________
hereinafter called GRANTEE, that real property in the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as follows:
See the fee simple interest in Exhibit “A”, attached.
Subject to special assessments if any, restrictions, reservations, and easements of
record.
08-SBd-015-PM 8.9-9.2-DD004461-01-03
This conveyance is executed pursuant to the authority vested in the Director of
Transportation by law and, in particular, by the Streets and Highways Code.
Page 151
Number
DD004461-01-03
Deed - DD004461-01-03 DJ 10/2015
Dated
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
APPROVED AS TO FORM
AND PROCEDURE
By
ATTORNEY
DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
Director of Transportation
By
Attorney in Fact
08-SBd-015-PM 8.9-9.2-DD004461-01-03
This Space Reserved for
California Transportation Commission
Certification
Page 152
Exhibit “A”
Legal Description
Parcel No. DD004461-01-03
That portion of Grant Deed to the State of California recorded November 18, 1974 in
Book 8559, Pages 60 through 65 of Official Records, in the Office of the San Bernardino County
Recorder, in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, lying
northwesterly of the following described line:
BEGINNING at the easterly terminus of Course “P” as described in said Grant Deed; thence
(Course “Z”) South 44°39’44” West 1,776.81 feet to a point 60.00 feet easterly of and parallel with
the West line of the Northwest Quarter of Section 26, Township 1 North, Range 6 West, San
Bernardino Meridian, according to the Official Plat thereof; being the POINT OF TERMINUS of said
reference line.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM all that portion lying northerly of Courses “P” through “T” as
described in said Grant Deed.
There shall be no abutter’s rights, including rights of access, appurtenant to the above
described real property in and to the adjacent State highway along hereinabove said
Course “Z”.
08-SBd-015-PM 8.6 DD004461-01-03
Page 153
e
Professional Land Surveyor
Exhibit “A”
Legal Description
Parcel No. DD004461-01-03
The distances used in the above description are based on the California Coordinate System
of 1983, Zone 5. Multiply all distances used in the above description by 1.00009175 to obtain
ground level distances.
This real property description has been prepared by me, or under my direction, in
conformance with the Professional Land Surveyors’ Act.
Signatur _________________________________
Date: March 21, 2020
08-SBd-015-PM 8.6 DD004461-01-03
Page 154
DATE:December 15, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Lori Sassoon, Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services
SUBJECT:Consideration of Resolution No. 2021-135, Authorizing the City to Enter
into the Settlement Agreements with McKesson Corporation, Cardinal
Health, Inc., AmerisourceBergen Corporation, Johnson & Johnson,
Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals,
Inc., and Janssen Pharmaceutica, Inc., Agree to the Terms of the
Memorandum of Understanding Allocating Settlement Proceeds, and
Authorize Entry into the Memorandum of Understanding with the Attorney
General; and authorize the City Attorney to take all actions necessary and
convenient to implement the settlements. (RESOLUTION NO. 2021-135)
(CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution, and authorize the City Attorney to
take all actions necessary and convenient to implement the settlements.
BACKGROUND:
Between 2017 and 2020, the State of California, 51 of 58 California counties and approximately
28 California cities filed lawsuits against opioid manufactures and distributors seeking to abate
the opioid crisis. Similar lawsuits were filed by almost all states and many cities and local
governments within those states. These lawsuits were consolidated into one lawsuit in the
Federal Court for the Northern District of Ohio. The Court converted the consolidated lawsuits
into a class action lawsuit with the Plaintiff’s Class consisting of all states and local governments
in the United States. As a result, the City of Rancho Cucamonga is a Plaintiff in these lawsuits
although the City is not required to pay any attorney fees or litigation costs.
The Court appointed a group of 30 attorneys representing state, county and city governments to
serve as the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee to control the litigation on behalf of the Plaintiffs and,
if possible, negotiate a settlement.
ANALYSIS:
Nationwide settlements have been proposed to resolve all opioid litigation brought by states and
local political subdivisions against the three largest pharmaceutical distributors: McKesson,
Cardinal Health and AmerisourceBergen (“Distributors”), and manufacturer Janssen
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and its parent company Johnson & Johnson (collectively, “J&J”).
These settlements will provide substantial funds to states and local political subdivisions for
abatement of the opioid epidemic across the country and will impose transformative changes in
the way these companies conduct their business.
Page 155
Page 2
1
0
6
0
Settlement Basic Terms:
Distributors will pay a maximum of $21 billion over 18 years; J&J will pay a maximum of $5
billion over no more than nine years. Of this potential $26 billion, approximately $22.8 billion
in settlement proceeds is payable to state and local subdivisions.
Based on the allocation formula for the States, the maximum amount California will receive
will be approximately $2.2 billion, with $339 million being retained by the State and $1.9 billion
being allocated to counties and cities within the State.
Based on the allocation formula for cities, it is anticipated that the City of Rancho Cucamonga
will receive an estimated $1.3 million over the term of the settlement. Actual settlement
proceeds to be paid to the states and local political subdivision will be in proportion to the
number of states and local political subdivisions that approve the Settlements, so the final
amount may vary from this estimate.
The settlements allow for a broad range of approved uses by state and local governments to
abate the opioid epidemic. A list of approved uses is found at Exhibit E of the Master
Settlement Agreements (Attachment 2).
Agreements also provide for injunctive relief that requires important changes to the
Distributors’ and J&J’s conduct to better protect our nation’s health and welfare.
o Creation of a groundbreaking clearinghouse through which the Distributors will be
required to account not only for their own shipments, but also the shipments of the
other distributors, in order to detect, stop, and report suspicious opioids orders.
o J&J (which ceased marketing opioids in 2015 and ceased selling opioids in 2020) will
not market or sell any opioid products in the next ten years and has agreed to cease
lobbying concerning prescription opioids for ten years.
o J&J also has agreed to make the clinical trial data for its discontinued opioids available
for medical research.
California Allocation Terms:
The National Settlements allot a certain amount of money to California to be allocated
between the State and local governments by agreement (the “Allocation Agreements”), with
the State retaining 15%, and the remaining 85% allocated to participating counties and cities.
No less than 50% of each local government’s allocation in each calendar year spent on one
or more of the following High Impact Abatement Activities:
o The provision of matching funds or operating costs for substance use disorder facilities
within the Behavioral Health Continuum Infrastructure Program;
o Creating new or expanded Substance Use Disorder (“SUD”) treatment infrastructure;
o Addressing the needs of communities of color and vulnerable populations (including
sheltered and unsheltered homeless populations) that are disproportionately impacted
by SUD;
o Diversion of people with SUD from the justice system into treatment, including by
providing training and resources to first and early responders (sworn and non-sworn)
and implementing best practices for outreach, diversion and deflection, employability,
restorative justice, and harm reduction; and/or
o Interventions to prevent drug addiction in vulnerable youth.
Participating cities must sign the Participation Agreements to the Settlements in order to be
allocated their local allocations. Cities can then request direct payment of their settlement funds,
or let the local allocation be paid to the County in which the city is located. Cities that elect for
direct payment must follow the use and reporting requirements of the Allocation Agreements and
Settlement Agreements. January 2, 2022, is the deadline for each local government to approve
the settlement agreements and participate.
Page 156
Page 3
1
0
6
0
The City Attorney’s Office has participated in a number of countywide calls with the County
Counsel’s Office to more fully understand the litigation and the potential benefits of the proposed
settlements. The settlements are the product of years of litigation and settlement negotiations. All
parties believe this is a fair settlement that brings significant funding to address the opioid
epidemic.
It is recommended that the City participate in the settlement, approve the agreements, and retain
the settlement funds over the coming years for programs and services to be developed to serve
Rancho Cucamonga residents in accordance with the program guidelines.
FISCAL IMPACT:
By this action, the City would receive an estimated $1.3 million in settlement funds over the next
18 years for the specified uses related to opioid response, treatment, and prevention.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This action promotes the Council’s core value of promoting and enhancing a safe and healthy
community for all.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Resolution No. 2021-135
Attachment 2 – Exhibit E to the National Settlement Agreements describing the allowable uses
for the Settlement Funds
Page 157
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. _____________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA TO ENTER INTO THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS WITH
MCKESSON CORPORATION, CARDINAL HEALTH, INC., AMERISOURCEBERGEN
CORPORATION, JOHNSON & JOHNSON, JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.,
ORTHO-MCNEIL-JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., AND JANSSEN
PHARMACEUTICA, INC., AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THE STATE-SUBDIVISION
AGREEMENTS, AND AUTHORIZE ENTRY INTO THE STATE-SUBDIVISION
AGREEMENTS WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
WHEREAS, the United States is facing an ongoing public health crisis of opioid abuse,
addiction, overdose, and death, forcing the State of California and California counties and cities to
spend billions of dollars each year to address the direct consequences of this crisis; and,
WHEREAS, pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio is a
multidistrict litigation (“MDL”) being pursued by numerous public entity plaintiffs against the
manufacturers and distributors of various opioids based on the allegation that the defendants’
unlawful conduct caused the opioid epidemic; and,
WHEREAS, on or about July 1, 2021, a proposed nationwide tentative settlement was
reached between the plaintiffs in the MDL and several of the defendants, specifically McKesson
Corporation, Cardinal Health, Inc., AmerisourceBergen Corporation (collectively, “Distributors”),
and Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals,
Inc., and Janssen Pharmaceutica, Inc. (collectively, “J&J”) (all collectively, the “Settling
Defendants”); and,
WHEREAS, as part of the settlement with the Settling Defendants, local subdivisions,
including certain cities, that are not plaintiffs in the MDL may participate in the settlement in
exchange for a release of the Settling Defendants; and,
WHEREAS, copies of the proposed terms of those proposed nationwide settlements have
been set forth in the Distributors Master Settlement Agreement and the J&J Master Settlement
Agreement (collectively “Settlement Agreements”); and,
WHEREAS, copies of the Settlement Agreements have been provided to the City Council
with this Resolution; and,
WHEREAS, the Settlement Agreements provide, among other things, for the payment of
a certain sum to settling government entities in California including to the State of California and
Participating Subdivisions upon occurrence of certain events as defined in the Settlement
Agreements (“California Opioid Funds”); and,
Page 158
2
1
9
0
7
WHEREAS, California local governments in the MDL have engaged in extensive
discussions with the State Attorney General’s Office (“AGO”) as to how the California Opioid
Funds will be allocated, which has resulted in the Proposed California State-Subdivision
Agreement Regarding Distribution and Use of Settlement Funds- Distributor Settlement and
Proposed California State-Subdivision Agreement Regarding Distribution and Use of Settlement
Funds- Janssen Settlement (collectively the “Allocation Agreements,”) which are agreements
between all of the entities identified in the Allocation Agreements; and,
WHEREAS, copies of the Allocation Agreements have been provided with this
Resolution; and,
WHEREAS, the Allocation Agreements allocate the California Opioid Funds as follows:
15% to the State Fund; 70% to the Abatement Accounts Fund; and 15% to the Subdivision Fund.
For the avoidance of doubt, all funds allocated to California from the Settlements shall be
combined pursuant to Allocation Agreements, and 15% of that total shall be allocated to the State
of California (the “State of California Allocation”), 70% to the California Abatement Accounts
Fund (“CA Abatement Accounts Fund”), and 15% to the California Subdivision Fund (“CA
Subdivision Fund”); and,
WHEREAS, under the Settlement Agreements, certain local subdivisions that did not file
a lawsuit against the Settlement Defendants may qualify to participate in the Settlement and obtain
funds from the Abatement Account Fund; and,
WHEREAS, the City is eligible to participate in the Settlement and become a CA
Participating Subdivision; and,
WHEREAS, the funds in the CA Abatement Accounts Fund (the 70% allocation) will be
allocated based on the allocation model developed in connection with the proposed negotiating
class in the National Prescription Opiate Litigation (MDL No. 2804), as adjusted to reflect only
those cities and counties that are eligible, based on population or litigation status, to become a CA
Participating Subdivision (those above 10,000 in population). The percentage from the CA
Abatement Accounts Fund allocated to each CA Participating Subdivision is set forth in Appendix
1 to the Allocation Agreements and provided to the City Council with this Resolution. The City’s
share of the CA Abatement Accounts Fund will be a product of the total in the CA Abatement
Accounts Fund multiplied by the City’s percentage set forth in Appendix 1 (the “Local
Allocation”); and,
WHEREAS, a CA Participating Subdivision that is a city will be allocated its Local
Allocation share as of the date on which it becomes a Participating Subdivision. The Local
Allocation share for a city that is a CA Participating Subdivision will be paid to the county in
which the city is located, unless the city elects to take a direct election of the settlement funds, so
long as: (a) the county is a CA Participating Subdivision, and (b) the city has not advised the
Settlement Fund Administrator that it requests direct payment at least 60 days prior to a Payment
Date; and,
Page 159
3
1
9
0
7
WHEREAS, it the intent of this Resolution is to authorize the City to enter into the
Settlement Agreements by executing the Participation Agreements and to enter into the Allocation
Agreements by executing the signature page to those agreements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: the City Council hereby approves and
authorizes City Attorney Nicholas Ghirelli to settle and release the City’s claims against the
Settling Defendants in exchange for the consideration set forth in the Settlement Agreements,
Allocation Agreements and all exhibits thereto.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all actions heretofore taken by the City Council and
other appropriate public officers and agents of the City with respect to the matters contemplated
under this Resolution are hereby ratified, confirmed and approved.
Adopted by the Rancho Cucamonga City Council this ___ day of ____________, 2021.
___________________________________
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Page 160
DISTRIBUTORS’ 9.18.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-1
EXHIBIT E
List of Opioid Remediation Uses
Schedule A
Core Strategies
States and Qualifying Block Grantees shall choose from among the abatement strategies listed in
Schedule B. However, priority shall be given to the following core abatement strategies (“Core
Strategies”).14
A.NALOXONE OR OTHER FDA-APPROVED DRUG TO
REVERSE OPIOID OVERDOSES
1.Expand training for first responders, schools, community
support groups and families; and
2.Increase distribution to individuals who are uninsured or
whose insurance does not cover the needed service.
B.MEDICATION-ASSISTED TREATMENT (“MAT”)
DISTRIBUTION AND OTHER OPIOID-RELATED
TREATMENT
1.Increase distribution of MAT to individuals who are
uninsured or whose insurance does not cover the needed
service;
2.Provide education to school-based and youth-focused
programs that discourage or prevent misuse;
3.Provide MAT education and awareness training to
healthcare providers, EMTs, law enforcement, and other
first responders; and
4.Provide treatment and recovery support services such as
residential and inpatient treatment, intensive outpatient
treatment, outpatient therapy or counseling, and recovery
housing that allow or integrate medication and with other
support services.
14 As used in this Schedule A, words like “expand,” “fund,” “provide” or the like shall not indicate a preference for
new or existing programs.
ATTACHMENT 2
Page 161
DISTRIBUTORS’ 9.18.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-2
C.PREGNANT & POSTPARTUM WOMEN
1.Expand Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to
Treatment (“SBIRT”) services to non-Medicaid eligible or
uninsured pregnant women;
2.Expand comprehensive evidence-based treatment and
recovery services, including MAT, for women with co-
occurring Opioid Use Disorder (“OUD”) and other
Substance Use Disorder (“SUD”)/Mental Health disorders
for uninsured individuals for up to 12 months postpartum;
and
3.Provide comprehensive wrap-around services to individuals
with OUD, including housing, transportation, job
placement/training, and childcare.
D.EXPANDING TREATMENT FOR NEONATAL
ABSTINENCE SYNDROME (“NAS”)
1.Expand comprehensive evidence-based and recovery
support for NAS babies;
2.Expand services for better continuum of care with infant-
need dyad; and
3.Expand long-term treatment and services for medical
monitoring of NAS babies and their families.
E.EXPANSION OF WARM HAND-OFF PROGRAMS AND
RECOVERY SERVICES
1.Expand services such as navigators and on-call teams to
begin MAT in hospital emergency departments;
2.Expand warm hand-off services to transition to recovery
services;
3.Broaden scope of recovery services to include co-occurring
SUD or mental health conditions;
4.Provide comprehensive wrap-around services to individuals
in recovery, including housing, transportation, job
placement/training, and childcare; and
5.Hire additional social workers or other behavioral health
workers to facilitate expansions above.
Page 162
DISTRIBUTORS’ 9.18.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-3
F.TREATMENT FOR INCARCERATED POPULATION
1.Provide evidence-based treatment and recovery support,
including MAT for persons with OUD and co-occurring
SUD/MH disorders within and transitioning out of the
criminal justice system; and
2.Increase funding for jails to provide treatment to inmates
with OUD.
G.PREVENTION PROGRAMS
1.Funding for media campaigns to prevent opioid use (similar
to the FDA’s “Real Cost” campaign to prevent youth from
misusing tobacco);
2.Funding for evidence-based prevention programs in
schools;
3.Funding for medical provider education and outreach
regarding best prescribing practices for opioids consistent
with the 2016 CDC guidelines, including providers at
hospitals (academic detailing);
4.Funding for community drug disposal programs; and
5.Funding and training for first responders to participate in
pre-arrest diversion programs, post-overdose response
teams, or similar strategies that connect at-risk individuals
to behavioral health services and supports.
H.EXPANDING SYRINGE SERVICE PROGRAMS
1.Provide comprehensive syringe services programs with
more wrap-around services, including linkage to OUD
treatment, access to sterile syringes and linkage to care and
treatment of infectious diseases.
I.EVIDENCE-BASED DATA COLLECTION AND
RESEARCH ANALYZING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE
ABATEMENT STRATEGIES WITHIN THE STATE
Page 163
DISTRIBUTORS’ 9.18.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-4
Schedule B
Approved Uses
Support treatment of Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) and any co-occurring Substance Use Disorder
or Mental Health (SUD/MH) conditions through evidence-based or evidence-informed programs
or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following:
PART ONE: TREATMENT
A.TREAT OPIOID USE DISORDER (OUD)
Support treatment of Opioid Use Disorder (“OUD”) and any co-occurring Substance Use
Disorder or Mental Health (“SUD/MH”) conditions through evidence-based or evidence-
informed programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, those that:15
1.Expand availability of treatment for OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH
conditions, including all forms of Medication-Assisted Treatment (“MAT”)
approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
2.Support and reimburse evidence-based services that adhere to the American
Society of Addiction Medicine (“ASAM”) continuum of care for OUD and any co-
occurring SUD/MH conditions.
3.Expand telehealth to increase access to treatment for OUD and any co-occurring
SUD/MH conditions, including MAT, as well as counseling, psychiatric support,
and other treatment and recovery support services.
4.Improve oversight of Opioid Treatment Programs (“OTPs”) to assure evidence-
based or evidence-informed practices such as adequate methadone dosing and low
threshold approaches to treatment.
5.Support mobile intervention, treatment, and recovery services, offered by
qualified professionals and service providers, such as peer recovery coaches, for
persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions and for persons
who have experienced an opioid overdose.
6.Provide treatment of trauma for individuals with OUD (e.g., violence, sexual
assault, human trafficking, or adverse childhood experiences) and family
members (e.g., surviving family members after an overdose or overdose fatality),
and training of health care personnel to identify and address such trauma.
7.Support evidence-based withdrawal management services for people with OUD
and any co-occurring mental health conditions.
15 As used in this Schedule B, words like “expand,” “fund,” “provide” or the like shall not indicate a preference for
new or existing programs.
Page 164
DISTRIBUTORS’ 9.18.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-5
8.Provide training on MAT for health care providers, first responders, students, or
other supporting professionals, such as peer recovery coaches or recovery
outreach specialists, including telementoring to assist community-based providers
in rural or underserved areas.
9.Support workforce development for addiction professionals who work with
persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.
10.Offer fellowships for addiction medicine specialists for direct patient care,
instructors, and clinical research for treatments.
11.Offer scholarships and supports for behavioral health practitioners or workers
involved in addressing OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH or mental health
conditions, including, but not limited to, training, scholarships, fellowships, loan
repayment programs, or other incentives for providers to work in rural or
underserved areas.
12.Provide funding and training for clinicians to obtain a waiver under the federal
Drug Addiction Treatment Act of 2000 (“DATA 2000”) to prescribe MAT for
OUD, and provide technical assistance and professional support to clinicians who
have obtained a DATA 2000 waiver.
13.Disseminate of web-based training curricula, such as the American Academy of
Addiction Psychiatry’s Provider Clinical Support Service–Opioids web-based
training curriculum and motivational interviewing.
14.Develop and disseminate new curricula, such as the American Academy of
Addiction Psychiatry’s Provider Clinical Support Service for Medication–
Assisted Treatment.
B.SUPPORT PEOPLE IN TREATMENT AND RECOVERY
Support people in recovery from OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions
through evidence-based or evidence-informed programs or strategies that may include,
but are not limited to, the programs or strategies that:
1.Provide comprehensive wrap-around services to individuals with OUD and any
co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, including housing, transportation, education,
job placement, job training, or childcare.
2.Provide the full continuum of care of treatment and recovery services for OUD
and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, including supportive housing, peer
support services and counseling, community navigators, case management, and
connections to community-based services.
3.Provide counseling, peer-support, recovery case management and residential
treatment with access to medications for those who need it to persons with OUD
and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.
Page 165
DISTRIBUTORS’ 9.18.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-6
4.Provide access to housing for people with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH
conditions, including supportive housing, recovery housing, housing assistance
programs, training for housing providers, or recovery housing programs that allow
or integrate FDA-approved mediation with other support services.
5.Provide community support services, including social and legal services, to assist
in deinstitutionalizing persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH
conditions.
6.Support or expand peer-recovery centers, which may include support groups,
social events, computer access, or other services for persons with OUD and any
co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.
7.Provide or support transportation to treatment or recovery programs or services
for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.
8.Provide employment training or educational services for persons in treatment for
or recovery from OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.
9.Identify successful recovery programs such as physician, pilot, and college
recovery programs, and provide support and technical assistance to increase the
number and capacity of high-quality programs to help those in recovery.
10.Engage non-profits, faith-based communities, and community coalitions to
support people in treatment and recovery and to support family members in their
efforts to support the person with OUD in the family.
11.Provide training and development of procedures for government staff to
appropriately interact and provide social and other services to individuals with or
in recovery from OUD, including reducing stigma.
12.Support stigma reduction efforts regarding treatment and support for persons with
OUD, including reducing the stigma on effective treatment.
13.Create or support culturally appropriate services and programs for persons with
OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, including new Americans.
14.Create and/or support recovery high schools.
15.Hire or train behavioral health workers to provide or expand any of the services or
supports listed above.
C.CONNECT PEOPLE WHO NEED HELP TO THE HELP THEY NEED
(CONNECTIONS TO CARE)
Provide connections to care for people who have—or are at risk of developing—OUD
and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions through evidence-based or evidence-informed
programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, those that:
Page 166
DISTRIBUTORS’ 9.18.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-7
1.Ensure that health care providers are screening for OUD and other risk factors and
know how to appropriately counsel and treat (or refer if necessary) a patient for
OUD treatment.
2.Fund SBIRT programs to reduce the transition from use to disorders, including
SBIRT services to pregnant women who are uninsured or not eligible for
Medicaid.
3.Provide training and long-term implementation of SBIRT in key systems (health,
schools, colleges, criminal justice, and probation), with a focus on youth and
young adults when transition from misuse to opioid disorder is common.
4.Purchase automated versions of SBIRT and support ongoing costs of the
technology.
5.Expand services such as navigators and on-call teams to begin MAT in hospital
emergency departments.
6.Provide training for emergency room personnel treating opioid overdose patients
on post-discharge planning, including community referrals for MAT, recovery
case management or support services.
7.Support hospital programs that transition persons with OUD and any co-occurring
SUD/MH conditions, or persons who have experienced an opioid overdose, into
clinically appropriate follow-up care through a bridge clinic or similar approach.
8.Support crisis stabilization centers that serve as an alternative to hospital
emergency departments for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH
conditions or persons that have experienced an opioid overdose.
9.Support the work of Emergency Medical Systems, including peer support
specialists, to connect individuals to treatment or other appropriate services
following an opioid overdose or other opioid-related adverse event.
10.Provide funding for peer support specialists or recovery coaches in emergency
departments, detox facilities, recovery centers, recovery housing, or similar
settings; offer services, supports, or connections to care to persons with OUD and
any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions or to persons who have experienced an
opioid overdose.
11.Expand warm hand-off services to transition to recovery services.
12.Create or support school-based contacts that parents can engage with to seek
immediate treatment services for their child; and support prevention, intervention,
treatment, and recovery programs focused on young people.
13.Develop and support best practices on addressing OUD in the workplace.
Page 167
DISTRIBUTORS’ 9.18.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-8
14.Support assistance programs for health care providers with OUD.
15.Engage non-profits and the faith community as a system to support outreach for
treatment.
16.Support centralized call centers that provide information and connections to
appropriate services and supports for persons with OUD and any co-occurring
SUD/MH conditions.
D.ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE-INVOLVED PERSONS
Address the needs of persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions who
are involved in, are at risk of becoming involved in, or are transitioning out of the
criminal justice system through evidence-based or evidence-informed programs or
strategies that may include, but are not limited to, those that:
1.Support pre-arrest or pre-arraignment diversion and deflection strategies for
persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, including
established strategies such as:
1.Self-referral strategies such as the Angel Programs or the Police Assisted
Addiction Recovery Initiative (“PAARI”);
2.Active outreach strategies such as the Drug Abuse Response Team
(“DART”) model;
3.“Naloxone Plus” strategies, which work to ensure that individuals who
have received naloxone to reverse the effects of an overdose are then
linked to treatment programs or other appropriate services;
4.Officer prevention strategies, such as the Law Enforcement Assisted
Diversion (“LEAD”) model;
5.Officer intervention strategies such as the Leon County, Florida Adult
Civil Citation Network or the Chicago Westside Narcotics Diversion to
Treatment Initiative; or
6.Co-responder and/or alternative responder models to address OUD-related
911 calls with greater SUD expertise.
2.Support pre-trial services that connect individuals with OUD and any co-
occurring SUD/MH conditions to evidence-informed treatment, including MAT,
and related services.
3.Support treatment and recovery courts that provide evidence-based options for
persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.
Page 168
DISTRIBUTORS’ 9.18.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-9
4.Provide evidence-informed treatment, including MAT, recovery support, harm
reduction, or other appropriate services to individuals with OUD and any co-
occurring SUD/MH conditions who are incarcerated in jail or prison.
5.Provide evidence-informed treatment, including MAT, recovery support, harm
reduction, or other appropriate services to individuals with OUD and any co-
occurring SUD/MH conditions who are leaving jail or prison or have recently left
jail or prison, are on probation or parole, are under community corrections
supervision, or are in re-entry programs or facilities.
6.Support critical time interventions (“CTI”), particularly for individuals living with
dual-diagnosis OUD/serious mental illness, and services for individuals who face
immediate risks and service needs and risks upon release from correctional
settings.
7.Provide training on best practices for addressing the needs of criminal justice-
involved persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions to law
enforcement, correctional, or judicial personnel or to providers of treatment,
recovery, harm reduction, case management, or other services offered in
connection with any of the strategies described in this section.
E.ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF PREGNANT OR PARENTING WOMEN AND
THEIR FAMILIES, INCLUDING BABIES WITH NEONATAL ABSTINENCE
SYNDROME
Address the needs of pregnant or parenting women with OUD and any co-occurring
SUD/MH conditions, and the needs of their families, including babies with neonatal
abstinence syndrome (“NAS”), through evidence-based or evidence-informed programs
or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, those that:
1.Support evidence-based or evidence-informed treatment, including MAT,
recovery services and supports, and prevention services for pregnant women—or
women who could become pregnant—who have OUD and any co-occurring
SUD/MH conditions, and other measures to educate and provide support to
families affected by Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome.
2.Expand comprehensive evidence-based treatment and recovery services, including
MAT, for uninsured women with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH
conditions for up to 12 months postpartum.
3.Provide training for obstetricians or other healthcare personnel who work with
pregnant women and their families regarding treatment of OUD and any co-
occurring SUD/MH conditions.
4.Expand comprehensive evidence-based treatment and recovery support for NAS
babies; expand services for better continuum of care with infant-need dyad; and
expand long-term treatment and services for medical monitoring of NAS babies
and their families.
Page 169
DISTRIBUTORS’ 9.18.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-10
5.Provide training to health care providers who work with pregnant or parenting
women on best practices for compliance with federal requirements that children
born with NAS get referred to appropriate services and receive a plan of safe care.
6.Provide child and family supports for parenting women with OUD and any co-
occurring SUD/MH conditions.
7.Provide enhanced family support and child care services for parents with OUD
and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.
8.Provide enhanced support for children and family members suffering trauma as a
result of addiction in the family; and offer trauma-informed behavioral health
treatment for adverse childhood events.
9.Offer home-based wrap-around services to persons with OUD and any co-
occurring SUD/MH conditions, including, but not limited to, parent skills
training.
10.Provide support for Children’s Services—Fund additional positions and services,
including supportive housing and other residential services, relating to children
being removed from the home and/or placed in foster care due to custodial opioid
use.
PART TWO: PREVENTION
F.PREVENT OVER-PRESCRIBING AND ENSURE APPROPRIATE
PRESCRIBING AND DISPENSING OF OPIOIDS
Support efforts to prevent over-prescribing and ensure appropriate prescribing and
dispensing of opioids through evidence-based or evidence-informed programs or
strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following:
1.Funding medical provider education and outreach regarding best prescribing
practices for opioids consistent with the Guidelines for Prescribing Opioids for
Chronic Pain from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, including
providers at hospitals (academic detailing).
2.Training for health care providers regarding safe and responsible opioid
prescribing, dosing, and tapering patients off opioids.
3.Continuing Medical Education (CME) on appropriate prescribing of opioids.
4.Providing Support for non-opioid pain treatment alternatives, including training
providers to offer or refer to multi-modal, evidence-informed treatment of pain.
5.Supporting enhancements or improvements to Prescription Drug Monitoring
Programs (“PDMPs”), including, but not limited to, improvements that:
Page 170
DISTRIBUTORS’ 9.18.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-11
1.Increase the number of prescribers using PDMPs;
2.Improve point-of-care decision-making by increasing the quantity, quality,
or format of data available to prescribers using PDMPs, by improving the
interface that prescribers use to access PDMP data, or both; or
3.Enable states to use PDMP data in support of surveillance or intervention
strategies, including MAT referrals and follow-up for individuals
identified within PDMP data as likely to experience OUD in a manner that
complies with all relevant privacy and security laws and rules.
6.Ensuring PDMPs incorporate available overdose/naloxone deployment data,
including the United States Department of Transportation’s Emergency Medical
Technician overdose database in a manner that complies with all relevant privacy
and security laws and rules.
7.Increasing electronic prescribing to prevent diversion or forgery.
8.Educating dispensers on appropriate opioid dispensing.
G.PREVENT MISUSE OF OPIOIDS
Support efforts to discourage or prevent misuse of opioids through evidence-based or
evidence-informed programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the
following:
1.Funding media campaigns to prevent opioid misuse.
2.Corrective advertising or affirmative public education campaigns based on
evidence.
3.Public education relating to drug disposal.
4.Drug take-back disposal or destruction programs.
5.Funding community anti-drug coalitions that engage in drug prevention efforts.
6.Supporting community coalitions in implementing evidence-informed prevention,
such as reduced social access and physical access, stigma reduction—including
staffing, educational campaigns, support for people in treatment or recovery, or
training of coalitions in evidence-informed implementation, including the
Strategic Prevention Framework developed by the U.S. Substance Abuse and
Mental Health Services Administration (“SAMHSA”).
7.Engaging non-profits and faith-based communities as systems to support
prevention.
Page 171
DISTRIBUTORS’ 9.18.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-12
8.Funding evidence-based prevention programs in schools or evidence-informed
school and community education programs and campaigns for students, families,
school employees, school athletic programs, parent-teacher and student
associations, and others.
9.School-based or youth-focused programs or strategies that have demonstrated
effectiveness in preventing drug misuse and seem likely to be effective in
preventing the uptake and use of opioids.
10.Create or support community-based education or intervention services for
families, youth, and adolescents at risk for OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH
conditions.
11.Support evidence-informed programs or curricula to address mental health needs
of young people who may be at risk of misusing opioids or other drugs, including
emotional modulation and resilience skills.
12.Support greater access to mental health services and supports for young people,
including services and supports provided by school nurses, behavioral health
workers or other school staff, to address mental health needs in young people that
(when not properly addressed) increase the risk of opioid or another drug misuse.
H.PREVENT OVERDOSE DEATHS AND OTHER HARMS (HARM REDUCTION)
Support efforts to prevent or reduce overdose deaths or other opioid-related harms
through evidence-based or evidence-informed programs or strategies that may include,
but are not limited to, the following:
1.Increased availability and distribution of naloxone and other drugs that treat
overdoses for first responders, overdose patients, individuals with OUD and their
friends and family members, schools, community navigators and outreach
workers, persons being released from jail or prison, or other members of the
general public.
2.Public health entities providing free naloxone to anyone in the community.
3.Training and education regarding naloxone and other drugs that treat overdoses
for first responders, overdose patients, patients taking opioids, families, schools,
community support groups, and other members of the general public.
4.Enabling school nurses and other school staff to respond to opioid overdoses, and
provide them with naloxone, training, and support.
5.Expanding, improving, or developing data tracking software and applications for
overdoses/naloxone revivals.
6.Public education relating to emergency responses to overdoses.
Page 172
DISTRIBUTORS’ 9.18.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-13
7.Public education relating to immunity and Good Samaritan laws.
8.Educating first responders regarding the existence and operation of immunity and
Good Samaritan laws.
9.Syringe service programs and other evidence-informed programs to reduce harms
associated with intravenous drug use, including supplies, staffing, space, peer
support services, referrals to treatment, fentanyl checking, connections to care,
and the full range of harm reduction and treatment services provided by these
programs.
10.Expanding access to testing and treatment for infectious diseases such as HIV and
Hepatitis C resulting from intravenous opioid use.
11.Supporting mobile units that offer or provide referrals to harm reduction services,
treatment, recovery supports, health care, or other appropriate services to persons
that use opioids or persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.
12.Providing training in harm reduction strategies to health care providers, students,
peer recovery coaches, recovery outreach specialists, or other professionals that
provide care to persons who use opioids or persons with OUD and any co-
occurring SUD/MH conditions.
13.Supporting screening for fentanyl in routine clinical toxicology testing.
PART THREE: OTHER STRATEGIES
I.FIRST RESPONDERS
In addition to items in section C, D and H relating to first responders, support the
following:
1.Education of law enforcement or other first responders regarding appropriate
practices and precautions when dealing with fentanyl or other drugs.
2.Provision of wellness and support services for first responders and others who
experience secondary trauma associated with opioid-related emergency events.
J.LEADERSHIP, PLANNING AND COORDINATION
Support efforts to provide leadership, planning, coordination, facilitations, training and
technical assistance to abate the opioid epidemic through activities, programs, or
strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following:
1.Statewide, regional, local or community regional planning to identify root causes
of addiction and overdose, goals for reducing harms related to the opioid
epidemic, and areas and populations with the greatest needs for treatment
Page 173
DISTRIBUTORS’ 9.18.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-14
intervention services, and to support training and technical assistance and other
strategies to abate the opioid epidemic described in this opioid abatement strategy
list.
2.A dashboard to (a) share reports, recommendations, or plans to spend opioid
settlement funds; (b) to show how opioid settlement funds have been spent; (c) to
report program or strategy outcomes; or (d) to track, share or visualize key opioid-
or health-related indicators and supports as identified through collaborative
statewide, regional, local or community processes.
3.Invest in infrastructure or staffing at government or not-for-profit agencies to
support collaborative, cross-system coordination with the purpose of preventing
overprescribing, opioid misuse, or opioid overdoses, treating those with OUD and
any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, supporting them in treatment or recovery,
connecting them to care, or implementing other strategies to abate the opioid
epidemic described in this opioid abatement strategy list.
4.Provide resources to staff government oversight and management of opioid
abatement programs.
K.TRAINING
In addition to the training referred to throughout this document, support training to abate
the opioid epidemic through activities, programs, or strategies that may include, but are
not limited to, those that:
1.Provide funding for staff training or networking programs and services to improve
the capability of government, community, and not-for-profit entities to abate the
opioid crisis.
2.Support infrastructure and staffing for collaborative cross-system coordination to
prevent opioid misuse, prevent overdoses, and treat those with OUD and any co-
occurring SUD/MH conditions, or implement other strategies to abate the opioid
epidemic described in this opioid abatement strategy list (e.g., health care,
primary care, pharmacies, PDMPs, etc.).
L.RESEARCH
Support opioid abatement research that may include, but is not limited to, the following:
1.Monitoring, surveillance, data collection and evaluation of programs and
strategies described in this opioid abatement strategy list.
2.Research non-opioid treatment of chronic pain.
3.Research on improved service delivery for modalities such as SBIRT that
demonstrate promising but mixed results in populations vulnerable to
opioid use disorders.
Page 174
DISTRIBUTORS’ 9.18.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-15
4.Research on novel harm reduction and prevention efforts such as the
provision of fentanyl test strips.
5.Research on innovative supply-side enforcement efforts such as improved
detection of mail-based delivery of synthetic opioids.
6.Expanded research on swift/certain/fair models to reduce and deter opioid
misuse within criminal justice populations that build upon promising
approaches used to address other substances (e.g., Hawaii HOPE and
Dakota 24/7).
7.Epidemiological surveillance of OUD-related behaviors in critical
populations, including individuals entering the criminal justice system,
including, but not limited to approaches modeled on the Arrestee Drug
Abuse Monitoring (“ADAM”) system.
8.Qualitative and quantitative research regarding public health risks and
harm reduction opportunities within illicit drug markets, including surveys
of market participants who sell or distribute illicit opioids.
9.Geospatial analysis of access barriers to MAT and their association with
treatment engagement and treatment outcomes.
Page 175
DATE:December 15, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Elisa Cox, Deputy City Manager
Fabian Villenas, Principal Management Analyst
SUBJECT:Consideration to Re-appoint William Wittkopf, Public Works Services
Director, as representative of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on the West
Valley Mosquito and Vector Control (WVMVC) District Board of Trustees.
(CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council reappoint William Wittkopf, Public Works Services
Director, as the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s representative on the West Valley Mosquito and
Vector Control (WVMVC) Board of Trustees for a four-year term through January 2026.
BACKGROUND:
The West Valley Mosquito and Vector Control District (WVMVCD) was established in 1983 to
control mosquitos and other vector populations and protect public health from associated illnesses
such as the West Nile Virus. Governed by a Board of Trustees with representatives from each
community and an at-large County representative, the District serves the communities of Chino,
Chino Hills, Ontario, Montclair, and Rancho Cucamonga.
ANALYSIS:
Public Works Services Director William Wittkopf currently represents the City of Rancho
Cucamonga on the WVMVCD Board of Trustees (Board) for a term through January 2022. The
Council initially appointed Mr. Wittkopf in December 2011; this appointment allows for closer
collaboration between the Public Works Services Department and the District’s active programs
in preventing the spread of the West Nile Virus. The Public Works Services Department is most
familiar with the work and activities the District is involved in and is best positioned to coordinate
vector control efforts. The Public Works Services Department is typically the first agency residents
contact to report mosquitoes, bees, dead birds, and other vermin issues. For these reasons,
William Wittkopf, Public Services Director, is recommended to be appointed as the City’s
representative to the WVMVCD Board of Trustees for a four-year term.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item addresses the City Councils Core Values of “promoting and enhancing a safe and
healthy community for all.”
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
Page 176
DATE:December 15, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Matt Burris, Deputy City Manager
Flavio Nunez, Management Analyst II
SUBJECT:Consideration to Approve the Housing Successor Fiscal Year 2020/2021
Annual Report. (HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Housing Successor Agency approve the Annual Report for Fiscal Year
2020/2021, authorize staff to make administrative changes to the Annual Report upon completion
of the CAFR, and authorize the City Manager or their designee to submit the Annual Report to
the appropriate State agencies.
BACKGROUND:
After February 1, 2012 all assets, properties and contracts of the former Rancho Cucamonga
Redevelopment Agency (former Agency) were transferred, by operation of law, to the Successor
Agency to the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency (Successor Agency). Pursuant to the
Dissolution Law, the City Council elected to retain the housing assets and affordable housing
functions upon dissolution and selected the Housing Successor Agency to former Rancho
Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency to assume all housing assets and functions.
On October 13, 2013, the Governor signed into law Senate Bill 341 (SB341), which amends
provisions of the Dissolution Law, in particular relating to housing successors. SB341 amended
the former housing annual report requirement due to both the State Controller and the Department
of Housing and Community Development while Redevelopment Agencies were active and
established affordable housing requirements to be performed by housing successors effective
January 1, 2014. As of dissolution, housing successors now maintain and deposit funds into a
Low-and-Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund (LMIHAF), subject to the requirements of the
Dissolution Law, as amended by SB 341. Under SB 341, housing successors have an annual
auditing and reporting obligation to be completed every fiscal year starting with FY 2013-2014.
ANALYSIS:
Pursuant to SB 341 a Housing Successor Agency is required to file an Annual Report of its
activities within six months of the Agency’s fiscal year end. This report is required to contain the
following information:
1. The amount deposited to the Low Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund (LMIHAF),
distinguishing and amounts deposited for items listed on the ROPS.
Page 177
Page 2
1
0
7
0
2. A statement of the balance in the LMIHAF as the close of the fiscal year, distinguishing any
amounts held for items listed on the ROPS.
3. A description of expenditures from the LMIHAF by category, including, but not limited to
expenditures for (a) monitoring and preserving the long-term affordability of units subject to
affordability restrictions or covenants and administrative expenses; (b) homeless prevention and
rapid re-housing services; and (c) development of affordable housing.
4. The statutory value of real property owned by the housing successor, the value of loans and
grants receivable, and the sum of these two amounts.
5. A description of any transfers of LMIHAF funds made to another housing successor in the
previous fiscal year.
6. A description of any project for which the Housing Successor receives or holds property tax
revenue pursuant to the ROPS and the status of that project.
7. For interests in real property acquired by the former agency prior to February 1, 2012, a status
update on compliance with Section 33334.16. For interest in real property acquired by the
Housing Successor on or after February 1, 2012, a status update on the project.
8. A description of any outstanding obligation pursuant to Section 33413 that remained to transfer
to the Housing Successor on February 1, 2012, the Housing Successor’s plans to meet unmet
obligations.
9. Housing Successor mush determine the % of housing for seniors and person of all ages within
the previous 10-years. Senior housing units may not exceed 50% of the total units restricted.
10. The amount of excess surplus, the amount of time the Housing Successor has had excess
surplus, and the Housing Successor’s plan for eliminating the excess surplus.
The Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2020/2021 is being transmitted to the Housing Successor
Agency in accordance with the applicable legislation and contains all the required information as
outlined above. Following the approval by the Housing Successor, the report will be sent to the
appropriate State agencies for review.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact to the City’s General Fund associated with the submission of the Annual
Report to Housing Successor Agency.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This item summarizes portions of the Council’s vision and core values by providing a sustainable
City and promoting a safe and healthy community for all.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – 2020/2021 Housing Successor Agency Annual Report
Page 178
FISCAL YEAR
2020/2021
HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY ANNUAL REPORT
Day Creek Villas Senior Affordable Housing – Rancho Cucamonga
Page 179
HOUSING SUCCESSOR ANNUAL REPORT – 2020/2021
1 | P a g e
1.) The amount deposited to the LMIHAF, distinguishing any amounts deposited for items
listed on the ROPS.
There was a total of $108,533 deposited into the LMIHAF during Fiscal Year 2020/2021.
The deposits primarily consisted value transferred of land and residual receipts associated
with the payments on loans related to the development of low and moderate income
multi-family housing financed by the former Redevelopment Agency, as well as loan
payoffs of first-time homebuyer loans, and loan payoff of equity distributions.
2.) A statement of the balance in the LMIHAF as the close of the fiscal year, distinguishing
any amounts held for items listed on the ROPS.
As of the close of Fiscal Year 2020/2021 the LMIHAF ended with a balance of
$1,169,347.00.
3.) A description of expenditures from the LMIHAF by category, including, but not limited
to, expenditures for (a) monitoring and preserving the long-term affordability of units
subject to affordability restrictions or covenants and administrative expenses; (b)
homeless prevention and rapid re-housing services; and (c) development of affordable
housing.
ACTIVITY EXPENDITURE
Administrative Costs $250,000.00
Homeless Prevention $40,500.00
Affordable Housing Development $13,400,00.00
4.) The statutory value of real property owned by the Housing Successor, the value of loans and
grants receivable, and the sum of these two amounts.
LOAN NAME/DESCRIPTION/PROPERTY ENDING BALANCE
FAIR VALUE OF LAND
SECURED BY LOAN
NHDC (San Sevaine Villas)$ 44,374,111.70 N/A
Woodhaven Manor $ 12,333,007.84 N/A
Villa Pacifica $ 229,880.74 N/A
LINC-Pepperwood $ 27,012,364.12 N/A
Page 180
HOUSING SUCCESSOR ANNUAL REPORT – 2020/2021
2 | P a g e
Rancho Verde Village East $ 7,561,322.09 N/A
Heritage Pointe $ 2,510,624.03 N/A
Olen Jones $ 4,476,760.64 N/A
Villa Del Norte $ 10,333,182.49 N/A
Villaggio on Route 66 $ 31,884,564.50 N/A
First-Time Homebuyer Program $ 3,226,808.00 N/A
Villa Pacifica II $9,051,318.85 N/A
Day Creek Villas $9,035,096.78 N/A
Total $ 162,029,041.78
5.) A description of any transfers of LMIHAF funds made to another Housing Successor in
the previous fiscal year.
There have been no transfers of LMIHAF funds to any other Housing Successor in the
previous fiscal year.
6.) A description of any project for which the housing successor receives or holds
property tax revenue pursuant to the ROPS and the status of that project.
There are no projects which the Housing Successor receives or holds property tax
revenue pursuant to the ROPS.
7.) For interests in real property acquired by the former agency prior to February 1, 2012,
a status update on compliance with Section 33334.16. For interest in real property
acquired by the Housing Successor on or after February 1, 2012, a status update on the
project.
In July 2014 the Housing Successor Agency acquired a 2.5-acre property for the purpose
of constructing a 60-unit senior affordable rental housing complex. The project
affordability agreement provides for 59 of the 60 1-and 2-bedroom units to be restricted
to income eligible seniors. Construction of the project has been completed and a grand
opening was held in May 2018.
Page 181
HOUSING SUCCESSOR ANNUAL REPORT – 2020/2021
3 | P a g e
Additionally, in 2019 the Agency acquired a 4.01-acre property for the construction of a
140-unit senior affordable rental housing complex. As of the date of this report the
project was completed in October of 2020. The project offers 1-and 2-bedroom units to
qualified seniors.
8.) A description of any outstanding obligation pursuant to Section 33413 that remained
to transfer to the housing successor on February 1, 2012, the Housing Successor’s
progress in meeting these obligations, and the Housing Successor’s plans to meet
unmet obligations.
There is no outstanding obligation that had been transferred to the Housing Successor
Agency on February 1, 2012.
9.)Housing Successor must determine the % of housing for seniors and persons of all ages
within the previous 10-years. Senior housing units may not exceed 50% of the total
units restricted.
Housing Projects Completed Within the Last 10-years (2009-2019)
PROJECT TYPE # OF UNITS
Pepperwood Family 228
Villaggio on Rt. 66 Family 131
Villa Pacifica II Senior 60
Day Creek Villas Senior 139
Total 558
Page 182
HOUSING SUCCESSOR ANNUAL REPORT – 2020/2021
4 | P a g e
Previous Affordable Housing Accomplishments Prior to 2009
PROJECT TYPE # OF UNITS
Las Casitas Family 14
Rancho Verde Family 104
Rancho Verde East Family 40
Monterey Village Family 110
San Sevaine Villas Family 225
Sycamore Springs Family 96
Sunset Heights Family 116
Villa Pacifica Senior 158
Heritage Pointe Senior 48
Olen Jones Senior 96
Total 1,007
10.) The amount of excess surplus, the amount of time the Housing Successor has
had excess surplus, and the Housing Successor’s plan for eliminating the excess
surplus.
The Housing Successor has ended this reporting Fiscal Year with no excess surplus.
Page 183
HOUSING SUCCESSOR ANNUAL REPORT – 2020/2021
5 | P a g e
COMPUTATION OF LOW- AND MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING FUND
EXCESS/SURPLUS
Page 184
1
1
0
5
7
DATE: December 15, 2021
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Matt R. Burris, AICP Deputy City Manager
Jennifer Nakamura, Management Analyst II
David F. Eoff, IV, Senior Planner
SUBJECT:Consideration of Resolutions to Certify the Environmental Impact Report
(SCH 2021050261) and Adopt the PlanRC General Plan Update, 2021-
2029 Housing Element, and Climate Action Plan. (RESOLUTION NOS.
2021-132 AND 2021-133) (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt resolutions to:
1. Certify the Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan
2. Adopt the General Plan Update, 2021-2029 Housing Element, and Climate Action Plan
BACKGROUND:
A general plan is a city’s blueprint, or constitution, for future development. It documents the city’s long-range
vision and established goals, objectives and actions to guide the community through the next 10 to 20 years
of change. A city must update its General Plan periodically to keep up with changing needs and conditions
of the city and region. The General Plan also should be updated to reflect new local, state and national
laws. Except for periodic development driven amendments, and the required update to the Housing Element
in 2017, the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan is substantially similar to the document updated in 2010.
While General Plans are required to be updated “periodically”, there is no specific timetable. Some cities
update their General Plan every 5 or 10 years, others wait for 20 years or more.
The Housing Element for Rancho Cucamonga is required by law to be updated and submitted to the State
in early 2022. Housing law has been updated significantly in the last few years, and these laws are designed
to increase housing production and streamline the development review process. The significant increase in
housing allocation from the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) requires mandatory changes to
the land use and transportation elements of the General Plan to physically accommodate the additional
housing units required.
Our current circulation element is also not in compliance with Assembly Bill 1358, which was effective in
2011. AB 1358 requires that General Plan circulation elements plan for a balanced, multimodal
transportation network that meets the needs of all users of the streets, roads, and highways for safe and
convenient travel in a manner that is suitable to the rural, suburban, or urban context of the General Plan.
Further, Senate Bill 1000 (Leyva, 2016) require cities that have disadvantaged communities to incorporate
Page 185
2
1
0
5
7
and environmental justice policies into their General Plans, either as a separate element or by integrating
related goals, policies and objectives throughout the other elements. Climate change and resiliency is also
a high priority subject which must be addressed in General Plans. The current revision includes a Climate
Action Plan to address new State and regional goals.
While the current General Plan establishes the vision for Rancho Cucamonga as a healthy, innovative
community with high quality development, urban centers and corridors, there have been significant
changes in state law that require more closely integrated elements of the General Plan than what is
currently included in the 2010 iteration. Therefore, in 2019, the City initiated this update to the General
Plan to help keep up with these changes in state law, and to build on our success as a world class
community to create a balanced, vibrant and innovative city. This comprehensive General Plan Update
addresses issues and challenges facing the City, including diversifying employment opportunities,
expanding housing and mobility choice and preserving the character, history, and quality of life that make
Rancho Cucamonga a special place to live. This updated General Plan will advance the City’s vision for a
sustainable, resilient, equitable and healthy community.
In January of 2020, the City embarked on PlanRC, the City’s General Plan Update process. The following
outlines the major phases and schedule of this multi-year process:
1. Winter - Spring 2020 – Existing Conditions: Reviewed existing policies and reports and identified
issues and opportunities.
2. Spring-Summer 2020 – Listening and Visioning: Developed long term vision and guiding principles
for the General Plan.
3. Fall 2020 – Plan Scenarios: Created and refined land use and transportation scenarios.
4. Winter-Spring 2021 – Policy and Plan Development: Developed policy solutions to address a range
of topics covered in the General Plan.
5. Spring-Summer 2021 – Public Review of Draft General Plan: Engaged with the public while the
Draft General Plan was available for public review and then revised prior to public hearings.
6. Fall 2021 – Public Review of Draft Environmental Impact Report: Public review and comment period
on the draft environmental document and then revised prior to public hearings.
7. Fall 2021-Winter 2022 – Review and Adopt: Public and decision makers review and consider
adoption of the updated General Plan.
Page 186
3
1
0
5
7
Phases 1 through 6 are complete and the City is now in the final phase of the process to consider adoption
of the updated General Plan. On November 10, 2021, the Planning Commission unanimously approved a
resolution recommending the City Council adopt the General Plan and Climate Action Plan and certify the
Environmental Impact Report. The information that follows provides a walk-through of the updated General
Plan, Climate Action Plan, and Environmental Impact Report for the City Council’s review and adoption,
as well as a summary of the engagement process, supporting studies and related implementing plans that
are also part of the PlanRC process.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
PlanRC is a community-based process; the City has been conducting a robust engagement effort with the
public since January 2020. Community input was solicited and reflected throughout each phase of the
planning process. PlanRC involved longtime residents, new residents, seniors, youth, clubs, organizations,
business owners, and many more. As a city with a rich mix of ethnicities, cultures and identities, the
engagement for PlanRC worked to provide consistent equitable and inclusive community engagement
practices throughout the process. Although in-person outreach was limited due to COVID-19 constraints,
the community adapted and found meaningful ways to get involved in PlanRC through digital engagement
platforms. During and after engagement events, the community had an opportunity to share their thoughts
and engage in live polling to provide additional feedback. Efforts prioritized determining values and ideas
for the future of the city and there have been many opportunities for participants to express their visions,
collaborate with neighbors, and explore possible innovations in housing, transportation, recreation, and
economic development throughout each planning phase. To date, PlanRC has received input from over
2,300 community members through online surveys and virtual meetings and generated over 1.1 million
digital impressions through various social media platforms.
Community Engagement Statistics
Page 187
4
1
0
5
7
Some of the highlights of the PlanRC community engagement effort are described below:
Two online surveys were initiated to guide engagement activities and future outreach. Conducted
during the Listening & Visioning phase, the surveys asked community members about the vision
and priorities for Rancho Cucamonga and garnered more than 800 responses.
An online mapping tool was shared as part of the Character & Place online workshop, which
allowed community members to drop pins on a virtual map in areas where they would like to see
certain amenities and activity centers. Participants could further expand on their ideas through a
comment system and by providing photos of what they envisioned.
Two internet-based “Forum on Our Future” events were held during the Listening & Visioning
phase. These interactive small group sessions built on results from the initial online visioning survey
and engaged community members in informal dialogue on specific topics such as housing,
resiliency, trails and mobility, equity and more.
An informative “dollars and sense” webinar was provided as part of the “Forum on Our Future”
week to provide more in-depth information about economic development and how it relates to the
future of the built environment.
The PlanRC Virtual Workshop, a robust and visually engaging online event focused on Character
and Place. The workshop engaged community members in exploring visual images and ideas of
what the City could be in the future. During the week-long online event, participants were able to
drop in and view and rate character images for different community planning areas in the City –
collections of photos represented different housing, activity centers, mobility options, business and
job districts, and more.
Nine virtual community discussions and an online survey to explore long term land use ideas by
presenting three land use and transportation options designed to create a framework for discussion
about how and where Rancho Cucamonga plans for change and growth over the next 20 years.
This engagement event was called, “Community Discussions: Considering our Options”.
The PlanRC General Plan Video Series provided explanations of the General Plan update process,
State requirements and existing conditions. Topics included housing, resiliency, community
mobility, community health and equity, land use and community design. In addition, an informative
video on the environmental review process was released with the Draft Environmental Impact
Report to educate the community about the purpose and content of the document and explain how
to provide comments during the 45-day public review period.
A series of online surveys were developed to obtain public feedback on the Draft General Plan
document - with particular emphasis on the goals and policies. The draft document is large, so to
avoid overwhelming the community, the survey was distributed in three parts to make it easier to
respond: Survey #1: Land Use, Focus Areas, and Mobility; Survey #2: Housing, Open Space and
Public Facilities; and Survey #3: Resource Conservation, Safety and Noise.
Members of the PlanRC Team hosted three virtual webinars to orient and walk interested
community members through the Draft General Plan document and answer questions. These
presentations were also posted to the website. In addition, eight informal Zoom discussion
sessions, including Spanish only, were offered throughout the review period to entertain specific
questions and comments and to further help facilitate understanding of the General Plan Update.
Finally, staff also participated in eight online meetings with existing groups, to share the document,
including Healthy RC Steering Committee, Healthy RC Community Champions, Healthy RC Youth
Leaders, Inclusionary Housing Committee, Chamber of Commerce, and National CORE.
Throughout the public review period, staff also documented and responded to numerous email and
Page 188
5
1
0
5
7
phone comments, questions, and suggestions regarding the Draft General Plan document.
As Covid restrictions loosened and with the availability of vaccines, staff hosted some in-person
pop-up events to increase awareness around the draft General Plan Update and receive additional
comments. Nine pop-up / tabletop events were held at locations including the Archibald and Biane
libraries, Haven City Market, Los Amigos Park, Day Creek Villas, Central Park and the 4th of July
Celebration at the Epicenter.
Initial Engagement, Visioning and Forum on Our Future
Early in the process, initial communication was focused on the purpose of a General Plan, why there is a
need to update the General Plan and encouraging public participation in this multi-year process. Once the
purpose was established, the City returned to the community for feedback. The online surveys and multi-
day virtual Forum on Our Future events were critical engagements that not only identified issues and
opportunities, but also helped establish a vision and set of core community values – Health, Equity and
Stewardship – which led the way in shaping the General Plan. The results of the surveys and virtual events,
along with the established core community values, were presented to the Planning Commission and City
Council in August 2020.
Character and Place Virtual Workshop
This led PlanRC to the next stage of engagement with a 10-day virtual workshop in September 2020
focused on character and place. This workshop garnered 4,194 views, 829 participants, 42,965 responses,
and 714 total comments. The intent of this workshop was to translate some the emerging themes that were
observed from the forums and other engagement into a visual preference survey. This allowed participants
to rate different images based on how they felt those images represented the community, and in which
neighborhood or part of town they should be located. While each area had distinct preferences for the
types of residential, commercial, and recreational developments participants wanted to see, there were
notable commonalities between all planning areas, which led to the development of three potential future
land use scenarios.
Land Use Scenarios Workshops
In November 2020, Staff continued the discussion with the community by presenting three land use and
transportation options in meetings that were held over the span of a week. This engagement event was
called, “Community Discussions: Considering our Options”. Nine virtual community discussions and an
online survey were hosted to explore long term land use ideas. Six sessions were promoted with the
general public, one of which was specifically held for teens and youth, and another of which was specifically
held for Spanish speakers. Three additional focused meetings were also held with the Healthy RC Steering
Committee, NAIOP (Commercial Real Estate Development Association), and the Chamber of Commerce.
Nearly 170 people engaged in the online and virtual conversations. The purpose of this effort was to define
future land use and transportation scenarios to create a framework for discussion about how and where
Rancho Cucamonga plans for change and growth over the next 20 years. The future scenarios presented
to the community were intended to spur dialog about how much reinvestment the City should plan for; where
growth and change should be located; how to meet the needs of future generations; how to satisfy various
State mandates, and what factors are most important to the community when considering how the city
should evolve.
Preferred Scenario
As a result of community input on the future land use scenarios, the City developed a preferred scenario
for the General Plan update. The preferred scenario best balances the input received on the three land
use scenarios by: 1) increasing goods, services, and amenities in all neighborhoods; 2) focusing investment
along key corridors; and 3) focusing investment at key nodes or centers in the city. It represents a policy
level approach for how and where we target investment and growth for future generations, and effectively
meet many State laws and regulations.
Page 189
6
1
0
5
7
Preferred Scenario
Planning Commission Workshop
On December 21, 2020, information on the three potential future land use scenarios and how the three
scenarios developed into a preferred scenario was presented to the Planning Commission at a Special
Meeting. Overall, the preferred scenario was well received by the Planning Commission. There was a
strong appreciation for the outreach efforts with the community and how the result of the preferred
scenario plan represented the input and feedback from the community. Additionally, the Commission
acknowledged that the plan represented the overarching theme of the General Plan and put the city’s
best foot forward to thrive by providing more jobs, more vibrancy, and a good balance of future
opportunities while protecting the characteristics that are cherished by the community.
City Council Workshop
On January 6, 2021, the preferred scenario was presented to the City Council. To further advance the
preferred scenario and build on the themes expressed by the community, the PlanRC Team developed
the Recommended Land Use and Community Design Strategy, which conveyed the locations of
concentrations of community activity centers and a framework for multi-modal access to those centers,
which became the vision diagram for the General Plan. This strategy diagram was well received by the
City Council, and they provided the direction to continue development of a detailed land use plan and the
Draft General Plan that implements this strategy. This strategy, or vision diagram, served as the foundation
for the Land Plan and policies for physical improvements in the rest of the Draft General Plan.
Page 190
7
1
0
5
7
Vision Diagram
Public Review Draft General Plan
The PlanRC process helped form the content of the Draft General Plan, which was presented to the
Planning Commission in a study session May 12, 2021. The importance of community, understanding of
areas where improvement is needed, and validation of the City’s commitment to lead the region all stem
from this foundational process. After the Draft General Plan was presented to the Planning Commission
and made available for public review and input in May 2021, there continued to be active community
engagement during this public review period, with virtual public meetings, focused meetings with various
stakeholder groups, and, socially distanced in-person pop-events around the community.
Input from the community specifically on the Draft General Plan during the public review period is
summarized below:
General support for the plan
Excitement about the future
Questions about a handful of individual properties
Housing affordability is important to many people
Widespread agreement on the community values of health, equity, and stewardship
Page 191
8
1
0
5
7
Appreciation for thoughtful development – create spaces where people want to be
Changes that were made to the Draft General Plan in response to the community input received during
this period were:
Clarifying language for improved comprehension and implementation
Changing the land use map to match recently approved projects
Incorporating updated data when available
Correcting any text errors or related edits
Adding details to help put the plan into action.
Planning Commission Hearing
On November 10, 2021, the Planning Commission unanimously approved Resolution #21-71 (Attachment
1) recommending the City Council adopt the General Plan and Climate Action Plan and certify the
Environmental Impact Report. Two members of the public provided comments during public hearing.
Their comments included:
Concerns that the public engagement process occurred virtually during the pandemic
Question about the equestrian overlay
Question about engagement with the City’s Sports Advisory Committee
Identification of an inconsistency in the Suburban Neighborhood-Moderate designation regarding
allowable commercial uses and associated floor area ratio (FAR).
An overview of Planning Commission and public comments as well as staff responses are included in the
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes (Attachment 2). These concerns and questions were addressed
by staff during the public hearing; revisions were made to the General Plan where applicable. In addition
to revisions made in response to public comments received during the hearing, additional revisions were
made that were presented to the Planning Commission for consideration. These revisions are documented
in Attachment 3.
UPDATED GENERAL PLAN:
Since its beginning, Rancho Cucamonga has been committed to creating a world-class community. With
each decade and each generation, our idea of what makes a world-class community has evolved, but it
remains grounded in the concepts of excellence, opportunity, and high quality of life. The vision for this
General Plan embodies these concepts in a single sentence:
Build on our success as a world-class community to create a balanced, vibrant, and
innovative city, rich in opportunity for all to thrive.
Accordingly, this General Plan lays out a series of strategies to chart a path towards building a 21st century
world-class community. The intent is to create a city with a wide variety of housing, recreation,
entertainment, and employment opportunities that are well connected and accessible to everyone. Through
the implementation of this General Plan, the city will develop in an even more welcoming and accessible
manner for both its residents and its visitors. This plan reflects the shared values and common goals
of a city abundant in opportunity for all; a city that has a history of deep appreciation for the differences
that enrich daily life in Rancho Cucamonga.
General Plan Organization
The Draft General Plan is organized as four volumes that are divided into topical chapters. The content of
the chapters contained in Volume 2, Built Environment, and Volume 3, Environmental Performance,
corresponds to the state requirements for the contents of a general plan. It’s not uncommon to see some
overlap between the subject areas and the state requirements, however, State law allows the City to
organize the topics in any fashion that meets the needs of the City. The following is an outline of the
General Plan document.
Page 192
9
1
0
5
7
Each of the chapters begins with a brief overview of the contents followed by a summary of the State
requirements. The legal requirements of a general plan are quite lengthy and change regularly and
therefore are not included in the General Plan. General plan law can be found on the California Office of
Planning and Research website (https://opr.ca.gov/planning/general-plan/guidelines.html).
One key component found throughout the entire General Plan document is The Heart of the Matter section.
The Heart of the Matter explains how the topic in each chapter affects people, raises equity issues the City
aims to address and suggests methods to achieve such resolution. Since the General Plan places an
emphasis on people, this text has distinctive formatting so that it can be easily identified in each chapter. The
human focus of The Heart of the Matter helps set the foundation for the subsequent discussion leading to
the Goals and Policies.
Following The Heart of the Matter discussion are individual topical areas that are important to the chapter,
and to the setting of Goals and Policies. Each chapter concludes with goals and policies that direct action
by the City to implement the vision and follow the core values of the City. Goals are broad in both purpose
and aim but are designed to establish directions and outcomes. Often goals are aspirational and express
the desired result within the planning horizon. Policies are specific position statements that support the
achievement of goals and serve as guides to the City when reviewing development proposals and making
other decisions. Policies seek to achieve the goals by mandating, encouraging, or permitting certain
actions. A summary of the main ideas of each Volume and Chapter is described below.
Volume 1 – Vision
The first Volume of this General Plan proclaims the vision statement for the City and sets the core values
as expressed by everyone who participated during the PlanRC outreach. The vision of building on the
world-class community that is Rancho Cucamonga is supported by the core values of health, equity, and
stewardship of its residents. This Volume explains these important concepts, sets the context for decision
making, and above all sets the tone that this is a city designed, built, and governed for the people. There
are big goals in this General Plan that intend to give more people better options for living, access, jobs,
and recreation, in a world class city designed to help make these ideas real. These are described in more
detail below. The chapters in this Volume also describe the physical and historical context of the City and
administration of the General Plan.
Core Values
While people make up a city, it is only when people come together and become a community that cities
achieve their full potential. It is no surprise then, that a good plan is based on the foundational values of a
community and takes input from the wide diversity of people, businesses, community groups, and other
organizations that make up the totality of the community. From the robust and authentic community
engagement that was the cornerstone of the General Plan, the core values of health, stewardship, and equity
encompass what the community, as a whole, finds most important and aspirational. These values are the
pillars upon which the vision rests. Without applying these values to future investments, we will not be able
Page 193
10
1
0
5
7
to achieve our vision for a world class community.
Health. Health is the foundation of human existence and is more than just longevity. Good health and a
good quality of life are the results of a combination of many factors beyond an individual's genetic history
and behaviors. The places we live shape us in ways beyond our values and personal relationships.
Community design, such as street layout and design or location of parks, inevitably determines our ability
to access healthy food choices and health care, a variety of housing types and affordability, clean air and
natural open spaces, and safe neighborhoods and walkable streets. A healthy lifestyle is not simply a
matter of choice but is fundamentally a matter of access and opportunity. Research shows that chronic
health conditions such as asthma, diabetes, and heart disease, are concentrated in the same
neighborhoods as poverty, environmental hazards, unemployment, and lower educational attainment.
Fostering a healthy community requires a comprehensive approach to creating healthy minds, bodies, and
a clean, sustainable earth, which has been a long-held value of the City and the focus of Healthy RC’s
mission since 2008. Although we cannot change our genes, we can certainly make strategic decisions
about our communities through the General Plan that shape the places where we live, work, and play;
provide a more equitable distribution of resources and services; and ultimately improve our chances for
living long, healthy and fruitful lives. Health is a value that Rancho Cucamonga is built on, and as such, it
is important that the General Plan purposefully include design elements that allow our community to
experience optimal health.
Equity. Equity is essential for creating and sustaining a world class community. Everyone should have a
fair and just opportunity to thrive and experience a high quality of life. Whereas equality is giving everyone
the exact same resources, equity involves the distribution and investment of resources based on the unique
needs of each neighborhood. This includes equitable access to goods and services throughout the city,
the ability to live in clean and safe neighborhoods, real opportunities for meaningful work and housing, and
the opportunity to actively and meaningfully participate in the community. When we maintain equity as a
core value, we recognize that everyone has different needs and abilities, and we should strive, through the
General Plan and related decision-making processes, to create a city that meets the unique needs,
abilities, and characteristics of all those within our community.
Past development practices have unintentionally resulted in health and economic impacts that
disproportionately affected groups of people living in specific areas, thus creating and continually affecting
disadvantaged neighborhoods across the nation as well as Rancho Cucamonga. To resolve existing health
and income disparity, some neighborhoods will need more investment in design, public improvements, and
services. The intent of this General Plan is for the city to remain a great place to live, work, shop, learn,
and play for all residents and households, and actively address the issues that disproportionately affect
certain neighborhoods and areas of the city. Addressing inequity requires communication, understanding,
and collaboration with those most affected. This means providing opportunity for meaningful neighborhood
input, prioritizing public investment, and collaborating with the neighborhoods. Equity is at the heart of a
world-class city, a core value of this community, and therefore addressed in intent and policies in every
chapter of this General Plan.
Stewardship. Stewardship is balancing the need to use limited resources today with the knowledge that
more will be needed tomorrow. Being good stewards means taking on the responsibility of ensuring the
well-being of the city by understanding the resources we have and allocating them in ways that consider
the future. It means efficiently utilizing our finite, non-renewable natural and historic resources, and
considering how all decisions we make impact the development or diminishment of these resources. Not
only does stewardship involve the protection of historic and natural resources, but it also ensures the City
is fiscally sustainable to provide the necessary services and infrastructure to weather the impact of both
economic and climate change. A world class city is resilient and adaptable and maintains its significant
history, culture, and values. As a world class city, Rancho Cucamonga must adapt effectively to shifting
economic, social, and demographic trends, and resiliently rebound from environmental, economic, and
public health shocks. Stewardship captures the essence of this responsibility and is a core value of this
General Plan.
Page 194
11
1
0
5
7
Big Ideas
To successfully achieve the City’s Vision and uphold the core values identified by the community, the
General Plan is designed around strengthening Rancho Cucamonga’s sense of identity and character by
creating places where people want to be and improving their ability to move around. The overarching
strategy is one of human-scaled design, with buildings and outdoor spaces oriented towards people
connected by safe and comfortable streets, pathways, and trails that provide equitable access for all. Each
chapter of the plan is rooted in the vision and core values, with an expectation that the future can be
harnessed to improve on the past. The following big ideas, as presented in Chapter 1 of the updated
General Plan, are considered critical to meeting the vision and core values for the community:
Design for People First. Regardless of the type of place designed, the focus must be on people, and
development should be human scale and inviting. The public realm of streets, paths, trails, open space,
and buildings represent the city’s “rooms” and are the first impression of anyone visiting the city. These
spaces should be a sense of pride for residents and be welcoming to everyone. To achieve this, buildings
must be designed to be visually appealing, interesting, and at an appropriate scale that attracts activity,
but is not overwhelming. Open spaces, plazas, and streets must be designed to be safe, convenient, and
comfortable for users of all modes of transportation. All aspects of the public realm should have robust
amenities. By designing for people first, Rancho Cucamonga will continue to thrive as a community with
a high quality of life for residents, employees, and visitors.
Provide Connectivity and Accessibility. Creating a community with equitable accessibility and
connectivity between places is an overall priority for the City. People of all abilities and means need to be
able to move about freely in their city and have choices for how they get around. To achieve this, physical
improvements in the city must provide a range of travel options including new opportunities and improved
networks for walking, bicycling, and transit, suited to all residents, employees and visitors. In addition to
connecting streets, developing sidewalks, and building trails, there must also be connections between
similar land uses and essential destinations. Neighborhoods should not be gated or separated from each
other, and should be well connected to commercial centers, entertainment venues, and employment
districts.
Walkable communities and communities with varied transportation options are not only easier to get
around, but they also foster a greater sense of community. Further, these type of communities provide the
opportunity to incorporate more activity into everyday life, encourage fewer car trips, provide numerous
public safety benefits, support the local business environment, and boost appeal to visitors by increasing
accessibility. The outcomes of improved accessibility and connectivity increase the social, health,
environmental and economic benefits to the community.
Create Destinations. An overarching theme expressed by the community throughout the public
engagement process was the desire for “More fun places to go, more things to do, and more ways to get
there.” Residents and visitors want places to congregate, gather, and socialize in lively centers, shopping
areas, and entertainment venues. The General Plan should evolve the relatively uniform suburban
environments of the city’s arterial corridors, shopping centers, and business parks into a diverse range of
distinctive places that is welcoming to all people. These places may include small centers near established
neighborhoods, more vibrant and dense centers similar to a downtown scale near Cucamonga Station and
Victoria Gardens, and larger mixed-use centers along major corridors, such as Foothill Boulevard and
Haven Avenue.
Creating destinations also applies to the outdoors. Maintaining and increasing a variety of quality open
spaces in the city was similarly an expressed desire by the community. The city’s open space destinations
will include small neighborhood parks, plazas and paseos, and natural areas, such as the extensive trails
system in the foothills and the North Etiwanda Preserve. The General Plan will further our commitment to
providing world-class outdoor destinations and preserving our beautiful natural setting in the foothills of the
San Gabriel Mountains.
Page 195
12
1
0
5
7
Address Environmental Justice. In Rancho Cucamonga, environmental justice means that everyone in
the city has a fair and just opportunity to thrive and no one, especially those with the least means. It also
includes the City considering the additional health burdens of environmental degradation and pollution. With
this General Plan, the City is striving to reduce and eliminate disproportionate burdens to living,
participating, and thriving in this city. A key first step is continuing to improve access to City processes and
decision making. While we have a long history of robust public engagement, we will continue to work hard
to improve the ease of participation by the community. Through this General Plan, it will also be critical to
improve everyone’s ability to get around the city and access the goods, services, jobs, housing, and
amenities that contribute to a quality life. Every neighborhood is different, and the future of each
neighborhood will be unique. Universally, however, the City is committed to engaging those directly
impacted by future decisions and development to collaborate on strategies to reduce disproportionate
environmental burdens and strive for equitable access to amenities and services as well as protection from
environmental hazards and pollution.
The California Government Code (Section 65040.12) defines Environmental Justice as: “the fair treatment
and meaningful participation of people of all races, culture and incomes with respect to the development,
adoption, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.
Environmental justice policies and laws have been established to ensure that all people, regardless of
race, color, national origin, or income, have equal protection from environmental hazards where they live,
work and play. Furthermore, all people should have the equal ability to participate in, and influence, the
decision-making process regarding environmental regulations.
In the context of this General Plan, equity is one of the three foundational pillars, or core values, upon
which this Plan was developed, and addressing environment justice is one of the big ideas identified in this
General Plan as critical to achieving the community’s vision. As such, goals and policies directly supporting
and furthering environmental justice are included in the development of each chapter. The Environmental
Justice Strategy, contained in Chapter 3 of Volume 4 of the General Plan, provides a list of the
environmental justice goals and policies from each chapter of the General Plan in one location.
Establish Rancho Cucamonga as the Cultural and Economic Hub of the Inland Empire. The Inland
Empire is similar in size and population to many states, yet it does not have a clear economic or cultural
center. This fact was identified and discussed multiple times during the public outreach process and the
community repeatedly articulated a desire to set the example and lead the region. As the City transitions
from a sprawling suburban growth model to a more sustainable urban growth model, it is important to
remember that people are at the core of what makes a city. Through the community engagement process,
the concept of creating vibrant activity nodes and a “real downtown” resonated deeply with people of all
ages from all areas of the city. A downtown area, or several major activity centers, with varied cultural
opportunities and public art, will provide areas for social, civic, and commercial activity. By creating vibrant,
high value places, Rancho Cucamonga will not only ensure its fiscal sustainability and resiliency but will
also distinguish itself as the cultural and economic hub of the Inland Empire. This General Plan envisions
a future Rancho Cucamonga with a stronger sense of place, higher quality of life, and more competitive
economy.
To be successful, the General Plan must be implemented purposefully, enhancing areas that are already
thriving, and focusing more investment in key opportunity areas where change is desired over time. During
the PlanRC community engagement process, it was clear that residents strongly identify with their
neighborhoods and, with some exceptions, are happy with where they live and how their neighborhoods
function. Accordingly, the Draft General Plan is focused on understanding each area of the city on its own
terms and calibrating the degree and nature of change to the neighborhoods and the people that make up
the neighborhood. Most of the city has already been built. There is very little undeveloped land left and
most of the developed areas will not change. This is both a constraint and an opportunity for the community.
We cannot afford to waste land with changes that do not benefit the community. To achieve the vision, all
future development and investment will need to be strategic. As such, this General Plan provides specific
direction on where to focus future efforts. Some changes will be small and incremental, similar to that which
is already occurring. Other changes will be transformative, through both land use design and
Page 196
13
1
0
5
7
implementation strategies in focused areas of the city where improvements have been suggested by the
community to meet the overall vision of a world class city.
Degrees of Change
As mentioned above, the key to the Plan’s success will be focusing investment strategically. As such,
several focus areas are identified where the public support for, and potential value of, significant near-term
change is particularly high. Chapter 2, Focus Areas, in Volume 2 of the Draft Plan, provides fundamental
priorities for strategic implementation of key areas of moderate and significant change. These key areas
are specific parts of the city where the potential value of coordinated private and public investment is
especially high, and near-term improvement is supported by a broad cross section of the community. A
higher level of detail, illustration, and strategic recommendations for the Focus Areas are provided to
prioritize those areas to help “jump-start” implementation of this Plan. The eight Focus Areas include:
•Focus Area 1: Downtown Rancho Cucamonga (Victoria Gardens & Epicenter)
•Focus Area 2: Civic Center
•Focus Area 3: HART District (Cucamonga Station)
•Focus Area 4: Red Hill Gateway
•Focus Area 5: Cucamonga Town Center
•Focus Area 6: Alta Loma Old Town
•Focus Area 7: Etiwanda Heights Town Center
•Focus Area 8: Modernized Industrial District
Page 197
14
1
0
5
7
Degrees of Change Map
Volume 2 – Built Environment
How we live, work, shop, learn, travel, exercise, and play in the City of Rancho Cucamonga is strongly
affected by the way the city is built. This Volume of the General Plan contains the goals and policies that
will most directly influence how the city, including its neighborhoods, districts, streets, and parks, is built.
While each of the topics in this Volume are presented in individual chapters, they function together to
support options for people. Because how we move about is intrinsic to the design of where we are going,
increasing options for access improves equity by ensuring all people can enjoy the opportunities the city
has to offer. Improving access, whether by completing trails, adding transport hubs, or ensuring
connectivity between where people are and where they want to be, is the overarching design theme of this
Volume.
Page 198
15
1
0
5
7
Chapter 1: Land Use and Community Character
The Land Use and Community Character Chapter describes and defines the distinct types of places—or
“place types”—that the City aims to create to achieve the community’s vision for Rancho Cucamonga. This
General Plan unifies the inseparable topics of land use and community character and design into a single
chapter to ensure that the uses, experiences, and activities that current and future community members
enjoy in our city cannot be divorced from our vision for the unique look, feel, character, ambiance and
quality of life that we enjoy in Rancho Cucamonga. A consistent message heard throughout the PlanRC
engagement process was the importance of displaying the rich history and culture of the city. This Chapter
of the General Plan preserves the character and strengths of each neighborhood and recommends
appropriate change—small in some cases, larger in others.
California law requires a Land Use Element to “designate the proposed general distribution and general
location and extent of the uses of the land for housing, business, industry, open space, including
agriculture, natural resources, recreation, and enjoyment of scenic beauty, education, public buildings and
grounds, solid and liquid waste disposal facilities, greenways, as defined in Section 816.52 of the Civil
Code, and other categories of public and private uses of land. The location and designation of the extent
of the uses of the land for public and private uses shall consider the identification of land and natural
resources. Given the City’s broad place-making goals and the community’s interest in shaping the form
and character of the city, this General Plan uses “place type” designations that go beyond conventional
land use designations to better define the existing and intended character, form, and function of each part
of the city. As shown in Figure LC-2, Place Types and General Plan Designations, and mapped in Figure
LC-3, Land Plan, each place type is organized into designations that provide direction on the intended
range of uses, appropriate levels of development density and intensity, and intended physical design
character. The Land Plan is also available on the City’s website: https://bit.ly/gplandplan.
Place Types and General Plan Designations
Page 199
16
1
0
5
7
Land Plan
Chapter 2: Focus Areas
Focus Areas are specific parts of the city where the vision indicates focused change. The potential value
of coordinated private and public investment in these areas is especially high, and near-term improvement
is supported by a broad cross section of the community. A higher level of detail, illustration, and strategic
recommendations for the eight Focus Areas identified previously in this report, and in Figure FA-1 below,
are provided in this chapter to prioritize these areas to help “jump-start” implementation of this Plan.
Page 200
17
1
0
5
7
Focus Areas
Chapter 3: Open Space
Open space is the place people go to recharge, play, exercise and learn. While open spaces can be large
recreational parks, natural conservation areas, and schools, they can also be trails, or a green space
between buildings. Open spaces are windows that let natural light and life into the urban fabric of the city.
Community playfields, Central Park and the conserved natural and rural open spaces of the foothills are
large specialized open space areas, whereas small- and medium-size parks, which provide places for
informal play, family activities, and quiet recreation, are considered part of the neighborhood they serve. A
wide range of open space types together meet the full range of residents’ needs for active and healthy
lifestyles.
While California law requires that a general plan include an element that addresses open space, the
provisions of Government Code Section 65560 are mainly focused on preserving agricultural land.
Agriculture was once the dominant land use in the city of Rancho Cucamonga, as discussed in the
Conservation Chapter, however, the historic agriculture businesses in the city are largely gone. This
chapter, therefore, focuses on open space as a general plan designation intended to preserve the natural
environment, water courses, and rural areas of the city, as well as preserve and enhance park space for
recreation.
Page 201
18
1
0
5
7
Although the City has several parks and conservation areas, this General Plan intentionally weaves open
space into every land use designation and focus area connecting people to the outside. The intent of this
Plan is to make use of areas large and small giving people the ability to enjoy the beauty of the City. Open
space is important to conservation and to recreation and is an important part of healthy living. Building on
the Mobility and Access chapter emphasis on connectivity, the approach to Open Space is to provide a
variety of trails and paths connecting open space with existing and new neighborhoods.
Chapter 4: Mobility & Access
Mobility needs to connect people to places. In Rancho Cucamonga, this includes connecting residents to
their employers, connecting residents to destinations within the city, and connecting the rest of the Inland
Empire to Rancho Cucamonga. Ultimately, the mobility system needs to provide for safe, enjoyable, and
healthy accessibility within the City. This is accomplished through a focus on the available rights-of-way
to create better connections within the City using utility corridors and flood control channels to create an
active transportation system and repurposing or reconfiguring roadways to provide additional bicycle,
pedestrian, and transit facilities. In this fashion, the City is implementing complete streets by designing for
people of all ages and all abilities. This chapter also furthers the coordination with others to make Rancho
Cucamonga the mobility center of the Inland Empire. Some of the big ideas include support for the following
innovative mobility options: Brightline high speed rail connection from the High Desert and Las Vegas to
the Cucamonga Station, the Boring Company’s effort to connect the Cucamonga Station to the Ontario
International Airport, and a future regional north/south transit connection from the Cucamonga Station to
Riverside County generally paralleling the I-15 corridor. The overarching approach to mobility and access
is to provide options for people to move around the city and the region.
California law requires that the General Plan include an element that identifies existing and proposed major
thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, any military airports and ports, and other local public
utilities and facilities, all correlated with the Land Use Element of the Plan. The law also stipulates that the
City plan for a balanced, multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of streets,
roads, and highways for safe and convenient travel. A balanced network means a system that provides for
all users of all ages and abilities, including bicyclists, children, persons with disabilities, motorists, movers
of commercial goods, pedestrians, users of public transportation, and seniors.
Chapter 5: Housing
Housing is one of the most basic human needs and recognized as a fundamental right under California
law. Planning for housing in a community usually addresses the following three aspects:
Availability: Housing growth that is keeping in pace with population and job growth.
Adequacy: A housing inventory that provides a variety of housing options to meet the diverse
housing needs in the community and offers a safe and decent living environment for all residents.
Affordability: A housing inventory that offers a range of price points that would be considered
affordable to all socioeconomic segments of the population.
The overarching focus for the City is to provide housing for people who live here now, and who may want
to live here in the future.
The 2021-2029 Housing Element represents the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s effort in fulfilling the
requirements under State Housing Element law. California’s local governments meet this requirement by
adopting housing plans as part of their General Plan. State housing-element law acknowledges that in
order for the private market to adequately address the housing needs and demand of Californians, local
governments must adopt plans and regulatory systems that provide opportunities for (and do not unduly
constrain) housing development. As a result, housing policy in California rests largely on the effective
implementation of local general plans and, in particular, local housing elements. Unlike all the other
elements of the General Plan, the Housing Element must be approved by the State and includes a
substantial amount of information that is both duplicative, and more detailed than the rest of the General
Plan. As such, this chapter summarizes a much larger evaluation of housing need and potential included
as an appendix to the General Plan and incorporated in the General Plan Housing Chapter by reference.
Page 202
19
1
0
5
7
Housing elements are required to be updated every 8 years, and the Regional Housing Needs Assessment
(RHNA) is mandated by State Housing Law as part of the periodic process of updating local housing
elements. RHNA quantifies the need for housing within each jurisdiction during specified planning periods.
The 6th cycle RHNA covers the planning period of October 2021 through October 2029. The main objective
of the RHNA is to distribute the need for new housing construction in an equitable method throughout the
state. The Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) allocates the needed housing units
among four household income categories. These four categories are:
Income Category Percent of Areawide Median Income (AMI)
Very-Low < 50% of AMI
Low 51% - 80% of AMI
Moderate 81% - 120% of AMI
Above-Moderate >120% of AMI
Communities use RHNA in land use planning, in prioritizing local resource allocation, and in deciding how
to address identified existing and future housing needs resulting from population, employment, and
household growth. RHNA does not necessarily encourage or promote growth, but rather allows
communities to anticipate growth and plan for that growth across the various income categories.
Collectively, this is intended to help the region and subregion grow in ways that enhance quality of life,
improve access to jobs, promote transportation mobility, and address social equity and fair share housing
needs. The City of Rancho Cucamonga’s RHNA allocation for the 2021-2029 planning period is identified
below.
Income Group Total Housing
Units
Allocated
Percentage of Units
Extremely/Very
Low
3,245 31%
Low 1,920 18%
Moderate 2,038 19%
Above Moderate 3,322 32%
Total 10,525 100%
Source: Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG).
Note: The City has a RHNA allocation of 3,245 very low income units (inclusive of
extremely low income units). Pursuant to State law (AB 2634), the City must project the
number of extremely low income housing needs based on Census income distribution
or assume 50 percent of the very low income units as extremely low income. For
purposes of identifying adequate sites for the RHNA, however, State law does not
mandate the separate accounting for the extremely low income category.
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) distributes jurisdictional housing needs
throughout Southern California based on a methodology that includes data from the California Department
of Finance and California Department of Housing and Community Development. The City is legally
obligated and required to ensure that the zoning and general plan land use map designations have
adequate capacity to allow for the development of the required units as well as ensure the appropriate
zoning on sites offers true development potential and fair processes and fees.
The General Plan Update is facilitating new housing development by introducing a new Land Plan that
transforms select areas of the city into specialty districts, corridors, place types and neighborhoods with a
diverse mix of uses. The updated General Plan incorporates a range of housing densities and significant
mixed-use infill that will guide the development of more diverse housing opportunities. The Housing
Element is being adopted concurrently with the General Plan update, and therefore utilizes this new Land
Plan for the purpose of the residential sites’ analysis.
Page 203
20
1
0
5
7
As part of this process, staff is preparing a framework for applying form-based code standards to new
development projects as interim guidelines or regulations to ensure that new projects will generally conform
to the new standards before the final Development Code is adopted in Spring 2022. This framework will
include the form-based zone standards; use tables and use definitions; and, building and frontage types.
Land Use Designation Minimum
Density
Maximum
Density
Residential
Allowed*
Feasible for
Low Income
City Center 40 100 50%Y
21st Century Employment
District
24 42 30%Y
City Corridor High 40 60 70%Y
City Corridor Moderate 24 40 70%Y
Traditional Town Center --30 50%N
*This is policy for the land use designation, not for individual parcels.
Based on the development potential on vacant sites and parcels of interest throughout the City, Rancho
Cucamonga can fully accommodate its RHNA for the planning period 2021-2029 through a combination of:
1) entitled sites in Etiwanda Heights, Victoria Gardens, and The Resort, 2) potential accessory dwelling
units based on past and projected trends, and 3) vacant and underutilized sites identified in the Sites
Inventory (Appendix B of the Housing Element).
Extremely
Low/ Very
Low
(Below 50%
AMI)
Low
(51-80%
AMI)
Moderate
(81-120%
AMI)
Above
Moderate
(Over 120%
AMI)
Total
RHNA 3,245 1,920 2,038 3,322 10,525
Potential ADUs 36 56 56 12 160
Entitlements 0 0 2,000 3,085 5,085
The Resort 0 0 2,000 0 2,000
Victoria
Gardens 0 0 0 385 385
Etiwanda
Heights 0 0 0 2,700 2,700
Remaining Need 3,209 1,864 0 225 5,280
In addition to providing a detailed sites analysis to accommodate the potential for new housing, the updated
Housing Element also includes:
Comprehensive update to housing and demographics data.
Addressing changes to housing law since the last update, including new legislation regarding fair
housing, measures to further promote Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) to the extent required by
state law, and regulatory changes regarding emergency shelters and supportive and transitional
housing.
Updating/restructuring of housing policies and programs to reflect current direction of the
community and City Council, and to:
o Remove policies and programs no longer appropriate for the city
o Consolidate programs/actions with similar objectives
o Adjust level of commitments based on past accomplishments
In addition to the above changes, in 2017 the State passed AB 686, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
(AFFH), requiring Housing Elements to address this topic. The law adopts a now repealed federal rule by
reference and indicates that jurisdictions that have completed an Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH) or
Analysis of Impediments (AI) to Fair Housing Choice would be able to incorporate information from these
Page 204
21
1
0
5
7
studies. HCD was supposed to release guidance on compliance in July 2020. However, release of this
guidance was significantly delayed due to the need to develop a data tool to assist local jurisdictions in
conducting the analysis. HCD finally released the guidance memo and data tool on April 27, 2021, and
staff completed the AFFH analysis, which is included in the Revised Housing Element as Appendix E.
Based on the guidance memo, the analysis required is extensive and focuses on a jurisdictional-specific
perspective. As such, jurisdictions are often not able to rely on analyses conducted as part of the AFH or
AI, which were encouraged by HUD to take a regional approach. The City complies with the State’s AFFH
requirements by taking meaningful actions to address impediments identified in the analysis. The Housing
Element summarizes fair housing issues, contributing factors, and implementing actions.
A key factor that sets the Housing Element apart from rest of the General Plan is the fact that it has to be
updated according to a statutory deadline. This is the only element of the General Plan that has a statutory
deadline and is required be updated every eight years. For the SCAG region, the deadline is October 15,
2021 with a 120-day grace period. What also sets the Housing Element apart from the rest of the General
Plan is that the Housing Element has to be submitted to the Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD) for review to determine compliance with housing element law.
The Draft Housing Element, which was presented to the Planning Commission on May 12, 2021, was
advertised and posted on the City’s website for public review on May 7, 2021. The City submitted the Draft
2021-2029 Housing Element to HCD for their mandatory review on June 3, 2021 and received HCD’s
review letter on August 2, 2021. The letter identified revisions necessary to comply with State Housing
Element Law (Article 10.6 of the Gov. Code). The comments received in this letter were comparable in
length and nature to revisions required of other Southern California jurisdictions that have submitted draft
housing elements for review this cycle, including the need to complete the fair housing analysis, described
previously. Staff met with HCD on the comments provided and made the necessary revisions.
The Revised Draft Housing Element was advertised and posted on the City’s website for public review on
August 25, 2021. The City submitted the revised draft to HCD for a second formal review on September
2, 2021 and received HCD’s second review letter on November 2, 2021. Staff continued to work with HCD
to address the final requested revisions which were minor and technical in nature and the complete revised
and final Housing Element for City Council consideration is available online at Draft Housing Element. This
will allow this version of the Housing Element to be recommended for adoption by the City Council within
120 days from the statutory due date of October 15, 2021 and maintain an eight-year planning cycle.
Chapter 6: Public Facilities & Services
California Government Code Section 65302(a) states that the General Plan must identify the location and
designation of land for public uses and utilities. This Chapter has been prepared to address these issues,
in addition to other issues involving the City’s public facilities and services. Public facilities are vital to any
city’s health, safety, livability, and economic well-being. Public facilities in the City of Rancho Cucamonga
include the Civic Center, community sports complexes, family resource center, cultural and senior centers,
fire stations, public works facilities, and libraries. An efficient and reliable system of public facilities and
infrastructure is essential as the city grows. Every built facility has a useful service life, and therefore the
City needs to plan for both expansion and maintenance. Likewise expanding services require an ongoing
investment in term of training and support. While new facilities are often funded by new development,
maintenance responsibility for existing facilities generally falls to the City’s existing residents. Many of the
essential utilities in the City are not under City jurisdiction however the City works closely with the service
providers to ensure a collaborative approach to meeting the needs of our residents. The facilities and
services provided in Rancho Cucamonga are world class and it is a matter of community pride that the
services are responsive to the needs of the people. This Chapter ensures that future growth does not
negatively impact the facilities or reduce services.
Volume 3 – Environmental Performance
This Volume addresses the environmental performance by committing the City, through design and policy,
to ensuring that new development equitably considers our natural resources and safety of our residents
and visitors. This Volume combines conservation of land with consideration of the natural resources that
Page 205
22
1
0
5
7
affect our health and well-being, including air and water quality. Safety is an essential human need, and
changes to the climate, like severity of Santa Ana winds and the emergence of a near year-round fire
season, make safety planning essential. This Volume also addresses the impacts of noise as the city
grows, recognizing that different levels of noise are appropriate in different areas of the city.
Chapter 1: Resource Conservation
Resource Conservation is the act of ensuring that the development and operation of the City does not
undermine the health of its residents, and that development is done with care for the local and global
resources that make this city special. The stewardship of natural resources is an important responsibility,
and this Chapter ensures their consideration with every action. The resource conservation goals serve to
guide and direct long-term planning in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The policies illustrate the
commitment made by the City to resource conservation and the importance of the natural environment. In
addition to natural resources, such as air and water, this Chapter also includes policies that respect the
City’s history.
California law requires that a General Plan include a conservation chapter that addresses the use of natural
resources, including water and its hydraulic force, forests, soils, rivers and other waters, wildlife, minerals,
and other natural resources. This Chapter considers the effect of development as described in the Land
Use and Community Character Chapter and is the foundation for implementation methods designed to
protect water quality and prevent flooding. The Resource Conservation Chapter was prepared to meet the
requirements of Government Code Section 65302(d) and identifies water courses, flood corridors, riparian
habitats, and land that may accommodate floodwater for purposes of groundwater recharge and
stormwater management. This Chapter also addresses historic, cultural, and tribal resources. In this
context, historic and cultural resources consider the built environment since settling of the area. Tribal
cultural resources are those of first residents of the area.
Chapter 2: Safety
Safety is recognizing that natural and human-caused hazards have the potential to harm people and things,
the economic impact to people is another form of harm. It is prudent to plan for emergencies and
uncertainty that can threaten the safety and security of residents and businesses. Three earthquake faults
either bisect the city or pass-through areas nearby, and the city is adjacent to the Angeles and San
Bernardino National Forests which increases the potential for wildfire. Combined with these threats are the
Santa Ana wind conditions that can cause damage even without wildfire. Making matters worse is climate
change that could increase the intensity of these threats by resulting in drier and hotter weather. Wetter
and more intense winter storms could inundate parts of the City that have never experienced flooding or
result in slope instability causing landslides or mudslides. This Chapter identifies hazards that would affect
the City and supports plans to deal with the hazard. While it is not possible to prevent these hazards, the
fact that this City has plans, and will allocate the resources to deal with the hazard, will provide comfort to
the people affected by them.
State law requires that the General Plan include an element that identifies hazards such as flooding,
wildfire, and ground disturbance (Government Code Section 65302 (g)). This Chapter meets the legal
requirements for a Safety Element and includes policies intended to reduce injury to people and damage
to the city. Relevant issues addressed in this Chapter include seismic and geologic hazards (seismically
induced surface rupture, ground shaking, ground failure, slope instability leading to mudslides and
landslides, and liquefaction), flooding (includes dam failure), wildland and urban fires, evacuation routes,
climate adaptation, and human-caused hazards. Other issues required under this government code section
do not apply to the city and are not addressed. The Chapter is also in alignment with other chapters, as
required by State law, including: (1) Housing, (2) Land Use, (3) Mobility, and (4) Open Space and
Conservation. Rancho Cucamonga has also developed and adopted a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
(LHMP), an Emergency Operations Plan (EOP), a Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP), and an
Evacuation Assessment, all of which allow the City to become eligible for federal grant funding to mitigate
many of these natural hazards. These plans are discussed subsequently in this staff report.
Page 206
23
1
0
5
7
In compliance with California Government Code Section 65302 (g) 3 [Senate Bill 1241] the Rancho
Cucamonga General Plan Safety Element requires adoption by the California Board of Forestry and Fire
Protection (BOF) due to the presence of Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones located within the city. As
part of this adoption process, the Safety Element underwent a review by Cal Fire staff within their Land
Use Planning Program. This review process included an initial review of the existing Safety Element in
2020, which Cal Fire performs as a courtesy to jurisdictions. Once the updated Safety Element was ready
for review, the City submitted the Public Review Draft Safety Element on July 21, 2021 to Cal Fire
staff. Since this submittal, coordination with staff involved conference calls and revisions that coincided
with the release of the 2nd Public Review Draft Safety Element. On October 15th, 2021, Cal Fire confirmed
the Safety Element was eligible for transmittal to the BOF for adoption. The element was reviewed and
approved by the BOF on November 2, 2021, indicating eligibility for final adoption by the City.
Chapter 3: Noise
California law requires that a General Plan include an element that addresses noise. This Chapter was
prepared to meet the requirements of Government Code Section 65302(f)) and addresses both noise and
vibration. As required, this Chapter identifies noise in the community from a variety of sources and supports
a pattern of land uses designed to minimize exposure of residents to excessive noise. This Chapter
includes possible solutions to address existing and foreseeable noise problems and establishes areas
where more noise may be acceptable.
As the city grows and more people live closer together, the excitement and energy that this brings needs
to be balanced with the very real need for quiet space. The approach to noise in this Chapter is to
differentiate between the good noise and the bothersome noise. Letting people know that an area will have
good noise gives them a choice to live nearby and limiting the bothersome noise will help with their quality
of life. While more noise may be inevitable in a growing city, there are things that can be done with design
to provide quiet places for people to relax. Design is also important in providing places for people to make
noise, and as noise friendly places are often near people, their need for peace and quiet need to be
addressed. The goal of the Noise chapter is to develop a city with appropriate noise and vibration levels
that support a range of places from quiet neighborhoods to active, exciting districts.
Volume 4 – Implementation
The implementation strategy is a series of actions large and small that are essential to realizing the goals
and policies of this General Plan. This volume includes a Work Plan that covers operations of the City,
provides staff with standard conditions of approval as a starting point for project evaluation, and a
Placemaking Toolkit that helps the City and landowners meet the land use and community character
expectations. Volume 4 also identifies all of the goals and policies contained in the General Plan that
address environmental justice issues per Senate Bill (SB) 1000.
Chapter 1: General Plan Work Plan
Because City resources are finite it is essential that a Work Plan be adopted that prioritizes how the City
implements the General Plan. Not everything can be done at once, and some actions are dependent upon
others having been completed. The intent of this Work Plan is to provide a general idea of which things
should be done first. The Work Plan is a guide for City staff, decision makers, developers and the public
that lays out specific actions and steps required to achieve the goals set forth in the General Plan. It is also
a flexible framework within which more precise measures are addressed. Many of the measures, such as
an update to the Development Code, or revised engineering standards, affect codes that are already in
use but need to be updated to realize the vision of this General Plan. In some cases, there are no existing
implementing measures, thus requiring new ones to be developed and included in this work plan. For many
of the implementation actions, community input is essential, and it is likely that several drafts will be
required before the next actions are decided upon.
A world class city is always evolving to respond to new challenges therefore this list is far from
comprehensive. The list will be used regularly for budgeting and strategic planning purposes. It will be
reviewed as part of the annual reporting on the progress of the General Plan. It is almost certain that
Page 207
24
1
0
5
7
through conversations between the people most affected by the implementation strategy and those
working to complete the task, new methods of achieving the vision of General Plan will be developed. As
such, this list supports the General Plan, but is expected to be amended regularly.
Chapter 2: Placemaking Toolkit
In addition to the Work Plan, Volume 4 of the General Plan includes a Placemaking Toolkit to help
implement the vision and goals of the General Plan. The Placemaking Toolkit is a set of implementation
tools intended as a guide for the City, property owners, and developers, to help ensure that each new
increment of private and public investment in Rancho Cucamonga contributes to the making of great places
of strong and enduring value. The intention of this Toolkit is to clearly describe, diagram and illustrate the
types of development patterns, forms and strategies that will result in human-scale, pedestrian-oriented
places that achieve the community’s vision as presented in this General Plan.
Through the extensive PlanRC community engagement process of 2020, thousands of residents shared
their hopes and dreams for the future of our city. While there were many diverse points of view, it was very
clear that the one thing most people want is “more nice places to go and more ways to get there.” This
requires that public and private improvements work together to “make places, not just projects” and focuses
attention on the streets and other public spaces of our city—the “public realm”—which is the network of
spaces through which one gets around town, and in which one meets and interacts with others. The public
realm is the glue that holds all the projects together and makes them into a great city. As such, the Toolkit
focuses on three high-priority topics related to the built environment: 1) activating the public realm, 2)
rebalancing streets and public spaces, and 3) completing the community fabric.
The Placemaking Toolkit is not a regulatory document, but rather a guide to the City, and to property
owners and developers, for implementing the placemaking policies set forth in the General Plan.
Chapter 3: Environmental Justice Strategy
The purpose of this chapter is to provide a list of the environmental justice goals and policies from each
chapter of this General Plan in one location. By law the General Plan must address at least the following
five health and environmental justice outcomes: Reduction of pollution exposure, including improvement
of air quality; Promotion of public facilities; Promotion of food access; Promotion of safe and sanitary
homes; and Promotion of physical activity. This chapter lists the policies and strategies from the General
Plan Update that address the SB 1000 required topics and are designed to address existing environmental
justice issues in the city and prevent future issues from occurring.
RELATED AND IMPLEMENTING PLANS:
The Work Plan and Placemaking Toolkit contained in Volume 4 of the General Plan are only one part of
the implementation strategy for the General Plan. There are other essential plans and efforts, such as the
Climate Action Plan, Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, and forthcoming updated Development Code that the
PlanRC Team has been working on as part of the PlanRC process that help implement, but are not included
in, the General Plan. These related plans and efforts are described below.
Climate Action Plan
The Climate Action Plan (CAP) is a companion to the General Plan, which envisions a world-class
community, in part, as one that reduces its contributions to a changing climate, and commits the City to
doing so through preparing, maintaining, and implementing the CAP. The CAP also helps implement the
General Plan by including the elements of a “qualified” plan under State regulations (CCR Section
15183.5[b]), which unlocks project-level environmental review streamlining benefits for development
consistent with the General Plan.
As a companion document to the General Plan, the CAP’s measures to reduce the community’s
contributions to climate change are grounded in the General Plan’s core community values of Health,
Equity, and Stewardship. The CAP also builds on the broad climate change policies set forth in the General
Page 208
25
1
0
5
7
Plan. Overall, the General Plan directs the City to reduce its climate change-causing greenhouse gas
(GHG) emission in alignment with statewide reduction goals, and to prioritize CAP measures that also
achieve economic, health, social, environmental, and other co-benefits for the city and its residents and
businesses. Structural equity is a priority, and the CAP measures involving physical improvements will be
used to improve areas of the city where existing improvements are lacking.
The General Plan recognizes that nearly all of the community’s climate change contributions are from
vehicle travel and building energy uses, and therefore the largest reductions will also need to come from
these activities. The development envisioned by the General Plan is intended to reduce the need to drive
by improving access by sidewalk, pathway, and trail, and by encouraging a more compact urban form that
arranges land uses close to where people live to give them options for moving around with or without their
vehicle. It promotes maintaining an urban forest of trees, parks, and landscaping, connecting pedestrian
paths and bikeways throughout the city to encourage active transportation, giving priority to transit and
providing incentives for telecommuting and carpooling. The General Plan also recognizes that changes in
vehicle technology will reduce GHG emissions and includes policies to increase the use of electric or zero
emissions vehicles in the City’s vehicle fleet and by residents and businesses. Transit services are also
envisioned as being powered by electricity or zero emissions technologies.
The General Plan also envisions a community of energy-efficient buildings that rely primarily on renewable
and non-polluting sources of energy. This means more high-tech changes like promoting renewable energy
installations, facilitating green technology and business, using sustainable design in new construction, and
retrofitting existing homes and businesses to improve efficiency and use the latest technologies. Low-tech
methods are also part of the vision, including passive building design suited to the local arid environment,
building materials that avoid contributing to the urban heat island effect, and cooling strategies that provide
shading in public spaces throughout the city. To supplement its focus on vehicle travel and building energy
use, the General Plan also lays out policies to reduce GHG emissions that result from how the community
sources and consumes water, uses off-road equipment, and creates and disposes of solid waste. This
CAP channels the General Plan’s vision and policies into a detailed plan of action for Rancho Cucamonga.
The CAP is available online at Climate Action Plan.
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
The 2021 City of Rancho Cucamonga Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) assesses the significant
natural and human-created hazards that may affect the city and its inhabitants. The plan evaluates these
hazards, assesses the population and potentially vulnerable structures, and recommends mitigation
strategies and actions to be implemented in the future to reduce these vulnerabilities and aid in creating a
more resilient community. The LHMP is a strategic plan that seeks to identify and mitigate natural hazards,
and is distinct from the Safety Element, directly responding to the requirements of the federal Disaster
Mitigation Act (DMA) of 2005. The DMA establishes requirements to identify hazards, evaluate mitigations,
and prioritize strategies to mitigate hazard risks. These future mitigation actions include policies, programs,
projects, and tools to implement over the long term to reduce future economic, infrastructure and personal
property losses community wide. The Fire District’s Emergency Management Division presented the draft
plan to the City Council and Fire Board on March 17, 2021, which also initiated the required public review
process until April 15, 2021. The LHMP received a few comments from the public but no suggestions for
changes to the plan. The plan was then sent to the California Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) for
their review and approval. CalOES completed their review and approval on May 27, 2021 and they
forwarded the plan to FEMA Region 9 for their formal review. On July 13, 2021, FEMA completed its review
and determined that the plan is eligible for final approval pending the adoption by the City of Rancho
Cucamonga. Adoption of the LHMP occurred on August 18, 2021, which ensures the City is eligible for
FEMA hazard mitigation grant funding programs like Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA), Building Resilient
Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC), and Hazard Mitigation Grant Programs (HMGP).
The LHMP is considered an implementation tool of the General Plan Safety Element and was incorporated
by reference into the element, ensuring compliance with Assembly Bill 2140 (California Government Code
Sections 8685.9 and 65302.6), which provides the City and State flexibility under the California Disaster
Assistance Act. The LHMP is available online at LHMP 2021.
Page 209
26
1
0
5
7
Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Communities with a wildfire risk are encouraged to complete a Community Wildfire Protection Plan
(CWPP). Wildfires have been a part of Rancho Cucamonga’s ecosystem for at least the thousands of
years for which we have geological data. The low humidity, high wind, hot temperature climate combined
with the native chaparral vegetation make this area prone to wildfires. A CWPP is a compilation of
information and data centered around wildfire history, wildfire safety best practices, and community
preparedness. The role of the CWPP is to identify wildland fire hazards, reduce the risks associated with
wildland fires, and engage the community in planning and preparing for wildland fires in order to minimize
the effects these fires have on residents, businesses, and the environment. This document serves as a
guide intended to assist the community with preventing wildfires, protecting against the potential
destruction of a wildfire event, and increasing resiliency to the wildfires that are a natural part of the
ecosystem of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the nearby unincorporated foothills that are within the
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District. The CWPP is available online at CWPP May 2021.
Evacuation Assessment
There are a variety of events that could require an evacuation of parts of the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
These events could be caused or fueled by nature, including wildfires, floods, geological or seismic events;
while others can be caused by human initiated events such as utility failures, infrastructure failures or other
factors (such as airplane crashes or vehicular crashes). With climate change increasing drought conditions
and weather events throughout the state, it is prudent to review the capacity of the evacuation system (e.g.
capacity of the evacuation roadways) to assist with planning for these events. Additionally, recent events
like the Camp Fire in Paradise, California, reinforce the need to better prepare for rapid evacuations during
these types of events. This study provides a detailed look at the evacuation system and focuses on
estimating the time needed to evacuate. The results provide information that helped inform the General
Plan Update (especially related to network redundancy and connectivity) in addition to meeting the
legislative requirements associated with SB 99 (2019) and AB 747 (2017). The assessment analyzes five
different emergency scenarios, all requiring different approaches to evacuation orders, and provides
recommendations to facilitate emergency evacuation, especially in the hazard areas north of SR-210, as
the City builds out the Mobility Element roadway network of the updated General Plan. The Evacuation
Assessment is available online at Evacuation Assessment.
Development Code Update
The City is currently working with the consultant team on amendments to the Development Code to
implement the updated General Plan, which will include the addition of form-based code components for
the new mixed-use place types established in the General Plan. The goals of the Development Code
update are to codify the community’s vision as established in the General Plan update process, increase
certainty in the development review process, and facilitate implementation of key General Plan concepts
related to land use and urban design.
A primary objective of the code update is to integrate form-based regulations in appropriate areas, such
as along Foothill Boulevard, to promote pedestrian activity and transition these areas from auto-oriented
to more walkable and urban configurations. Fundamental elements of the Development Code Update are:
An updated hybrid Development Code that integrates form-based and conventional zones.
New form-based zoning regulations for walkable mixed-use areas along Foothill Boulevard and
other key corridors.
Evaluation of existing Specific Plans and Master Plans and the opportunities for incorporating
existing standards into the new zoning regulations.
New Objective Design and Development Standards (ODDS) for multi-family residential and
mixed-use development projects with an evaluation of how the proposed ODDS align with the
form-based standards, such as building and frontage types.
Development of an interim process to establish the new form-based code standards prior to the
adoption of the updated Development Code.
New or revised conventional zones to implement the land use vision of the General Plan.
Revised general development standards to address General Plan policy or existing deficiencies
Page 210
27
1
0
5
7
with respect to landscaping, open space, and noise, among others as needed.
Improved administration and permit procedures to streamline development review for projects
consistent with the General Plan and ensure adequate tools for enforcement of the Code.
Compliance with State and Federal law.
Work on the Development Code update has begun, and a draft for public review will be available in early
2022.
Economic Development Strategic Plan Update
As part of the PlanRC process, the City is conducting a targeted update of the Economic Development
Strategic Plan (EDSP). The EDSP is a policy document that will guide the City’s economic development
priorities and activities over the next five years, and the most recent EDSP was adopted in 2015. This
document has been extensively used to help guide the City’s economic development efforts but is now
outdated and in need of revisiting to keep current with changing needs and conditions. Based on previously
completed economic and market analyses for the General Plan update and targeted follow-up research
and interviews, the revised EDSP will describe the City’s economic context, opportunities and constraints,
and will provide strategies and implementation actions for recovering from the impacts of the COVID-19
pandemic and for improving the City’s long-term economic resilience. Work on the EDSP update
commenced in August 2021, and a complete draft is anticipated to be ready for consideration by the City
Council the first quarter of 2022.
City staff and the consultant team are continuing to collaborate to develop strategies supporting the City’s
vision and goals. Key issues being considered include: 1) opportunities to support the growth of office-
based employers and to drive demand for additional office space in locations identified in the General Plan,
2) revitalization of and reinvestment in underperforming retail centers, 3) development and retention of
industrial-manufacturing type businesses, particularly within green manufacturing and other targeted
industry clusters, and 4) enhancing opportunities to match local job opportunities with the City’s residents,
both in terms of jobs-housing balance and in terms of jobs-skills match.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT:
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the City’s local CEQA Guidelines, a Draft
Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was prepared by the City’s environmental consultant to analyze the
potential environmental effects of the General Plan. (CEQA) requires that local government agencies
consider the environmental consequences before acting on projects over which they have discretionary
approval authority. An environmental impact report (EIR) analyzes potential environmental consequences
to inform the public and support informed decisions by local and state governmental agency decision
makers.
The primary purpose of this EIR is to evaluate the broad-scale environmental effects of the theoretical
potential development resulting from the General Plan at build out and identify possible ways to avoid or
reduce those impacts to below thresholds acceptable to the community or to be in line with State
requirements. In developing the General Plan we considered, discussed, and addressed
possible environmental impacts as part of the process, and the EIR is analyzing and confirming the policies
and programs of the General Plan to ensure it effectively deals with environmental implications and that
mitigation can be achieved. The EIR covers all the topics included in the CEQA guidelines. This includes:
Aesthetics (Visual)
Agricultural & Forestry Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Energy
Geology & Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Page 211
28
1
0
5
7
Hazards & Hazardous Materials
Hydrology & Water Quality
Land Use & Planning
Mineral Resources
Noise
Population & Housing
Public Services
Recreation
Transportation
Utilities & Service Systems
Tribal Cultural Resources
Wildfire
The following summarizes key points in the environmental review process:
Notice of Preparation
A Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Environmental Impact Report was prepared and circulated on May
10, 2021 to the State Clearinghouse, and to public agencies that have discretionary approval power over
the project, i.e. “Responsible Agencies” and Tribal Governments. Also, the NOP was made available for
review at City Hall, and on the City’s website. In compliance with State law, the comment period ended 32
days after the date of circulation on June 11, 2021.
The NOP serves as public notification that an EIR is being prepared and requests comment and input from
responsible agencies and other interested parties regarding environmental issues to be addressed in the
document. The City received comments from 3 public agencies, 3 organizations, and no individual members
of the community. The NOP and the comments that were received are contained in Appendix 2-2 of the
Draft EIR. Agencies or interested persons, whether they responded during the public review period of the
NOP or not, also have an opportunity to comment on the Draft EIR during the public review period or during
public hearings to be conducted by the City on the Draft EIR and the General Plan Update. The City also
consulted with 3 Native American tribes as part of the SB 18 process.
Public Scoping Meeting
In addition to the NOP, CEQA recommends conducting a scoping meeting for the purpose of identifying the
range of potential significant impacts that should be analyzed within the scope of the Draft EIR. The City
conducted a noticed Public Scoping meeting during a Planning Commission meeting on May 18, 2021. The
notice for this scoping meeting appeared in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper notification was
provided in various social media platforms. The intent of the Public Scoping Meeting was to receive public
testimony on those issues that the public would like to have addressed in the EIR as it relates to the project
and environment. Following a brief explanation of the environmental review process, comments were
received from the public. Public comments included general questions about topics covered in the EIR.
Draft EIR Preparation and Circulation
The Notice of Availability (NOA) and the Draft EIR (SCH No. 2021050261) were prepared and distributed to
all responsible agencies, tribal governments, and individuals who had expressed interest in the project
and/or had previously requested copies. The Draft EIR is also available on the City’s General Plan Update
webpage, along with an informational video about the EIR and how to comment on the EIR. It was advertised
in the City’s “eNewsletter” (which has 18,000 subscribers), and an email was sent to individuals who
subscribe to the General Plan Update email. The Draft EIR was also advertised in various social media
platforms including Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and Nextdoor. The 45-day public review period for the
Draft EIR began on September 10, 2021 and expired on October 25, 2021. During the public review period,
the Draft EIR and technical appendices are available for review at:
The Archibald Library - 7368 Archibald Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
The Paul A. Biane Library - 12505 Cultural Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739
The Planning Counter at City Hall - 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Page 212
29
1
0
5
7
Online at https://www.cityofrc.us/GeneralPlan
Opportunities to comment on the Draft EIR were made available through:
Emails to GP-EIR-Comments@cityofrc.us or jennifer.nakamura@cityofrc.us
A dedicated Comment Portal at www.publicinput.com/GP-EIRcomments
Final EIR
The Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) has been prepared in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as amended (Public Resources Code §§ 21000 et seq.) and CEQA
Guidelines (California Code of Regulations §§ 15000 et seq.). The Final EIR incorporates the Draft EIR and
contains comments received on the DEIR, responses to the individual comments, revisions to the DEIR
including any clarifications based on the comments and the responses to the comments, and the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the proposed project, which is inclusive of standard
conditions of approval applicable to future development within the City.
Comment letters on the Draft EIR were received from 5 agencies and organizations and 3 individuals. The
Final EIR provides a list of agencies and interested persons commenting on the DEIR; copies of comment
letters received during the public review period, and individual responses to written comments. In
accordance with CEQA, Public Resources Code Section 21092.5, copies of the written responses to public
agencies were forwarded to those agencies 10 days prior to certifying the environmental impact report. The
FEIR is posted on the project website at: Final EIR
Facts, Findings, and Statement of Overriding Considerations
If significant unavoidable environmental impacts result with a project, the City must balance the benefits of
the project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. If the
benefits outweigh the unavoidable adverse impacts, the City may adopt a statement of Overriding
Considerations in accordance with CEQA Section 21081. The DEIR found that, despite the implementation
of General Plan policies and standard conditions of approval intended to minimize of avoid significant
impacts to the environments, certain impacts to the following would remain significant and
unavoidable; therefore, the City prepared a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the proposed
project:
Aesthetics (cumulative impacts only)
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Mineral Resources (cumulative impacts only)
Noise
Transportation
Wildfire (cumulative impacts only)
A full description of the significant impacts resulting from the proposed project and the benefits of the
proposed project that outweigh the project’s unavoidable adverse effects are contained in the Facts,
Findings, and Statement of Overriding Considerations. In summary, the Statement of Overriding
Considerations balances the following project benefits against the significant environmental impacts
identified:
Project Benefit #1: Adoption of the General Plan would provide goals and policies that would facilitate
implementation of the project objectives to:
Provide a human-scaled design, with buildings and outdoor spaces oriented towards people
connected by safe and comfortable streets, pathways, and trails that provide equitable access for
all.
Focus transformative growth along major corridors and allowing incremental change in the
neighborhoods.
Page 213
30
1
0
5
7
Increase jobs in the City to encourage more residents to work locally and reduce commuting out
of the City to work.
Maintain and enhance conservation areas.
Create vibrant activity nodes and a “real downtown” area with one or several major activity centers,
with varied cultural opportunities and public art providing areas for social, civic, and commercial
activity.
Project Benefit #2: Implementation of the General Plan would provide an increase in housing to meet the
City’s regional housing needs and meet current State housing law. The Housing Element of the General
Plan Update includes policies and programs to support a variety of housing types and densities to
accommodate residents in the City.
Project Benefit #3: Adoption of the General Plan would provide consistency with the regional
goals in Connect SoCal, the 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
(RTP/SCS). The proposed General Plan would address economic growth in the City by supporting job
creation and reducing jobs-housing imbalance; improve mobility by proposing vehicular, bicycle, and
pedestrian circulation systems; and would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by reducing VMT due to the
mix of uses permitted.
Project Benefit #4: The General Plan promotes the City’s economic vision by including economic
strategies that reflect changing conditions and promote fiscal sustainability by actively managing growth
and investments in the community to maximize the value of new development.
Project Benefit #5: Adoption of the General Plan and Climate Action Plan bring the City into compliance
with current legislation. The proposed General Plan and Climate Action Plan contain goals, policies, and
strategies that help the City implement:
Assembly Bill 1358 (2008), Complete Streets
Senate Bill 1000 (2016), Environmental Justice
Senate Bill 1241 (2012), Safety Element Fire Hazard Impacts
Senate Bill 379 (2015), Climate Resiliency and Vulnerability
Senate Bill 32 (2016), Global Warming Solutions Act
Other Considerations: If the City does not update the General Plan, there will still be significant impacts
relating to air quality, GHG emissions, and noise. Even without any growth in the city, which is not a
realistic scenario, the significant impacts relating to air quality and GHG emissions will occur simply due
to regional growth. Impacts relating to construction noise are temporary in nature.
FISCAL IMPACT:
One of the “Big Ideas” of this General Plan is to establish Rancho Cucamonga as the cultural and economic
hub of the Inland Empire. By creating vibrant, high value places, Rancho Cucamonga can ensure its fiscal
sustainability and resiliency and distinguish itself as the economic hub of the Inland Empire. This General
Plan envisions a future Rancho Cucamonga with a higher quality of life and more competitive economy.
As such, the Land Plan and associated “place type” designations promote development patterns that
secure the community’s fiscal condition while reinforcing a strong sense of place.
Fiscal Impact Analysis
The fiscal impact of projected future growth under the buildout program for the General Plan Update is
analyzed in the Fiscal Impact Analysis Results and Technical Information Memorandum, dated October
14, 2021, and prepared by Strategic Economics. This analysis is attached to this staff report as Attachment
4.
The fiscal impact analysis measured the net revenue impact of total projected growth on the City’s largest
operating funds—including the General Fund, the Fire Fund, and two fire protection community facilities
district funds—by calculating associated increases in revenues and expenditures. The assumptions
Page 214
31
1
0
5
7
regarding the amounts and types of new growth were based on the buildout program.
The analysis found that the PlanRC buildout program will result in a significantly positive net fiscal impact,
generating about $25.2 million net annual revenue (i.e., revenues minus expenses) at full build-out. The
General Fund accounts for $13.9 million of this projected revenue, while the Fire Protection District
accounts for $11.3 million. Property tax and “Property Tax In-Lieu of Vehicle License Fee” (VLF) constitute
the largest sources of revenues associated with the buildout program, together accounting for 65 percent
of total revenue for the operating funds considered in this analysis. The largest projected expenditures
attributable to serving growth in the buildout program are associated with the Sheriff’s Department contract
($13.5 million) and the Fire Protection District ($10.4 million). These two departments are projected to
account for 75 percent of all new City expenditures associated with serving growth under the General Plan
buildout program.
The fiscal impact analysis also found that growth in the buildout program will generate high net positive
revenues relative to total revenue; that is, the cost of providing services for new growth in the buildout
program will be significantly lower than the additional revenue generated by growth. Net revenue as a
percent of total new revenue was projected at 39 percent for the General Fund and 52 percent for the Fire
Protection District. The analysis found that the buildout plan results in a high net positive fiscal impact
because new residential and commercial property will generate a significant amount of property tax
revenue and related tax revenue, while staff from City departments determined that few significant new
recurring expenditures will be necessary to serve anticipated growth in the City’s residential and employee
populations. In part this is attributable the Land Plan and the underlying concepts which concentrate and
focus growth in areas that are already served well, rather than promoting unconstrainted horizontal growth
which would require a commensurately greater investment in new facilities, personnel and programs.
Value Per Acre Economic Analysis
In addition to the fiscal impact analysis, we worked with Urban3 to conduct a spatial economic analysis of
the proposed General Plan Land Plan using a value per acre model. This model analyzed the fiscal
implications of different patterns of development and demonstrated how the way Rancho Cucamonga is
built drives the way it is funded. The value per acre metric was used a starting point to create a visual
representation of the fiscal productivity and health of the community and economic potential of the
proposed General Plan Land Plan, including both property and sales tax revenue streams.
Using the value per acre analysis throughout the PlanRC process, our planning team garnered information
about the development patterns in the community, leading to stronger decision-making about the proposed
land use plan based on the public’s return on investment. It is sometimes assumed that budget problems
can be solved by creating more growth, yet more growth in unproductive patterns simply creates more cost
than revenues and thereby increases economic problems. This analysis and approach helped to provide
transparency regarding the cost of growth and long-term obligations to create a healthy, sustainable fiscal
future for Rancho Cucamonga.
The results of the visual analysis demonstrate the economic potency of having denser, mixed use urban
centers, or a real “downtown,” within the city. A side-by-side comparison of the taxable value per acre of
the current and planned buildout of the City shows a significant increase in the total, average, and peak
value, including a nearly 20% increase in total value created. A wider model of the future Rancho
Cucamonga in the current two county region reminds us that creating active centers or nodes of denser
mixed-use development, as illustrated by the “purple spikes,” can help the City maintain a high level of
fiscal performance and become a focal point of activity for the region.
The City will require similar economic analyses for large projects to demonstrate the financial benefits and
impacts of development at the project approval level based on anticipated full life-cycle costs and value
per acre.
Page 215
32
1
0
5
7
NEXT STEPS:
Following adoption of the General Plan, staff will continue the existing work already well under way on the
Development Code Update, a key implementing tool of the updated General Plan land use designations,
or “place types”. Staff is currently working on the Administrative Review Draft and engaging with key
stakeholders to get initial input. The schedule for the Development Code Update is to prepare a public
review draft that will be available early in the new year, continue to engage with the public and key
stakeholders, and present to the Planning Commission and City Council in Spring 2022 for adoption.
COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
This comprehensive General Plan Update supports the Council’s Mid and Long-Range Planning goal of
preparing a comprehensive update to the General Plan by the 4th quarter of 2022.
Page 216
33
1
0
5
7
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Planning Commission Resolution 21-71 Recommending Approval of the General Plan
Update, 2021-2029 Housing Element, Climate Action Plan and Certifying the EIR
Attachment 2 – November 10, 2021 Planning Commission Minutes
Attachment 3 – Revisions to Planning Commission Public Hearing Draft General Plan (dated November
2021) for City Council Public Hearing Draft General Plan (dated December 2021)
Attachment 4 – Fiscal Impact Analysis, October, 2021
Attachment 5 – Public Hearing Draft General Plan (December 2021), 2021-2029 Housing Element
(December 2021) and Climate Action Plan (September 2021)
Attachment 6 – Draft and Final Environmental Impact Report
Attachment 7 – Resolution No. 2021-132
Attachment 8 – Resolution No. 2021-133
Page 217
Page 218
Page 219
Page 220
Page 221
Page 222
Historic Preservation Commission and
Planning Commission Agenda
November 10, 2021
MINUTES
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729
7:00 p.m.
The regular meeting of the Historic Presentation Commission and Planning Commission was held on
November 10, 2021. The meeting was called to order by Chair Oaxaca at 7:00 p.m.
A. Roll Call
Planning Commission present: Chair Oaxaca, Vice Chair Dopp, Commissioner Guglielmo,
Commissioner Morales and Commissioner Williams.
Staff Present: Nicholas Ghirelli, City Attorney; Anne McIntosh, Planning Director; Mike Smith,
Principal Planner; Jason Welday, Engineering Services Director; Matt Burris, Deputy City
Manager; Elisa Cox, Deputy City Manager; Jennifer Nakamura, Management Analyst; Justine
Garcia, Engineering Services Deputy Director; David F. Eoff IV, Senior Planner; Tabe van der
Zwaag, Associate Planner; Jennifer Camacho-Curtis, Community Affairs Officer; Elizabeth
Thornhill, Executive Assistant.
B. Public Communications
Chair Oaxaca opened the public communications.
Kyler Gillam, resident, commented regarding drought conditions and suggested development
of a desalination plant and explained it takes salt water to fresh water and to locate it possibly
at Etiwanda Preserve.
Hearing no other comments, Chair Oaxaca closed public communications.
C. Consent Calendar
C1.Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of November 10, 2021.
Motion by Commissioner Guglielmo, second by Commissioner Williams to approve Consent
Calendar. Motion carried unanimously 5-0 vote.
D. Public Hearings
D1.LOCATED AT 9377 HAVEN AVENUE - TRINITY HOLDINGS HAVEN AVENUE, LLC - A
request to convert an existing 8,993-square foot office building on a 0.103-acre parcel
(4,495 square feet) of land into 4 office condominium units in the Industrial Park (IP) District
and Haven Overlay District; APN: 0210-081-33. Tentative Parcel Map (SUBTT20317).
Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner, presented Commissioners with a Staff Report and
presentation (copy on file).
Chair Oaxaca opened public hearing.
Page 223
HPC/PC MINUTES – November 10, 2021
Page 2 of 7
Draft
Serge Bonaldo, Applicant, thanked Tabe for his work and was available for any questions.
Hearing no further comments, Chair Oaxaca closed the public hearing.
Commissioners concur and support this project.
Motion by Commissioner Guglielmo, second by Commissioner Morales to adopt the proposed
Resolutions 21-70 - Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM20317. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0 vote.
D2.Consideration of the following: PlanRC General Plan Update, 2021-2029 Housing Element,
Climate Action Plan and Environmental Impact Report (SCH 2021050261). This item will
be forwarded to City Council for Final Action.
Jennifer Nakamura, Management Analyst II; David Eoff IV, Senior Planner; Jennifer Camacho-Curtis,
Community Affairs Officer; and Mark Teague, EIR Consultant (PlaceWorks) presented the
Commissioners with a presentation (copy on file).
Vice Chair Dopp praised staff on their hard work and expressed it was tremendous with all the effort
and detail that went into it. He asked about utilities corridor on permanent structures and wanted to
know what kind of discussion took place at staff level and the public about ways of creativity in terms
of utilizing space for interaction and connectivity with neighborhoods and allowing people to have
recreation opportunities.
Jennifer Nakamura answered utilities corridors are multifaceted areas, but we believe they have
potential to create connections within the city. She said, however, we do need to be sensitive to the
needs of public utility and not interfering with their uses. As we move forward, we want to support those
efforts but also work with SCE and public utilities to ensure it could all be done safely and mutual
agreement with both parties.
Nicholas Ghirelli, City Attorney, mentioned there are instances where a utility easement will not allow
the installation of structures on site. Also, Standard Conditions of Approval in the EIR are being
recommended to make sure future recreational facilities do not interfere with utility infrastructure.
Vice Chair Dopp stated there was clarification made on community benefit beyond what appeared to
be industrial uses and asked for examples where that might pop up in future developments.
Jennifer Nakamura replied when it comes to community benefit that is an area that has a wide range
of possibilities. It could potentially impact any development that chooses to work with the City and
would like any sort of change or negotiation in standards, as long as they can provide this additional
community benefit. It’s not necessarily related to any one type of user, but it could happen with any
future development.
Vice Chair Dopp regarding traffic and transportation he asked what kind of comments did we get from
the public about the desire to see different types of mode of transportation in the city.
Jennifer Nakamura answered they received a wide variety of responses. Individuals who were very
interested in continuing current auto centric model. Interest in having additional bike lanes and those
wanting to find an easier way to walk from their neighborhood to their local shopping centers. This plan
tries to accommodate all of those needs.
Page 224
HPC/PC MINUTES – November 10, 2021
Page 3 of 7
Draft
Anne McIntosh added they did focus on transportation and transit opportunities in one of the workshops
and when we talked about Victoria Gardens area and Civic Center area and having those be the new
downtowns, there was a lot of interest in transit that would provide circulation opportunities between
those areas, they saw potential for that to connect in the future. In recognition similar to The Resort
where we have higher density development and potentially a station in the future, we have more people
that want to live in those types of communities who will be out to use those local circulators like trollies
in the area. In creating a whole new transit in the city east of Haven south of Foothill area.
Chair Oaxaca opened public hearing.
Lawrence Henderson, resident, expressed his objection. He takes exception with the phrase “World
Class Community”, it’s an undefined term. He said it is a marketing term and no place for planning.
He has concern that a lot of the community did not know about this or have a way to involve themselves.
A personal thing, he would send comments to the City and receive back a basic comment “thank you
for your input”. Not, “this is what we did with your input”. It became clear when he realized all the
overlays were eliminated in the General Plan. Primarily the equestrian overlay. He views this document
as a marketing document meant to help developers. Not so much the community or people. He said
looking at some of the language in the General Plan is slanted too far to development side of things. It
jumps a lot of the responsibility to staff, and you will find out you will not get the quality if you do this.
As a citizen of the community, he is giving his view on the inconsistencies of the plan.
Rick Fontana, resident, stated he was not contacted about this engagement. He said nobody reached
out to Sports Advisory Group, which he is part of. Making plans with parks and not reaching out to the
proper groups is wrong. He would like to hear from somebody on this.
For the record, it is noted the following correspondence was received after the preparation of the
agenda packet and the following general concern is noted. The actual correspondence should be
referred to for more detail:
Paige H. Gosney, Gresham Savage Nolan & Tilden, representing “Tree Island Wire” located at
12459 Arrow Route expressed their concerns with the street network expansion within the
Southeast Industrial Area.
With no further comments, Chair Oaxaca closed the public hearing.
Jennifer Nakamura responded to some of the comments received during public hearing:
Equestrian Overlay – It was not included in the General Plan; however, it does still exist in the
Development Code and that is not scheduled for change and does not see that change moving
forward.
Sports & Recreational Facility – Explained the General Plan is a community-based plan and
when we do a community-based plan we want to engage and bring as many people to the table
with a variety of different voices. She said we do not necessarily reach out to individuals or
specific groups because inevitably one will get left out and it’s an area we want to avoid. We
want to make sure everyone across the city knows it through a variety of different channels.
Covid did put some additional constrains on it that we were not prepared for but were able to
adapt and overcome. She mentioned they did talk to people about open space and with people
who represented sports teams did participate in our online engagement.
Jennifer Nakamura further stated: however, we want to make sure it’s understood the General Plan
talks about overall recreation. The Community Department Services are about to start a Parks Master
Plan where we will take a deeper dive into the recreation needs of the community and how those move
Page 225
HPC/PC MINUTES – November 10, 2021
Page 4 of 7
Draft
forward. As to the goal of converting baseball fields to soccer fields was a comment received through
conversation with the community. As the Community Services Department moves forward with the
Parks Master Plan there will be additional time for more in-depth conversation and the Sports Advisory
Committee will be one of the groups who will be reached out to because they have a specific need and
interest in Parks Development and Parks Master Plan.
Anne McIntosh mentioned when it came to open space and recreation, a lot of input received was not
necessarily targeted to organized sport. It was more passive opportunities for recreation at local
neighborhood parks, along pedestrian ways and pathways and electric pacific trails.
David Eoff stated the General Plan still identifies a need and priority for trails. It is listed as one of the
goals of the open space element to maintain and complete connecting network of diverse trails in
connected open space that improves access to all areas of the city. Encourages non-motorized activity
and one of those being equestrian trails. It is still identified in the plan. It is an important mode of
transportation in addition to walking and vehicles.
Nicholas Ghirelli mentioned the overlay is still part of the Zoning Code. The overlay is not being
eliminated.
Commissioner Morales stated it was a great presentation and great work they did. The fact the city
teams worked so diligently and be able to develop this work within 2 years is amazing. Included the
community in the process, the engagement was a big plus, made it what it was, and it truly was
designed for people first. A lot of us in the community talk about our values and some of those big
ones being equity, community, culture, neighborhood amenities and this update implements all that.
Especially housing that is affordable. Somebody mentioned our city had certain characteristics in the
beginning when we were first incorporated. Now we are dealing with State Housing requirements and
State Laws we have to comply with, so this General Plan Update keeps the character of our city in
place. Transportation, mobility, parts of it are good to the equity. Environmental justice strategy is for
all people to have the opportunity to thrive. This General Plan Update preserves the character and
strength of the already established neighborhoods and it does it well and that is what makes a world
class city. It also establishes our city as economic and cultural hub of the inland empire. He expressed
his support.
Commissioner Williams she also commends the staff. It is a little concerning on the comments made
from the audience, but she is counting on incorporating all that into the development code. The General
Plan is more of a “big picture”, the sense of the soul of the city and staff did a great job in capturing
that. We do need to be cautious in the development code to be extremely specific, so it does not get
lost. We need to make sure staff has the opportunity to use this as a “bible” to say no. It gives you
the opportunity to create fun and great things. She expressed her support and is very proud of staff.
Commissioner Guglielmo asked about the Healthy Development Checklist and wanted to know if it
became incorporated into the final draft.
Anne McIntosh explained the Healthy Checklist will be a tool when we review projects in the future.
Commissioner Guglielmo thanked staff for their hard work and dedication over the past two years
working on this integrated document and thanked the community who did engage. He knows it is not
a perfect system on reaching out to everybody, but he does recall a number of efforts made by the City
as mentioned over 1.1 million impressions via online, mail and various workshops outreach and they
did a great job. Regarding members of the public who spoke today, he is concerned about comments
made on the sports field. He does not know this particular document is the place and time to deal with
Page 226
HPC/PC MINUTES – November 10, 2021
Page 5 of 7
Draft
some of it. It’s more a micro-level. This document of the General Plan is more of a birds-eye global
look overall vision and goals of the city. He believes it is a marketing piece. It is meant to attract
investment into our community and world class developers to come and bring their brain power to our
city. He said this document does the best to really showcase the strengths, opportunities and mobility
of the city and take us into the next decade or two of what our community needs. Touching on some
of the main core principals; Health, Equity and Stewardship are key focal points that guide this
document, and guide future Planning Commissioners and City Council going forward. He does believe
we can become, with proper planning and investment, the place to go in the Inland Empire. This
document will help foster that investment we need in the coming decade or two. He believes the
equestrian overlay is very important, and he is glad to hear it is not getting removed or diminished.
Also, the sports field, he hopes Mr. Fontana will engage in the Parks Masterplan and dive into this some
more to help elevate some of the congestion we have with our parks right now in sports. This General
Plan will help us in the future, and he expressed his support.
Jennifer Camacho-Curtis, Community Affairs Officer, mentioned she just checked her stakeholder list,
and Mr. Fontana was included. She requested if he could meet after the meeting to make sure we
have his most current contact information. They do want to speak with him due to his expertise and
long-standing relationship and volunteering he has with these sports leagues; they definitely want to
include him in these conversations.
Vice Chair Dopp expressed his thanks to the outreach team on the efforts made during corona virus,
he knows it was a challenge. It is on us as citizens to be engaged. If you are connected with social
media and connected to City apps, you would have come across this at some point and it’s a good call
for citizens to have as an avenue as we continue with technology for outreach and communication with
each other. He said when looking at the plan, the overall question he has with regards to this document
is, how do we move the City forward, as Commissioner Guglielmo ended on. There are so many people
in the area that consider Rancho Cucamonga to be the gold standard for the region. He said a lot of
us enjoy living in our city. We get various things out of it; recreation, quality of life, shopping, the options
we have to raise our families.
Holistically speaking, he is proud to put his name behind this document in terms of the goals it seeks
to achieve to move our city into an even better direction and to advance our economic and
environmental interests and some of the challenges we are facing as a city and to provide that quality
of life for others. He remembers having this conversation about equity and stewardship when we first
started off. He said just the importance of maintaining the quality of life and resources we have available
at our disposal to create an economic financial situation so we can maintain that standard for the public.
He said from an equity standpoint, something he has talked about in the past year, when looking at
some of these focal areas and potential in some of the policies, whether it be from an environmental
justice standpoint or housing opportunities, we really are putting focus on places that have not had
attention as in the past.
He said he was impressed with the focal areas in general. Obviously, these focal areas are only
recommendations but if these areas look like what the diagrams have and what recommendations are
from City Staff, each of these areas will be very unique and bring so much to our community. He said
Victoria Garden and the HART plan shows how Rancho Cucamonga can be a Hub for our local area,
whether it be from a transportation standpoint or attracting businesses, jobs and great housing
opportunities. He expressed Kudos to staff and all the team who had a process in visualizing some of
those communities, generically speaking, because the goal, not just from an economic development
standpoint, but creating opportunities and placemaking for our city is what some of residents want at
some level.
Page 227
HPC/PC MINUTES – November 10, 2021
Page 6 of 7
Draft
He said there is always going to be an aspect to the city that tradition is always going to play a part in
who we are, and we can’t lose that, but we do also have to move forward and that was one of the other
really big takeaways. There are pockets of the city that are not going to change, and staff did a good
job listening to concerns from people in those areas. Some of the phrases he wrote down was “Keep
Rancho, Rancho” for certain parts of it, “maintaining the historical character”, generically speaking. He
said he is more than pleased to see some of the standards we put in place. When he looks at the Tool
Kit as an avenue, whether it be from a transportation standpoint or giving ideas out there of what we
want to see.
He knows that housing is a big problem in our region and continues to be. People are not always happy
with housing and some of the effects in regards to traffic. One of the things he appreciates is there was
an effort and there is some concern that in a place like Rancho that traffic and ultimate modes of
transportation is seen as a last-ditch effort, it’s nice to see some feedback from the community in that
regard. Lastly, regarding Community Benefit Plan, he knows we had this experience with Bridge Point
Project, but he really sees this as a great opportunity for us to continue to form relationships with
developers and proposals and making sure we not only maintain standards of high quality for our
community but also finding ways for our community to thrive. He expressed his appreciation to staff
and team for a job well done.
Chair Oaxaca stated one of the aspects of a document of this type what he looks for is it accessible
especially to those who it will affect most directly. He said it is something that touches every resident,
business owner and operator in the city one way or another at some point. He said this document really
does that job of being something that is accessible and understandable, and it illustrates it very well of
what we are talking about when we say change and what the future of the city should be. He said as
a resident here for over 30 years, he can still say we are able to maintain it somehow and that somehow
has a lot to do on how we approached these types of processes from the outreach to the visioning to
the actual development of the document that results from it. He will acknowledge the timing for the
type of outreach that staff conducted was not the best. Who could have predicted we would have gone
through what we did in the past +20 months at the time this was being looked at. He completely
acknowledges that significant challenge.
Staff is to be commended for thinking out of the box and using technology that is available people use
to keep in touch with others to get the word out. Some of the highlights for him that stood out; a place
making tool kit for this document that provides something for the development community to use in
working in conjunction with staff to make real what it is we are talking about in this General Plan and
doing it in a consistent way, otherwise we lose all this work that has been done and lose touch what
that future is we want to have for the city. The new way of looking at development from an equity
perspective from a fiscal impact perspective.
He said the variety of place types that where developed he thought was fantastic. It opens the door to
much more opportunity, flexibility, and a move in the direction of form-based approach to development.
It really shifts the emphasis on looking at what do we want things to look and feel like accessibility,
walkability, transportation rather than getting locked into specific uses based on more traditional zoning.
He said he was happy to see how the city is managing the regional housing needs requirements and
to see we have an effective path forward for doing that. It’s not an easy requirement to meet and the
State is not making it any easier in the future. It was an area of concern to him, but it was nice to see
how it was delt with. Finally, for him, this continued confirmation of work that was done previously the
focus on our main corridors in our areas of focus in the city; Haven corridor, Foothill corridor. The other
focus areas we identified where really reaching in parts of the city that need reaching into. Putting that
in the maps and diagrams and making it real was the first step for him of what those areas can become
through the General Plan. We all know there are more steps to go. It’s the development code. That is
Page 228
HPC/PC MINUTES – November 10, 2021
Page 7 of 7
Draft
where it comes to life. He looks forward in seeing the final steps happen successfully. He expressed
his thanks to staff for all their great work.
Motion by Commissioner, second by Commissioner to adopt the proposed Resolutions 21-71,
Recommending the City Council Certify an Environmental Impact Report and Adopt a Statement of
overriding considerations and a Mitigation Monitor and Reporting Program for a Proposed General Plan
Update Including the 2021-2029 Housing Element, and a Climate Action Plan. Motion carried
unanimously, 5-0 vote.
E. Director Announcements - None
F. Commission Announcements - None
G. Adjournment
Motion by Commissioner Williams, second by Commissioner Guglielmo to adjourn the meeting, motion
carried unanimously, 5-0 vote. Meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
________________________
Elizabeth Thornhill
Executive Assistant, Planning Department
Approved:
Page 229
Revisions to Planning Commission Public Hearing Draft General Plan (dated November 2021) for City
Council Public Hearing Draft General Plan (dated December 2021).
Volume Chapter Page Revision
1 Updated Cover
1 1 18-19 Added spread on Value per Acre analysis of General Plan buildout
1 2 30 Updated community engagement numbers
2 1 60 Changed Land Plan Designation for APN: 106117219 from Rural Open
Space to General Open Space (change also applied to Figures LC-1, FA-1,
OS-2, and V-2)
2 1 61, 64,
70
Updated Suburban Neighborhood – Moderate Non-Residential Intensity
to Max 0.3 FAR
2 1 92 Added Policy LC-1.16 as follows: Healthy Development. Ensure that the
design and development of our communities supports the health and
well-being of our residents. Use the Healthy Development Checklist, or
similar assessment tool, to assess the overall health performance and
supportiveness of new development projects.
2 1 94 Revised Policy LC-3.2 as follows: Community Benefit. Require a
community benefit and economic analysis for large projects that abut
existing neighborhoods or for any project at the maximum density, with a
focus on resolving physical, economic, long-term fiscal, and aesthetic
impacts.
2 1 98 Added Policy LC-5.8 as follows: Equestrian Uses. Continue to protect
equestrian uses and to implement the Equestrian Overlay Zone.
2 1 99 Revised Policy LC-7.1 as follows: Gateway & Employment Hub. Establish
the Central South Community Planning Area is established as the City’s
main “gateway from the I-10 Freeway” and an employment hub of
regional significance. Haven Avenue and 4th Street, in particular, is a
significant gateway location that is envisioned as a higher intensity urban
environment with iconic architecture and a mix of uses that can
include luxury or full-service hotel, high rise office building, fine dining
restaurant, and/or a public recreation amenity in addition to higher
density residential uses.
2 2 123 Added text under Figure FA-6 to prioritize bike and pedestrian activity
along segments of Arrow Route through Cucamonga Town Center and
residential neighborhoods to contribute to and maintain the character of
these areas.
2 2 135 Figure FA-9: Changed legend for Day Creek Channel from Recommended
Park to Open Space
2 4 161 Added sentence to paragraph under Arterial Roadway: Portions of Arrow
Route through Cucamonga Town Center and residential
neighborhoods prioritize pedestrian and bike modes to contribute to and
maintain the character of these areas.
2 4 172 Added sentence to last bullet: Except for the one identified east-west
road, this General Plan’s circulation network omits any public streets
through property owned by Southern California Edison in the Southeast
Area, as depicted in Figures M-8 and FA-9.
Page 230
Volume Chapter Page Revision
2 4 173 Figure M-8: Changed legend for Day Creek Channel from Recommended
Park to Open Space
3 1 230 Added new Resource Conservation Policy as follows:
RC-7.15 Utility Preservation. Public and private development within the
City, including multi-purpose trails, shall not interfere with safe and
reliable transmission, storage, and generation of electricity. With the
exception of utility infrastructure and other public improvements that do
not interfere with such infrastructure, permanent structures are not
allowed within utility corridors.
4 1 273 Added new action item in Table WP-3 as follows: Healthy Development
Checklist. Continue to update with current best practices and use the
Healthy Development checklist, or similar assessment tool, to assess the
overall health performance and supportiveness of new development
projects.
4 1 276 Added action item to Table WP-3: Fiscal Impact Analyses. Establish
additional procedures and tools to consider the financial benefits and
impacts of development at the project approval level based on
anticipated full life-cycle costs and value per acre.
4 1 295-
296
Added additional Standards Conditions of Approval under Hazards and
Hazardous Materials Section as follows:
5.9-2. With respect to all open space, recreational, or parkland uses, the
City will ensure through project design features and conditions of
approval that Southern California Edison (SCE)has 24/7 downline access
by SCE facilities and operations.
5.9-3. With respect to parkland proposed within utility corridors, anti-
climbing sharks teeth style barriers, or their equivalent, shall be installed
on all transmission towers. Anti-climbing devices shall conform to the
California Public Utilities Commission guidance that is in effect at the time
of parkland project implementation. The cost of anti-climbing guards and
installation shall be borne by the project proponent.
5.9-4. Any proposed trees within utility corridors should be maintained at
a height not to exceed 15 feet.
5.9-5. With the exception of utility infrastructure and other public
improvements that do not interfere with such infrastructure, permanent
structures are not allowed within utility corridors.
5.9-6. Southern California Edison (SCE)shall be notified in writing of any
proposal to locate parkland or recreational uses within a utility corridor. If
the use is located on SCE property or if otherwise required by law or the
terms of a utility easement, SCE’s written approval of such uses shall be
obtained prior to the issuance of any CEQA approval or permit or other
ministerial or discretionary City approval.
Page 231
STRATEGIC ECONOMICS | 2991 SHATTUCK AVE. BERKELEY, CA 94705 | 510.647.5291
MEMORANDUM
To: Jean Ward, General Plan Update Project Manager, City of Rancho Cucamonga
From: Derek Braun and Heather Bromfield, Strategic Economics
Date: October 29, 2021
Project: City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Subject: Fiscal Impact Analysis Results and Technical Information
This memorandum describes the results of Strategic Economics’ fiscal impact analysis of potential
future growth under the buildout program for the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s General Plan 2020, or
“PlanRC.” The fiscal impact analysis measured the net revenue impact of projected growth on the
City’s largest operating funds—including the General Fund, the Fire Fund, and two fire protection
community facilities district funds—by calculating associated increases in revenues and expenditures.
The assumptions regarding the amounts and types of new growth were based on the buildout program
generated by consultant PlaceWorks in conjunction with other General Plan consultant team
members. Strategic Economics worked closely with staff from several City departments throughout
development of the fiscal impact analysis. This memo summarizes the fiscal impact analysis results
and provides detailed information about the approach, assumptions, and methodology applied in the
analysis.
Page 232
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 2
About Fiscal Impact Analysis
A fiscal impact analysis measures the impact of new development and associated municipal services
on a city’s budget. New residents and businesses create demand for city services (such as public
safety) and facilities (such as parks and streets), but also provide increased sales tax, property taxes,
other local taxes, and other revenues. The net fiscal impact reflects the revenues minus the costs that
growth is expected to generate. This fiscal impact analysis is focused on the ongoing operations and
maintenance impacts of new growth in Rancho Cucamonga on the following funds:
The General Fund, which is the primary operating fund for the City
The Fire Protection District operating fund (“Fire Fund”)
The two fire Community Facilities Districts, which are operating funds for fire protection special
districts corresponding to geographically defined areas of the City.
The analysis does not include projections of one-time capital expenses such as infrastructure or
facilities that may be required to accommodate new development. The analysis also excludes impacts
on other special districts, enterprise funds and other agencies that are funded independently of these
operating funds, such as the library fund, school districts, and landscape maintenance districts. Note
that references to the Fire Protection District account for all revenues and expenditures associated
with the Fire Fund and the two fire Community Facilities Districts.
The analysis presented here is “static,” in that it only projected fiscal impacts for one year upon build-
out of the growth program, rather than providing annual projections of revenues and costs as the city
grows over time. All revenue and cost projections are presented in 2021 dollars.
Fiscal impact analysis requires long-range projections of the future and is therefore best used to
understand which components of the buildout program generate revenues and costs, and to
understand the relative magnitude of revenues and costs. Fiscal impact analysis uses the best
available data to generate assumptions for projecting future revenues and expenses. These revenues
and costs are derived from existing and historic conditions. However, build-out will occur over the long
term, and conditions may change significantly—for example, the COVID-19 pandemic may have
ongoing implications for Rancho Cucamonga’s fiscal outlook—but any long-term revenue, cost, and
budget structure impacts are not yet known. Finally, this fiscal impact analysis is not based on a
measurement of the market feasibility of the growth scenario, but instead relies on a hypothetical
buildout program based on the land use plan.
Page 233
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 3
Land Use and Urban Design Buildout Program
The fiscal impact analysis was conducted based on growth under PlanRC’s buildout program, matching
the types and quantities of commercial and industrial uses and the total quantity of housing units—
but with a variation in the mix of the types of housing units, as explained below. Projected growth of
commercial and residential uses is summarized in Figure 1, below. Market and development
conditions over time will ultimately determine whether actual growth in Rancho Cucamonga matches
this buildout program by 2040.
The fiscal impact analysis assumed that 85 percent of new housing units would consist of dwelling
units (DUs) in multifamily buildings, with the remainder consisting of single-family homes. This housing
mix differed from the program studied in the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the PlanRC
general plan update, which assumed a future condition matching today’s housing unit mix in Rancho
Cucamonga in which 29 percent of dwelling units consist of DUs in multifamily buildings or buildings
other than single-family homes. The fiscal impact analysis’ housing mix incorporated consideration of
the fiscal outcomes of a potential long-term shift toward increased production of multifamily housing,
per the General Plan’s emphasis on growth within specific focus areas and the city’s limited remaining
land to accommodate additional single-family homes.
While both the fiscal impact analysis and DEIR analysis incorporated the same total number of housing
units, the different assumptions in housing mix applied a relatively conservative approach for each
analysis. The fiscal impact analysis’ higher share of multifamily housing avoids overstating property
tax and related revenues since DUs in multifamily buildings are associated with lower assessed values
than single family homes.1 Meanwhile, the DEIR’s higher share of single-family homes avoids
understating environmental impacts of growth since single-family homes are often associated with
higher land consumption and automobile trip generation compared to multifamily homes.
1 Inclusion of a higher share of DUs in multifamily buildings does result in a smaller increase in “service population” compared to a
scenario with a higher share of single-family homes, since average household sizes are larger in single-family homes. However, the
fiscal analysis found that growth in revenues would significantly exceed growth in costs if a higher share of future DUs were assumed
to consist of single-family homes.
Page 234
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 4
Figure 1: PlanRC Buildout Program
Land Use Number of Square Feet/
Number of Housing Units
Residential*
Single-Family Homes 3,944
Housing Units in Multifamily Buildings:
Market-Rate 17,393
Units in 100% Affordable Projects 4,348
Total Units in Multifamily Buildings 21,741
Total, Residential Units 25,685
Commercial
Office (square feet) 1,080,000
Industrial (square feet):
Warehouse/Distribution 8,000,000
Manufacturing 3,000,000
Retail (square feet) 2,720,800
Hotel (rooms) 1,179
*The housing unit mix differs from the PlanRC DEIR mix; see explanation in preceding paragraph.
Sources: PlaceWorks, 2021; Strategic Economics, 2021.
Page 235
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 5
Summary of Results
The PlanRC buildout program is projected to generate a significantly positive net fiscal impact,
generating about $25.2 million net annual revenue at full build-out. This net revenue is the
total for all operating funds considered in this analysis. The General Fund accounts for $13.9
million of this projected revenue, while the Fire Protection District accounts for $11.3 million.
Note that the Fire Protection District revenues include those from both the Fire Fund and the
two fire Community Facilities Districts.
Property tax and “Property Tax In-Lieu of Vehicle License Fee” (VLF) constitute the largest
sources of revenue associated with the buildout program. Property tax accounts for $23.9
million of projected revenue, nearly 80 percent of which will accrue to the Fire Protection
District. Property Tax In-Lieu of VLF accounts for $13.5 million in revenue, all of which accrues
to the General Fund. Together, property tax and Property Tax In-Lieu of VLF account for 65
percent of total revenue for the operating funds considered in this analysis.
The largest projected expenditures attributable to serving growth in the buildout program are
associated with the Sheriff’s Department contract ($13.5 million) and the Fire Protection
District ($10.4 million). These two departments are projected to account for 75 percent of all
new City expenditures associated with serving growth under the General Plan buildout
program.
The fiscal impact analysis found that growth in the buildout program will generate high net
positive revenues relative to total revenue associated with growth. The analysis found that the
cost of providing services for new growth in the buildout program will be significantly lower
than the additional revenue generated by growth. Net revenue as a percent of total new
revenue was projected at 39 percent for the General Fund and 52 percent for the Fire
Protection District. The analysis found that the buildout plan results in a high net positive fiscal
impact because new residential and commercial property will generate a significant amount
of property tax revenue and related tax revenue, while staff from City departments determined
that few significant new recurring expenditures will be needed in order to serve anticipated
growth in the City’s residential and employee populations.
Page 236
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 6
FIGURE 2: PROJECTED ANNUAL GENERAL FUND IMPACT OF THE PLANRC BUILDOUT PROGRAM, IN 2021 DOLLARS
Revenue or Expense Item General Fund
Fire Protection
District Total
Revenue
Property Tax $4,989,000 $18,872,000 $23,861,000
Property Transfer Tax $691,000 -- $691,000
Sales Tax (including Prop 172 1/2 cent sales tax) $6,689,000 -- $6,689,000
Property Tax In Lieu of VLF $13,471,000 -- $13,471,000
Transient Occupancy Tax $4,422,000 -- $4,422,000
Other Recurring Revenues $5,220,000 $119,000 $5,338,000
CFD 85-1 -- $2,201,000 $2,201,000
CFD 88-1 -- $477,000 $477,000
Total Revenues $35,482,000 $21,669,000 $57,150,000
Expenditures
Sheriff's Department $13,499,000 -- $13,499,000
Fire Department -- $10,373,000 $10,373,000
Public Works $3,670,000 -- $3,670,000
Other Recurring Expenditures $4,384,000 -- $4,384,000
Total Expenditures $21,554,000 $10,373,000 $31,927,000
Net Revenue $13,928,000 $11,296,000 $25,223,000
Net Revenue as % of Total Revenue 39% 52% 44%
Note: Columns may not sum due to rounding.
Source: Strategic Economics, 2021.
Page 237
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 7
Definitions, Assumptions, Data Sources, and Methodology
This section describes the methodology used to conduct the fiscal impact analysis of the PlanRC
buildout program. The fiscal impact model used for this analysis was “static” and measured fiscal
impacts at build-out, rather than a dynamic model that shows revenues and costs for every year.
The following definitions apply in this memo and are shared across the many technical documents
developed to describe and analyze growth in PlanRC:
Planning Period: This is the 20-year period for the General Plan Update that spans from
2020 through 2040.
Buildout: The citywide projected land use development scenario for the planning period.
Estimate: When applied to descriptive data regarding an existing condition, “estimate” refers
to a current figure, usually derived from a city, state, or regional source.
Projection: A calculation of a future condition, typically starting with an estimate and applying
a growth factor or other customized analysis.
Population: The City will use the 2040 projection of 233,088 as the planning period
population for this planning effort. The figure is based on the land use scenario that is
comprised of focus areas and citywide incremental growth used in the traffic analysis and
subsequent reports.
Density. While individual projects will have a range of densities, for calculations single family
residential is assumed to average a density of 6 units per acre and other housing an average
12 units per acre.
BASE ASSUMPTIONS
BUDGET YEAR
The analysis was based on Rancho Cucamonga’s audited budget actuals for the 2018-2019 Fiscal
Year, shown in Figure 4 on the following page. At the time that this analysis was conducted, this budget
year was the most recent fiscal year for which budget actuals were available. Budget data was
supplemented by data collected from City departments regarding the service costs related to new
development.
EXISTING SERVICE POPULATION
To calculate certain costs and revenues on a per capita basis, an existing service population – or
“daytime population” of residents and workers – must be established. The service population refers
to an equivalent population, incorporating residents and employees, for which a city provides services.
Rancho Cucamonga had an estimated population of 175,201 residents and 80,637 workers
according to the California Department of Finance (January 1, 2019) and an analysis conducted by
Stanley Hoffman (2019), respectively. Each worker was counted as producing one-third of the impacts
of a resident for analytical purposes, since workers are assumed to consume fewer services compared
to residents (parks, recreation, etc.). Workers who also live in Rancho Cucamonga were excluded from
the calculation of the existing worker population to avoid double counting these individuals’ impact on
service needs and revenue generation. The current service population is shown in Figure 3.
Page 238
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 8
FIGURE 3: SERVICE POPULATION IN RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 2019
Population Type Number
Residents 175,201
Employees 80,637
Share of Employees Who Also Live in Rancho Cucamonga 13.4%
Total Employees, Excl. Rancho Cucamonga Residents 69,832
Employee Factor 0.33
Total Service Population 198,246
Sources: California Department of Finance, 2019; Strategic Economics, 2020.
FIGURE 4: RANCHO CUCAMONGA OPERATING FUNDS BUDGETS, FY 2018-2019 AUDITED ACTUAL VALUES
General Fund Fire Fund CFD 85-1 CFD 88-1
Total, All
Operating
Funds
Revenues
Property Tax $8,346,906 $25,667,880 -- -- $34,014,786
Parcel Tax -- -- $6,018,990 $1,250,595 $7,269,585
Property Transfer Tax $1,201,287 -- -- -- $1,201,287
Property Tax In-Lieu of VLF $19,347,973 -- -- -- $19,347,973
Sales Tax $32,803,372 -- -- -- $32,803,372
Transient Occupancy Tax $4,054,058 -- -- -- $4,054,058
Franchise Fees $6,657,152 -- -- -- $6,657,152
Licenses and Permits $4,663,050 -- -- -- $4,663,050
Fines and Forfeitures $1,472,772 -- -- -- $1,472,772
Use of Money and Property $1,154,293 -- -- -- $1,154,293
Charges for Services $4,725,687 -- -- -- $4,725,687
Intergovernmental $208,153 -- -- -- $208,153
Other $3,833,551 $3,266,193 $60,065 $1,188,383 $8,348,192
Transfers In $1,758,800 -- $1,758,800
Total, All Revenues $90,227,053 $28,934,073 $6,079,056 $2,438,978 $127,679,160
Expenditures (by Category for General Fund Only)
Admin Services $7,616,436 -- -- -- --
Animal Care and Services $3,254,794 -- -- -- --
Building & Safety $1,750,622 -- -- -- --
Community Services Admin $4,743,342 -- -- -- --
Economic and Community
Development $692,945 -- -- -- --
Engineering $2,328,722 -- -- -- --
Finance $1,713,622 -- -- -- --
Governance $2,422,447 -- -- -- --
Human Resources $992,126 -- -- -- --
Innovation & Tech $4,954,156 -- -- -- --
Planning $2,799,602 -- -- -- --
Police Department $39,324,233 -- -- -- --
Public Works $10,090,222 -- -- -- --
Records Management $432,923 -- -- -- --
Total, All Expenditures $83,116,192 $24,345,443 $6,052,766 $2,439,447 $115,953,848
Note: Library services were excluded from the analysis since the Library Fund receives separate and independent funding.
Sources: Rancho Cucamonga Finance Department, 2021; Strategic Economics, 2021.
Page 239
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 9
RESIDENTIAL AND EMPLOYEE DENSITY BY BUILDING TYPE
Figure 5 shows the assumptions for the number of residents per household and square feet per
employee which were used to calculate the number of new residents and workers associated with
growth in the buildout program. Resident and worker density figures were developed by consulting firm
PlaceWorks and reflect typical densities for buildings in the area.
FIGURE 5: SERVICE POPULATION ASSUMPTIONS
Land Use Per Value
Residential
Household Size, Single-Family Homes Unit 3.026
Household Size, Multifamily Buildings Unit 2.47
Commercial
Office Square Foot 255
Industrial
Warehouse Square Foot 1,484
Manufacturing Square Foot 1,484
Retail/Restaurant Square foot 400
Hotel Room 1
Sources: PlaceWorks, 2021; US Green Building Council LEED BC+C: New Construction Appendix 2, Table 1; Vallen and Vallen, "Chapter 1:
The Traditional Hotel Industry," Check-In, Check-Out, 2012"; Strategic Economics, 2021.
SERVICE POPULATION FOR BUILDOUT PROGRAM
Figure 6 shows the projected service populations associated with each land use, derived from the
buildout program shown in Figure 1, the employee factor shown in Figure 3, and the
employee/household density assumptions shown in Figure 5. Because the analysis only examined
costs and revenues associated with growth, the change in employees was not studied for land uses
for which the buildout program anticipates a net loss of square feet.
FIGURE 6: PROJECTED INCREASE IN ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES, RESIDENTS, AND SERVICE POPULATION BY LAND USE
Land Use
Number of
Employees/Residents
Residential
Single-Family Homes 11,935
Multifamily Housing Units 53,700
New Residents 65,635
Commercial
Office 4,235
Industrial
Warehouse/Distribution 5,391
Manufacturing 2,022
Retail 6,802
Hotel 1,179
New Employees 19,629
Total Service Population 72,113
Source: Strategic Economics, 2021.
Page 240
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 10
LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
PROPERTY OCCUPANCY, TURNOVER, AND ASSESSED VALUE ASSUMPTIONS
Figure 7 shows land use assumptions, including holding period (sales turnover), vacancy rates, and
occupancy rates, each of which is explained below. These figures were multiplied by the estimated
property value per housing unit or square foot of anticipated new development.
Holding period: A holding period is the length of time between changes in ownership of property. The
holding period is used to calculate property transfer taxes. Strategic Economics assumed a 15-year
period for commercial and residential multifamily properties, and a 7-year period for single-family
homes, based on experience and industry standards.
Vacancy: Occupancy and vacancy rates were used to determine the actual revenues and costs
generated by properties, given that buildings are not usually fully occupied. Unoccupied spaces would
not generate workers or residents, nor, on the revenue side, retail sales or transient occupancy tax
(where applicable). The analysis applied long-term vacancy rates typically assumed by developers.
Single-family homes: The value of single-family homes was estimated based on a review of sales prices
per square foot and typical sizes of new single family detached homes in Rancho Cucamonga using
data from the real estate brokerage firm Redfin. To best approximate the sales price of new homes,
sales prices were analyzed for homes built 2015 or later in Rancho Cucamonga, with transaction dates
from 2018 through 2020. During this period, average sales prices per square foot were $277, and the
average size of homes sold was 3,027 square feet. The fiscal impact analysis incorporated an
assumed value of $825,000 for new single-family homes, based on an assumed size of 3,000 square
feet and assumed sales price of $275 per square foot.
Multifamily values per home: Values for market rate multifamily housing units were developed using
a capitalized value approach based on likely achievable rents. Strategic Economics estimated the
capitalized value using multifamily apartment rents per square foot and average unit sizes based on
comparable properties in Rancho Cucamonga according to data from real estate data firm CoStar.
Capitalization rates as of the second half of 2019 were reported by CBRE. Below market rate units
were presumed to be included in 100 percent affordable housing developments, which are not subject
to property taxes. For this reason, their valuations were not calculated.
Office: The value of office space was calculated using a capitalized value approach, which involves
gathering information on average annual warehouse and manufacturing rents for properties in the
market area, subtracting out expected losses due to vacancies and other expenses, and multiplying
by the capitalization rate for the given market and property type. Industrial rents per square foot as of
2021 were reported by CoStar, and capitalization rates as of 2019 were reported by commercial real
estate brokerage firm CBRE.
Industrial: The value of industrial space, including both warehouse and manufacturing, was also
calculated using a capitalized value approach. Industrial rents per square foot as of 2021 were
reported by CoStar, and capitalization rates as of 2019 and 2020 (for manufacturing and warehouse,
respectively) were reported by commercial real estate brokerage firm CBRE.
Retail/Service value: Similar to the office and industrial valuations, the value of retail space was
calculated using a capitalized value approach. Retail rents per square foot as of 2020 within the
submarket were estimated based on data from CoStar.
Page 241
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 11
Hotel value: The value of hotels was calculated using a capitalized value approach. Hotel revenue was
calculated using reported gross daily room rates for the Rancho Cucamonga submarket. Additional
hotel income, occupancy rate, and operating expense assumptions were derived from industry
standard assumptions. Capitalization rates as of the second half of 2019 were based on CBRE data.
FIGURE 7: KEY LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS
Land Use Value Per:
Holding Period
(years)
Vacancy
Rate
Occupancy
Rate
Turnover
Rate Per
Year
Residential
Single-Family Homes $825,000 Dwelling Unit 7 5% 95% 14%
Multifamily Housing $465,537 Dwelling Unit 15 5% 95% 7%
Commercial
Office $260 Sq Ft 15 5% 95% 7%
Industrial
Warehouse/Distribution $203 Sq Ft 15 5% 95% 7%
Manufacturing $182 Sq Ft 15 5% 95% 7%
Retail $408 Sq Ft 15 5% 95% 7%
Hotel $182,029 Room 15 5% 95% 7%
Source: Strategic Economics, 2021.
Estimating Revenues
This section summarizes assumptions for property tax, property tax in-lieu of vehicle license fees, sales
tax, and transient-occupancy tax.
PROPERTY TAX, PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX, AND PROPERTY TAX IN-LIEU OF VEHICLE LICENSE FEES
(VLF)
Annual property tax revenue: Per California’s Proposition 13, the base property tax rate in Rancho
Cucamonga is one percent of assessed property value. The apportionment of the one percent revenue
varies by jurisdiction and by tax rate areas in each jurisdiction; for the purposes of this analysis,
Strategic Economics examined the overall share of Rancho Cucamonga’s one percent that is received
on average citywide. Rancho Cucamonga’s General Fund receives 3.30 percent of the one percent tax
revenue after accounting for the contribution to the Library Fund, per data provided by the City’s
Finance Department. The City’s Fire District receives an additional 12.48 percent of the one percent.
The property tax rate was applied to estimated assessed values of new growth in the buildout program
to determine property tax revenue.
About three quarters of projected property tax revenue will come from residential development, as
shown in Figure 8. Note that housing projects which are 100% affordable are not subject to property
tax levies, and the projected revenues below therefore reflect only those of market-rate residential
properties.
Page 242
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 12
FIGURE 8: PROPERTY TAX REVENUE, IN 2021 DOLLARS
Land Use General Fund
Fire Protection
District
Total Property Tax
Revenue
Residential
Single-family homes $1,073,434 $4,060,742 $5,134,176
Multifamily housing $2,671,210 $10,105,043 $12,776,252
Subtotal, Residential $3,744,644 $14,165,785 $17,910,428
Commercial
Office $92,636 $350,438 $443,075
Industrial
Warehouse/Distribution $534,441 $2,021,760 $2,556,201
Manufacturing $180,022 $681,014 $861,036
Retail $366,219 $1,385,388 $1,751,607
Hotel $70,801 $267,836 $338,637
Subtotal, Commercial $1,244,119 $4,706,436 $5,950,555
Total $4,988,763 $18,872,221 $23,860,984
Source: Strategic Economics, 2021.
Property Transfer Tax: As a General Law city, Rancho Cucamonga receives $.55 per $1,000 of the
assessed value of properties sold in the city. Annual property transfer tax revenue was calculated by
multiplying the assessed value by the average turnover rate (to project the value of property sold
annually), and then by a generalized rate of 0.055 percent (Figure 9).
Page 243
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 13
FIGURE 9: PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX, IN 2021 DOLLARS
Land Use Revenue
Residential
Single-family homes $255,656
Multifamily housing $296,890
Subtotal, Residential $552,545
Commercial
Office $10,296
Industrial
Warehouse/Distribution $59,400
Manufacturing $20,008
Retail $40,703
Hotel $7,869
Subtotal, Commercial $138,277
Total $690,822
Source: Strategic Economics, 2021.
Property Tax In-Lieu of Vehicle License Fees (VLF): Since 2004, the State of California has swapped
city and county vehicle license fee revenues for additional property tax revenues. The property tax
payment provided in-lieu of the VLF grows proportionally to a city’s assessed value. Figure 10 shows
the calculation of property tax in-lieu of VLF revenue per dollar of assessed value, based on Rancho
Cucamonga’s total estimated assessed value in FY 2004-2005 and the final revised in-lieu payment
from the State for the same fiscal year, and Figure 11 shows the projected property tax in-lieu of VLF
that is anticipated for each land use in the buildout program.
FIGURE 10: PROPERTY TAX IN-LIEU OF VLF ASSUMPTIONS
Total Estimated Citywide Assessed Value (FY 2004-05) $12,541,601,225
Citywide VLF Property Tax In-lieu Revenue (FY 2004-05) $9,209,981
VLF Property Tax In-lieu Per $1,000 Assessed Value $0.734354
Source: Strategic Economics, 2021.
Page 244
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 14
FIGURE 11: PROPERTY TAX IN-LIEU OF VLF BY LAND USE, IN 2021 DOLLARS
Land Use Value
Residential
Single-family homes $2,389,443
Multifamily housing $5,946,060
Subtotal, Residential $8,335,503
Commercial
Office $382,377
Industrial
Warehouse/Distribution $2,206,019
Manufacturing $743,080
Retail $1,511,649
Hotel $292,246
Subtotal, Commercial $5,135,371
Total $13,470,874
Source: Strategic Economics, 2021.
SALES TAX
Anticipated sales tax revenues reflect the revenues generated by taxable purchases that new residents
and workers will make at brick-and-mortar retail stores in Rancho Cucamonga, as well as sales from
by consumers from outside of the City who will make purchases within Rancho Cucamonga.2 To project
these revenues, Strategic Economics calculated the taxable sales per square foot of retail building
area in 2019 using data from the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration and from real
estate analytics firm CoStar, shown in Figure 12. The taxable sales per square foot value was then
multiplied by the number of new retail square feet in the buildout program. Strategic Economics
examined potential resident and worker spending and determined that the chosen approach accounts
for sales potentially generated and captured from resident spending, worker spending, and shoppers
from outside Rancho Cucamonga.
Revenue from Proposition 172, the San Bernardino County half cent sales tax, was projected using
the ratio of Proposition 172 revenue to general citywide sales tax collected in FY2018-2019, which
was $19.10 per $1,000 of general sales tax. This value was then multiplied by the new projected sales
tax revenue (Figure 13).
2 In addition to the sales tax revenue from retail sales, there may be additional business-to-business sales tax revenues from companies
that purchase office equipment, business services, and other taxable goods and services. These revenues were excluded from this analysis
because of the variability in the types of businesses may eventually occupy new commercial space, which may or may not generate taxable
sales.
Page 245
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 15
FIGURE 12: SALES TAX REVENUE INPUTS AND DERIVED ASSUMPTIONS
Value
Total Citywide Retail and Food Services, 2019 $2,035,711,144
Rentable Building Area (RBA) of Retail in Rancho Cucamonga, 2019 8,438,552
Taxable Sales per Square Foot of RBA $241
Prop 172 Revenue Factor (per $1,000 of sales tax generated) $19.10
Source: Strategic Economics, 2021.
FIGURE 13: SALES TAX CALCULATIONS AND PROJECTED REVENUES, IN 2021 DOLLARS
Value
Taxable Sales per Square Foot of Retail RBA $241
New Retail Square Feet 2,720,800
Total new taxable sales: retail $656,364,135
Sales Tax Revenue $6,563,641
Prop 172 Sales Tax Revenue $125,361
Total Sales Tax Revenue $6,689,002
Source: Strategic Economics, 2021.
TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX
The Rancho Cucamonga buildout program included hotels which will collectively add 1,179 new hotel
rooms to the City. Strategic Economics applied an average hotel occupancy rate and average daily rate
per room based on a review of data for hotels in the market area, and the City’s scheduled transient
occupancy tax rate of 10 percent. The projected transient occupancy tax revenue was calculated to be
$4.4 million, as shown in Figure 14.
FIGURE 14: TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX ASSUMPTIONS AND REVENUE
Value or Factor
Number of Rooms 1,179
Average Rate per Room $137
Average Occupancy Rate 75%
TOT Rate 10%
Daily Availability 365
Total TOT Revenue $4,421,692
Source: Strategic Economics, 2021.
FIRE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT REVENUES
Rancho Cucamonga has two Community Facilities Districts (CFDs) for fire protection, CFD 85-1 and
CFD 88-1, which correspond to defined geographic areas within the City. CFD revenues are generated
by parcel taxes that are assessed by land use and contribute funding to the City’s Fire Protection
District. To estimate future revenues, Strategic Economics tabulated the approximate number of units
Page 246
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 16
and building square feet that are anticipated in each of the CFDs’ geographic boundaries according to
data provided by Rancho Cucamonga City staff. Most citywide residential and commercial growth was
projected to occur in CFD 85-1, as shown in Figure 15. Based on fee schedules for FY 2018-2019 for
each of the CFDs provided by the City’s Finance Department, the projected revenues for CFD 85-1
were approximately $2.2 million and for CFD 88-1 were approximately $477,000 shown in Figure 16
and Figure 17.
FIGURE 15: BUILDOUT PROGRAM BY COMMUNITY FACILITY DISTRICT
Land Use
New Units (Residential) or Square Feet (Commercial)
CFD 85-1 CFD 88-1 Other Areas Citywide Total
Single-Family 99 3,366 479 3,944
Multifamily 18,805 763 2,173 21,741
Office 945,089 0 134,911 1,080,000
Industrial 10,051,173 0 948,827 11,000,000
Retail 1,778,046 526,289 416,465 2,720,800
Hotel 958 71 150 1,179
Sources: City of Rancho Cucamonga, 2021; Strategic Economics, 2021.
Page 247
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results October 29, 2021 17 FIGURE 16: PROJECTED REVENUES FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT 85-1, IN 2021 DOLLARS Property Type Fee per unit or per sq ft [1] Fee per acre (commercial and industrial only) Presumed number of units per multifamily property category (residential only) [2] Share of total multifamily projects [3] Number of total units or square feet Number of Properties Total acres (commercial and industrial only) [4] Annual Fees [5] Residential Single Family & Condos $144.12 -- -- -- 99 $14,268 Multifamily 5-14 DU 7 15% 2,893 413 $220,388 15-30 DU 0 0% 0 0 $0 31-80 DU 70 23% 4,340 62 $230,067 81-UP DU 200 62% 11,572 58 $594,154 Commercial Properties Retail $0.08 $144.12 1,778,046 6 $139,553 Hotel [6] $0.08 $144.12 385,880 7 $31,094 Industrial $0.10 $144.12 10,051,173 115 $971,489 Total Fees $2,201,013 [1] Note that fees are levied on either a land area or on building square feet based on which is larger. A review of recently completed comparable projects determined that the square foot approach typically generates greater revenues. See CFD 85-1 fee schedule, FY 2018-2019. [2] Reflects the average number of units in recently completed projects (2010 onward) in Rancho Cucamonga and Ontario. [3] Assumptions developed based on a review of recently completed (2010 onward) multifamily projects in Rancho Cucamonga and Ontario. [4] Acreage assumptions developed by calculating FAR of recently built comparable projects for each land use. [5] For calculation methodology, See CFD 85-1 fee schedule, FY 2018-2019. [6] The 958 hotel rooms projected in the buildout program were assumed to correspond to approximately 8 hotel projects, based on a review of the size of recently built hotel properties in Rancho Cucamonga and Ontario. The calculated square footage of hotel development is calculated as eight times the size of the RBA of a representative hotel property in Rancho Cucamonga. Sources: City of Rancho Cucamonga, 2021; Strategic Economics, 2021. Page 248
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 18
FIGURE 17: PROJECTED REVENUES FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT 88-1, IN 2021 DOLLARS
Land Use/Residential
Size Category
Residential Floor Area
(in square feet)
Special Tax per unit
or per Sq Ft
Projected Number of
Units or Sq Ft [1] Total Annual Revenue
Residential
Residential Class 1 > 3,590 $144.12 2,020 $291,065
Residential Class 2 3,077-3,589 $110.86 337 $37,315
Residential Class 3 2,564-3,076 $88.69 0 $0
Residential Class 4 2,308-2,563 $77.60 337 $26,120
Residential Class 5 2,051-2,307 $66.52 673 $44,781
Residential Class 6 1,795-2,050 $60.97 0 $0
Residential Class 7 < 1,759 $55.43 763 $42,293
Commercial
Retail -- $0.06 526,289 $32,104
Hotel -- $0.06 48,235 $2,942
Total Revenue $476,621
[1] Assumptions for residential class size were developed based on a review of recently constructed (2005 onward) homes in or near the
CFD 88-1 boundaries. For the hotel land use, the 71 units in the buildout program were assumed to correspond to one hotel property based
on a review of recently constructed hotel properties in Rancho Cucamonga and Ontario. The analysis assumes building square feet for a
single property to be equivalent to that of a hotel built in Rancho Cucamonga in 2021.
Sources: City of Rancho Cucamonga, 2021; Strategic Economics, 2021.
OTHER RECURRING REVENUES
Calculating other revenue per capita: Strategic Economics consulted with the Rancho Cucamonga
Finance Department to determine which remaining General Fund and Fire Fund revenue categories
vary with service population growth, which are shown in Figure 18. The “percent variable” values reflect
the degree to which revenues are anticipated to vary in relationship to the new residents and
employees being added to the area. Revenue sources which do not change as a function of the number
of the service population in a jurisdiction, such as “Use of Money and Property,” were assigned percent
variable values of zero. While revenue sources that vary partially as a function of the service population
in a jurisdiction were assigned values between 0 and 100 percent, those which are completely
dependent on population change were assigned values of 100 percent.
For all the revenue sources that vary on a per capita basis, Strategic Economics applied a service
population factor of either 1.00 or .33 to reflect the respective service demand for new residents and
employees. The value of the variable revenues was multiplied by the respective service population
factor, and then divided by the current total current service population in order to generate an estimate
of the current total revenues per capita for each service population type by expense category. Finally,
these per capita factors were multiplied by the new service populations to arrive at additional revenues
associated with residential and worker growth. The results of these projections are shown in Figure
19.
Page 249
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results October 29, 2021 19 FIGURE 18: OTHER RECURRING REVENUE PER CAPITA ASSUMPTIONS, 2021 DOLLARS Revenue (2018-19 Audited) Variable Revenues Service Pop. Factors Revenue Per Capita % Variable Resident Employee Resident Employee General Fund Revenues Franchise Fees $6,657,152 100% $6,657,152 1.00 0.33 $33.58 $11.08 Licenses and Permits $4,663,050 25% $1,165,763 1.00 0.33 $5.88 $1.94 Fines and Forfeitures $1,472,772 100% $1,472,772 1.00 0.33 $7.43 $2.45 Use of Money and Property $1,154,293 0% $0 1.00 0.33 $0.00 $0.00 Charges for Services $4,725,687 65% $3,071,696 1.00 0.33 $15.49 $5.11 Intergovernmental $208,153 0% $0 1.00 0.33 $0.00 $0.00 Other $3,833,551 15% $575,033 1.00 0.33 $2.90 $0.96 Transfers In $1,758,800 80% $1,407,040 1.00 0.33 $7.10 $2.34 Total General Fund Revenues $72.38 $23.89 Fire Protection District Other Revenues $3,266,193 10% $326,619 1.00 0.33 $1.65 $0.54 Sources: City of Rancho Cucamonga FY18-19 Audited Budget Actuals; Strategic Economics, 2021. FIGURE 19: OTHER RECURRING REVENUES, IN 2021 DOLLARS New Residents/ Employees New Residents 65,635 New Employees 19,629 Increase in Net General Fund Revenues $5,219,688 Increase in Net Fire Protection District Revenues $118,809 Sources: Strategic Economics, 2021. Page 250
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 20
Expenditure Projections
A “case study” approach was used to calculate several of Rancho Cucamonga’s most significant
departmental operating fund expenditure items that will be impacted by new growth, including the Fire
Protection District, Sheriff’s Department contract, and Public Works.3 Strategic Economics consulted
closely with staff in these departments to determine preferred approaches and assumptions for
estimating the annual service impact of the growth in Rancho Cucamonga, including approval of the
final approaches, methodologies, and assumptions. Growth of other expenses, which individually
comprise relatively small shares of the General Fund and are more likely to increase incrementally
with population growth, were projected on a per capita basis. Note that funding for recurring costs for
many city departments in Rancho Cucamonga is commonly generated via special districts which
assess taxes on new development, meaning that new residential and commercial development has a
relatively limited impact on the City’s General Fund compared to many other jurisdictions in California.
FIRE DISTRICT AND FIRE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICTS
In consultation with the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District staff, Strategic Economics
developed cost projections of increased fire protection needs while maintaining current service levels.
Based on historical data on calls for service by land use (Figure 20), projections were developed for
the total number of new calls associated with new growth within each CFD and overall. The total cost
of each call for service was calculated using the total departmental budget for FY 2018-2019 divided
by the total number of calls. This cost per call figure was then multiplied by the projected new number
of service calls associated with the buildout program. For the purposes of this analysis, all
expenditures for the Fire District and Community Facilities District were calculated together. However,
the share of service calls anticipated within the geographic boundaries of the CFDs are provided for
reference in Figure 21. The total projected service expenditure is $10.7 million (Figure 22).
FIGURE 20: FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT CALLS FOR SERVICE ASSUMPTIONS BY LAND USE
Land Use Per
Calls per year per
1,000 building square
feet or per unit/room
Number of Building Square Feet or Units/Rooms
CFD 85-1 CFD 88-1 Outside CFDs
New
Units/Square
Feet, Total
Single-Family Unit 0.175433 99 3,366 479 3,944
Multifamily Unit 0.15526 18,805 763 2,173 21,741
Office Square feet 0.145707 945,089 0 134,911 1,080,000
Industrial Square feet 0.037187 10,051,173 0 948,827 11,000,000
Retail Square feet 0.142894 1,778,046 526,289 416,465 2,720,800
Hotel Units 0.0732999 958 71 150 1,179
Note: Number of calls for service on roadways and in recreation/open space facilities excluded from analysis.
Source: Stanley Hoffman Associates, 2019; City of Rancho Cucamonga, 2021; Strategic Economics, 2021.
3 All other departmental expenditures were assumed to increase in direct proportion to the service population and were calculated on a per
capita basis rather than using a case study approach. The expense estimates for these departments are shown in the final section.
Page 251
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 21
FIGURE 21: PROJECTED FIRE PROTECTION CALLS FOR SERVICE BY LAND USE AND CFD
Land Use CFD 85-1 CFD 88-1 Outside CFDs Total, Citywide
Single-Family 17 591 84 692
Multifamily 2,920 118 337 3,376
Office 138 0 20 157
Industrial 374 0 35 409
Retail 254 75 60 389
Hotel 70 5 11 86
Total 3,773 789 547 5,109
Share 74% 15% 11%
Source: Strategic Economics, 2021.
FIGURE 22: ESTIMATED TOTAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT EXPENDITURES, IN 2021 DOLLARS
Expenditures Number
Fire District Expenditures, 2018-2019 $32,837,656
Total Fire Calls for Service, 2018-2019 16,174
Cost per call for Service $2,030
New Calls for Service 5,109
Total Cost, New Calls for Service $10,372,757
Sources: Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, 2021; Strategic Economics, 2021.
SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT
Policing services in Rancho Cucamonga are provided on a contract basis via the San Bernardino
County Sheriff’s Department. Based on input from the City of Rancho Cucamonga Finance
Department, costs were projected under the assumption that that staffing levels relative to the service
population in Rancho Cucamonga would be maintained at their present-day level. Based on input from
the Sheriff’s Department, future expenditures were projected by calculating an average cost per call
for service using data from FY 2018-2019. This cost per call for service was calculated by identifying
budget line items in the Sheriff Department contract that are anticipated to increase as a function of
calls for services and assigning them appropriate percent variable values, shown in Figure 23. The
total value of variable expenses was then divided by the total number of calls for service in 2019.
Projected expenditures were calculated by multiplying the anticipated number of new calls for service
associated with the new residential and employee population by the cost per call for service value,
shown in Figure 24.
Page 252
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 22
FIGURE 23: SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT EXPENDITURES FY2018-19 AND VARIABLE COST ASSUMPTIONS
Budget Category Expenditures Percent variable Variable cost
Sheriff's Department Contract (Personnel) $36,450,968 100% $36,450,968
Vehicle Maintenance Costs $550,565 100% $550,565
Vehicle Operations and Maintenance $199,707
Vehicle Collision Repair $46,036
Gasoline $304,822
Equipment, Training, and Travel $108,518 100% $108,518
Travel and Meetings $21,617
Training $39,060
Office Supplies and Equipment $46,460
Membership Dues $1,380
Facilities Operations and Maintenance $154,542 0% $0
Other $2,056,602 0% $0
Total $39,321,195 $37,110,051
Source: City of Rancho Cucamonga, 2021; Strategic Economics, 2021.
FIGURE 24: PROJECTED SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT EXPENDITURES, IN 2021 DOLLARS
Projected New Expenditures
Calls for service, 2019 155,929
Service population, 2019 198,246
Residents 175,201
Employees 69,832
Employee service factor 0.33
Calls per resident 0.79
Call per employee 0.26
Estimated Variable Cost $37,110,051
Cost per Call for Service $237.99
New Resident Population 65,635
New Employee Population 19,629
New Projected Calls for Service, Residents 51,625
New Projected Calls for Service, Employees 5,095
Total New Calls for Service 56,720
New Projected Sheriff's Contract Expenses $13,498,972
Source: City of Rancho Cucamonga, 2021; Strategic Economics, 2021.
Page 253
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 23
PUBLIC WORKS
The Public Works department maintains the City’s open space, street landscapes, traffic signals, street
markings on City rights-of-way, and certain City public facilities. The budgetary impacts associated with
new growth include removing additional debris on streets, more frequent maintenance of street
markings due to additional traffic on City roadways, and may include the maintenance of new needed
public facilities. New street landscaping and parks are generally paid for via existing or new community
facilities districts and were therefore excluded from this analysis.
The Public Works department reported that commercial buildings, industrial buildings, and denser,
infill multifamily buildings—where most new units will be added according to the buildout program—
tend to have a low budgetary impact because property owners assume the responsibility of
maintaining landscaping. Department staff noted that the General Fund may need to bear greater
costs for street maintenance over time if state gas tax revenues or replacement revenues continue to
decline or fail to keep pace with service population growth, and if Measure I funding expires.4 While it
was outside the scope of this analysis to study possible structural budget changes, General Fund
expenditures for street maintenance costs per new employee or resident could potentially increase
over time if state gas tax and other outside revenues do not keep pace with growth.
At the recommendation of Public Works Department staff, future Public Works expenditures were
projected using the existing department budget for FY 2018-2019 on a per service population basis,
which calculates to $50 per service population. This figure was then multiplied by the new service
population to be added according to the buildout program, Figure 25. This approach incorporates an
implicit assumption that the City’s current level of service continues. While this is a standard approach
for a fiscal impact analysis at the scale and timeframe of a General Plan analysis, Public Works
Department staff noted that operations and maintenance needs are currently underfunded and that
fiscal impact analyses for individual development projects should incorporate cost assumptions based
on meeting higher service standards for addressing any impacts of those projects’ new residents and
workers.
FIGURE 25: PUBLIC WORKS EXPENDITURES, IN 2021 DOLLARS
Value
Budget in 2018-2019 $10,090,222
Service Population, 2018-2019 201,811
Cost per Service Population $50
New Service Population 72,113
Total New Expenditures $3,605,521
Sources: City of Rancho Cucamonga, 2021; Strategic Economics, 2021.
OTHER RECURRING COSTS
Strategic Economics used a per capita approach to calculate other departmental General Fund
expenditures (Figure 26). As with the per capita revenues, Strategic Economics applied a service
population factor to each expense category, representing the relative proportion of expenses
4 Measure I is a voter-approved half-cent sales tax measure used to fund transportation improvements in San Bernardino County.
The current measure runs through 2040.
Page 254
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results
October 29, 2021 24
attributable to new residents (1.0) and employees (0.33). The value of the variable costs was
multiplied by the respective service population factor, and then divided by the current total current
service population to generate an estimate of the current total costs per capita for each service
population type by expense category. Finally, these per capita factors were multiplied by the respective
new service population in the buildout program to arrive at additional costs associated with residential
and worker growth, shown in Figure 27.
Page 255
PlanRC Fiscal Impact Analysis Results October 29, 2021 25 FIGURE 26: OTHER RECURRING DEPARTMENTAL EXPENDITURES, IN 2021 DOLLARS Expenditures (FY 2018-2019 Audited) % Variable Variable Cost Service Pop. Factors Expenditures Per Capita Resident Employee Resident Employee General Fund Expenditures Assumptions Admin Services $7,616,436 5% $380,822 1.00 0.33 $1.92 $0.63 Animal Care and Services $3,254,794 75% $2,441,095 1.00 0.33 $12.31 $4.06 Building & Safety $1,750,622 50% $875,311 1.00 0.33 $4.42 $1.46 Community Services Admin $4,743,342 100% $4,743,342 1.00 0.33 $23.93 $7.90 Economic and Community Development $692,945 10% $69,295 1.00 0.33 $0.35 $0.12 Engineering $2,328,722 50% $1,164,361 1.00 0.33 $5.87 $1.94 Finance $1,713,622 15% $257,043 1.00 0.33 $1.30 $0.43 Governance $2,422,447 15% $363,367 1.00 0.33 $1.83 $0.60 Human Resources $992,126 10% $99,213 1.00 0.33 $0.50 $0.17 Innovation & Tech $4,954,156 15% $743,123 1.00 0.33 $3.75 $1.24 Planning $2,799,602 25% $699,901 1.00 0.33 $3.53 $1.17 Records Management $432,923 50% $216,461 1.00 0.33 $1.09 $0.36 Net Variable General Fund Expenditures $33,701,737 $60.80 $20.06 Note: Does not include costs analyzed in departmental case studies. Sources: City of Rancho Cucamonga FY2018-2019 Budget Actuals; Strategic Economics, 2021. FIGURE 27: OTHER RECURRING DEPARTMENTAL EXPENDITURES TOTAL, IN 2021 DOLLARS New Population New Residents 65,635 New Employees 19,629 Increase in Net General Fund Expenditures $4,384,462 Source: Strategic Economics, 2021. Page 256
ATTACHMENT 5
Public Hearing Draft General Plan (December 2021), 2021-2029 Housing Element (December 2021) and
Climate Action Plan (September 2021)
Due to file size, these documents can be accessed through the following link:
https://www.cityofrc.us/GeneralPlan
Page 257
ATTACHMENT 6
Draft EIR and Final EIR
Due to file size, these documents can be accessed through the following link:
https://www.cityofrc.us/GeneralPlan
Page 258
Resolution No. 2021-132 - Page 1 of 6
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-132
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA ADOPTING ENVIRONMENTAL
FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, CERTIFYING THE
FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE PLANRC 2020 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE (SCH
2021050261), ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND ADOPTING A
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM.
A. RECITALS
WHEREAS, the PlanRC General Plan Update (the “Project”) would consist of a
comprehensive update to the City of Rancho Cucamonga (the “City”) General Plan in
accordance with the City’s vision for the future. The Project would emphasize protection of
existing residential neighborhoods and targeting new residential, office and commercial growth
along major corridors (such as Foothill Boulevard) and other areas south of Foothill Boulevard
(such as Haven Avenue) where development opportunities exist on vacant and underutilized
properties; and
WHEREAS, the Project includes a new Climate Action Plan (“CAP”) as a companion to
the PlanRC General Plan Update to reduce the community’s contributions to climate change to
build on the broad climate change policies set forth in the PlanRC 2040; and
WHEREAS, the Project also includes a comprehensive update to the City’s Housing
Element for years 2021-2019, which represents the City’s effort to fulfill its requirements under
State housing element law to meet the mandate that all cities and counties prepare a housing
element as part of a comprehensive general plan to meet the plan for new housing growth
mandated through the Regional Housing Needs Assessment, of which the City has been
allocated 10,525 units for the 6th cycle housing element update period; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) (Public Res.
Code, § 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR § 15000 et seq.), the City
Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (“Council”) is the lead agency for the Project, as the
public agency with authority to approve and implement the Project; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060 and 15168, the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, as lead agency, determined that a Program Environmental Impact Report
(“PEIR”) would clearly be required for the Project pursuant to CEQA in order to analyze all
adverse environmental impacts of the Project; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) identifying the scope of environmental
issues to be analyzed in the PEIR was distributed to numerous State, federal, and local
agencies, organizations, and interested persons on May 10, 2021, with comments requested by
June 9, 2021 pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines sections 15082(a), 15103 and 15375. A total
of six comment letters were received and are included in Appendix 2-2 and summarized in
Table 2-1 of the Draft PEIR (“Draft PEIR”). Relevant comments received in response to the
NOP were incorporated into the Draft PEIR; and
Page 259
Resolution No. 2021-132 - Page 2 of 6
WHEREAS, a public scoping meeting was held on May 18, 2021 and input from the
public providing direction and scope of the EIR was received; and
WHEREAS, a Draft PEIR was prepared for the Project in accordance with CEQA and
the State CEQA Guidelines, where the City analyzed the Project’s environmental impacts; and
WHEREAS, the Draft PEIR was distributed for a 45-day public review period on
September 10, 2021, with the comment period expiring on October 25, 2021. Eight comment
letters were received during the public comment period. The City prepared written responses to
all comment received on the PEIR, and those responses to comments are incorporated into the
Final PEIR. The responses to comments were distributed to all public agencies and all
individuals that provided comments during the comment period at least 10 days prior to
certification as required by CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the PEIR concludes that, even with the inclusion of standard conditions of
approval, which function as mitigation measures, the Project may have a significant and
unavoidable impact on several environmental resources. Accordingly, the City Council must
adopt a statement of overriding considerations in order to approve the Project; and
WHEREAS, as a result of public comments received during the Draft PEIR’s public
comment period, as well as during public meetings regarding the PlanRC General Plan Update,
certain revisions were made to the Project and included in a revised City Council Public Hearing
Draft of the PlanRC General Plan Update, including the following: (1) changed Land Plan
Designation for APN: 106117219 from Rural Open Space to General Open Space; (2) updated
the Suburban Neighborhood – Moderate Non-Residential Intensity to Max 0.3 Floor Area Ratio;
(3) added Policy LC-1.16 requiring the use of a Healthy Development Checklist to assess the
health performance of development projects; (4) added Policy LC-5.8 to continue to protect
equestrian uses and to implement the Equestrian Overlay Zone; (5) revise Policy LC-7.1 to
provide that Haven and 4th Street are envisioned for higher intensity urban environmental,
consistent with the Central South Community Planning Area; (6) encourage bike and pedestrian
activity along segments of Arrow Route through Cucamonga Town Center; (7) clarified that Day
Creek Channel is recommended for Open Space, rather than Parkland; (8) clarified that except
for one east-west road, no public streets are planned through property owned by Southern
California Edison; and (7) added additional standard conditions of approval and policies to
protect utility infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, the City analyzed each of the changes to the Project identified in the
December 2021 Public Hearing Draft, and concluded that some of the changes would likely
reduce the significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the Draft PEIR, but would not
change the Draft PEIR’s overall conclusions; and
WHEREAS, the City prepared a Final PEIR in accordance with CEQA, which is
comprised of the Draft PEIR, and all appendices thereto, the comments and responses to
comments, and the mitigation monitoring and reporting program, including all appendices
thereto; and
WHEREAS, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program requires the City to
implement applicable standard conditions of approval on future development within the City and
to report on compliance with the implementation of those measures; and
Page 260
Resolution No. 2021-132 - Page 3 of 6
WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion (“NOC”) was sent with the Draft PEIR to the State
Clearinghouse on December 3, 2021; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held a public
hearing to consider the PlanRC General Plan Update, the Draft PEIR, and staff
recommendations, on November 10, 2021. Notice of this Planning Commission hearing was
provided through publication on October 25, 2021; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga after a duly
noticed public hearing, recommended that the City Council certify the EIR, make findings
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and adopt a statement of overriding
considerations, including with the revisions described above in the Public Hearing Draft; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held a public hearing to
consider the PlanRC General Plan Update, the Final PEIR, all comment letters received on the
PEIR, any oral testimony provided, and staff recommendations, on December 15, 2021. Notice
of this City Council hearing was provided through publication on December 3, 2021.
B. RESOLUTION
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
1. Recitals. The City Council hereby finds that all of the facts set forth in the
Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Findings. Based upon the information and evidence set forth in the Final PEIR,
together with its appendices, and all other available evidence that has been presented at the
hearings and in the record of the proceedings, including the staff reports, technical studies,
appendices, plans, specifications, and other materials that constitute the record of the
proceedings on which this Resolution is, the City Council hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The City has endeavored in good faith to set forth the basis for its
decision on the Project.
b. All of the requirements of CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and the
City’s Local CEQA Guidelines have been satisfied in the EIR, which is sufficiently detailed so
that all of the significant environmental effects of the Project have been adequately evaluated.
c. Agencies and interested members of the public have been afforded
ample notice and opportunity to comment on the EIR and the Project.
d. The revisions to the Public Hearing Draft were identified to the Planning
Commission and, in any event, the City Council finds that the revisions are minor in nature and
do not affect the Planning Commission’s recommendation because they do not affect the
improvements to be constructed, uses, or densities previously outlined in the Project as
presented to the Planning Commission.
e. Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires that the City,
before approving the Project, make one or more of the following written findings for each
significant effect identified in the Final PEIR accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale
Page 261
Resolution No. 2021-132 - Page 4 of 6
for each finding: (1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in
the final EIR; or, (2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of
another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been
adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency; or, (3)
Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or
project alternatives identified in the final EIR. These required findings are set forth in the
attached Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference.
i. Environmental impacts identified in the Final PEIR as less than
significant and not requiring mitigation are described in Section III.B of Exhibit A, attached
hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
ii. Environmental impacts identified in the Final PEIR as significant
but which the City finds cannot be fully mitigated to a level of less than significant, despite the
imposition of all feasible mitigation measures, including standard conditions of approval,
identified in the Final PEIR and set forth herein, are described in Section III.C of Exhibit A,
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
iii. Alternatives to the PlanRC General Plan Update that might
eliminate or reduce significant environmental impacts are described in Section IV of Exhibit A,
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and
f. Sections 15092 and 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines require that if a
project will cause significant unavoidable adverse impacts, the City must adopt a Statement of
Overriding Considerations prior to approving the project. A Statement of Overriding
Considerations states that any significant adverse project effects are acceptable if expected
project benefits outweigh unavoidable adverse environmental impacts.
g. A discussion of the project benefits and a Statement of Overriding
Considerations for the environmental impacts that cannot be fully mitigated to a less than
significant level are set forth in Section IV of Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein
by this reference; and
h. Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and CEQA Guidelines Section
15091 require the City to prepare and adopt a mitigation monitoring and reporting program for
any project for which mitigation measures have been imposed to assure compliance with the
adopted mitigation measures. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is attached
hereto as Exhibit C, and is hereby incorporated herein by reference. Further, the mitigation
measures in the form of standard conditions of approval set forth therein are made applicable to
the Project and will be imposed where appropriate to future development within the City.
i. Prior to taking action on the Final PEIR to approve the Project, the City
Council reviewed, considered and has exercised its independent judgment on the Final PEIR
and all of the information and data in the administrative record, and all oral and written
testimony presented to it during meetings and hearings and finds that the Final PEIR is
adequate and was prepared in full compliance with CEQA. No comments or any additional
information submitted to the City have produced any substantial new information requiring
recirculation or additional environmental review of the Project under CEQA; and
Page 262
Resolution No. 2021-132 - Page 5 of 6
j. The Final PEIR reflects the City Council’s independent judgment and
analysis.
3. Determination. On the basis of the foregoing and all of the evidence in the
administrative record before it, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby
certifies the Final PEIR, adopts findings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, as
set forth in Exhibit A incorporated herein by reference; adopts the Statement of Overriding
Considerations set forth in Exhibit A incorporated herein by reference; adopts the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference, and
imposes each mitigation measure as a condition of Project approval. City staff shall implement
and monitor the mitigation measures as described in Exhibit B.
4. Location of Record. The documents and other materials, including the staff
reports, technical studies, appendices, plans, and specifications, that constitute the record on
which this Resolution is based are on file for public examination during normal business hours
at the Planning Department located at City of Rancho Cucamonga City Hall, 10500 Civic Center
Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. All such documents are in the custody of the Planning Director and
are incorporated herein by reference.
5. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 15th day of December 2021.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
____________________________________
L. Dennis Michael, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________________
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
I, JANICE C. REYNOLDS, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved and
adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a Regular Meeting
of said City Council on the 15th day of December 2021.
Executed this 15th day of December 2021, at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
____________________________________
Page 263
Resolution No. 2021-132 - Page 6 of 6
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
Page 264
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 1 -
Exhibit A
CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT
AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
REGARDING THE
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2021050261
I. INTRODUCTION
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that a number of written findings be made
by the lead agency in connection with certification of an environmental impact report (EIR) prior to
approval of the project pursuant to Sections 15091 and 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines and Section
21081 of the Public Resources Code. This document provides the findings required by CEQA. The
potential environmental effects of the proposed City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
project (proposed project) have been analyzed in a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) (State
Clearinghouse [SCH] 2021050261) dated September 2021. A Final EIR has also been prepared that
incorporates the Draft EIR and contains comments received on the DEIR, responses to the individual
comments, revisions to the DEIR including any clarifications based on the comments and the
responses to the comments, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the proposed
project (MMRP). This document provides the findings required by CEQA for approval of the
proposed project.
A. STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR FINDINGS
The CEQA (Pub. Res. Code §§ 21000, et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Guidelines) (14 Ca.
Code Regs §§ 15000, et seq.) promulgated thereunder, require the environmental impacts of a project
be examined before a project is approved. Specifically, regarding findings, Guidelines Section 15091
provides:
(a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has
been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects
of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings
for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of
the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are:
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect as identified in the FEIR.
2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction
of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such
Page 265
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 2 -
changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be
adopted by such other agency.
3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations,
including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained
workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives
identified in the FEIR.
(b) The findings required by subsection (a) shall be supported by substantial
evidence in the record.
(c) The finding in subdivision (a)(2) shall not be made if the agency making the
finding has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal with
identified feasible mitigation measures or alternatives. The finding in
subsection (a)(3) shall describe the specific reasons for rejecting identified
mitigation measures and project alternatives.
(d) When making the findings required in subdivision (a)(1), the agency shall also
adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has
either required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or
substantially lessen significant environmental effects. These measures must
be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other
measures.
(e) The public agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents
or other material which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which
its decision is based.
(f) A statement made pursuant to Section 15093 does not substitute for the
findings required by this section.
The “changes or alterations” referred to in Section 15091(a)(1) above, that are required in, or
incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects of the
project, may include a wide variety of measures or actions as set forth in Guidelines Section 15370,
including:
(a) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an
action.
(b) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation.
(c) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the impacted
environment.
(d) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and
maintenance operations during the life of the action.
Page 266
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 3 -
(e) Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources
or environments.
Page 267
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 4 -
Regarding a Statement of Overriding Considerations, Guidelines Section 15093 provides:
(a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the
economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide
or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project against its
unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the
project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits,
including region-wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposal [sic]
project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse
environmental effects may be considered "acceptable."
(b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence
of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not
substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to
support its action based on the final EIR and/or other information in the
record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by
substantial evidence in the record.
(c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement
should be included in the record of the project approval and should be
mentioned in the notice of determination. This statement does not substitute
for, and shall be in addition to, findings required pursuant to Section 15091.
B. CERTIFICATION
Having received, reviewed, and considered the EIR for the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan
Update Project State Clearinghouse No. 2021050261, as well as other information in the record of
proceedings on this matter, the City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council adopts the following Findings
(Findings) and Statement of Overriding Considerations, in its capacity as the legislative body for the
City of Rancho Cucamonga (City), which is the CEQA Lead Agency. The Findings and Statements of
Overriding Considerations set forth the environmental and other bases for current and subsequent
discretionary actions to be undertaken by the City and responsible agencies for the implementation of
the proposed project.
In addition, the City of Rancho Cucamonga City Council (City Council) hereby make findings pursuant
to and in accordance with Section 21081 of the California Public Resources Code and State CEQA
Guidelines Sections 15090 and 15091 and hereby certifies that:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
(2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of
another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes
have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by
such other agency.
Page 268
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 5 -
(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations,
including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers,
make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in
the Final EIR.
C. PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT AND DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
The FEIR addresses the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects of future construction
and operation activities associated with the proposed project. The FEIR provides the environmental
information necessary for the City to make a final decision on the requested discretionary actions for
all phases of this project. The FEIR was also intended to support discretionary reviews and decisions
by other responsible agencies. Discretionary actions to be considered by the City may include, but are
not limited to, the following:
Certify that the FEIR for the proposed project has been completed in compliance with CEQA,
and reflects the independent judgement and analysis of the City; find that the City Council has
reviewed and considered the information contained in the FEIR prior to approving the project;
adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, finding that the Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program, which is inclusive of standard conditions of approval applicable to future
development within the City, is adequately designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation
measures and standard conditions of approval during project implementation; and determine that
the significant adverse effects of the project either have been reduced to an acceptable level, or are
outweighed by the specific overriding considerations of the project as outlined in the CEQA
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, as set forth herein.
Approve the proposed project and related discretionary actions needed for future implementation
of the proposed project.
II. PROCEDURAL COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT
The City published a DEIR on September 10, 2021. A FEIR was prepared in the December 2021 in
compliance with CEQA requirements. The FEIR has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and
the CEQA Guidelines, as amended. As authorized in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15084(d)(2), the
City retained a consultant to assist with the preparation of the environmental documents. City staff
from multiple departments, representing the Lead Agency, have directed, reviewed, and modified
where appropriate all material prepared by the consultant. The FEIR reflects the City’s independent
analysis and judgement. The key milestones associated with the preparation of the EIR are summarized
below. As presented below, an extensive public involvement and agency notification effort was
conducted to solicit input on the scope and content of the EIR and to solicit comments on the results
of the environmental analysis presented in the DEIR.
Page 269
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 6 -
A. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND OUTREACH
In conformance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga CEQA
Guidelines, the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted an extensive environmental review of the
proposed project.
Completion of a Notice of Preparation (NOP) on May 13, 2021. The public review period
extended from May 13, 2021, to June 11, 2021. The NOP was published in the Inland Valley Daily
Bulletin on May 7, 2021. The NOP was posted at the San Bernardino County Clerk’s office on May
14, 2021. A copy of the NOP was made available for public review on the City’s website.
Completion of the scoping process where the public was invited by the City to participate in a
scoping meeting held via Zoom on May 18, 2021 at 6:00 PM. The notice of a public scoping
meeting was included in the NOP.
Preparation of a Draft EIR (DEIR), which was made available for a 45-day public review period
beginning September 10, 2021, and ending October 25, 2021. The scope of the DEIR was
determined based on the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Checklist, comments received in
response to the NOP, and comments received at the scoping meeting conducted by the City of
Rancho Cucamonga. Section 2.3 of the DEIR describes the issues identified for analysis in the
DEIR. The Notice of Availability (NOA) for the DEIR was sent to interested persons and
organizations, sent to the State Clearinghouse in Sacramento for distribution to public agencies,
posted at the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin. The
NOA was posted at the San Bernardino County Clerk’s office on September 10, 2021. The Notice
of Availability of the DEIR was published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on September 10, 2021.
Preparation of a Final EIR (FEIR), including the responses to comments to the DEIR. The FEIR
was released for a 10-day agency review period prior to certification of the FEIR.
Public hearings on the proposed project, including a Planning Commission hearing and a City
Council hearing.
In summary, the City conducted all required noticing and scoping for the proposed project in
accordance with Section 15083 of the CEQA Guidelines, and conducted the public review for the EIR,
which exceeded the requirements of Section 15087 of the CEQA Guidelines.
B. FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND CITY COUNCIL
PROCEEDINGS
The City prepared a FEIR, including Responses to Comments to the DEIR. The FEIR/Response to
Comments contains comments on the DEIR, responses to those comments, revisions to the DEIR,
and appended documents. A total of eight comment letters were received.
The DEIR found that, despite the implementation of General Plan policies and standard conditions
of approval intended to minimize of avoid significant impacts to the environments, certain impacts to
the following would remain significant and unavoidable. Therefore, the City prepared a Statement of
Overriding Considerations for the following impacts found to be significant and unavoidable:
Page 270
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 7 -
Aesthetics (cumulative impacts only)
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Mineral Resources (cumulative impacts only)
Noise
Transportation
Wildfire (cumulative impacts only)
Members of the public can view searchable agendas for scheduled City Council meetings and access
agenda-related City information and services directly on the following website:
https://www.cityofrc.us/your-government/city-council-agendas.
The FEIR document will be posted for viewing and download with the previously posted DEIR prior
to the City’s consideration of the FEIR and project recommendations on the City’s website.
A date for consideration of the FEIR and project recommendations at the City Council was set for the
proposed project and notice of the meeting was provided consistent with the Brown Act (Government
Code Sections 54950 et seq.). The City Council took testimony on the proposed project in conjunction
with the public hearing for the proposed project.
C. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
For purposes of CEQA and these Findings, the Record of Proceedings for the proposed project
consists of the following documents and other evidence, at a minimum:
The NOP, NOA, and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the proposed
project.
The DEIR and FEIR for the proposed project.
All written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public review
comment period on the DEIR.
All responses to written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the
public review comment period on the DEIR.
All written and verbal public testimony presented during a noticed public hearing for the proposed
project.
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
The reports and technical memoranda included or referenced in the FEIR.
Page 271
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 8 -
All documents, studies, EIRs, or other materials incorporated by reference in the DEIR and FEIR.
The Resolutions adopted by the City in connection with the proposed project, and all documents
incorporated by reference therein, including comments received after the close of the comment
period and responses thereto.
Matters of common knowledge to the City, including but not limited to federal, state, and local
laws and regulations.
Any documents expressly cited in these Findings.
Any other relevant materials required to be in the record of proceedings by Public Resources Code
Section 21167.6(e).
D. CUSTODIAN AND LOCATION OF RECORDS
The documents and other materials that constitute the administrative record for the City's actions
related to the project are at the City of Rancho Cucamonga – Planning Department, 10500 Civic Center
Drive, City of Rancho Cucamonga. The City Planning Division is the custodian of the administrative
record for the project. Copies of these documents, which constitute the record of proceedings, are and
at all relevant times have been and will be available upon request at the offices of the Planning Division.
This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(2) and
Guidelines Section 15091(e).
E. PROJECT LOCATION
The City of Rancho Cucamonga is in the Inland Empire in southwestern San Bernardino County,
California. The City is surrounded by developed municipalities to the west, south, and east including
the cities of Upland, Ontario, and Fontana and a large area of rural unincorporated San Bernardino
County to the north and east. The northernmost portion of the City’s Sphere of Influence (SOI) is
adjacent to the San Bernardino National Forest. Interstate and regional access to the City is provided
by Interstate 15 (I-15), which runs in a general north-south direction and bisects the eastern portion
of the City, and by State Route 210 (SR-210), an east-west freeway that runs through the center of
the City. The I-10 freeway also provides regional access and is located approximately 0.75-mile south
of the City boundary.
F. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
Objectives for the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update which will aid decision makers in
their review of the proposed project and associated environmental impacts, are as follows:
1. Provide a human-scaled design, with buildings and outdoor spaces oriented towards people
connected by safe and comfortable streets, pathways, and trails that provide equitable access
for all.
2. Focus transformative growth along major corridors and allowing incremental change in the
neighborhoods.
Page 272
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 9 -
3. Increase jobs in the City to encourage more residents to work locally and reduce commuting
out of the City to work.
4. Maintain and enhance conservation areas.
5. Create vibrant activity nodes and a “real downtown” with one or several major activity centers,
with varied cultural opportunities and public art providing areas for social, civic, and
commercial activity.
G. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project is an update of the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s General Plan. The General Plan is a state-
required legal document that provides guidance to decision-makers regarding the allocation of
resources and determining the future physical form and character of development in the City and its
SOI. It is the official statement of the City regarding the extent and types of development needed to
achieve the community’s physical, economic, social, and environmental goals. Although the General
Plan is composed of individual chapters that individually address a specific area of concern, the General
Plan embodies a comprehensive and integrated planning approach for the jurisdiction.
III. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS
A. FORMAT
Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that a Lead Agency make a finding for each significant
effect for the project. This section summarizes the significant environmental impacts of the project,
describes how these impacts are to be mitigated, and discusses various alternatives to the proposed
project, which were developed in an effort to reduce the remaining significant environmental
impacts. All impacts are considered potentially significant prior to mitigation or a project revision
through the incorporation of a standard condition of approval unless otherwise stated in the findings.
This remainder of this section is divided into the following subsections:
Section B, Findings on “No Impact” and “Less Than Significant Impacts,” presents
environmental issues, as identified in Chapter 5 of the DEIR, which would result in no impact or less
than significant impacts.
Section C, Significant and Unavoidable Impacts that Cannot be Mitigated to Below the Level
of Significance, presents significant impacts of the proposed project that were identified in the DEIR,
the findings for significant impacts, and the rationales for the findings.
Section IV, Alternatives to the Proposed Project, presents alternatives to the project and evaluates
them in relation to the findings set forth in Section 15091(a)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, which
allows a public agency to approve a project that would result in one or more significant environmental
effects if the project alternatives are found to be infeasible because of specific economic, social, or
other considerations.
Page 273
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 10 -
Section V, Statement of Overriding Considerations, presents a description of the proposed
project’s one significant and unavoidable adverse impact and the justification for adopting a statement
of overriding considerations.
Section VI, Findings on Responses to Comments on the DEIR and Revisions to the DEIR,
presents the City’s findings on the response to comments and revisions to DEIR, and decision on
whether a recirculated DEIR is necessary or not.
B. FINDINGS ON “NO IMPACT” AND “LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS”
Based on the environmental issue area assessment in the DEIR, the City determined that the proposed
project would have no impact or less than significant impacts for the environmental issues summarized
below. The rationale for the conclusion that no significant impact would occur in each of the issue
areas is based on the environmental evaluation in the listed topical EIR sections in Section 5 of the
DEIR.
Relevant General Plan policies are listed and numbered in the DEIR; additionally, applicable local,
state, and federal regulations, as well as standard conditions of approval also serve to prevent the
occurrence of, or reduce the significance of, potential environmental effects are included in the DEIR.
The EIR concluded that all or some of the impacts of the proposed project with respect to the
following issues either will not be significant or will be reduced to below a level of significance by
implementing standard conditions of approval or existing regulatory requirements as detailed in
Chapter 5 of the DEIR. CEQA Guidelines Section 15901 requires that an EIR may not be certified
for a project which has one or more significant environmental effects unless one of three possible
findings is made for each significance effect. Since the following environmental issue areas were
determined to have no impact or a less than significant impact, no findings for these issues are required.
1. Aesthetics
Impact 5.1-1: Development in accordance with the General Plan Update would not
substantially alter or damage scenic vistas or substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway. [Threshold AE-1 and AE-2]
The proposed project would allow for development, redevelopment, and intensification of land uses
in some areas of the City. Open space areas, parks, and agricultural lands that currently provide views
of scenic vistas would continue to be preserved under the General Plan Update. The generally low-
density residential uses, estate, and rural residential uses within or adjacent to these scenic vistas and
resources would also remain unchanged, thereby preserving views of these scenic vistas and resources.
The high elevation of the northern mountains ensures that they will remain a scenic backdrop to
Rancho Cucamonga and its SOI without interference from future development accommodated by the
General Plan Update. Design standards under the City’s municipal code guide future development
characteristics, such as height and placement of buildings and structures, setback requirements, and
architectural design parameters.
Page 274
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 11 -
There are no scenic highways in or near the City or SOI that would be adversely affected by future
development under the General Plan Update. Although views from the I-15 and SR-210 freeways
would change with future development, these freeway segments are not designated scenic highways.
Foothill Boulevard/Route 66 is considered an unofficial route by the City. Although future
development and redevelopment along the Foothill Boulevard/Route 66 corridor may alter views of
scenic resources, the place types, and focus areas approach taken with the General Plan will enhance
the streetscape and create a unified theme for this major corridor. Therefore, there would be no impact
to scenic vistas or highways by the General Plan Update and the City’s beautification master plans for
designated special boulevards, would ensure that special boulevards remain unaffected.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to aesthetics to less than significant levels.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially
lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.1-2: Buildout in accordance with the proposed land use plan would alter the
existing visual appearance of the City and SOI, but would not substantially
degrade its existing visual character or quality. [Threshold AE-3]
Future development and redevelopment facilitated under the General Plan Update would allow for
new development of currently undeveloped parcels and intensification of already developed areas in
Rancho Cucamonga. Although new development would alter the visual appearance of the City, because
the City is largely developed with urban and suburban uses, it would not substantially degrade Rancho
Cucamonga’s visual character or quality. Buildout proposed under the General Plan Update would
most often occur within areas that are already developed and urbanized, or areas that are planned for
development. Development under the General Plan Update would be required to comply with existing
City regulations that maintain the City’s character which would encourage high-quality design and
provide for well-designed and attractive development that promotes a sense of community.
Compliance with the City’s existing regulations, including standard conditions of approval, and the
General Plan Update policies, future development would be built to reflect and maintain Rancho
Cucamonga’s existing visual character and resources.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to aesthetics to less than significant levels.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially
lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.1-3: Development in accordance with the General Plan would not generate
substantial additional light and glare. [Threshold AE-4]
Sources of light in the City include building lighting (interior and exterior), security lighting, sign
illumination, sports fields lighting, and parking-area lighting. These sources of light and glare are mostly
associated with the residential, commercial, and industrial uses and the larger community parks in the
more developed areas of the City. Other sources of nighttime light and glare include streetlights,
vehicular traffic along surrounding roadways, and ambient lighting from surrounding communities.
Page 275
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 12 -
Development and redevelopment projects in the City would be required to comply with the design
guidelines for residential and commercial-industrial land, sign ordinance, and landscape design
guidelines. Future development and redevelopment would also be required to comply with the outdoor
lighting standards in Chapter 17.58 of the municipal code. The outdoor lighting standards require
lighting to be directed away and shielded from adjacent residential areas; prohibit the creation of areas
with intense light or glare; and call for the use of fences, walls, berms, screens, and landscaping to
reduce light and glare spillover. By ensuring that all future development projects comply with the
municipal code and General Plan Update policies pertaining to light and glare, any potential spillover
would be minimized.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to aesthetics to less than significant levels.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially
lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Impact 5.2-1: see Section C. Significant and Unavoidable Significant Impacts That Cannot be
Mitigated to Below the Level of Significance.
Impact 5.2-2: The proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract. [Threshold AG-2]
According to the proposed Land Use Plan, the lots that are currently vineyards and orchards would
be converted into urban uses as part of future, anticipated development.
The City does not have an agricultural land use designation in its existing land use plan or the
proposed Land Use Plan. The Development Code also does not have an agricultural zone, although
agricultural uses are allowed as an interim use on lots 2.5 acres or more in the Residential
Development Districts. Therefore, because the City has no zoning for agricultural use, no impact
would occur.
There are no lands in the city under a Williamson Act contract, and no impacts related to Williamson
Act contracts would occur.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to agriculture and forestry resources to less than
significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid
or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Page 276
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 13 -
Impact 5.2-3: The proposed project would not conflict with zoning for forest land or
timberlands, and would not result in the loss of forest land. [Thresholds AG-3
and AG-4]
There are no lands that qualify as forest land or timberland. Therefore, no impacts would occur related
to the loss or conversion of forest land to a non-forest use. There are also no areas within the Plan
Area that are zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. Therefore, no impacts would
occur.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to agriculture and forestry resources to less than
significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid
or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
3. Air Quality
Impact 5.3-1: The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
2016 Air Quality Management Plan. [Threshold AQ-1]
The 2016 AQMP control strategy strongly relies on a transition to zero and near-zero emission
technologies in the mobile source sector, including automobiles, transit buses, medium- and heavy-
duty trucks, and off-road equipment. There are several General Plan Update policies that ensure
consistency with the 2016 AQMP, and the City has prepared a Climate Action Plan (CAP) as a
companion document to the General Plan Update that includes a set of goals, strategies, and
measures with specific metrics and quantified GHG reduction estimates that will achieve greenhouse
gas (GHG) reductions from existing and future development in the City. These strategies and
measures would also have the effect of reducing air pollutant emissions under implementation of the
General Plan Update. The CAP strategies and measures would reduce both localized air pollutant
emissions within the City and regionwide emissions in the South Coast Air Basin.
The 2040 population projection for the City of Rancho Cucamonga in the RTP/SCS is 204,300, which
is less than the projected population for planning period buildout of the General Plan Update of
233,088. However, the General Plan Update, including the companion CAP document, are both
consistent with the goals of the RTP/SCS and would further AQMP goals through policies, strategies,
and measures that reduce air pollutant emissions from mobile, stationary, and areawide sources.
Therefore, the General Plan Update would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 2017
AQMP. This impact is less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to air quality to less than significant levels.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially
lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Page 277
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 14 -
Impact 5.3-2: see Section C. Significant and Unavoidable Significant Impacts That Cannot be
Mitigated to Below the Level of Significance.
Impact 5.3-3: see Section C. Significant and Unavoidable Significant Impacts That Cannot be
Mitigated to Below the Level of Significance.
Impact 5.3-4: The proposed project would not result in short- or long-term increases in
localized CO emissions that would exceed South Coast AQMD-recommended
thresholds. [Thresholds AQ-2]
As discussed in Section 5.3.4.1, Methodology, of Chapter 5.3, Air Quality, of the DEIR, all areas of the
SoCAB have remained below the federal standard level since 2003. The EPA redesignated the SoCAB
to attainment of the federal CO standards, effective June 11, 2007. There have been no exceedances
of the Stage 1 episode (federal alert) level (8-hour average CO greater ≥ 15 ppm) since 1997. The CO
concentrations are also well below the State standards. Buildout of the General Plan update would not
result in the increase in traffic volume required to generate a CO hotspot. While daily mass emissions
of CO are projected to exceed SCAQMD’s thresholds under Impact 5.3-3, in Chapter 5.3, Air Quality,
of the DEIR, the highest emissions of CO are projected from use of dispersed landscaping equipment
in the city. Therefore, CO emissions from idling vehicles are not anticipated to cause a localized impact.
Given that the SoCAB is in attainment for CO and is not projected to exceed the AAQS, it is not
anticipated that the General Plan Update would result in localized CO impacts, considering that
individual discretionary projects implemented under the General Plan Update would be dispersed
throughout the city. Additionally, federal and State vehicle emissions standards are anticipated to result
in a decrease in CO concentrations over time. These include the Corporate Average Fuel Economy
standards at the federal level and the Advanced Clean Cars Program in California, both of which set
fuel efficiency standards for vehicles.
For these reasons, local mobile-source CO emissions generated by future development that could be
accommodated under the General Plan Update would not result in or substantially contribute to
concentrations of CO that exceed the 1-hour or 8-hour California or National AAQS.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to air quality to less than significant levels.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially
lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.3-5: see Section C. Significant and Unavoidable Significant Impacts That Cannot be
Mitigated to Below the Level of Significance.
Page 278
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 15 -
Impact 5.3-6: The proposed project would not result in other emissions (such as those leading
to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people. [Threshold AQ-
4]
Future development and other physical changes that could occur as a result of General Plan Update
implementation could expose sensitive receptors to future development that could include odor
sources and may cause a nuisance. Additionally, new sensitive receptors could be exposed to existing
land uses that include odors and may result in a nuisance impact.
South Coast AQMD Rule 402 states: “A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such
quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance
to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health
or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury
or damage to business or property.” Enforcement of Rule 402 would serve to mitigate new odor-
generating land uses developed as a result of the General Plan Update that may cause a nuisance to
nearby sensitive receptors.
Minor odors from the use of heavy-duty diesel-powered equipment and the laying of asphalt during
construction activities would be intermittent and temporary. Due to the characteristics of diesel exhaust
emissions, odors generated from the use of heavy-duty diesel-powered equipment would dissipate
rapidly within 150 meters (492 feet). While construction would occur intermittently through the
General Plan planning horizon, these types of odor-generating activities would not occur at any single
location or within proximity to the same off-site receptors for an extended period of time and would
not result in permanent odor sources. Therefore, construction is not anticipated to result in substantial
odors.
Future nonresidential land uses or specific facilities in the city could generate odor emissions that could
be a nuisance. Specifically, industrial land uses have the potential to generate objectionable odors. Areas
where these types of uses could be developed under the General Plan Update would be generally
limited to the Neo-Industrial or Industrial Employment Districts in the southeast portion of the city.
Stand-alone residential uses would not be permitted in these districts. Industrial land uses associated
with the General Plan Update would also be required to comply with South Coast AQMD Rule 402.
In addition, the Land Use and Community Character Element of the General Plan includes land use
compatibility policies that would serve to reduce potential impacts from receptors near existing odors
sources. As a result, implementation of the General Plan Update would not result in odor impacts on
existing sensitive receptors or future sensitive receptors.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to air quality to less than significant levels.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially
lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Page 279
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 16 -
4. Biological Resources
Impact 5.4-1: see Section C. Significant and Unavoidable Significant Impacts That Cannot be
Mitigated to Below the Level of Significance.
Impact 5.4-2: Implementation of the proposed General Plan Update could impact sensitive
natural communities, including wetlands and riparian habitat. [Thresholds B-
2 and B-3]
The western edge of the Plan Area runs along Cucamonga Creek. Other creeks that flow through the
City include Deer Creek, Day Creek, and Etiwanda Creek. Riparian vegetation can be found along the
canyon bottoms in the northern portion of the Plan Area, predominantly within the SOI. Channels
occur within the Plan Area; some channels are dry while others have water. Open water occurs in
various natural and constructed catch basins throughout the Plan Area.
As shown in Table 5.4-1, Special Status Plant Species with Records in the Study Area, of the DEIR, at least
13 special status plant species are found in riparian and/or freshwater habitats. The goals and policies
in the Resource Conservation Element would help conserve, protect, and manage Rancho
Cucamonga’s biological resources. Standard conditions of approval 5.4-6 and 5.4-7 require developers
to obtain permits from the USACE and RWQCB for waters of the U.S. and from CDFW for waters
of the state. Compliance with these standard conditions of approval would ensure no net loss of waters
of the U.S. or waters of the state. Impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to biological resources to less than significant
levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or
substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.4-3: Development pursuant to the proposed General Plan Update would not
adversely impact wildlife movement in and surrounding the Plan Area.
[Threshold B-4]
The San Gabriel-San Bernardino Linkage is at the divide of the San Gabriel and San Bernardino
Mountains and includes the mountains and foothills north of and in the Plan Area. The linkage design
covers approximately 129,901 acres and has three roughly parallel routes to accommodate diverse
species and ecosystem functions. Natural vegetation makes up most of the linkage design but urban
and agricultural development covers approximately 1.8 percent of the area. The majority of the Plan
Area is developed and has little natural open space, and therefore, provides few wildlife movement
corridors. Existing corridors include creeks and open drainage canals, which connect wildlife to the
mountains to the north. The northern part of the Plan Area has large, contiguous open space areas and
areas designated for preservation in perpetuity.
Page 280
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 17 -
A number of migratory bird species are known to occur within the City where buildout of the proposed
project could impact these migratory birds through future development and removal of vegetation that
could be used for nesting. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act administered by the USFWS governs the
taking, killing, possession, transportation, and importation of migratory birds, their eggs, parts, and
nests. Additionally, California law, particularly relevant statues in the Fish and Game Code, provide
protections for birds and their active nests. Development in existing open space and undeveloped areas
of the Plan Area could result in habitat fragmentation and constrain wildlife movement that has
regional significance. The Resource Conservation Element of the proposed project includes policies
that would reduce impacts to wildlife corridors. Compliance with the MBTA, and adherence to the
General Plan policies and implementation of the standard conditions of approval (specifically 5.4-7)
would reduce impacts to less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to biological resources to less than significant
levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or
substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.4-4: Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance, adopted habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan. [Thresholds B-5 and B-6]
The City adopted the EHNCP in October 2019 that includes the conservation of alluvial fan and
foothills between the northernmost neighborhoods and the National Forest. Over 82 percent of the
EHNCP is in the Rural/Conservation area, which contains several existing and planned preserves,
numerous hiking trails, and natural features. These 3,603 acres of Rural/Conservation would provide
for a mix of conserved habitat mitigation lands and open space, existing open space preserves, and
very-low-density rural homes. The General Plan Update would designate this area Natural Open Space,
Rural Open Space, and General Open Space and Facilities, with the latter two designations allowing
residential development at very low densities. This would be consistent with the vision of the EHNCP.
Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with a conservation plan.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to biological resources to less than significant
levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or
substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
5. Cultural Resources
Impact 5.5-1: see Section C. Significant and Unavoidable Significant Impacts that Cannot be
Mitigated to Below the Level of Significance.
Page 281
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 18 -
Impact 5.5-2: Future development in the City that would be accommodated by the General
Plan Update could impact known and unknown archaeological resources.
[Thresholds C-2]
Adoption of the General Plan Update in itself would not directly affect archaeological resources. Long-
term implementation of the General Plan Update land use plan could include grading of known and
unknown sensitive areas. Grading and construction activities of undeveloped areas or redevelopment
that requires more intensive soil excavation than in the past could potentially cause disturbance of
archaeological resources. Therefore, future development that would be accommodated by the General
Plan Update could potentially unearth previously unrecorded resources. Archaeological sites are
protected by a variety of state policies and regulations under the California Public Resources Code.
Cultural resources are also recognized as nonrenewable and therefore receive protection under the
California Public Resources Code and CEQA. If the lead agency determines that the project may have
a significant effect on unique archaeological resources, the project-level CEQA document prepared for
the development project is required to address the issue of those resources. Long-term implementation
of the General Plan Update could include grading of unknown sensitive areas. Grading and
construction activities of undeveloped areas or redevelopment that require more intensive soil
excavation than in the past could potentially cause the disturbance of archaeological resources.
Therefore, future development could potentially unearth previously unknown/unrecorded
archaeological resources. The implementation of standard condition of approval 5.5-8 would reduce
impacts to less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to cultural resources to less than significant
levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or
substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.5-3: Grading activities could potentially disturb human remains. [Threshold C-3]
The General Plan Update includes policies which require measures to prevent impacts to human
remains and compliance with the California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
if human remains are found on a project site.
California Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5; CEQA Section 15064.5; and Public Resources
Code, Section 5097.98 mandate the process to be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of
any human remains in a location other than a dedicated cemetery. Although soil-disturbing activities
associated with development in accordance with the General Plan Update could result in the discovery
of human remains, compliance with existing law and proposed General Plan policies would ensure that
significant impacts to human remains would not occur.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to biological resources to less than significant
levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or
substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Page 282
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 19 -
6. Energy
Impact 5.6-1: Implementation of the General Plan Update would not result in potentially
significant environmental impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources. [Threshold E-1]
Overall, regulatory compliance (e.g., Building Energy Efficiency Standards, CALGreen, RPS, and
CAFE standards) would increase building energy efficiency and vehicle fuel efficiency and reduce
building energy demand and transportation-related fuel usage. Additionally, the General Plan Update
includes policies related to land use and transportation planning and design, energy efficiency, and
renewable energy which would contribute to minimizing building- and transportation-related energy
demands overall and demands on nonrenewable sources of energy. Implementation of proposed
policies of the General Plan Update in conjunction with and complementary to regulatory requirements
would ensure that energy demand associated with growth under the General Plan Update would not
be inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary. Therefore, energy impacts associated with implementation and
operation of land uses accommodated under the General Plan Update would be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to energy to less than significant levels.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially
lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.6-2: The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan
for renewable energy or energy efficiency. [Threshold E-2]
The state’s electricity grid is transitioning to renewable energy under California’s RPS Program.
Renewable sources of electricity include wind, small hydropower, solar, geothermal, biomass, and
biogas. The RPS goals have been updated since adoption of SB 1078 in 2002. The statewide RPS
requirements do not directly apply to individual development projects, but to utilities and energy
providers such as SCE.
The land uses accommodated under the General Plan Update would comply with the current and
future iterations of the Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen. As discussed in Impact
5.6-1, of the DEIR, the General Plan Update includes policies which would support the statewide goal
of transitioning the electricity grid to renewable sources. Therefore, implementation of the General
Plan Update would not conflict or obstruct implementation of California’s RPS Program, and impacts
would be less than significant.
The City of Rancho Cucamonga does not have its own renewable energy plan; however, the City has
prepared a Climate Action Plan as a companion to the General Plan Update that includes goals,
strategies, and measures to reduce communitywide and municipal GHG emission reductions in the
categories of zero emission and clean fuels, efficient and carbon free buildings, renewable energy and
zero carbon electricity, carbon sequestration, local food supply, efficient water use, waste reductions,
and sustainable transportation. Impacts would be less than significant.
Page 283
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 20 -
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to energy to less than significant levels.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially
lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
7. Geology and Soils
Impact 5.7-1: Project occupants and visitors would be subject to potential seismic-related
hazards. [Thresholds G-1 i-iv]
Ground Rupture
The location of the project site and its underlying geology make it likely to experience seismic hazards,
including strong seismic shaking and secondary hazards, like liquefaction. Ground rupture refers to
ground surface displacement that can result in structural, roadway, and pipeline damage. The
Cucamonga Fault runs east-west along the northern city limits and has the potential for an M7.0
earthquake that can lead to ground rupture along its fault traces. The Red Hill Fault runs from the
northeast around Etiwanda Avenue to the southwest around Red Hill. The area along the southwestern
segment of the Red Hill Fault is considered an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The Etiwanda
Fault Scarp has potential for an M6.5 earthquake and could pose ground rupture hazards to existing
and planned developments.
Future development and redevelopment pursuant to the General Plan Update that would be located
on a fault trace would be exposed to ground rupture hazards. However, General Plan Policy SE-2.1
requires minimum setbacks for structures proposed for human occupancy within State and City Special
Study Zones. The setbacks would be required to be based on minimum standards established under
State law and recommendations of a Certified Engineering Geologist and/or Geotechnical Engineer.
Incorporation of setbacks from the fault trace would avoid ground rupture hazards to future
developments. In addition, compliance with standard conditions of approval and policies of the
General Plan would reduce ground rupture hazards to future development and redevelopment.
Ground Shaking
Ground shaking in the City could occur during an earthquake on the Cucamonga or Red Hill Faults.
The City is also located near two of California’s most active faults – San Andreas and San Jacinto.
Policies in the General Plan Update would reduce hazards from ground shaking to less than
significant.
Ground Failure
During an earthquake, liquefaction may occur in areas with loose soils and high-water tables. Though
no liquefaction hazards are known in the City, three small areas in the southwestern portion of the
City north of Red Hill have perched water conditions and could be subject to liquefaction. Future
development and redevelopment under the proposed General Plan Update in these three areas could
be exposed to liquefaction hazards. Compliance with the CBC would identify potential for
Page 284
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 21 -
liquefaction hazards on individual development sites and construction of buildings and infrastructure
that ensures structural integrity to withstand liquefaction hazards.
Landslides
Earthquake shaking and heavy rain events have the potential to trigger landslides on unstable, sloping
land. Rock falls and landslides from the San Gabriel Mountains could affect existing and planned
developments at the northern end of the City and in the SOI. Compliance with project-specific
geotechnical recommendations, the City’s Hillside Development Regulations (Section 17.24.070 of
the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code), standard conditions of approval, General Plan Updated
policies, and CBC would reduce impacts to less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to geology and soils to less than significant
levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or
substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.7-2: Unstable geologic unit or soils conditions, including soil erosion, could result
from development of the project. [Thresholds G-2 and G-3]
The County of San Bernardino includes the City of Rancho Cucamonga in designated Soil Erosion
Control Areas. The City is also underlain by soils that have moderate to high erosion hazard and soil
blowing hazards. Erosion would likely occur in a southerly and southwesterly direction to match the
general topography. Implementation of erosion-control measures as required by Chapter 8.16 of the
Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code; standard conditions of approval; project-specific BMPs, site
design, source control, and treatment control measures would reduce erosion impacts. Additionally,
any project that disturbs one or more acre of land would also be required by the State Water Resources
Control Board to develop and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan to control discharges
from construction sites. Impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to geology and soils to less than significant
levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or
substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.7-3: Soil conditions would not result in risks to life or property and potentially result
in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or
collapse. [Thresholds G-3 and G-4]
Areas subject to potential liquefaction or earthquake-induced landslides are in the northern portion of
the City and SOI area. Compliance with the recommendations of project-specific geotechnical
investigations, the CBC, and the City’s Hillside Development Regulations would prevent risks due to
lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse.
Page 285
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 22 -
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to geology and soils to less than significant
levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or
substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.7-4: Soil conditions may not adequately support septic tanks. [Threshold G-5]
Where existing sewer lines are available, future development and redevelopment would connect to the
public sewer system. However, future development in the SOI in areas designated as Hillside
Residential could utilize onsite septic tank systems. Upon annexation into the City, these areas would
be required to connect to the public sewer system.
Where limitations on septic tank systems could pose hazards to surface and groundwater, standard
conditions of approval for future projects would reduce potential impacts. DEHS would regulate the
installation, use, maintenance, and routine inspection of tanks. If a sewer line becomes available to a
property served by a septic tank, the property owner must connect to the sewer line within 90 days and
abandon the septic tank in accordance with County regulations. Implementation of these standard
conditions of approval would provide oversight prior to septic system construction as well as
maintenance and inspection over the life of the septic system to ensure proper operation, thus reducing
the potential for impacts related to septic tanks. These conditions would reduce potential effects to
less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to geology and soils to less than significant
levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or
substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.7-5: The project would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or unique geologic feature. [Threshold G-6]
Research performed at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County indicates that the bulk of
the study area consists of surficial sedimentary or metamorphic rocks that are unlikely to contain
significant vertebrate fossils; however, there may be sedimentary deposits at a greater depth. Alluvial
deposits extend throughout the Plan Area. Though shallow excavations in the younger Quaternary
alluvium are unlikely to expose significant fossils, deeper excavations that extend into older Quaternary
deposits could encounter significant fossils.
The presence of sedimentary units known to contain fossil materials indicates that there is a potential
for encountering unidentified paleontological resources during excavation and construction of future
development projects. Therefore, this is considered a potentially significant impact on paleontological
resources. Implementation of standard condition of approval 5.7-7 would reduce potential impacts to
less than significant levels.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to geology and soils to less than significant
Page 286
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 23 -
levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or
substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impact 5.8-1: The proposed project would not directly or indirectly result in an increase in
GHG emissions compared to existing conditions. [Threshold GHG-1]
Development under the proposed project would result in GHG emissions that would contribute to
climate change on a cumulative basis. Future construction activities would result in GHG emissions
that are limited in duration for any given project, but when taken together over buildout of the
proposed project, could be considerable.
Emissions Forecasts
Communitywide GHG emissions were forecast for 2030 and 2040 based on the growth and
development assumptions of the General Plan Update which are included in the CAP. Future GHG
emissions for the years 2030 and 2040 would be reduced due to state and federal legislative actions
that would result in overall GHG emission reductions as the City continues to grow. Activities in the
City are anticipated to result in a reduction of 277,959 MTCO2e (19 percent) from the City’s 2018
baseline annual emissions. By 2040, annual emissions would result in a reduction of 364,295
MTCO2e (26 percent) from the City’s 2018 baseline communitywide emissions. In addition to the
state and federal actions that would reduce emissions from future activities in the City, the General
Plan Update includes goals and policies that would further support reductions in emissions from
existing and future activities in the City. The CAP also includes a set of goals, strategies, and
measures with specific metrics and quantified GHG reduction estimates that will further support
GHG reductions from existing and future development in the City. Implementation of the General
Plan Update would not directly or indirectly result in an increase in GHG emissions compared to
existing conditions in 2018. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse greenhouse gas emissions impacts to less than
significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid
or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.8-2: The proposed project would not conflict with the SCAG region’s achievement
of SB 375 emissions reduction targets. [Threshold GHG-2]
SB 375 requires that metropolitan planning organizations, including SCAG, develop a Sustainable
Communities Strategy that meets the per capita GHG emissions reduction targets set by CARD for
the years 2020 (8 percent below 2005 levels) and 2035 (19 percent below 2005 levels). The General
Plan Update has a comprehensive set of goals and policies that are consistent with the core visions in
Connect SoCal. The General Plan Update and its companion CAP document recognize that the largest
source of the community’s climate change contributions is vehicle travel and therefore the CAP has
identified feasible measures to reduce emissions from the on-road transportation sector including from
Page 287
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 24 -
passenger vehicles. The development envisioned by the proposed project is intended to reduce the
need to drive (i.e., lower VMT) by improving access by sidewalks, pathways, and trails, and by
encouraging a more compact urban form that arranges land uses close to where people live to give
them options for moving around with or without a vehicle.
The General Plan Update has been developed to help support future development that reduces local
and regional VMT while promoting land use patterns that promote alternative transportation modes.
The General Plan Update goals and policies are consistent with Connect SoCal and would support the
SCAG region in achieving its SB 375 emissions reduction targets. The General Plan Update would not
conflict with the SCAG region’s achievement of SB 375 emissions reduction targets. This impact would
be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse greenhouse gas emissions impacts to less than
significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid
or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.8-3: The proposed project would be consistent with the State’s ability to achieve the
2030 reduction target of SB 32. [Threshold GHG-2]
The implementation of the General Plan Update would result in growth in population and the
development of new residential and nonresidential projects. Development under the proposed General
Plan Update would result in GHG emissions that would contribute to climate change. However, state
and federal legislative actions are anticipated to result in reductions in emissions from specific activities
in the future and would, therefore, reduce overall communitywide GHG emissions from these activities
as the City continues to grow through implementation of the General Plan Update. The General Plan
Update includes goals and policies, and the CAP includes GHG reduction strategies that would result
in a reduction in emissions. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not be
inconsistent with the state’s ability to achieve the 2030 reduction target of SB 32. Therefore, impacts
would be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse greenhouse gas emissions impacts to less than
significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid
or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.8-4: see Section C. Significant and Unavoidable Significant Impacts that Cannot be
Mitigated to Below the Level of Significance.
9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact 5.9-1: Project construction and operations of the proposed project could involve the
transport, use, and/or disposal of hazardous materials; however, compliance
Page 288
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 25 -
with existing local, state, and federal regulations would ensure impacts are
minimized. [Thresholds H-1, H-2, and H-3]
During construction of future projects throughout the City, new development would potentially
involve the use of hazardous materials, such as fuels, lubricants, paints, solvents, and greases in
construction equipment and coatings used in construction. The release of hazardous materials could
impact residents and businesses. However, future construction activities would be short term in nature,
and the materials used would not require use or storage of hazardous materials in quantities that would
pose a substantial safety hazard. Additionally, the use, transport, and disposal of construction-related
hazardous materials would be required to conform to existing laws and regulations. Compliance with
applicable laws and regulations would ensure that all potentially hazardous materials are used and
handled in an appropriate manner and would minimize the potential for safety impacts to occur; and
all contaminated waste would be required to be collected and disposed of at an appropriately licensed
disposal or treatment facility.
Grading and excavation of infill areas may expose construction workers and the public to known or
potentially unknown hazardous materials in the soil groundwater. Although there are several sites in
the City that the SWRCB and DTSC have identified as containing hazardous materials, remediation
prior to construction activities would be required. Remediation would be required to satisfy the
appropriate responsible agency––DTSC, RWQCB, or the San Bernardino County Fire Department––
and would prevent exposure of people and the environment to these hazards. Demolition of older
buildings would be required to comply with the California Health and Safety Code, Occupational Safety
and Health Administration (OSHA), and South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1403
related to the removal of asbestos containing materials and lead-based paints. Impacts would be less
than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse hazards and hazardous materials impacts to less than
significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid
or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.4-2: The project site is not on a list of hazardous materials sites. [Threshold H-4]
According to the SWRCB’s GeoTracker database, there are 34 hazardous materials sites in the City;
these include 29 Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Cleanup Sites and five Cleanup Program
Sites; however, the cases for all 29 sites have been completed and closed. Additionally, according to
the DTSC’s EnviroStor database, there are 24 toxic substance sites within the City, including seven
voluntary cleanup sites, 9 school investigation sites, six-tiered permit sites, one school cleanup site, and
one non-operating site. Since there are sites undergoing investigation and/or remediation within the
City, hazardous substance contamination on or adjacent to specific project developments in the City
could impact existing residents and/or employees in the City. Future development in accordance with
implementation of the General Plan Update may be impacted by hazardous substance contamination
remaining from historical operations on a particular site. However, properties contaminated by
hazardous substances are regulated at the federal, state, and local levels and are subject to compliance
with stringent laws and regulations for investigation and remediation. Therefore, impacts resulting
Page 289
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 26 -
from buildout of the General Plan Update would be less than significant with the compliance with
existing laws and regulations.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse hazards and hazardous materials impacts to less than
significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid
or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.9-3: The project site is located in the vicinity of an airport or within the jurisdiction
of an airport land use plan. [Threshold H-5]
Rancho Cucamonga is located along major ground and air transportation corridors. As a result, a
variety of human-caused hazards associated with air and ground transportation could impact the
community. Proximity to airports requires consideration for land uses and development patterns to
ensure airport operations will not conflict with surrounding uses. The city is approximately 3.2 miles
north of the Ontario International Airport and 4.5 miles east of Cable Municipal Airport in Upland.
The southwestern portion of the city (south of Church Street east to approximately Etiwanda Avenue)
is in the Ontario International Airport Influence Area; thus, compliance with applicable regulations of
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) would be required, and the Airport Land Use Compatibility
Plan would be considered for any proposed project in the area. Considerations for new development
would be airport-related safety, noise, airspace protection, and overflight factors. The City of Rancho
Cucamonga participates in the airport land use planning process for Ontario International Airport, and
new development in the Ontario Airport Influence Area would be consistent with the approved
Airspace Protection Zones identified in the latest version of the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse hazards and hazardous materials impacts to less than
significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid
or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.9-4: Project development would not affect the implementation of an emergency
responder or evacuation plan. [Threshold H-6]
Future development under the proposed General Plan would result in construction activities that could
temporarily affect roadways as a result of lane closures or narrowing for roadway and/or utility
improvements. This could affect emergency response times or evacuation routes. The proposed project
would increase the number of people who may need to evacuate the Plan Area in the event of an
emergency. All existing roadway modifications and new roadways that would occur with
implementation of the proposed project must be constructed based on industry and City designs
standards, and future roadways would be required to demonstrate compliance with the Fire
Department requirements pertaining to access/egress to ensure adequate emergency access.
Implementation of the General Plan Update policies would minimize the potential for a roadway
design that could hinder its use for emergency response or evacuation.
Page 290
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 27 -
Additionally, the City has developed and adopted an LHMP as an integrated component of the General
Plan which reduces injury, loss of life, property damage, and loss of services from natural disasters and
provides a comprehensive analysis of the natural and human-caused hazards that threaten the City with
a focus on mitigation. In addition to the LHMP, the City would implement an Emergency Operations
Plan (EOP), a Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP), and an Evacuation Assessment to
provide the framework for responding to major emergencies or disasters. Therefore, impacts would
be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse hazards and hazardous materials impacts to less than
significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid
or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
10. Hydrology and Water Quality
Impact 5.10-1: Development pursuant to the General Plan would not violate water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade
surface or groundwater quality. [Threshold HYD-1]
Urban runoff from storms or nuisance flows (runoff during dry periods) from development projects
can carry pollutants to receiving waters. Runoff can contain pollutants such as oil, fertilizers, pesticides,
trash, soil, and animal waste. This runoff can flow directly into local streams or lakes or into storm
drains and continue through pipes until it is released untreated into a local waterway and eventually the
ocean.
Construction Activities
Clearing, grading, excavation, and construction activities associated with buildout of the General Plan
Update may impact water quality due to sheet erosion of exposed soils and subsequent deposition of
particulates in local drainages. State and local regulations effectively mitigate construction stormwater
runoff impacts from buildout associated with the General Plan Update. Future development would be
required to comply with Chapter 19.04 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, standard
conditions of approval 5.10-1 and 5.10-2, and development projects with one or more acre of soil
disturbance are required to comply with the Construction General Permit and associated local NPDES
regulations to ensure that the potential for soil erosion is minimized. Additionally, project-specific
SWPPPs are required in accordance with the site-specific sediment risk analyses based on the grading
plans and must described construction BMPs.
Operational Phase
Development resulting from the General Plan Update may result in long-term impacts to the quality
of stormwater and urban runoff, subsequently impacting downstream water quality. To help prevent
long-term impacts associated with land use changes, development and significant redevelopment
would be required to comply with Chapter 19.20, Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4), of
the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. Chapter 19.20 indicates that nonpriority and noncategory
projects may be required to implement applicable site design LID and local implementation plan
Page 291
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 28 -
requirements. The BMPs, LIDs, and water quality treatment solutions prescribed in project-specific
WQMPs would be designed to support or enhance the regional BMPs and efforts implemented by the
City as part of its effort to improve water quality.
With the implementation of federal, state, local regulations, and the goals and policies of the General
Plan Update, runoff from the construction and operational phases of development pursuant to the
General Plan Update would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements,
and impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to hydrology and water quality to less than
significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid
or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Page 292
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 29 -
Impact 5.10-2: Buildout of the General Plan would generate a substantial increase in water
demand but would not decrease groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project would impede
sustainable groundwater management of the basin. [Threshold HYD-2]
The Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD) main sources of water supply are from groundwater
pumped from the Chino Basin and imported surface water. The CVWD also uses groundwater
produced from the Cucamonga Basin.
In 2020, the total water supply was 51,516 acre-feet, and 26,933 acre-feet accounted for groundwater
supply; the total water demand was 46,021 acre-feet, according to CVWD’s 2020 Urban Water
Management Plan (UWMP). The UWMP indicates that the water supply would exceed the water
demand for normal, single dry, and multiple dry years from 2025 through 2045. The 2020 UWMP
projects a population of 236,573 in 2045, which exceeds the population projected for the proposed
General Plan Update (233,088). Consequently, the UWMP overestimates the demand that would be
generated by buildout of the General Plan Update. With the implementation of the policies from the
General Plan Update, buildout of the General Plan would not substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge, and impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to hydrology and water quality to less than
significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid
or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.10-3: Development pursuant to the General Plan would increase impervious
surfaces and therefore could alter drainage patterns, but would not increase
the potential for erosion and siltation on- or off-site, or create runoff water that
would exceed the capacity of storm drain systems, or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff, or impede or redirect flood flows.
[Thresholds HYD-3 (i), (ii), (iii), and (iv)]
Development within the General Plan area would result in an increase in impervious surfaces which
could result in an increase in stormwater runoff, higher peak discharges in channels which has the
potential to cause erosion or sedimentation in drainage swales and streams.
Drainage patterns of new development would be largely maintained and would use the existing
drainage facilities within the public right-of-way. Current runoff is captured and conveyed by existing
storm drain infrastructure in the City and SOI.
Standard flood control requirements for new development would minimize impacts of increased flows
and volumes on downstream receiving waters. Implementation of proposed land uses in future
redevelopment areas would not result in substantial increases in surface water peak flows or volumes
over the existing conditions and would likely result in reduced discharges due to onsite water quality
and LID features and BMPs. The proposed project would likely increase runoff in undeveloped areas
but discharges would be required to remain within the parameters defined by the most current
Drainage Plan or site-specific watershed study.
Page 293
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 30 -
All new development or significant redevelopment would be required to prepare a project-specific
WQMP that would describe BMPs and site-design measures that would minimize stormwater runoff
from the site. Additionally, standard erosion control measures would be implemented as part of the
SWPPP for any proposed project to minimize the risk of erosion or sedimentation during construction.
Though flood hazards cover approximately 3,857 acres of the City, other areas in the City may
experience flooding during a heavy precipitation event. Flooding hazards have the potential to impact
a significant amount of the community, but less than 10 percent of this area is subject to a 100-year
event. Development within flood hazard areas would comply with flood protection standards that
reduce vulnerability to flood impacts and ensure safe use and occupation of structures. Additionally,
the proposed policies of the General Plan Update would reduce impacts to less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to hydrology and water quality to less than
significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid
or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.10-4: The proposed project would not result in flood hazards associated with flood
zones, tsunami, or seiche zones, or due to dam inundation. [Threshold HYD-
4]
Flood Hazards
The General Plan Update includes several policies that ensure development minimizes potential flood
impacts (Policies RC 2.1, RC-2.3, S-4.1 through S-4.5). As discussed in Impact 5.10-3, of the DEIR,
with the implementation of General Plan Update policies and federal, state, and local regulations, future
development pursuant to the General Plan Update would not increase flood hazards associated with
flood zones, and impacts would be less than significant.
Tsunami
The General Plan area is more than 30 miles northeast of the Pacific Ocean and is well outside of the
tsunami inundation zone. No impacts would arise from tsunamis.
Seiches
Released water from a seiche would result in much smaller footprints than the dam inundation zones,
and the probability of this occurring is extremely low. In the rare chance that a seiche does occur, the
seiche would flow into the dam inundation zones, as illustrated in Figure 5.10-3, Dam Inundation Zones,
of the DEIR. Implementation of the General Plan Update policies and federal, state, and local
regulations would ensure that future development pursuant to the General Plan Update would not
result in flood hazards, and impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to hydrology and water quality to less than
significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid
or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Page 294
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 31 -
Impact 5.10-5: Buildout of the General Plan would not obstruct or conflict with the
implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan.
[Threshold HYD-5]
The Chino Basin Water Bank Strategic Plan is designed to promote and implement water storage and
recovery programs in the Chino Basin. Impact 5.10-1, of the DEIR, details measures in place to ensure
future development has a less than significant impact on surface and groundwater quality. These
measures would also ensure that future development does not obstruct or conflict with the
implementation of the UWMP. As discussed in Impact 5.10-2, of the DEIR, the water supply would
exceed the water demand, and buildout of the General Plan Update would not substantially decrease
groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. The project area is in
adjudicated Chino Basin. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act contains reporting
requirements for adjudicated basins. Because the proposed General Plan Update is within an
adjudicated basin and is consistent with the Chino Basin Water Bank Strategic Plan, which manages
the basin, there would be no conflict with a sustainable groundwater management plan, and impacts
would be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to hydrology and water quality to less than
significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid
or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
11. Land Use and Planning
Impact 5.11-1: Project implementation would not divide an established community.
[Threshold LU-1]
The design direction for the General Plan is to improve access and mobility for existing and future
residents by providing vehicular connections and non-motorized transportation options. The land use
pattern proposed in the General Plan increases building intensity in areas of the City that are already
planned for commercial and high intensity development. These areas are accessed with major roadways
and, as the proposed project is implemented, with additional transit and pedestrian pathways. The
narrative of the proposed project indicates that connectivity is both a planning and an equity issue.
Several of the General Plan Update policies would improve not only connectivity but compatibility
between existing and future development. A primary goal of the General Plan Update is to retain the
city’s current character, and several policies address consistency of new development with existing
developments using materials, siting, and other design techniques.
No aspect of the proposed General Plan Update would divide the existing city. In addition, the updated
General Plan includes provisions that directly address land use connectivity, compatibility, and
encroachment of new development on existing neighborhoods and land uses. Thus, the General Plan
update would result in no impact regarding division of an established community or land use
compatibility issues.
Page 295
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 32 -
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to land use and planning to less than significant
levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or
substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.11-2: Project implementation would not conflict with applicable plans adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. [Threshold LU-2]
Consistency with Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Community Strategy
The growth in population projected for the General Plan Update is not fully accounted for in the 2016-
2040 SCAG growth forecasts because those forecasts were made before the sixth cycle regional
housing needs assessment (RHNA) estimates, which resulted from a statewide housing crisis.
The 2040 population projection for Rancho Cucamonga in the RTP/SCS is 204,300 which is less than
the projected population for planning period buildout of the General Plan Update of 233,088. Because
the proposed project may result in the City’s population exceeding the 2040 population forecast for
the City, this could be considered a conflict. However, the General Plan is both consistent with the
goals of the RTP/SCS and would further state goals through emphasis on design and reduction in
VMT. While the proposed project would eliminate the new interchange at the intersection of Arrow
Route and I-15, as identified in the RTP/SCS, congestion is not considered an environmental effect.
Further, adding roadway capacity could also encourage additional automobile use which could increase
VMT and associated impacts. As shown in Table 5.11-1, SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS Goal Consistency
Analysis, and Table 5.11-2, SCAG 2020 Connect SoCal Goal Consistency Analysis, of the DEIR, the
proposed project would be consistent with SCAG’s goals.
Consistency with City Land Use Plans and Regulations
The proposed project would require an update to the City’s Municipal Code and Zoning Map, and will
replace or amend specific plans and master plans previously adopted. When an existing plan is
recommended to be repealed and replaced with existing districts or new districts, all citywide
regulations that apply to that district, including citywide design regulations would apply.
Following the amendments to the zoning code, if zoning and General Plan land use designations are
not identical, General Plan policies would be consulted for guidance in amending the Zoning
Ordinance for consistency with the updated General Plan during consideration of any development
project. The update to the zoning code will follow this project and bring the code into consistency with
the General Plan and will tier from this EIR. Once the code is amended, there will be no inconsistency
between the General Plan and the zoning code.
Municipal Code: Tree Preservation Regulations
Section 17.80, Tree Preservation, of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code protects trees that are
community resources from indiscriminate cutting or removal. The ordinance establishes procedures
for the removal and replacement of trees. The proposed General Plan continues to support this
ordinance.
Page 296
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 33 -
None of the changes in the General Plan Update would affect plans, policies, or regulations of other
agencies that have jurisdiction within the planning area. Most of the design of the General Plan Update
is intended to address state and global issues related to climate change and reduce vehicle miles
travelled. As individual projects are considered by the City, those proposed projects would be subject
to a variety of federal, State, and locally adopted plans designed to mitigate environmental impacts or
to preserve important resources. Plans and policies related to specific resource issues are addressed in
those specific sections of this EIR. No conflicts between the specific resources and a policy or
regulation of another agency would occur because of the proposed project. Therefore, impacts would
be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to land use and planning to less than significant
levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or
substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
12. Mineral Resources
Impact 5.12-1: Project implementation would not result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the
state or result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use
plan. [Threshold M-1 and M-2]
Regionally Important Mineral Resources
The designated aggregate resource sectors are at the northern end of the City, where limited urban
development is present. The majority of these areas are planned for Open Space, Conservation, Flood
Control/Utility Corridor, or Hillside Residential that allows low density development.
The resource area along Deer Canyon and Deer Creek is designated Flood Control/Utility Corridor
and will continue to provide future access to underlying aggregate resources. According to the
proposed land use plan, the north sections of the Deer Creek and Day Creek Channel are planned for
moderate change over the next 15 to 20 years, at Etiwanda Heights Town Center, to become a
traditional neighborhood, and additional sectors would retain Open Space use and Flood
Control/Utility Corridor designations to maintain access to underlying mineral resources. Future
residential uses near this area would preclude mining operations on the residential site and adjacent
areas. The Etiwanda Heights Town Center development area contains a closed sand and gravel mining
operation that has no intent to resume.
The State Geologist released an updated designation report for the termination of mineral resource
designation for 18 areas in 11 sectors due to the presence of adjacent incompatible land use
developments. Among these are C-2 on the Upper Cucamonga Fan and portions of D-3 on the Deer
Creek Fan. Although two new sectors were proposed for designation in the San Bernardino
Production-Consumption region, another 57 areas in eight sectors were processed for termination,
which included portions along the San Sevaine Wash. Though there are aggregate mineral resources in
the City, no mine is currently operating within the City or SOI boundaries, and no impact would occur.
Page 297
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 34 -
Locally Important Mineral Resources
Construction of future development and redevelopment in the City would require sand and gravel
resources for roadways, infrastructure, and building construction. These resources would be derived
from local sources in the City or other nearby areas. The City contains approximately 1,119 acres
classified as containing aggregate resources, and 1,411 acres containing aggregate resources are in the
SOI. Since the City does not have any active mining operations, resource demand would have to be
met from other available resources in the region. There are additional sand and gravel mining sites
within 1.5 miles of Rancho Cucamonga, including the Holliday Rock Campus Plant and the Kaiser
Fontana Mine. These mining operations would not be impacted by the proposed project and would
also help to provide the required resources. Thus, there would be no impact due to the potential loss
of availability of these local resources due to future development.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to mineral resources to less than significant
levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or
substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
13. Noise
Impact 5.13-1: see Section C. Significant and Unavoidable Impacts that Cannot be Mitigated
to Below the Level of Significance.
Impact 5.13-2: see Section C. Significant and Unavoidable Impacts that Cannot be Mitigated
to Below the Level of Significance.
Impact 5.13-3: The project could generate a substantial permanent increase in stationary
noise at noise-sensitive uses that exceed City Standards. [Threshold N-3]
Development under the proposed project would include various stationary noise sources. To evaluate
increases in operational stationary noise sources associated with new development, the adopted
standards contained in Development Code Section 17.66.050(F) were applied. Specifically, daytime
(7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) standards of 65 dBA Leq/50 dBA Leq (exterior/interior) and nighttime (10:00
p.m.-7:00 a.m.) standards of 60 dBA Leq/45 dBA Leq (exterior/interior) are used in this analysis to
determine significance. It should be noted that exterior standards are established such that if complied
with, interior noise standards would also be achieved. Thus, this analysis only addresses exterior noise
levels.
Loading docks associated with commercial and industrial uses can result in noise levels of 77 dBA Leq
at 100 feet, exceeding daytime exterior noise standards within 300 feet of the source and nighttime
exterior standards within 450 feet of the source. In addition, stationary equipment such as fans,
Page 298
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 35 -
compressors, or pumps can generate noise levels of 70 dBA Leq at 50 feet, exceeding daytime exterior
noise standards within 80 feet of the source and nighttime exterior standards within 120 feet of the
source.
Because new commercial and industrial development under the proposed project would occur in
proximity to existing development, and would include new mixed use development involving
commercial and residential land uses in proximity to one another, consistent with the overarching goals
of the General Plan Update’s land plan and vision, new stationary equipment and activities associated
with development under the 2040 General Plan could result in substantial stationary noise level
increases that exceed adopted exterior, and therefore interior, noise standards. This impact would be
potentially significant. However, implementation of standard condition of approval 5.13-3 would
require project applicants to analyze and mitigate potential noise impacts from new stationary noise
sources to comply with the City’s daytime noise standard. Therefore, with the implementation of
proper noise-attenuating measures, this impact would be reduced to less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse noise impacts to less than significant levels. Accordingly,
no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially lessen any
significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.13-4: see Section C. Significant and Unavoidable Impacts that Cannot be Mitigated
to Below the Level of Significance.
Impact 5.13-5: see Section C. Significant and Unavoidable Impacts that Cannot be Mitigated
to Below the Level of Significance.
14. Population, Housing, and Employment
Impact 5.14-1: Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an areas, either directly
(for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure). [Threshold PH-
1]
Table 5.14-4, of the DEIR, projects the planning period buildout 2040 population to be 233,088 which
is higher than the SCAG projection of 203,400. The proposed project focuses change along major
transportation corridors and in areas of the City already planned for growth (see Figure 1-1, Degrees
of Change Map in Volume 1 of the General Plan Update).
The General Plan Update anticipates that growth over the planning period will be higher than the 2016
projection provided by SCAG. The SCAG estimate, as shown in Table 5.14-4 projects a 2040
population of 204,300 for an annual growth rate of approximately 0.81 percent. Development
projection for the City, as shown in Table 3-2, of the DEIR, projects a 2040 population of 233,088 for
Page 299
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 36 -
an average annual growth rate of 1.43 percent, approximately 0.62 percent higher than the SCAG
projection. Table 5.14-6, of the DEIR, shows the growth potential of the proposed General Plan which
reflects a 50 percent reduction in the theoretical development potential for each land use due to several
factors such as not all property owners will want to develop and there might be other existing
development or physical constraints on individual sites that have not been considered.
The RTP/SCS and associated growth projections were prepared to prior to the COVID pandemic,
and the recent RHNA assigned as part of the sixth cycle housing element. As such, the projections do
not reflect changes in market conditions.
The current jobs to housing ratio for the City is 1.44 as shown in Table 5.14-5, of the DEIR, the rate
of employed resident to job is 1.08, and nearly 85 percent of the residents commute outside of the city
for employment. The low ratio results in lengthy commutes and adds to the high vehicle miles travelled
estimate for the City. Based on Table 3-2, of the DEIR, approximately 21,647 jobs would be generated
at buildout which is slightly higher than the 19,221 jobs projected by SCAG for 2040 in the RTP/SCS.
The General Plan Update accommodates future growth in the City by providing for infrastructure and
public services to accommodate the projected growth. Proposed policies under the General Plan
Update also ensure that the City provides adequate housing choices for various income levels. By
focusing development in areas of the existing General Plan that are designated for intense growth, the
General Plan Update would not directly or indirectly result in substantial unplanned population growth
in the Plan Area. Implementation of the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact
relating to population growth.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to population, housing, and employment to less
than significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to
avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.14-2: Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere. [Threshold PH-2]
Government Code Section 66300(d)(2) requires that any project that would demolish residential units
must create at least as many units as will be demolished. As shown in Table 3-2, of the DEIR, the
planning period buildout projects approximately 25,685 new dwelling units. The combination of adding
residential uses to existing non-residential land use designations and focusing growth in areas of the
city that do not have high concentration of housing, and avoiding existing, established neighborhoods,
reduces the potential to displace substantial numbers of people or housing. As a result, new
development in the city would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, and the
impact would be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to population, housing, and employment to less
than significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to
avoid or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Page 300
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 37 -
15. Public Services
Impact 5.15-1: The proposed project would introduce new structures, residents, and workers
into the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District’s service boundaries,
thereby increasing the requirement for fire protection personnel. [Threshold
FP-1]
The General Plan Update anticipates that the City’s permanent population will increase by
approximately 60,000 residents over the next 20 years. Additionally, the General Plan Update
anticipates an increase in the number of businesses that will be operating in Rancho Cucamonga.
Based on consultation with the Fire District, the anticipated increases in population and businesses can
be adequately served by existing fire stations and the planned opening of Stations 178 and 179. The
adoption of the General Plan Update would not in itself create a need for new or altered facilities. If
the General Plan Update is implemented as proposed, the currently planned additional response
capacity that will result from staffing Stations 178 and 179 would be needed to continue delivering the
current level of service to existing and new residents and businesses. If service demands begin to exceed
the service capacity of the existing and planned stations and their current and proposed staffing, the
Fire District will consider adding additional companies to the response system. All existing stations,
along with Stations 178 and 179, can accommodate additional companies without having to physically
expand the stations.
All development in the city that results from the implementation of the General Plan Update will be
reviewed by the Fire District for compliance with applicable provisions of the California fire and
residential codes and the Fire District’s Standards and Guidance documents. This will ensure that all
future development will benefit from the most current fire prevention and safety standards, which is
expected to help keep service demands within projected year-over-year increases.
Because adoption of the General Plan Update would not create an immediate need for increased or
enhanced response capacity, the impact of the adoption of the General Plan Update would be less than
significant to fire protection.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to public services to less than significant levels.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially
lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.15-2: The proposed project would introduce new structures, residents, and workers
into SBSD’s service boundaries in the City, thereby increasing the requirement
for police protection personnel. [Threshold PP-1]
Upon implementation of the General Plan Update, the San Bernardino County Sherriff’s Department
(SBSD) would maintain appropriate staffing to ensure compliance with local and regional standards
for response times and coverage. As the City’s population increases, additional staff will be required.
Based on the department’s current staffing ration of 1 officer for every 1,614 residents, the incremental
development resulting from implementation of the proposed project would result in the demand for
Page 301
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 38 -
approximately 37 additional law enforcement officers to maintain the current level of service. This
increase in demand for police services would be met through the hiring of additional staff, as needed,
which would be funded through existing funding mechanisms, such as the general fund revenue and
grant funding. The demand can be served with additional patrols; however, no additional police
stations would be required to support the additional officers. Therefore, impacts would be less than
significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to public services to less than significant levels.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially
lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.15-3: The proposed project would generate new students who would impact the
school enrollment capacities of area schools. [Threshold SS-1]
Implementation of the proposed project could result in the development of up to approximately 17,300
dwelling units in the City. Assuming 0.5 student per residential unit, buildout of the General Plan could
generate approximately 8,650 K-12 students, or approximately 665 per grade. The City is served by 29
elementary schools, 7 middle schools, and 4 high schools; these existing schools could likely serve these
new students, but depending upon the location of new development, new school facilities could be
required. As development projects are proposed, the appropriate school districts will be notified and
would participate in the review process, which would allow for school planning purposes. In addition,
pursuant to SB 50, each of the school districts can collect school impact fees as new development
occurs, which would fund school resources. Though these impact fees may not provide full funding
for all necessary resources, exceeding school capacity would not be considered a physical impact under
CEQA, and payment of fees is considered full mitigation. Therefore, buildout of the proposed General
Plan Update would result in a less than significant impact related to schools.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to public services to less than significant levels.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially
lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.15-4: The proposed General Plan Update would not result in a substantial adverse
physical impact related to construction of facilities for the provision of library
services. [Threshold LS-1]
Implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would result in an increase in which would
increase the demand for library services. While the City does not have any currently planned library
facilities, the Development Impact Fee program was developed to provide library space and
replacement cost of the Library’s collection. Library construction, if needed in the future, would be
subject to all applicable regulations and standard conditions of approval identified throughout this
EIR. There would be no additional impact with respect to the provision of libraries, and impacts would
be less than significant.
Page 302
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 39 -
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to public services to less than significant levels.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially
lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
16. Recreation
Impact 5.16-1: The proposed project would generate additional residents that would increase
the use of existing park and recreational facilities. [Threshold R-1]
Buildout of the proposed project would result in an estimated population of 233,088 residents by 2040,
increasing the existing population in the City and SOI from 175,522 in 2020, which would increase the
use of existing park and recreational facilities.
The City’s park standard is 5 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents and also includes a requirement for
open space to be within a 10-minute walking distance from homes and jobs. With 644 acres of existing
parks and recreational facilities, the City currently provides approximately 3.64 acres per 1,000
residents. Using the City’s established park standard of 3 to 5 acres for every 1,000 residents, between
532.9 and 888.01 acres of parkland would be required to meet the standard based on the current
population. With the existing total area of 644 acres of parkland, trails and special use facilities, the city
currently exceeds the minimum City standard.
With the annexation of the North Etiwanda Preserve into the city, approximately 4,393 acres of land
has been incorporated into the City’s jurisdiction. Approximately, 3,565 acres is expected to be
maintained as a “Rural/Conservation Area”, with existing and planned preserves and hiking trails, and
approximately 828 acres would be designated as a “Neighborhood Area”, in which the open space
character of the foothills would extend into the neighborhoods. With the inclusion of the recently
acquired North Etiwanda Preserve into the City’s jurisdiction, there is more than adequate publicly
available recreational land within the city and its SOI to satisfy recreational opportunities for local
residents. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to recreational facilities to less than significant
levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or
substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.16-2: Project implementation would result in environmental impacts to provide new
and/or expanded recreational facilities. [Threshold R-2]
Based on the City’s projected population growth, as well as the City’s availability of funds, portions of
undeveloped land would be improved as parks and recreational facilities. The development and
operation of future new or expanded parks and recreational facilities may have an adverse physical
effect on the environment. These adverse physical effects include impacts to air quality, biological
resources, lighting, noise, and traffic, among others. Environmental impacts associated with the
construction of new and/or expanded recreational facilities in accordance with the proposed land use
Page 303
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 40 -
plan are addressed in the other technical sections of the DEIR. Subsequent environmental review for
individual park developments would be required. Potentially adverse impacts to the environment that
may result from the expansion of parks and recreational facilities would be reduced with the
implementation of the General Plan Update’s goals and policies, as well as existing federal, state, and
local regulations. Impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to recreational facilities to less than significant
levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or
substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
17. Transportation
Impact 5.17-1: The proposed project potentially creates an inconsistency with the adopted
RTP/SCS which notes a future interchange at Arrow Route and I-15.
[Threshold T-1]
The RTP/SCS (RTP ID Number 200152) identifies a new interchange at the intersection of Arrow
Route and I-15 which would be eliminated under the proposed project, and therefore, this would create
a potential inconsistency with RTP/SCS.
To determine the impact of this facility removal, VMT forecasting with and without this future
interchange was completed, to determine if its elimination would increase or decrease VMT. The VMT
forecasting results indicate that VMT in the City would decrease by 8,729 VMT per weekday within
the City limits. This indicates that removing the Arrow Route interchange at I-15 would result in a
benefit to VMT within the City, making the impact less-than-significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse transportation impacts to less than significant levels.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially
lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.17-2: see Section C. Significant and Unavoidable Impacts that Cannot be Mitigated
to Below the Level of Significance.
Impact 5.17-3: The project would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment). [Threshold T-3]
The City of Rancho Cucamonga has adopted engineering standards to ensure consistency in the
geometric design of their mobility facilities. Additionally, all plans undergo an extensive review process
at the City to ensure consistency with these adopted standards. Given that all future projects will be
subject to these reviews, this impact is considered less than significant.
Page 304
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 41 -
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse transportation impacts to less than significant levels.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially
lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.17-4: The project would not result in inadequate emergency access. [Threshold T-
4]
The City of Rancho Cucamonga has adopted standards related to emergency accessibility.
Additionally, the fire department reviews all development applications to ensure that adequate
emergency accessibility is provided based on local and state guidance. Since all future projects will
undergo such reviews and requirements, this impact is considered less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse transportation impacts to less than significant levels.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially
lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
18. Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact 5.18-1: The proposed project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource that is listed or eligible for listing in
the California Register of Historical Resources or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public Resources Codes section 5020.1(k).
[Threshold TCR-1 (i, ii)]
In accordance with AB 52, the City notified six local tribes about the proposed project on June 1, 2021,
to determine the potential for tribal cultural resources onsite and to determine if local knowledge of
tribal cultural resources is available in the Plan Area and surrounding areas. The San Manuel Band of
Mission Indians responded on June 8, 2021, requesting information on the General Plan Update.
Information on the General Plan Update was provided to San Manuel Band of Mission Indians on
June 21, 2021. The Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation responded on June 2, 2021,
and declined consultation. At the time of future development, the City will consult with tribes and the
City will discuss the City’s standard conditions of approval with the tribes.
The City also requested a local government tribal consultation list from the California Native American
Heritage Commission (NAHC) on June 1, 2021. The tribal consultation list was requested in
accordance with SB 18 requirements for a general plan. The NAHC responded on June 15, 2021, and
provided a list of tribes for the City to contact regarding potential consultation. The City sent initial
notification letters to 16 California Native American tribes and tribal contacts on June 21, 2021 from
the NAHC listing. No responses have been received by the City from the tribes on the tribal
consultation list provided by the NAHC. In addition to the NAHC list, the City notified 6 local tribes
(which included the Kizh nation) in accordance with AB 52 and the Gabrieleno Band of Mission
Indians responded.
Page 305
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 42 -
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse transportation impacts to less than significant levels.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially
lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
19. Utilities and Service Systems
Impact 5.19-1: Sewer and wastewater treatment systems are adequate to meet project
requirements. [Thresholds U-1 (part) and U-3]
The IEUA operates the wastewater Regional Plant No. 4 within Rancho Cucamonga, which has a
treatment capacity of 14 MGD; the current average treatment volume at the facility is 10 MGD. The
Wastewater Treatment Plants are expected to have adequate capacity to service the Regional Collection
System’s needs through 2030 and would result in a less than significant impact.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to utilities and service systems to less than
significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid
or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.19-2: Water supply and delivery systems are adequate to meet project requirements.
[Thresholds U-1 (part) and U-2]
Rancho Cucamonga is served by CVWD for water and operates the water delivery systems to
customers. The current and planned sources of water available through at least 2045, listed in Table
5.19-1, of the DEIR,show the volumes of water expected to be available for decades to come. The
population within CVWD’s service area is expected to increase to 236,573 by 2045 from the current
population of approximately 198,979. CVWD projects that it will have adequate water supplies through
2045. In addition, water conservation efforts by CVWD and the City will help to make the city more
resilient during drought periods and future climate change impacts. Therefore, the impact would be
less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to utilities and service systems to less than
significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid
or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.19-3: Existing and/or proposed storm drainage systems are adequate to serve the
drainage requirements of the proposed project. [Threshold U-1 (part)]
The City’s drainage plans provide a drainage system consisting of regional mainline, secondary regional,
and master plan facilities that will adequately convey a 100-year storm event based upon certain
drainage criteria.
Page 306
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 43 -
Development in the undeveloped portions of the City that have no flood control improvements would
have to provide the necessary infrastructure to accommodate storm drain needs. Also, development
within the Southeast Industrial Area (Focus Area 8) may be required to provide on-site detention
facilities to prevent flood hazards. Continued implementation of the Master Plan of Drainage-Westside
Area and the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area Drainage Policy, with its associated Etiwanda Area Master
Plan of Drainage, would fund the improvement of the storm drainage systems in these areas. Storm
drainage system improvements in other areas of the city are constructed in accordance with the storm
drain plan in the applicable Specific Plan or Community Plan. Compliance with this standard condition
would result in the development and/or improvement of the storm drainage systems and prevention
of flood hazards. The potential environmental impacts of construction of the necessary storm drain
facilities would be assessed on a project-by-project basis as proposed projects pursuant to the General
Plan Update is implemented. Therefore, impacts related to flooding or drainage system capacity of
water bodies downstream of the site would be reduced to less than significant levels.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to utilities and service systems to less than
significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid
or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.19-4: Existing and/or proposed facilities would be able to accommodate project-
generated solid waste. [Threshold U-4]
Solid waste collection, transport, and disposal are handled by a contracted private firm that hauls
collected materials to several regional landfills and materials recovery facilities. For household waste
disposal, Rancho Cucamonga utilizes a three-container system for recycling, organics collection, and
waste disposal. Solid waste generated in the city is transferred to Burrtec’s West Valley MRF. Solid
waste that is not diverted is primarily disposed at Mid-Valley Landfill which has a remaining capacity
of 61,219,377 cubic yards (cy), and an anticipated close date of 2045. Thus, existing facilities have ample
capacity to accommodate increased volumes of waste from the city through 2040, and impacts would
be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to utilities and service systems to less than
significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid
or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.19-5: The proposed project would comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste. [Threshold U-5]
The proposed project would comply with the CALGreen Building Code Standards, which requires that
at least 65 percent of nonhazardous construction and demolition waste from nonresidential
construction operations be recycled and/or salvaged for reuse. Furthermore, the proposed project
would also comply with the requirements of AB 341 that mandates recycling for commercial land uses.
Additionally, any organic waste generated in amounts over a certain threshold would be recycled in
Page 307
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 44 -
accordance with AB 1826. Therefore, the proposed project would comply with all applicable federal,
State, and local solid waste regulations and impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse impacts to utilities and service systems to less than
significant levels. Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid
or substantially lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
20. Wildfire
Impact 5.20-1: Buildout of the proposed project would not substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. [Threshold W-1]
The City of Rancho Cucamonga has prepared an EOP and an Evacuation Assessment to ensure the
most effective allocation of resources during times of emergency for the maximum benefit and
protection of the civilian population. The City’s LHMP is designed to provide mitigation measures to
address local hazards, and the City’s Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) assists the
community to define level of risk, assess vulnerability, provide guidance for reducing risks, manage
vegetation fuels, increase preparedness, formulate pre-fire response and evacuation plans, and increase
community resiliency.
Buildout under the proposed project would not result in substantial changes to the circulation patterns
or emergency access routes in the City or SOI. The Emergency Management Division of the RCFPD
coordinates emergency management functions within Rancho Cucamonga and the RCFPD adheres to
the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) and the National Incident Management
System (NIMS). During an emergency, standard emergency response procedures of the Rancho
Cucamonga Police Department and RCFPD are conducted in tandem. ReadyRC, the Academy that
prepares individuals for various emergencies and disasters has published a guide that includes
evacuation routes and centers that residents can use during emergencies.
Future development would be required to comply with applicable fire and building codes. To ensure
emergency services in the City and SOI are not impaired by future development, all development
projects in the City and SOI are reviewed by the RCFPD prior to approval. RCFPD has amended the
Fire Code to require two points of access for all new development and for areas proposing increased
residential densities. Additionally, proposed General Plan policies would ensure effective emergency
response. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse wildfire impacts to less than significant levels.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially
lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Page 308
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 45 -
Impact 5.20-2: The proposed project would not exacerbate wildfire risks due to slope,
prevailing winds, and other factors, thereby exposing project occupants to
elevated particulate concentrations from a wildfire. [Threshold W-2]
The City of Rancho Cucamonga and its SOI are vulnerable to and at significant risk of wildfires. During
a wildfire event, people within the air basin are exposed to elevated levels of particulates. The type and
extent of vegetation and fuel, wind and climatic patterns, general topography and canyons, and other
local characteristics make the City more vulnerable to wildfires. Residential neighborhoods,
commercial zones, and open space are all located in the Wildland Urban Interface Area (WUIFA), and
buildout of the proposed project would result in new development in the WUIFA, thereby placing
more assets in the VHFHSZ. To protect development in the WUIFA, the city requires adherence to a
wide range of state and local codes (California Fire Code, CAL FIRE fire safe design requirements,
City Fire and Public Works Standards, RCFPD wildfire requirements, and other standards).
With adherence to these building practices and wildfire management requirements, as well as the
policies in the General Plan Update, impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse wildfire impacts to less than significant levels.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially
lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Impact 5.20-3: The proposed project would require the installation and maintenance of
associated infrastructure in areas that are undeveloped or vacant which could
exacerbate fire risk or may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment. [Threshold W-3]
Buildout of the General Plan Update would result in additional infrastructure, such as roadways and
transmission lines, in underdeveloped and undeveloped areas of the City and SOI in order to serve
new development. Some of this new infrastructure would likely be constructed in the WUIFA or
VHFHSZ. To protect development in these areas from the risk of wildfire, the City requires adherence
the regulations under the California Fire Code that provide minimum standards to increase the ability
of a building to resist the intrusion of flames or embers from a vegetation fire and building with
materials that meet performance standards, CAL FIRE fire-safe design requirements that include
standards for setbacks and maintenance of defensible space and for secondary egress, the City’s
standard conditions of approval, RCFPD wildfire requirements that include steps for home
maintenance and landscaping practices, as well as emergency and evacuation preparation, and other
standards and recommendations outlined in the City’s EOP, Evacuation Assessment, LHMP, and
CWPP. Additionally, the General Plan Update policies would minimize risk from wildfire hazards.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse wildfire impacts to less than significant levels.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially
lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
Page 309
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 46 -
Impact 5.20-4: The proposed project would not expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result
of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes. [Threshold W-4]
Flooding
Flood hazard zones cover approximately 3,857 acres of the City while other areas within the City may
experience flooding during a heavy precipitation event. Less than 10 percent of the City and SOI are
subject to a 100-year flood event, although flood hazards have the potential to impact a significant
amount of the community. The counties of Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino are working with
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to design and construct the Santa Ana River Mainstream
Project which will provide increased flood protection to the communities in the three counties, and
will include specific environmental restoration projects. It is anticipated that the project may be
completed in 2021, pending Federal appropriations.
Development in flood hazard areas would be required to comply with flood protection standards that
reduce vulnerability to flood impacts and ensure safe use and occupation of structures, such as
Municipal Code 19.12, Floodplain Management Regulations. Additionally, the proposed project
includes policies which would reduce or minimize run-off to less than significant.
Landslides and Debris Flow
Areas with steep slopes, adverse joints or deep weathering have a potential for failure. Within the City
and SOI, potential landslides or slope failure are expected in areas with steep slopes in the northwestern
corner. Additionally, slopes steeper than 25 percent are found on Red Hill and at the foothills north of
the City. Areas with rock fall hazards are confined to the hillsides at the northern edge of the City and
SOI. Streams systems from the eastern San Gabriel Mountains created alluvial fans beneath the City;
these fans and washes represent debris flow events in the recent geologic period.
Development in the hillsides is regulated by Chapter 17.52, Hillside Development, of the Municipal
Code, which includes design standards and guidelines intended to facilitate the appropriate
development of hillside areas. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Finding. Compliance with existing regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval, and
General Plan Policies would minimize adverse wildfire impacts to less than significant levels.
Accordingly, no changes or alterations to the proposed project were required to avoid or substantially
lessen any significant environmental impacts under those thresholds.
C. SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS THAT CANNOT
BE MITIGATED TO BELOW THE LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
The following summary describes the unavoidable adverse impact of the proposed project where there
were no feasible mitigation measures or no further standard conditions of approval that could reduce
the impact to below the threshold of significance. The following impacts would remain significant and
unavoidable:
Page 310
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 47 -
1. Aesthetics
Cumulative Impacts
Cumulative aesthetic impacts are based on potential changes to the visual quality in the City, the SOI,
and the surrounding area. More intense urban development in Rancho Cucamonga and in the adjacent
cities and unincorporated County area is expected as vacant land is used for development of new
residential, commercial, light industrial and other institutional or public land uses, or the redevelopment
of older structures. This future development would alter the visual quality of the landscape through
the introduction of structures in currently open areas and the redevelopment of older structures to
other land uses or to higher density/intensity uses. Future development would contribute to the
cumulative loss of undeveloped land in Rancho Cucamonga, adjacent cities, and San Bernardino
County. The permanent change in visual character of the city and surrounding areas from past and
future development would be considered a significant cumulative impact.
Future development and redevelopment proposed under the General Plan Update would remain
consistent with the design standards of the City’s current General Plan and standard conditions of
approval, and would be subject to discretionary review by the Planning Commission and/or City
Council as well as final design review by the Design Review Committee. All development that adheres
to the General Plan Update goals and policies, municipal code, standard conditions of approval, and
development standards would result in less than significant aesthetic impacts. However, although the
visual character of Rancho Cucamonga and its SOI would only incrementally change as development
intensity increases, when combined with past development in the city and SOI, the General Plan’s
contribution to the visual impact would be cumulatively considerable.
While compliance with the General Plan Update goals and policies, the City’s standard conditions of
approval, and the municipal code would prevent light spillover and adverse impacts on adjacent light-
sensitive uses, when combined with past and future development in the adjacent cities and
unincorporated County area, the project’s contribution to the cumulative impact would be cumulatively
considerable.
Mitigation Measures
There are no feasible mitigation measures.
Finding
Because the actions of the City cover both discretionary projects that are subject to CEQA and
ministerial projects that are not, the City drafted standard conditions of approval that would apply to
all land use decisions. In addition, the General Plan includes policies and standard conditions of
approval that are specifically designed to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect as identified in the DEIR. The General Plan policies and standard conditions of approval,
including a mitigation measure that requires application to them are included in MMRP. The City
hereby finds that the implementation of the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies
are feasible, and are therefore adopted.
Page 311
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 48 -
Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other factors, that would mitigate this impact to a less-
than-significant level, and further, that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed
in the MMRP and the alternatives identified in the EIR, as discussed in Section IV of these Findings
(Public Resources Code §§ 21081(a)(1), (3); Guidelines §§ 15091(a)(1), (3)). As described in the
Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable because
specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or
statewide environmental benefits, of the proposed project outweigh its significant effects on the
environment.
2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Impact 5.2-1: The proposed project would convert Farmland to nonagricultural uses, but would not result in the conversion of forest land to nonforest uses. [Thresholds AG-1 and AG-5]
Though Rancho Cucamonga is largely developed, pockets of agricultural land remain, predominantly
in the form of vineyards and orchards that are remnants from the city’s agricultural heritage. Of the
total 7,352 acres of farmland in the Plan Area (City of Rancho Cucamonga and SOI), approximately
13.37 acres are designated Prime Farmland, 125.12 acres are Unique Farmland, and 0.06 acres are
Farmland of Statewide Importance.
The proposed Land Use Plan does not include an agricultural designation. The 3,796.14 acres with a
Rural Open Space designation in the proposed Land Use Plan would allow for existing conventional
agricultural uses to continue. However, the City expects that all conventional agriculture would
eventually be developed according to the land use designation of each parcel. Although unconventional
agriculture would continue to be operational (e.g. indoor growing, community plots, etc.), no
agricultural lands designated by the FMMP as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of
Statewide Importance would be preserved under the General Plan Update. Therefore, the proposed
project would convert approximately 7,352 acres of agricultural land to nonagricultural uses, including
13.37 acres of Prime Farmland that would continue to be designated Low Density Residential and Very
Low Density Residential.
Future development associated with buildout of the proposed General Plan Update Land Use Plan
could result in the conversion of these farmland areas to nonagricultural uses, a significant impact.
Preservation of off-site agricultural land is not feasible due to the developed nature of the city and the
region. Preserved land would likely be in a developed portion of a city surrounded by urban uses and
could be subject to nuisance complaints and development pressure. Therefore, there are no feasible
mitigation measures to address this impact under the proposed land use plan, and impacts would be
significant and unavoidable.
Grazing lands include scattered undeveloped lands in the city and the foothills of the San Gabriel
Mountains. The loss of small, scattered undeveloped lands for grazing would not adversely affect
Farmlands, nor would it result in a significant impact related to the conversion to nonagricultural uses.
Page 312
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 49 -
Additionally, the Plan Area does not include lands that qualify as forest land of timberland. Therefore,
no impacts would occur related to the loss or conversion of forest land to a nonforest use.
Mitigation Measures
There are no feasible mitigation measures.
Finding
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR The changes are
identified in the form of the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed in the
MMRP. The City hereby finds that the implementation of the standard conditions of approval and
General Plan policies are feasible, and are therefore adopted.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other factors, that would mitigate this impact to a less-
than-significant level, and further, that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed
in the MMRP and the alternatives identified in the EIR, as discussed in Section IV of these Findings
(Public Resources Code §§ 21081(a)(1), (3); Guidelines §§ 15091(a)(1), (3)). As described in the
Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable because
specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or
statewide environmental benefits, of the proposed project outweigh its significant effects on the
environment.
3. Air Quality
Impact 5.3-2: The proposed project would cause construction-generated criteria air pollutant or precursor emissions to exceed South Coast AQMD’s recommended thresholds. [Threshold AQ-2]
The General Plan Update would accommodate future development of varying land uses which would
generate construction-related emissions of criteria air pollutants and precursors, including VOC, NOx,
PM10, and PM2.5 from site preparation, off-road equipment, material delivery, worker commute trips,
and other activities. Fugitive dust emissions PM10 and PM2.5, emissions of ozone precursors, paving,
and application of architectural coatings would result from construction activities.
Specific construction phasing and intensity are unknown. The levels of emissions generated through
these activities would depend on the characteristics of individual future development projects under
the General Plan Update, including the size and type of land uses being developed, which would
determine the length and intensity of construction activity.
Construction activities were assumed to occur at a constant rate over the General Plan Update horizon
period of 19 years to provide an illustrative analysis of construction emissions. Construction emission
estimates were modeled and are shown in Table 5.3-9, Modeled Maximum Daily Emissions of Criteria Air
Page 313
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 50 -
Pollutants and Precursors Emissions (lb/day), of the DEIR. As shown in Table 5.3-9, construction activity
associated with the General Plan Update would generate VOC, NOX, and PM10 emissions in excess of
South Coast AQMD’s recommended thresholds. Construction activities resulting from
implementation of the General Plan Update could contribute substantially to the SoCAB’s
nonattainment status for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 and could result in an increase in the potential for
adverse health impacts from these pollutants.
Implementation of policies and action items from the General Plan Update would reduce construction-
generated emissions of criteria air pollutants and precursors, but it cannot be guaranteed that emissions
from individual discretionary projects would be reduced to below the South Coast AQMD thresholds.
The addition of NOX, which is a precursor to ozone, could result in an increase in ambient
concentrations in the SoCAB and, moreover, increase the likelihood that ambient concentrations
exceed the California and National AAQS. Also, the increase in construction-generated emissions of
PM10 and PM2.5 could impede air quality planning efforts to bring the SoCAB into attainment of the
AAQS.
Due to the nonattainment status of the SoCAB for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5, construction activities
associated with implementation of the General Plan Update may result in adverse air quality impacts
to surrounding land uses and may contribute to the existing adverse air quality condition in the city.
Based on conservative modeling, it is likely that emissions would exceed South Coast AQMD
thresholds at some point during buildout of the General Plan Update. The Resource Conservation
Element of the General Plan Update includes goals and policies focused on reducing criteria air
pollutant and precursor emissions from construction activity. However, implementation of these
policies cannot guarantee construction-generated emissions would be reduced to below the South
Coast AQMD thresholds. Therefore, construction emissions could contribute to the existing
nonattainment condition in the SoCAB and the city with respect to the California and National AAQS
for ozone and PM2.5 and with respect to the California AAQS for PM10 and could result in an increase
in the potential for adverse health impacts to occur from exposure to ozone and PM10.
Mitigation Measures
There are no feasible mitigation measures.
Finding
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR. The changes are
identified in the form of the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed in the
MMRP. The City hereby finds that the implementation of the standard conditions of approval and
General Plan policies are feasible, and are therefore adopted.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other factors, that would mitigate this impact to a less-
than-significant level, and further, that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed
in the MMRP and the alternatives identified in the EIR, as discussed in Section IV of these Findings
Page 314
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 51 -
(Public Resources Code §§ 21081(a)(1), (3); Guidelines §§ 15091(a)(1), (3)). As described in the
Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable because
specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or
statewide environmental benefits, of the proposed project outweigh its significant effects on the
environment.
Impact 5.3-3: The proposed project would result in a net increase in long-term operational criteria air pollutant and precursor emissions that exceed South Coast AQMD-recommended
thresholds. [Threshold AQ-2]
Future development and other physical changes that could occur as a result of General Plan Update
implementation would result in long-term operational emissions of VOC, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5.
Operational emissions would be generated from area sources, energy use, and from vehicle trips
associated with new land use development. Table 5.3-10, Summary of Maximum Daily Operational
Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants and Precursors in 2040 (lb/day), of the DEIR, summarizes the maximum
daily operation-related emissions of criteria air pollutants and precursors and the daily significance
thresholds established by South Coast AQMD.
As shown in Table 5.3-10, operational activities would result in emissions of VOC, NOX, CO, PM10,
and PM2.5 that exceed the South Coast AQMD thresholds of significance. The General Plan Update’s
contribution to operational criteria air pollutants and precursors could result in greater acute or chronic
health impacts compared to existing conditions.
Stationary sources, such as boilers, heaters, flares, and other types of combustion equipment associated
with industrial uses undergo a permitting process by South Coast AQMD. The permits approved by
South Coast AQMD require emission caps for sources that are tied to attaining or maintaining the
AAQS. Stationary sources are required to implement and comply with applicable South Coast AQMD
rules for their specific operation. A stationary source may also be required to offset its emissions of
criteria air pollutants and precursors in order to be permitted.
While there are policies in the General Plan Update that would reduce criteria air pollutant and
precursor emissions, it is unknown if emission levels from future development would be reduced below
the South Coast AQMD thresholds. Because the SoCAB is in nonattainment for California and
National AAQS for ozone and PM2.5 and for California AAQS for PM10, future development under
the General Plan Update could contribute to the existing nonattainment status.
Mitigation Measures
There are no feasible mitigation measures.
Finding
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR. The changes are
identified in the form of the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed in the
Page 315
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 52 -
MMRP. The City hereby finds that the implementation of the standard conditions of approval and
General Plan policies are feasible, and are therefore adopted.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other factors, that would mitigate this impact to a less-
than-significant level, and further, that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed
in the MMRP and the alternatives identified in the EIR, as discussed in Section IV of these Findings
(Public Resources Code §§ 21081(a)(1), (3); Guidelines §§ 15091(a)(1), (3)). As described in the
Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable because
specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or
statewide environmental benefits, of the proposed project outweigh its significant effects on the
environment.
Impact 5.3-5: The proposed project would expose sensitive receptors to substantial increases in toxic air contaminant emissions. [Threshold AQ-3]
Implementation of the General Plan Update could result in exposure of sensitive receptors to
construction-related TACs. However, given that future development under the General Plan Update
would occur by 2040 and would occur in various areas throughout the city, it is unlikely that any one
sensitive receptor would be exposed to construction-related TACs for extended periods of time.
Therefore, construction activity as a result of the General Plan Update would not result in the exposure
of existing or new sensitive receptors to a substantial increase in TAC emissions. The General Plan
Update would also result in an increase in total VMT along local roadways within the city as a result of
future growth and development. Because there are roads in and around the city that exceed 100,000
vehicles per day, new sensitive receptors could be exposed to roadway traffic levels that could result in
adverse health effects from TACs. However, the General Plan includes policies and action items that
would minimize TAC impacts to the extent feasible. Regarding stationary sources of TACs, the General
Plan Update includes policies that would limit exposure of new sensitive receptors to TACs from
stationary sources such as industrial land uses. Additionally, all new development undergoing
discretionary review would be required to evaluate existing TAC exposure and incorporate available
reduction measures in accordance with SCAQMD requirements. However, it cannot be guaranteed
that emissions of TACs and associated health risk would be reduced to an acceptable level for
individual projects. In consideration of these factors, implementation of the General Plan Update could
result in the exposure of new sensitive receptors to a substantial increase in TAC emissions.
Mitigation Measures
There are no feasible mitigation measures.
Finding
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR. The changes are
identified in the form of the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed in the
Page 316
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 53 -
MMRP. The City hereby finds that the implementation of the standard conditions of approval and
General Plan policies are feasible, and are therefore adopted.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other factors, that would mitigate this impact to a less-
than-significant level, and further, that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed
in the MMRP and the alternatives identified in the EIR, as discussed in Section IV of these Findings
(Public Resources Code §§ 21081(a)(1), (3); Guidelines §§ 15091(a)(1), (3)). As described in the
Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable because
specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or
statewide environmental benefits, of the proposed project outweigh its significant effects on the
environment.
4. Biological Resources
Impact 5.4-1: Buildout of the proposed Land Use Plan would impact sensitive plant and animal species known to occur in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. [Threshold B-1]
The majority of conservation areas, both existing and proposed, are in the northeastern portion of the
City and SOI. Much of the SOI is undeveloped and includes areas with natural vegetation, including
the San Bernardino National Forest. Most of the City is highly urbanized and provides minimal habitat
value for sensitive and special status species. Less developed areas in the City and SOI that are open
space, water features, or agricultural land have the potential to support native species and natural
communities. Figure 5.4-2, Designated Critical Habitat in the City and SOI, of the DEIR, identifies critical
habitat for the San Bernardino kangaroo rat that has been designated within or adjacent to the study
area. Potential land covers that could contain sensitive habitat for biological species are open space
areas, vacant urban land, and agricultural land. The proposed project allows for development on vacant
land and agricultural land in the City and SOI that could potentially include sensitive biological
resources.
There are 61 special status species that have CNDDB or CNPS Rare Plant Inventory records in the
Plan Area. These special status plant species could be associated with valuable habitat for wildlife, and
in some cases may contribute to wildlife movement. Therefore, the proposed project could impact
areas of previously undisturbed habitat. Buildout of the City and SOI in accordance with the General
Plan Update could impact special status vegetation or special status wildlife in the City. As the city’s
environment is not statis and may change over time as a result of development, other vegetation
communities may become sensitive and/or other species may be listed in the future.
The proposed Resource Conservation Element identifies policies to reduce impacts on Rancho
Cucamonga’s biological resources. However, even with adherence to the City’s policies protecting
biological resources, standard conditions of approval, and compliance with state and federal law, future
development projects could require more detailed evaluations of biological resources and formulation
of mitigation measures by a qualified biologist. Even though most of the future growth is anticipated
to occur in focus areas that are currently developed and are surrounded by existing development and
Page 317
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 54 -
unlikely to provide high quality habitat, the impact on sensitive plant and animal species is considered
significant and unavoidable.
Mitigation Measures
There are no feasible mitigation measures.
Finding
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR. The changes are
identified in the form of the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed in the
MMRP. The City hereby finds that the implementation of the standard conditions of approval and
General Plan policies are feasible, and are therefore adopted.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other factors, that would mitigate this impact to a less-
than-significant level, and further, that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed
in the MMRP and the alternatives identified in the EIR, as discussed in Section IV of these Findings
(Public Resources Code §§ 21081(a)(1), (3); Guidelines §§ 15091(a)(1), (3)). As described in the
Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable because
specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or
statewide environmental benefits, of the proposed project outweigh its significant effects on the
environment.
5. Cultural Resources
Impact 5.5-1: Buildout of the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan could impact historic resources. [Threshold C-1]
There are at least 445 previously identified properties in the City’s “Historic Site List,” 3 properties
listed in the NRHP, 9 properties listed in the CRHR, 3 California Historical Landmarks, 6 California
Points of Historical Interest. The City has 77 designated local landmarks and 29 designated points of
interest. The City identified 8 properties potentially eligible for listing in the NRHP that were identified
as “Potential National Register” properties; 115 properties identified as “Potential Local Landmarks,”
3 of which have been demolished; 24 properties determined insignificant or “Survey Determined
Insignificant;” and 154 properties that were listed as “Survey Undetermined Significant.” There are no
historical resources in the SOI.
Future development under the proposed General Plan could adversely impact some of these historic
resources through changes to accommodate adaptive reuse, removal, or reconstruction. Compliance
with the proposed General Plan Update policies, and state and federal regulations would ensure that
development would not result in adverse impacts to identified historic and cultural resources. While
the regulations provide a process for recognizing historic buildings and places, they do not prevent the
reuse or modification of them.
Page 318
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 55 -
Identified historic structures and sites that are potentially eligible for future historic resources listing
may be vulnerable to development activities accompanying infill, redevelopment, or revitalization that
would be accommodated by the General Plan Update. In addition, other buildings or structures that
could meet the NRHP criteria upon reaching 50 years of age might be impacted by development or
redevelopment activity that would be accommodated by the General Plan Update, and construction
could damage or destroy as-yet undiscovered resources. Regardless of the implementation of General
Plan policies and adherence to state regulations, some historic properties may be significantly affected
by implementation of this General Plan. Despite the implementation of standard conditions of
approval 5.5-4 through 5.5-7, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.
Mitigation Measures
There are no feasible mitigation measures.
Finding
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR. The changes are
identified in the form of the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed in the
MMRP. The City hereby finds that the implementation of the standard conditions of approval and
General Plan policies are feasible, and are therefore adopted.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other factors, that would mitigate this impact to a less-
than-significant level, and further, that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed
in the MMRP and the alternatives identified in the EIR, as discussed in Section IV of these Findings
(Public Resources Code §§ 21081(a)(1), (3); Guidelines §§ 15091(a)(1), (3)). As described in the
Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable because
specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or
statewide environmental benefits, of the proposed project outweigh its significant effects on the
environment.
6. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impact 5.8-4: The proposed project would be inconsistent with the State’s ability to achieve the long-term reduction goals of Executive Orders S-3-05. [Threshold GHG-2]
The General Plan Update horizon year is 2040 and does not extend to the year 2050. As a result, an
interim CAP target for 2040 was established by the City in the CAP that is consistent with the pace of
reductions needed by 2040 to reduce emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050, as established
in Executive Orders B-30-15 and S-3-05. Because Executive Order B-55-18 calls for net zero GHG
emissions no later than 2045, it sets a more aggressive GHG reduction goal than Executive Orders B-
30-15 and S-3-05. If the City’s 2040 communitywide GHG emissions would not achieve the City’s
Page 319
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 56 -
2040 reduction target, then such emissions would be considered inconsistent with the state’s ability to
achieve the long-term reduction goals of Executive Orders S-3-05, B-30-15, and B-55-18.
If the strategies in the CAP are fully implemented, a total reduction of 199,709 MTCO2e by 2040 would
be achieved. These reductions place the City’s post-2030 communitywide emissions on a downgrade
trajectory that makes substantial progress toward the City’s and state’s long-term GHG reduction goals,
but they are not sufficient to achieve the 339,478 MTCO2e of reductions needed to achieve the City’s
2040 emissions reduction target.
The measures in the CAP achieve 59 percent of the reductions needed to achieve the 2040 emissions
target. Because the City, through the implementation of the General Plan Update and CAP, would not
achieve its 2040 emissions target, it is not projected that the City would achieve the long-term statewide
emissions targets in Executive Orders B-30-15 and S-3-05 to reduce emissions 80 percent below 1990
levels by 2050. For the same reasons, the City would not achieve the State’s carbon neutrality goal by
2045 as established in B-55-18 because the CAP does not include strategies that would achieve net-
zero emissions by 2045. As a result, this impact would be potentially significant.
Mitigation Measures
There are no feasible mitigation measures.
Finding
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR. The changes are
identified in the form of the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed in the
MMRP. The City hereby finds that the implementation of the standard conditions of approval and
General Plan policies are feasible, and are therefore adopted.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other factors, that would mitigate this impact to a less-
than-significant level, and further, that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed
in the MMRP and the alternatives identified in the EIR, as discussed in Section IV of these Findings
(Public Resources Code §§ 21081(a)(1), (3); Guidelines §§ 15091(a)(1), (3)). As described in the
Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable because
specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or
statewide environmental benefits, of the proposed project outweigh its significant effects on the
environment.
7. Mineral Resources
Cumulative Impacts
The cumulative impacts on mineral resources are evaluated based on the potential impacts of past and
future development in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, SOI, and Claremont-Upland and San
Bernardino Production-Consumption Regions.
Page 320
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 57 -
The State Mining and Geology Board recognizes that urban development has precluded access to most
known resources through development on or adjacent to the resource areas. Future development and
redevelopment under the General Plan Update would contribute to cumulative demand for
construction aggregates in the region. Most of the production-consumption regions in the state do not
have sufficient supplies to meet their projected 50-year demand. The surrounding cities contain mining
operations, two of which are located within 1.5 miles of the City boundary. The proposed project
would increase the demand for aggregate resources, but the California Geological Survey already
estimates that the demand for these resources is greater than the supply. Therefore, the loss of
additional mineral resources due to buildout of the city, although not locally significant, would
contribute to a cumulatively significant impact related to the loss of known mineral resources. This
impact would be significant and unavoidable.
Mitigation Measures
There are no feasible mitigation measures.
Finding
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR. The changes are
identified in the form of the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed in the
MMRP. The City hereby finds that the implementation of the standard conditions of approval and
General Plan policies are feasible, and are therefore adopted.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other factors, that would mitigate this impact to a less-
than-significant level, and further, that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed
in the MMRP and the alternatives identified in the EIR, as discussed in Section IV of these Findings
(Public Resources Code §§ 21081(a)(1), (3); Guidelines §§ 15091(a)(1), (3)). As described in the
Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable because
specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or
statewide environmental benefits, of the proposed project outweigh its significant effects on the
environment.
8. Noise
Impact 5.13-1: Construction activities would result in temporary noise increases in the vicinity of the future development under the General Plan. [Threshold N-1]
The City has established standards for acceptable noise levels in Section 17.66.050 of the Development
Code for construction activities affecting various land uses. Construction noise levels are considered
substantial when they occur at a residential, school, church, or similar land use between 8:00 p.m. and
7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturdays, or any time on Sunday or a national holiday and exceed 65
dBA. Additionally, construction noise levels are considered substantial when they occur at a
Page 321
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 58 -
commercial or industrial land use between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., including Saturday and Sunday,
and exceed 70 dBA at these uses.
The highest noise levels from the types of construction activities that would take place under 2040
General Plan implementation usually occur during the grading and site excavation phases. Large earth-
moving equipment like graders, scrapers, and dozers generate maximum noise levels between 80 to 85
dBA when measured at 50 feet from a construction site. Other construction equipment like pile drivers
can generate noise levels up to 101 dB at 50 feet.
Considering building construction noise of 86 dBA Leq without pile driving, residential, schools,
churches, or similar uses within 580 feet of construction activity, and commercial/industrial uses within
330 feet construction activity may be exposed to substantial construction noise levels exceeding the
City’s noise standards of 65 dBA Leq and 70 dBA Leq, respectively. Considering building construction
noise with pile driving, of 91 dBA Leq, residential, schools, churches, or similar uses within 1,000 feet
of construction activity, and commercial/industrial uses within 530 feet of construction activity may
be exposed to substantial construction noise levels exceeding the City’s noise standards.
In addition, certain types of construction work, such as utility installation and roadway improvements
associated with implementation of the proposed project could periodically occur during nighttime
hours (for example to avoid causing traffic congestion) and expose existing or future residential,
schools, churches, or similar uses, and commercial/industrial uses to substantial noise levels during the
sensitive times of the day. Therefore, the development associated with the 2040 General Plan would
generate substantial temporary increases in construction noise levels. This impact would be potentially
significant.
Implementation of standard condition of approval 5.13-1, which requires project applicants to prepare
a site-specific construction noise analysis and, if required, implement measures, would avoid or
substantially lessen potential construction noise impacts. However, because site-specific construction
details are not known at this time, it is not possible to conclude that implementation of standard
condition of approval 5.13-1 would avoid generation of substantial temporary construction. Further,
available construction noise attenuation measures (e.g., temporary walls, mufflers), can typically achieve
a maximum of 10 dB noise reduction, which may not be adequate to achieve noise standards depending
on the proximity of construction activities to nearby land uses. Therefore, this impact would be
significant and unavoidable.
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of standard condition of approval 5.13-1.
Finding
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR. These changes are
identified in the form of standard condition of approval 5.13-1. The City hereby finds that
implementation of standard condition of approval 5.13-1 is feasible, and the condition is therefore
adopted.
Page 322
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 59 -
Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other factors, that would mitigate this impact to a less-
than-significant level, and further, that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the standard condition of approval 5.13-1 and the alternatives
identified in the EIR, as discussed in Section IV of these Findings (Public Resources Code §§
21081(a)(1), (3); Guidelines §§ 15091(a)(1), (3)). As described in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable because specific overriding
economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or statewide
environmental benefits, of the proposed project outweigh its significant effects on the environment.
Impact 5.13-2: Project implementation could generate a substantial permanent increase in traffic noise levels at noise-sensitive land uses in excess local standards. [Threshold N-2]
Land use development that results in traffic increases can also result in long-term traffic noise increases,
or decreases, on roadways and freeways in the City. New development and associated traffic increases
could result in exposure of existing receptors or future planned development to substantial permanent
noise increases.
As shown in Table 5.13-7, of the DEIR, there are two segments (segments 2 and 5) where traffic noise
levels would increase from below 60 dBA CNEL to above 60 dBA CNEL, and eight segments
(segments 24, 25, 33, 34, 41, 62, 63, and 69) where traffic noise would increase from below 70 dBA to
above 70 dBA as a result of General Plan Update implementation. In addition, on numerous segments
that exceed 70 dBA CNEL in the existing condition (2021), noise levels would increase by more than
1 dB and on all freeway segments; and on four segments (segments 77, 78, 79, 80) that exceed 75 dBA
in the existing condition (2021), there would be noise increases as a result of implementation of the
2040 General Plan.
General Plan Policy N-1.1 requires new development to meet the noise compatibility standards
identified in Table N-1 and Policy N-1.2 requires the use of design-related noise reduction measures
to achieve interior and exterior noise standards. However, project-specific impacts are unknown at this
time. Although the proposed land use pattern would reduce traffic noise on some segments, the
increases in traffic volumes result in substantial long-term increases in traffic noise along the segments
described above, which would be a potentially significant impact. Implementation of standard
condition of approval 5.13-2, which requires project applicants to prepare a traffic noise study to
evaluate potential traffic noise impacts on existing noise sensitive receptors, would routinely avoid
exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial permanent traffic noise levels. However, there may be
cases where noise reduction measures are either infeasible or inadequate for reducing traffic noise to
less than significant level. Therefore, because there may be cases where discretionary development
could result in project-generated traffic noise above the City standards and such project-generated
noise would not always be reduced to acceptable levels, this impact would be significant and
unavoidable.
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of standard condition of approval 5.13-2.
Page 323
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 60 -
Finding
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR. These changes are
identified in the form of standard condition of approval 5.13-2. The City hereby finds that
implementation of standard condition of approval 5.13-2 is feasible, and the condition is therefore
adopted.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other factors, that would mitigate this impact to a less-
than-significant level, and further, that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the standard condition of approval 5.13-2 and the alternatives
identified in the EIR, as discussed in Section IV of these Findings (Public Resources Code §§
21081(a)(1), (3); Guidelines §§ 15091(a)(1), (3)). As described in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable because specific overriding
economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or statewide
environmental benefits, of the proposed project outweigh its significant effects on the environment.
Impact 5.13-4: Expose new sensitive land uses to noise compatibility standards identified in 2040 General Plan Noise Element Table N-1. [Threshold N-4]
Traffic Noise
To evaluate noise exposure at new sensitive receptors, traffic noise contours for the with-project future
(2040) conditions were modeled and are shown in Table 5.13-8, of the DEIR. As shown in Table 5.13-
8, future traffic noise levels could be as high as 80.3 dBA on freeways and 73.5 dBA on roadways.
Depending on the specific land use type and proximity to roadway segments, applicable noise standards
for respective land uses (Table N-1) could be exceeded at new receptors. However, the 2040 General
Plan includes policies that address the placement of new noise-sensitive receptors near transportation
noise sources. Nonetheless, provided that specific land use types and their proximity to existing and
future traffic noise levels are unknown and the ability of applicable noise attenuation measures (e.g.,
setbacks, building insulation, sound barriers) to be fully implemented such that acceptable noise levels
at future receptors is always achieved is not guaranteed, it is possible that new development located in
proximity to existing roads could be exposed to levels that exceed levels in Table N-1.
Railroad and Transit Noise
Placement of new receptors near existing or future planned rail lines could expose people to substantial
noise levels, depending on the proximity to rail alignments, the type of rail, and daily frequency of
service. Several new and expansions to existing rail services are planned within and near the City that
would generate noise and have the potential to affect new sensitive receptors. Although it is more likely
that higher density uses, that have higher allowable noise standards (i.e., 70 dBA) would occur closer
to new rail lines, low density residential and City Corridor uses would also be allowed to occur adjacent
to the proposed Brightline alignment. Thus, given that specific receptor types and their proximity to
existing and future planned rail alignments are unknown, it is possible that new receptors would be
Page 324
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 61 -
located within distances to rail that could expose them to noise levels that exceed the applicable noise
standard for the respective land use type.
New development associated with the 2040 General Plan could potentially be in close proximity to
existing roadways and existing or future planned railroads. Thus, because specific land use development
details are unknown, including land use type and exposure levels, it cannot be guaranteed that noise
levels in Table N-1 would always be achievable. This impact would be potentially significant.
Standard conditions of approval 5.13-4a through 5.13-4e would reduce exterior and interior noise to
acceptable levels. However, there may be cases where noise reduction measures are either infeasible or
inadequate for reducing traffic noise to less than significant level. Therefore, because there may be
cases where new development could result in exposure to substantial permanent noise (traffic and rail)
above standards in Table N-1, this impact would be significant and unavoidable.
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of standard conditions of approval 5.13-4a through 5.13-4e.
Finding
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR. These changes are
identified in the form of standard conditions of approval 5.13-4a through 5.13-4e. The City hereby
finds that implementation of standard conditions of approval 5.13-4a through 5.13-4e is feasible, and
the condition is therefore adopted.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other factors, that would mitigate this impact to a less-
than-significant level, and further, that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the standard conditions of approval 5.13-4a through 5.13-4e and the
alternatives identified in the EIR, as discussed in Section IV of these Findings (Public Resources Code
§§ 21081(a)(1), (3); Guidelines §§ 15091(a)(1), (3)). As described in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable because specific overriding
economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or statewide
environmental benefits, of the proposed project outweigh its significant effects on the environment.
Impact 5.13-5: Future development under the General Plan could generate short-term construction vibration or exposure to new sensitive land uses to long-term operational vibration sources that exceed City thresholds. [Threshold N-5]
Typical construction activities, such as the use of jackhammers, blasting, other high-power or vibratory
tools, compactors, and tracked equipment, may generate substantial vibration near the source.
Activities involving pile driving and blasting tend to generate the highest levels of vibration, and thus,
these activities tend to result in construction-related impacts more frequently than other construction
activities. Table 5.13-10, of the DEIR, includes reference vibration levels for construction activities
Page 325
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 62 -
that generate the highest levels of vibration. In addition, like construction noise, vibration levels would
be variable depending on the type of construction project and related equipment use.
For construction activities involving pile driving, based on FTA’s recommended procedure for
applying propagation adjustments to reference levels for a typical pile driver, vibration levels could
exceed the threshold of significance for disturbance to a sensitive land use within 500 feet of
construction activities and could exceed the threshold of significance for structural damage within 100
feet of construction activities.
For construction activities that would not involve pile driving, a roller or a dozer is generally the
equipment that causes the highest vibration levels. Using a reference vibration level for a roller and
applying standard propagation adjustments, vibration levels from construction activity without pile
driving could exceed the threshold of significance for disturbance to a sensitive land use within 80 feet
of construction activities and could exceed the threshold of significance for structural damage within
25 feet of construction activities.
The City’s nighttime construction limitations would avoid vibration-related disturbance during
nighttime hours; however, due to the level of anticipated development throughout the City, the lack of
specific construction activities and their proximity to sensitive receptors, the possibility remains for
construction activities that generate vibration to occur within distances identified above, resulting in
disturbance to sensitive land uses or structural damage. This impact would be potentially significant.
Several new and expansions to existing transit services (bus and rail) are planned within and near the
City that would generate vibration and have the potential to affect new sensitive receptors developed
within the identified Focus Areas. Placement of new receptors near existing or future planned rail right-
of-way could expose people to substantial vibration levels, depending on the proximity to rail
alignments and depending on the type of rail and daily frequency of service.
Due to the programmatic nature of this analysis, specific distances from transit types to specific uses
cannot be determined at this time because project-specific details about development under the 2040
General Plan, such as building location, materials, and soil conditions are unknown at this time. Thus,
this analysis assumes that new sensitive land uses (all uses contained in FTA’s Category 1 and 2)
proposed within 600 feet of existing or new rail and 100 feet of existing or new bus service, could
result in excessive vibration levels at new development. This impact would be potentially significant.
Implementation of standard conditions of approval 5.13-5a through 5.13-5c would result in
compliance with vibration threshold levels established to prevent structural damage. However, it is not
possible to conclude that vibration levels in all locations associated with all future development under
the proposed project would be reduced below human annoyance levels; there could be future
development that results in vibration levels that cause human annoyance. Therefore, impacts would be
significant and unavoidable.
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of standard conditions of approval 5.13-5a through 5.13-5c.
Page 326
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 63 -
Finding
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR. These changes are
identified in the form of standard conditions of approval 5.13-5a through 5.13-5ce. The City hereby
finds that implementation of standard conditions of approval 5.13-5a through 5.13-5c is feasible, and
the condition is therefore adopted.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other factors, that would mitigate this impact to a less-
than-significant level, and further, that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the standard conditions of approval 5.13-5a through 5.13-5c and the
alternatives identified in the EIR, as discussed in Section IV of these Findings (Public Resources Code
§§ 21081(a)(1), (3); Guidelines §§ 15091(a)(1), (3)). As described in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable because specific overriding
economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or statewide
environmental benefits, of the proposed project outweigh its significant effects on the environment.
9. Transportation
Impact 5.17-2: The project may be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b) regarding policies to reduce VMT. [Threshold T-2]
Table 5.17-5, of the DEIR, summarizes the results of the VMT assessment which does not include a
reduction in anticipated VMT associated with the proposed connection of high-speed rail to the
Rancho Cucamonga Transit Station. The results of the VMT assessment indicates that, with
implementation of the land use and circulation element in the proposed General Plan, VMT/SP would
be reduced by approximately 16 percent (i.e., improves) compared to the existing condition.
Furthermore, the proposed General Plan shows benefits to the region by also reducing Countywide
and Region Wide VMT accordingly.
Although the findings from the modeling indicate that the project is beneficial from a VMT efficiency
perspective using the best tool available in San Bernardino County (and the proposed General Plan is
expected to produce VMT at a rate that would not result in a significant impact), the uncertainty related
to future fuel prices, driving habits of residents, and future legislative policy could dramatically
influence VMT production in the City during the horizon of this General Plan. In addition, the intent
of the proposed project is to improve connectivity by expanding pathways, road extensions, and
removing existing barriers to access. However, implementing polices like MA-2.1 that calls for
complete streets and MA-2.3 that emphasizes connectivity, will take time to implement. It is probable
that some development projects may be proposed and considered before the citywide improvements
envisioned by the General Plan can be completed. As the modeling assumes a fully implemented
General Plan that will reduce VMT as shown in Table 5.17-5, of the DEIR, projects that occur before
buildout may increase VMT until the cumulative condition is reached. Although CEQA does not
require the assessment to investigate speculative and unforeseeable circumstances, for the purposes of
a Citywide planning effort, the City is choosing to disclose a significant VMT impact due to speculative
influences to provide complete transparency. While policies in the General Plan Update and standard
Page 327
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 64 -
conditions of approval could help reduce VMT in the City, the applicability of them as project-level
mitigation would be dependent on the significance and context of the project and the size of the impact.
Given the uncertainty, impacts are deemed significant and unavoidable.
Mitigation Measures
There are no feasible mitigation measures.
Finding
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR. The changes are
identified in the form of the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed in the
MMRP. The City hereby finds that the implementation of the standard conditions of approval and
General Plan policies are feasible, and are therefore adopted.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other factors, that would mitigate this impact to a less-
than-significant level, and further, that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed
in the MMRP and the alternatives identified in the EIR, as discussed in Section IV of these Findings
(Public Resources Code §§ 21081(a)(1), (3); Guidelines §§ 15091(a)(1), (3)). As described in the
Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable because
specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or
statewide environmental benefits, of the proposed project outweigh its significant effects on the
environment.
10. Wildfire
Cumulative Impacts
Development associated with buildout of the General Plan Update would result in new development
within the WUIFA and would place more assets in the VHFHSZ. To protect development within the
WUIFA, the City requires that future development adhere to a wide range of state and local codes,
(California Fire Code, CAL FIRE fire-safe design requirements, City Fire and Public Works Standards
[City’s standard conditions of approval], RCFPD wildfire requirements, and other standards). These
include restrictions on hillside development. Because development in the WUIFA presents challenges
for fire protection and suppression, development in these areas would be required to abide by those
requirements. With adherence to these building practices and wildfire management requirements,
development associated with the General Plan buildout would reduce wildfire risk; however, when
combined with past and future development in the adjacent cities and unincorporated County area, the
project’s contribution to the cumulative impact would be cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures
There are no feasible mitigation measures.
Page 328
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 65 -
Finding
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the DEIR. The changes are
identified in the form of the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed in the
MMRP. The City hereby finds that the implementation of the standard conditions of approval and
General Plan policies are feasible, and are therefore adopted.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other factors, that would mitigate this impact to a less-
than-significant level, and further, that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly
trained workers, make infeasible the standard conditions of approval and General Plan policies listed
in the MMRP and the alternatives identified in the EIR, as discussed in Section IV of these Findings
(Public Resources Code §§ 21081(a)(1), (3); Guidelines §§ 15091(a)(1), (3)). As described in the
Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable because
specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or
statewide environmental benefits, of the proposed project outweigh its significant effects on the
environment.
IV. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
An EIR must briefly describe the rational for selection and rejection of alternatives. The lead agency
may make an initial determination as to which alternatives are feasible, and therefore, merit in-depth
consideration, and which ones are infeasible.
A. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND REJECTED DURING THE
SCOPING/PROJECT PLANNING PROCESS
The following is a discussion of the alternatives considered during the scoping and planning process
and the reasons why they were not selected for detailed analysis in the DEIR.
1. Alternative Development Areas
The proposed General Plan covers the entire City and the Sphere of Influence. Alternative locations
are typically included in an environmental document to avoid, lessen, or eliminate the significant
impacts of a project by considering the proposed development in an entirely different location. To be
feasible, development of off-site locations must be able to fulfill the project purpose and meet most of
the project’s basic objectives. Given the nature of the proposed project (adoption of a General Plan
for the entire city and sphere of influence), it is not possible to consider an off-site alternative because
the city boundaries have been established through incorporation and later annexations. For this reason,
an off-site alternative was considered infeasible pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(c)
and was rejected as a feasible project alternative.
Finding
The City finds that there are no alternative development areas for the proposed project as the City
does not have jurisdiction over land uses outside of the City’s boundaries. As described in these
Page 329
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 66 -
Findings of Fact, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts. For significant and
unavoidable impacts, the City has determined that these impacts are acceptable because specific
overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or statewide
environmental benefits, of the proposed project outweigh its significant effects on the environment,
as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations.
2. Reduced Density Alternative
A reduced density alternative that would result in fewer residences and less non-residential
development, which would theoretically reduce traffic and thereby reducing community impacts such
as air quality, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, traffic, noise, and demand for utilities and public
services. However, such an alternative would not achieve or would only partially achieve General Plan
objectives of providing for growth of the City. This alternative would not increase jobs in the City, or
foster growth along major corridors rather than in the neighborhoods. Further, such an alternative
would not be consistent with regional planning that requires accommodation of regional housing needs
and could result in the City failing to plan for adequate capacity for those needs in accordance with
State law. Finally, by significantly restricting growth, the environmental impact of the projected growth
would increase development pressure elsewhere in the region. As a reduced development density
conflicts with regional plans, would relocate impacts outside of the city, and would not meet the project
objectives, this option was not evaluated in the EIR.
Finding
The City finds this alternative to be infeasible as this alternative would not meet all of the General Plan
objectives and would not increase jobs or foster growth along major corridors or produce the amount
of residential capacity needed to meet state law. As described in these Findings of Fact, the proposed
project would result in less than significant impacts for most impact areas. For significant and
unavoidable impacts, the City has determined that these impacts are acceptable because specific
overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or statewide
environmental benefits, of the proposed project outweigh its significant effects on the environment,
as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations.
B. ALTERNATIVES SELECTED FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS
The following alternatives were determined to represent a reasonable range of alternatives with the
potential to feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but avoid or substantially lessen
any of the significant effects of the project. Table 7-1, of the DEIR, shows the change in development
between the current General Plan and General Plan Update. Table 7-2, of the DEIR, shows a
comparison of the project alternatives to the proposed project, and Table 7-3, of the DEIR, shows a
comparison of the project alternatives to the project objectives.
1. No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative
The No Project Alternative is required to discuss the existing conditions at the time the notice of
preparation is published and evaluate what would reasonably be expected to occur in the foreseeable
future if the proposed project is not approved (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6(e)). Pursuant to
Page 330
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 67 -
CEQA, this Alternative is also based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and
community services. Therefore, the No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative assumes that the
proposed General Plan would not be adopted, and the development intensity assumed in the existing
General Plan would be followed. Table 7-1, of the DEIR, shows the projected holding capacity if all
development occurred as originally projected.
Because the Planning Area would be the same under the 2010 General Plan, the footprint-related
impacts (e.g., biological resources, cultural resources) of the No Project Alternative would be the same
as the proposed General Plan Update. The proposed General Plan Update has an estimated buildout
population of 233,088, approximately 30,000 more residents than would occur under the No Project
Alternative. The reduced population under this alternative would generally result in a reduction in
intensity-related impacts. For example, this alternative would generate fewer auto trips, traffic noise
would be less, and impacts on services and utilities would be less.
An objective of the proposed General Plan Update is to guide development into areas of the city that
have the resources to accommodate it, or where the supportive resources can be easily provided. These
areas include existing and planned regional connections to transit, as well as local mobility hubs.
Therefore, while the intensity-related impacts would be less for the city overall under the No Project
alternative, the resulting impacts would be greater than those of the proposed project. The proposed
General Plan Update would reduce the intensity of these types of impacts on a per capita basis by
taking advantage of the efficiencies of providing resources in the focus areas allowing for more non-
motorized transportation, and a more efficient movement of people and goods.
Finding
The No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative would not implement the proposed General Plan
Update policies, which are designed to further enhance the project objectives, compared to the existing
General Plan. While this alternative would generate fewer auto trips, and reduce traffic noise, and
reduce impacts on services and utilities, regional connections to transit and local mobility hubs would
be less under the No Project Alternative and the City could be in jeopardy of not planning sufficient
residential capacity pursuant to State law. As a result, specific economic, legal, social, technological, or
other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers,
make infeasible this project alternative for the reasons identified in the FEIR.
2. Dispersed Development Alternative
Integral to the design of the proposed General Plan Update is a focus on placing new development
along major transportation corridors that either have transit or will have excellent transit as the plan
develops. These areas were identified in the 2010 General Plan, and the proposed General Plan expands
on the development concepts for these areas. This emphasis on areas planned for intense development
was done specifically to make the best use of transit and to help protect the older outlying
neighborhoods from substantial growth.
This alternative would disperse the projected growth shown in Table 14-6, Buildout Projections from
the Proposed Land Use Plan, over the entire City. Changes to the existing land use designations, like
those of the proposed project, would be required to allow this growth to occur as the potential 2040
Page 331
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 68 -
buildout population of 233,088 is greater than the 2030 buildout population potential of 203,800 as
shown in Table 7-1. While this alternative was chosen to provide a counterpoint to the design approach
taken in the proposed General Plan Update, the alternative also addresses the significant and
unavoidable impacts associated with noise and air quality linked to building homes near busy transit
corridors.
Like the No Project Alternative, this alternative would occur within the existing City limits and Sphere
of Influence area. Therefore, the footprint-related effects would also be the same as the proposed
General Plan Update. This alternative would reduce the amount of development proposed in the
General Plan Update along transit corridors, which would reduce the number of residents who would
be exposed to noise and air pollutants generated in those areas. However, by diverting development
outside these corridors, traffic generated in those areas would increase noise and air pollutants
throughout the city, though at lower levels. Depending on the location of new development under this
alternative, this alternative could expose parts of the city to noise and air pollutants that would not
have been exposed under the proposed General Plan Update. By dispersing development into existing
neighborhoods, this alternative will also change their character and visual appearance likely impacting
aesthetics at a greater level than the proposed project.
However, dispersing development across the city would result in development pressure in some areas
where adequate facilities may not be available. This could result in the need to upsize existing facilities,
such as sewer and water lines, or widen roads. Having to upgrade facilities citywide rather than in select
focus areas will be more expensive and disruptive to the existing neighborhoods. This type of citywide
utility expansion is not envisioned in the proposed General Plan Update that guides for more intense
development into specific focus areas. In addition, the efficiencies gained by having development
focused in areas with existing capacity for growth would not be realized under this alternative. A more
dispersed development pattern would increase vehicle miles travelled, lead to substantive change in the
neighborhoods, and not take advantage of existing and planned transit. The increase in personal vehicle
trips would also use more energy and generate more emissions than under the proposed General Plan.
For these reasons, this alternative would not reduce overall impacts compared to the proposed General
Plan Update, and it would not reduce any of the identified significant impacts to a less than significant
level.
Finding
This Alternative would reduce the amount of residents exposed to noise and air pollutants along transit
corridors, but could divert noise and air pollutants to other parts of the City and may require upgrading
and installing city facilities (water/sewer lines, roads) in other parts of the City. As a result, specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment
opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible this project alternative for the reasons
identified in the FEIR.
Environmentally Superior Alternative
CEQA requires a lead agency to identify the “environmentally superior alternative” to the proposed
project. Because the No Project Alternative (implementation of the 2010 General Plan) would result
in an overall reduction in the level of impacts identified for the proposed General Plan Update, the No
Page 332
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 69 -
Project Alternative has been identified as “environmentally superior” to the proposed project.
However, in cases where the “No Project Alternative” is environmentally superior to the proposed
project, the environmentally superior development alternative must be identified.
The Proposed Project has been identified as the environmentally superior alternative because this
alternative would have fewer impacts related to air quality, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, public
services, and vehicle miles travelled, while achieving the benefits of the project objectives.
I. Statement of Overriding Considerations
CEQA requires decision makers to balance the benefits of the proposed project against its
unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the benefits of
the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse effects, those effects may be considered “acceptable”
(State CEQA Guidelines § 15093[a]). CEQA requires the agency to support, in writing, the specific
reasons for considering a project acceptable when significant impacts are infeasible to mitigate. Such
reasons must be based on substantial evidence in the FEIR or elsewhere in the administrative record
(State CEQA Guidelines § 15093 [b]). The agency’s statement is referred to as a Statement of
Overriding Considerations.
The following provides a description of the project’s significant and unavoidable adverse impact
and the justification for adopting a statement of overriding considerations.
C. SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
Although most potential project impacts have been substantially avoided or reduced with standard
conditions of approval, as described above, there remains 15 project impacts for which complete
mitigation is not feasible. The DEIR identified the following significant unavoidable adverse impacts
of the project, which would continue to be applicable upon implementation of the proposed project:
Aesthetics
Cumulative impacts. As there are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce cumulative impacts
to visual character and lighting in the City, SOI, and surrounding areas, impacts would be
significant and unavoidable.
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Impact 5.2-1: As the proposed project would result in the eventual development of conventional
agriculture, and no lands designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of
Statewide Importance would be preserved, impacts would be significant and unavoidable.
Air Quality
Impact 5.3-2: Due to the nonattainment status of the SoCAB for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5,
construction activities associated with implementation of the General Plan Update may result in
adverse air quality impacts. Because project-specific details are unknown at this time, impacts
would be significant and unavoidable.
Page 333
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 70 -
Impact 5.3-3: While there are policies in the General Plan Update that would reduce criteria air
pollutant and precursor emissions, it is unknown if emission levels from future development would
be reduced below the South Coast AQMD thresholds. Because the SoCAB is in nonattainment
for California and National AAQS for ozone and PM2.5 and for California AAQS for PM10, future
development under the General Plan Update could contribute to the existing nonattainment status,
and impacts are significant and unavoidable
Impact 5.3-5: As it cannot be guaranteed that emissions of TACs and associated health risk would
be reduced to an acceptable level for individual projects, impacts are significant and
unavoidable.
Biological Resources
Impact 5.4-1: Although most of the future growth is anticipated to occur in focus areas that are
currently developed and are surrounded by existing development and unlikely to provide high
quality habitat, the impact on sensitive plant and animal species is considered significant and
unavoidable.
Cultural Resources
Impact 5.5-1: Some historic properties may be significantly affected by implementation of the
General Plan Update which would result in significant and unavoidable impacts.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impact 5.8-4: Because the City, through implementation of the General Plan Update and the
CAP, would not achieve its 2040 emissions target (Executive Orders B-30-15 and S-3-05) and
would not achieve the State’s carbon neutrality goal by 2045 (Executive Order B-55-18), as such
impacts would be significant and unavoidable.
Mineral Resources
Cumulative Impacts: The proposed project would increase the demand or aggregate resources,
and therefore the loss of additional mineral resources due to buildout of the City, although not
locally significant, would cumulatively impact related loss of known mineral resources; impacts
would be significant and unavoidable.
Noise
Impact 5.13-1: Because individual construction activities and noise exposure are unknown, it is
possible that noise standards may not be met, and therefore, impacts would be significant and
unavoidable.
Impact 5.13-2: As there may be cases where noise reduction measures are either infeasible or
inadequate for reducing traffic noise, impacts would be significant and unavoidable.
Page 334
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 71 -
Impact 5.13-4: Exposing new sensitive land uses to noise levels in excess of the noise
compatibility standards could occur if noise reduction measures are either infeasible or inadequate,
impacts would be significant and unavoidable.
Impact 5.13-5: Because exact rail locations and technologies, including specific receptor type and
proximity to transit is unknown, it cannot be determined whether new development would achieve
acceptable vibration levels in all locations, and impacts would be significant and unavoidable.
Transportation
Impact 5.17-2: Due to the uncertainty related to future fuel prices, driving habits of residents, and
future legislative policy, which could influence VMT production, impacts are considered
significant and unavoidable.
Wildfire
Cumulative Impacts: When combined with past and future development in the adjacent cities
and unincorporated County area, the project’s contribution to the cumulative impact would be
cumulatively considerable, and therefore, significant and unavoidable
D. PROJECT BENEFITS IN SUPPORT OF THE STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS
The following section describes the benefits of the proposed project that outweigh the project’s
unavoidable adverse effects and provides specific reasons for considering the project acceptable even
though the DEIR has indicated that there will be 15 significant project impacts. Accordingly, this
Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding potentially significant adverse environmental
impacts resulting from the proposed project, as set forth below, has been prepared. Pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines §15093(c), the Statement of Overriding Considerations will be included in the record of the
project approval and will also be noted in the Notice of Determination. Each of the benefits identified
below provides a separate and independent basis for overriding the significant environmental effects
of the proposed project.
Having reduced the potential effects of the proposed project through all feasible standard conditions
of approval, General Plan Update policies, and applicable regulations, as described previously herein,
and balancing the benefits of the proposed project against its potential unavoidable adverse impacts
on Aesthetics (cumulative impacts), agriculture and forestry resources, air quality, biological resources,
cultural resources, greenhouse gas emissions, mineral resources (cumulative impacts), noise,
transportation, and wildfire (cumulative impacts) if the standard conditions of approval for these
impacts cannot be implemented, the City finds that the following legal requirements and benefits of
the proposed project individually and collectively outweigh the potentially significant unavoidable
adverse impacts for the following reasons:
1. Implements the Objectives Established for the Proposed Project
The proposed project would provide goals and policies that would facilitate and achieve the project
objectives:
Page 335
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 72 -
1. Provide a human-scaled design, with buildings and outdoor spaces oriented towards people
connected by safe and comfortable streets, pathways, and trails that provide equitable access
for all.
2. Focus transformative growth along major corridors and allowing incremental change in the
neighborhoods.
3. Increase jobs in the City to encourage more residents to work locally and reduce commuting
out of the City to work.
4. Maintain and enhance conservation areas.
5. Create vibrant activity nodes and a “real downtown” with one or several major activity centers,
with varied cultural opportunities and public art providing areas for social, civic, and
commercial activity.
2. Provides an Increase in Housing to Meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs
The proposed project would introduce 25,685 housing units in the City and SOI. To make meaningful
reforms to the housing crisis in California, the State Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD) recently declared that cities and counties in Southern California will have to plan
for the construction of 1.3 million new homes in the next decade. The Southern California Association
of Governments (SCAG) will distribute the increased targets to jurisdictions based on factors such as
jobs, households, and affordability. For cities and counties that do not perform, the state can withhold
state transportation revenue generated from Senate Bill 1 (2017). The Housing Element of the General
Plan Update includes several policies to support a variety of housing types and densities to
accommodate residents in the City.
3. Consistency with the Regional Goals in the Connect SoCal
On September 3, 2020, SCAG adopted the SoCal 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable
Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) that replaces the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS. The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS
identifies goals to encourage regional economic prosperity, improve mobility for people and goods,
enhance resiliency of transportation, increase travel choices, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, support
healthy communities, adapt to climate change, leverage new transportation technology, encourage
development of diverse housing types, and conserve natural and agricultural lands.
The proposed project provides goals and policies that would be consistent with the goals of the
RTP/SCS. For instance, the General Plan Update would address economic growth in the City and SOI
by supporting job creation and reducing jobs-housing imbalance; improve mobility by proposing
vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation systems; and would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by
reducing VMT due to the mix of uses permitted in the General Plan Update.
4. Promotes the City’s Economic Vision
The General Plan Update supports the City’s economic vision by including economic strategies that
reflect the changing condition and promote fiscal sustainability. Policies from the Land Use and
Page 336
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 73 -
Community Character Element of the proposed General Plan that support the City’s fiscal
sustainability and economic vision include:
LC-3.1 Community Value. Actively manage growth and investments in the community to
maximize the value of new development, seeking value-per-acre outcomes of up to six times
higher.
LC-3.2 Community Benefit. Require a community benefit and economic analysis for large
projects that abut existing neighborhoods or for any project at the maximum density, with a focus
on resolving physical, economic, and aesthetic impacts.
LC-3.3 Community Amenities. Balance the impacts of new development, density, and
urbanization through the provision of a high-level of neighborhood and community amenities
and design features.
LC-3.4 Institutional Land Uses. Site new institutional land uses based on all forms of access
available to the service population. Satellite offices that are disbursed in the community may be
necessary to ensure equitable access.
LC-3.5 Efficient Growth. Manage growth in a manner that is fiscally sustainable, paced with the
availability of infrastructure, and protects and/or enhances community value. Discourage growth
and development that will impact the City’s ability to sustainably maintain infrastructure and
services.
LC-3.6 Diverse Economy. Guide development and public investments to maintain a fiscally
sound city with a diverse and sustainable tax base.
LC-3.7 Developing Our Economy. Actively promote and encourage opportunities for local
economic development, education, housing, locally hiring, internships and employment from
cradle to career so as to increase resident retention, improve and grow a strong local economy,
achieve a positive jobs-housing match; retain critical educational resources and human capital,
reduce regional commuting, gas consumption and greenhouse gas emissions and ensure equitable
opportunities for all residents of the City and region to thrive.
LC-3.8 Jobs-housing match. Encourage new employment generating uses and businesses that
improve the jobs-housing match in the city.
LC-3.9 Infrastructure Funding. Actively investigate and support new funding mechanisms that
enable the City to maintain services and infrastructure. Discourage the formation of bonded
Community Facilities Districts unless there are compelling and substantial wide-spread community
benefits.
LC-3.10 Economic Synergy. Encourage businesses and development that will support and/or
enhance the operations of existing businesses when complimentary to the General Plan Vision
while discouraging new development and businesses that will have detrimental impacts to existing
businesses and development.
Page 337
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 74 -
5. Complies with Current Legislations
AB 1358 – California Complete Streets Acts (2008)
The General Plan Update contains policies that help the City implement AB 1358, the California
Complete Streets Act, including:
LC-5.1. Improved Street Network. Systematically extend and complete a network of complete
streets to ensure a high-level of multi-modal connectivity within and between adjacent
Neighborhoods, Centers, and Districts. Plan and implement targeted improvements to the quality
and number of pedestrian and bicycle routes within the street and trail network, prioritizing
connections to schools, parks, and neighborhood activity centers.
MA-2.1 Complete Streets. Require that new roadways include provisions for complete streets,
balancing the needs of all users of all ages and capabilities.
MA-2.2 New Streets. To achieve the vision for transportation and mobility in the city, the final
design, location, and alignment of streets shall provide levels of access, connectivity, and
circulation consistent with the conceptual layouts shown in this Mobility and Access Chapter.
MA-2.3 Street Design. Implement innovative street and intersection designs to maximize
efficiency and safety in the city. Use traffic calming tools to assist in implementing complete street
principles. Possible tools include roundabouts, curb extensions, high visibility crosswalks, and
separated bicycle infrastructure.
MA-2.4 Street Connectivity. Require connectivity and accessibility to a mix of land uses that
meets residents’ daily needs within walking distance.
MA-2.5 Street Vacations. Prioritize pedestrian and utility connectivity over street vacations.
MA-2.6 Context. Ensure that complete streets applications integrate the neighborhood and
community identity into the street design. This can include special provisions for pedestrians and
bicycles.
MA-2.9 High-Quality Pedestrian Environment. Enhance sidewalks to create a high-quality
pedestrian environment, including wider sidewalks, improved pedestrian crossings, buffers
between sidewalks and moving traffic, pedestrian lighting, wayfinding signage, shade trees,
increased availability of benches, end of cul-de-sac access, etc.
MA-2.10 Block Pattern. Require development projects to arrange streets in an interconnected
block pattern, so that pedestrians, bicyclists, and drivers are not forced onto arterial streets for
inter- or intra- neighborhood travel.
SB 1000 – Environmental Justice (2016)
Senate Bill 1000 (SB 1000), Planning for Healthy Communities Act, mandate that cities adopt an
environmental justice (EJ) element or integrate EJ policies, objectives, and goals into other elements
Page 338
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 75 -
in their general plans. Table WP-3 in Volume 4 of the General Plan Update includes equity and
environmental justice action items such as continue to update the “Improve the Healthy Communities”
program and identifying resources for existing sensitive receptors experiencing adverse air quality
issues.
SB 1241 – Safety Element Fire Hazard Impacts (2012)
California Government Code § 65302 requires that safety elements be revised periodically to address
wildfire risks in accordance with regulations and guidance promulgated by the Board of Forestry and
Fire Protection. The Safety Element of the General Plan Update includes goals and policies pertaining
to emergency preparedness and programming, and fire personnel and facilities within the City, and
reducing fire hazards:
S-1.1 City Staff Readiness. Ensure City staff and departments demonstrate a readiness to
respond to emergency incidents and events.
S-1.2 Culture of Preparedness. Promote a culture of preparedness for businesses and residents
that empowers them to increase their resilience to hazard related events and a changing climate.
S-1.3 Evacuation Capacity. Require new developments, redevelopments, and major remodels to
enhance the City’s evacuation network and facilities and comply with the City’s Evacuation
Assessment.
S-1.4 WUIFA Access Points. Require all new developments and redevelopments within the
WUIFA to provide a minimum of two points of access by means of public roads that can be used
for emergency vehicle response and evacuation purposes.
S-1.5 Enhanced Circulation. In areas of the city with limited access routes and circulation
challenges, require additional roads and improvements to ensure adequate emergency vehicle
response and evacuation.
S-1.6 Evacuation Road Widths. Require any roads used for evacuation purposes to provide at
least 26 feet of unobstructed pavement width.
S-1.7 Maintenance of Plans. Maintain and regularly update the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation
Plan (LHMP) as an integrated component of the General Plan, in coordination with the
Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP), the Emergency Operations Plan (EOP), the
Evacuation Plan, and Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) compliant disaster
plans to maintain eligibility for grant funding.
S-1.8 Regional Coordination. Ensure regional coordination continues with neighboring
jurisdictions, County, State, and Federal agencies on emergency management and risk
reduction planning and activities.
S-1.9 Mutual Aid. Ensure mutual aid agreements with Federal, State, local agencies, and the
private sector establish responsibility boundaries, joint response services, and multi-alarm and
station coverage capabilities.
S-3.1 Fire Risk Reduction. Apply all state and local codes and regulations (fire safe design,
adherence to Standard 49-1) to new development, redevelopment, and major remodels in the
WUIFA.
Page 339
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 76 -
S-3.2 Fire Protection Plans. All new development, redevelopment, and major remodels in the
WUIFA will require the preparation of Fire Protection Plans (FPPs) to reduce fire threat, in
accordance with Fire District policies and procedures.
S-3.3 Vegetation Management. Owners of properties and public/private roads within and
adjacent to the WUIFA are required to conduct brush clearance and fuel modification to reduce
fire ignition potential and spread.
S-3.4 Buffer Zones. Require development projects to incorporate buffer zones as deemed
necessary by the City’s Fire Marshal for fire safety and fuel modification.
S-3.5 Water Supply. All developments will meet fire flow requirements identified in the Fire Code.
S-3.6 Coordination with Agencies. Coordinate with State, regional, and local agencies and
service providers on fire risk reduction planning and activities.
S-3.7 Wildfire Awareness. Assist residents and property owners with being better informed on
fire hazards and risk reduction activities in the WUIFA.
S-3.8 New Essential Facilities (WUIFA). Prohibit the siting of new essential public facilities
(including, but not limited to, hospitals and health care facilities, emergency shelters, emergency
command centers, and emergency communications facilities) within the WUIFA, unless
appropriate construction methods or strategies are incorporated to minimize impacts.
SB 379 – Climate Resiliency and Vulnerability (2015)
In order to comply with Government Code Section 65302(g)(4), a climate change vulnerability
assessment, adaptation plan to address these vulnerabilities, and a comprehensive hazard mitigation
and emergency response strategy are needed. The Resource Conservation Element provides climate
change policies:
RC-6.1 Climate Action Plan. Maintain and implement a Climate Action Plan (CAP) that provides
best management practices for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
RC-6.2 Renewable Energy. Encourage renewable energy installations and facilitate green
technology and business.
RC-6.3 Reduce Energy Consumption. Encourage a reduction in community-wide energy
consumption.
RC-6.4 Urban Forest. Protect the city’s healthy trees and plant new ones to provide shade, carbon
sequestration, and purify the air.
RC-6.5 GHG Reduction Goal. Reduce emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 and
achieve carbon neutrality by 2045.
RC-6.6 Co-Benefits. Prioritize the development and implementation of GHG reduction
measures that also achieve economic, health, social, environmental, and other co-benefits for the
City and its residents and businesses.
Page 340
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 77 -
RC-6.7 Structural Equity. Encourage GHG reduction and climate adaptation measures such as
trail completion, equipment upgrade, sidewalk connectivity, tree planting, and buffers be included
in the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to improve areas of the city where these features
are lacking.
RC-6.8 Reduce Vehicle Trips. Require Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies,
such as employer provided transit pass/parking credit, bicycle parking, bike lockers, highspeed
communications infrastructure for telecommuting, and carpooling incentives, for large office,
commercial, and industrial uses.
RC-6.9 Access. Require pedestrian, vehicle, and transit connectivity of streets, trails, and
sidewalks, as well as between complementary adjacent land uses.
RC-6.10 Green Building. Encourage the construction of buildings that are certified Leadership
in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) or equivalent, emphasizing technologies that reduce
GHG emissions.
RC-6.11 Climate-Appropriate Building Types. Encourage alternative building types that are
more sensitive to and designed for passive heating and cooling within the arid environment found
in Rancho Cucamonga.
RC-6.12 Reduced Water Supplies. When reviewing development proposals, consider the
possibility of constrained future water supplies and require enhanced water conservation measures.
RC-6.13 Designing for Warming Temperatures. When reviewing development proposals,
encourage applicants and designers to consider warming temperatures in the design of cooling
systems.
RC-6.14 Designing for Changing Precipitation Patterns. When reviewing development
proposals, encourage applicants to consider stormwater control strategies and systems for
sensitivity to changes in precipitation regimes and consider adjusting those strategies to
accommodate future precipitation regimes.
RC-6.15 Heat Island Reductions. Require heat island reduction strategies in new developments
such as light-colored paving, permeable paving, right-sized parking requirements, vegetative cover
and planting, substantial tree canopy coverage, and south and west side tree planting.
RC-6.16 Public Realm Shading. Strive to improve shading in public spaces, such as bus stops,
sidewalks and public parks and plazas, through the use of trees, shelters, awnings, gazebos, fabric
shading and other creative cooling strategies.
RC-6.17 Offsite GHG Mitigation. Allow the use of creative mitigation efforts such as offsite
mitigation and in lieu fee programs as mechanisms for reducing project-specific GHG emissions.
RC-6.18 Water Sources with Low GHG Emissions. Encourage local and regional water utilities
to obtain water from sources with low or no GHG emissions.
Page 341
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 78 -
SB 32 – Global Warming Solutions Act (2016)
As part of the General Plan Update, the City of Rancho Cucamonga proposes to update its Climate
Action Plan (CAP) which covers greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and emissions reductions in the
City. The GHG reduction measures of the CAP allow the City to continue reductions consistent with
the State’s interim emissions reduction goal of lowering. The CAP includes the following goals:
Goal 1: Zero Emissions and Clean Fuels. A community that uses zero emission vehicles and clean
vehicles to move people and goods.
Goal 2: Efficient and Carbon Free Buildings. An existing building stock that is energy efficient and
net zero carbon.
Goal 3: Green Building. Development practices that demonstrate high environmental performance
through decarbonization, sustainable design, and zero net carbon buildings.
Goal 4: Sustainable City-Facilities. City-facilities that achieve high levels of sustainable design.
Goal 5: Zero Emission Electricity. A city powered by carbon free electricity.
Goal 6: Thriving Urban Forests. A community with significant urban forestry resources.
Goal 7: Local Food. A community with locally grown and affordable food.
Goal 8: Water Conservation. A community that conserves and recycles water.
Goal 9: Efficient Wastewater Management. A city that generates minimal wastewater through
sustainable treatment and reuse.
Goal 10: Zero-Waste. A community that produces minimal solid waste.
Goal 11: Regional Mobility Hub. A multimodal transportation hub that connects regional and local
destinations through a symbiotic relationship with regional partners.
Goal 12: Active Transportation. A first-class pedestrian and bicycle network that fosters safe and
connected access to non-motorized travel and recreation.
Goal 13: Sustainable Transportation. A transportation network that adapts to changing mobility
needs while preserving sustainable community values.
6. Other Considerations
There are unavoidable, significant impacts in 10 categories: Aesthetics, Agriculture and Forestry
Resources, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Mineral
Resources, Noise, Transportation, and Wildfire.
If the City does not update the General Plan, there would still be significant impacts relating to air
quality, GHG emissions, and noise. Even without any growth in the City, which is not a realistic
Page 342
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update Project
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations - 79 -
scenario, the significant impacts relating to air quality and GHG emissions will occur simply due
to regional growth.
Impacts relating to construction noise are temporary in nature.
E. Conclusion
The City Council of Rancho Cucamonga has balanced the project’s benefits against the significant
unavoidable impact. The City Council finds that the proposed project’s benefits, which aim to enhance
the City of Rancho Cucamonga and comply with current legislation, especially housing legislation,
outweigh the project’s significant unavoidable impacts, and these impacts, therefore, are considered
acceptable in the light of the project’s benefits. The City Council finds that each of the benefits
described above is an overriding consideration, independent of the other benefits, that warrants
approval of the project notwithstanding the project’s significant unavoidable impact.
V. FINDINGS ON RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE DEIR AND REVISIONS
TO THE FEIR
The Final EIR contains response to comments, revisions, clarifications, the mitigation monitoring and
reporting program, and corrections to the DEIR. The focus of the response to comments is on the
disposition of significant environmental issues as raised in the comments, as specified by State CEQA
Guidelines Section 15088(b). The City provided written responses to each comment made by a public
agency, as set forth in Section 2 of the FEIR, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088(b).
City staff has reviewed this material and determined that none of this material constitutes the type of
significant new information that requires recirculation of the DEIR for further public comment under
CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5. None of this new material indicates that the project will result in
a significant new environmental impact not previously disclosed in the DEIR. Additionally, none of
this material indicates that there would be a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified
environmental impact that will not be reduced to less than significant, or that there would be any of
the other circumstances requiring recirculation described in Section 15088.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.
Page 343
December 2021 | Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
State Clearinghouse No. 2021050261
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
for City of Rancho Cucamonga
Prepared for:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Contact: Jennifer Nakamura, Management Analyst II
10500 Civic Center Drive,
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
909.774.4324
Prepared by:
PlaceWorks
Contact: Mark Teague, AICP, Principal
3 MacArthur Place, Suite 1100
Santa Ana, California 92707
714.966.9220
info@placeworks.com
www.placeworks.com
Page 344
Page 345
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Table of Contents
December 2021 Page i
Section Page
1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 PURPOSE OF MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ............................ 1
1.2 PROJECT LOCATION ....................................................................................................................................... 1
1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................................. 2
1.4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ........................................................................................................................ 2
2. MITIGATION MONITORING REQUIREMENTS .............................................................................. 5
2.1 CATEGORIZED MITIGATION MEASURES/MATRIX ......................................................................... 5
3. REPORT PREPARATION .................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
3.1 LIST OF PREPARERS ......................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
Page 346
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Table of Contents
Page ii PlaceWorks
List of Tables
Table Page
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements ................................................................................................ 7
Page 347
December 2021 Page 1
1. Introduction
1.1 PURPOSE OF MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been developed to provide a vehicle by which
to monitor mitigation measures and conditions of approval outlined in the Draft Environmental Impact Report
(DEIR), State Clearinghouse No. 2021050261. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been
prepared in conformance with Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code and Rancho Cucamonga
Monitoring Requirements. Section 21081.6 states:
(a) When making findings required by paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 21081 or when
adopting a mitigated negative declaration pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (c) of
Section 21080, the following requirements shall apply:
(1) The public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made
to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid
significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be
designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. For those changes which
have been required or incorporated into the project at the request of a responsible agency
or a public agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by the project,
that agency shall, if so requested by the lead or responsible agency, prepare and submit a
proposed reporting or monitoring program.
(2) The lead agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other
material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which its decision is based.
1.2 PROJECT LOCATION
The City of Rancho Cucamonga is in the Inland Empire in southwestern San Bernardino County, California.
The City is surrounded by developed municipalities to the west, south, and east including the cities of Upland,
Ontario, and Fontana and a large area of rural unincorporated San Bernardino County to the north and east.
The northernmost portion of the City’s Sphere of Influence (SOI) is adjacent to the San Bernardino National
Forest. Interstate and regional access to the City is provided by Interstate 15 (I-15), which runs in a general
north-south direction and bisects the eastern portion of the City, and by State Route 210 (SR-210), an east-
west freeway that runs through the center of the City. The I-10 freeway also provides regional access and is
located approximately 0.75-mile south of the City boundary.
Page 348
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
1. Introduction
Page 2 PlaceWorks
1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project is an update of the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s General Plan. The General Plan is a state-required
legal document that provides guidance to decision-makers regarding the allocation of resources and
determining the future physical form and character of development in the City and its SOI. It is the official
statement of the City regarding the extent and types of development needed to achieve the community’s
physical, economic, social, and environmental goals. Although the General Plan is composed of individual
chapters that individually address a specific area of concern, the General Plan embodies a comprehensive and
integrated planning approach for the jurisdiction.
The project includes the following elements that address all the required topics in state law:
Land Use and Community Character
Focus Areas
Open Space
Mobility and Access
Housing
Public Facilities and Services
Resource Conservation
Safety
Noise
The General Plan Update would result in an increase of 25,685 dwelling units, 57,566 residents, 6,802 square
feet of retail/commercial space, 3,533 square feet of office space, and a reduction of 2,055 square feet of
industrial/flex space, compared to existing conditions.
The City of Rancho Cucamonga is also proposing to update the City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP). The CAP
identifies greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction measures that allow the City to continue reductions consistent with
the State’s interim emissions reduction goal of lowering emissions.
1.4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1.4.1 Impacts Considered No Impact or Less Than Significant
The EIR identified various thresholds from the CEQA Guidelines among a number of environmental
categories that would not significantly impact the proposed project as identified in Chapter 5, Environmental
Analysis, and therefore, did not require mitigation. Impacts to the following environmental resources were found
to be less than significant or no impact:
Aesthetics
Energy
Geology and Soil
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Population, Housing, and Employment
Public Services
Recreation
Tribal Cultural Resources
Page 349
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
1. Introduction
December 2021 Page 3
Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use and Planning
Mineral Resources
Utilities and Service Systems
Wildlife
1.4.2 Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts
The following impacts would remain significant and unavoidable after implementation of standard conditions
of approval, as identified in the EIR:
Aesthetics (cumulative impacts only)
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Mineral Resources (cumulative impacts only)
Noise
Transportation
Wildfire (cumulative impacts only)
Page 350
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
1. Introduction
Page 4 PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 351
December 2021 Page 5
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
2.1 CATEGORIZED MITIGATION MEASURES/MATRIX
Standard conditions of approval, and General Plan policies have been categorized in matrix format, as shown
in Table 1, Mitigation Monitoring Requirements. The matrix identifies the environmental factor, specific standard
conditions of approval and General Plan policies, schedule, and responsible monitor. The mitigation matrix
will serve as the basis for scheduling the implementation of, and compliance with, all standard conditions of
approval and General Plan policies.
Page 352
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 6 PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 353
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 7
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
As a result of public and staff review of the Draft EIR, a single mitigation measure has been added to the Draft EIR. The mitigation measure will be as follows:
MM-1 The City shall apply all applicable standard conditions of approval to
future development within the City.
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Community Development
Department
At the time future
development is proposed
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Development
Department
AESTHETICS
Standard Conditions of Approval
5.1-1: A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric diagram, shall be
submitted by project applicants and reviewed and approved by the Planning
Director and Police Department prior to the issuance of building permits. Such
plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so
as not to adversely affect adjacent properties.
Future Project Applicant Prior to issuance of building
permits
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department,
Rancho Cucamonga
Police Department
5.1-2: Solar access easements shall be dedicated for the purpose of assuming
that each lot or dwelling unit shall have the right to receive sunlight across
adjacent lots or units for use of a solar energy system. The easements may be
contained in a Declaration of Restrictions for the subdivision which shall be
recorded concurrently with the recordation of the final map or issuance of
permits, whichever comes first. The easements shall prohibit the casting of
shadows by vegetation, structures, fixtures, or any other object, except for utility
wires and similar objects, pursuant to Development Code Section 17.08.060-G-
2.
Future Project Applicant Concurrently with the
recordation of the final map
or issuance of permits,
whichever comes first
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Applicable General Plan Policies
LC-1.2: Quality of Place. Ensure that new infill development is compatible
with the existing, historic, and envisioned future character and scale of each
neighborhood.
LC-1.3: Quality of Public Space. Require that new developments
incorporate the adjacent street and open space network into their design to soften
the transition between private and public realm and creating a greener more -
human-scale experience.
Page 354
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 8 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
LC-1.5: Master Planning. When planning a site, there must be meaningful efforts
to master plan the site so as to ensure a well-structured network and block pattern
with sufficient access and connectivity to achieve the placemaking goals of this
General Plan.
LC-1-8: Public Art. Require new construction to participate in the acquisition and
installation of public art in accordance with the City Public Arts Program.
LC-1.11:Compatible Development. Allow flexibility in density and intensity to
address specific site conditions and ensure compatibility of new development with
adjacent context.
LC-1.12: Adaptive Reuse. Support the adaptive reuse of historic properties
consistent with neighborhood character.
C-1.14: Street Amenities and Lighting. Modify pedestrian and street amenities,
lighting styles, and intensities to be compatible with the character of the
surrounding neighborhoods.
LC-2.1: Building Orientation. Require that buildings be sited near the street and
organized with the more active functions—entries, lobbies, bike parking, offices,
employee break rooms, and outdoor lunch areas—facing toward and prominently
visible from the street and visitor parking areas.
LC-2.2: Active Frontages. Require new development abutting streets and other
public spaces to face the public realm with attractive building facades and entries
to encourage walking, biking, and public transit as primary—not “alternative”—
mobility modes.
LC-2.4: Tree planting. Require the planting of trees that shade the sidewalks,
buffer pedestrians from traffic, define the public spaces of streets, and moderate
Page 355
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 9
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
high temperatures and wind speeds throughout the city.
LC-2.5: Gradual Transitions. Where adjacent to existing and planned residential
housing, require that new development of a larger form or intensity transition
gradually to complement the adjacent residential uses.
LC-2.6: Commercial Requirements. Require development projects in non-
residential and mixed-use areas to provide for enhanced pedestrian activity
through the following techniques:
Require that the ground floor of buildings where retail uses are allowed have
a minimum 15 feet floor-to-floor height.
Require that the ground floor of the building occupy the majority of the lot’s
frontage, with exceptions for vehicular access where necessary.
Require that most of the linear ground floor retail frontage (where such
occurs) be visually and physically “open” to the street, incorporating windows
and other design treatments to create an engaging street frontage.
Minimize vehicle movements across the sidewalk.
Allow for and encourage the development of outdoor plazas and dining
areas.
LC-2.7: Shared Parking. Encourage structured and shared parking solutions that
ensure that parking lots do not dominate street frontages and are screened from
public views whenever possible.
LC-2.8: Landscaping. Require development projects to incorporate high quality
landscaping to extend and enhance the green space network of the city.
LC-4.1: Neighborhood Preservation. Preserve and enhance the character of
existing residential neighborhoods.
LC-4.3: Complete Neighborhoods. Strive to ensure that all new neighborhoods,
Page 356
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 10 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
and infill development within or adjacent to existing neighborhoods, are complete
and well structured such that the physical layout and land use mix promote
walking to services, biking, and transit use and have the following characteristics.
Be organized into human-scale, walkable blocks, with a high level of
connectivity for pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles.
Be organized in relation to one or more focal activity centers, such as a park,
school, civic building, or neighborhood retail, such that most homes are no
further than one-quarter mile.
Require development patterns such that 60 percent of dwelling units are
within one-half mile walking distance to neighborhood goods and services,
such as markets, cafes, restaurants, churches, dry cleaners, laundromats,
farmers markets, banks, hair care, pharmacies, and similar uses.
access to goods and services within a safe, comfortable walking distance.
Provide as wide a diversity of housing styles and types as possible,
appropriate to the existing neighborhood context.
Provide homes with entries and windows facing the street, with driveways
and garages generally deemphasized in the streetscape composition.
LC-4.6: Block Length. Require new neighborhoods to be designed with blocks
no longer than 600 feet nor a perimeter exceeding 1,800 feet. Exceptions can be
made if mid-block pedestrian and bicycle connections are provided, or if the
neighborhood is on the edge of town and is intended to have a rural or semi-rural
design character.
LC-4.10: Neighborhood Transitions. Require that new neighborhoods provide
appropriate transitions in scale, building type, and density between different
General Plan designations, place types, and community planning areas.
LC-4.11: Conventional Suburban Neighborhood Design. Discourage the
construction of new residential neighborhoods that are characterized by sound
Page 357
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 11
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
wall frontages on any streets, discontinuous cul-de-sac street patterns, long
block lengths, single building and housing types, and lack of walking or biking
access to parks, schools, goods, and services.
LC-4.12: Neighborhood Edges. Encourage neighborhood edges along street
corridors to be characterized by active frontages, whether single-family or
multifamily residential, or ground-floor, neighborhood-service non-residential
uses. Where this is not possible due to existing development patterns or
envisioned streetscape character, neighborhood edges shall be designed based
on the following policies:
• Strongly discourage the construction of new gated communities except in
semi-rural neighborhoods.
• Allow the use of sound walls to buffer new neighborhoods from existing
sources of noise pollution such as railroads and limited access roadways.
• Prohibit the use of sound walls to buffer residential areas from arterial or
collector streets. Instead design approaches such as building setbacks,
landscaping and other techniques shall be used.
• In the case where sound walls might be acceptable, require pedestrian access
points to improve access from the neighborhoods to nearby commercial,
educational, and recreational amenities; activity centers; and transit stops.
• Discourage the use of signs to distinguish one residential project from another.
Strive for neighborhoods to blend seamlessly into one another. If provided,
gateways should be landmarks and urban design focal points, not
advertisements for home builders.
LC-5.5: Foothill Boulevard as a Gateway. Transform the ends of Foothill
Boulevard near the city boundary to a unique gateway environment through street
improvements and coordinated infill development along both sides of Foothill
Boulevard.
Page 358
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 12 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
LC-7.3: Campus Design. Encourage employment areas to be developed like a
college campus, with buildings oriented toward an internal roadway, buffer
landscaping along the perimeter, and ample opportunities for paths and trails
connecting to the City system as well as relaxation areas for employees.
LC-7.6: Loading Docks. Require that parking lots, loading docks, outdoor
storage, and processing be located behind or beside buildings, not in front, and
be screened from public views.
OS-1.4: Design Character and Public Art. Require neighborhood parks, greens,
and playgrounds to be designed as an integral element of their planning
community, reflecting the design character, art, and culture of that neighborhood,
center, or district.
OS-2.8: Art and Education. Require public art, education, and recreation
features on trails, where appropriate.
MA-2.5: Context. Ensure that complete streets applications integrate the
neighborhood and community identity into the street design. This can include
special provisions for pedestrians and bicycles.
RC-1.1: View Corridors. Protect and preserve existing signature public views of
the mountains and the valleys along roadways, open space corridors, and at other
key locations.
RC-1.2: Orient toward View Corridors. Encourage new development to orient
views toward view corridors, valley, and mountains.
C-1.3: Transfer of Development Rights. Allow the transfer of development rights
from conservation areas to select development areas throughout the city and
sphere of influence to protect hillsides, natural resources, and views and to avoid
Page 359
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 13
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
hazards and further the City’s conservation goals.
RC-1.4: Dark Sky. Limit light pollution from outdoor sources, especially in the
rural, neighborhood, hillside, and open spaces to maintain darkness for night sky
viewing.
RC-1.5: Transit Corridor Views. Require that new development along major
transit routes and travel corridors include 360° project design and landscape or
design screening of outdoor activity and storage, including views from the transit
routes and travel corridors.
RC-1.6: Hillside Grading. Grading of hillsides shall be minimized, following
natural landform to the maximum extent possible. Retaining walls shall be
discouraged and, if necessary, screened from view.
AIR QUALITY
Standard Conditions of Approval
5.3-1: The City shall ensure that discretionary development will incorporate best
management practices (BMPs) to reduce emissions to be less than applicable
thresholds. These BMPs include but are not limited to the most recent South Coast
AQMD recommendations for construction BMPs (per South Coast AQMD’s CEQA
Air Quality Handbook, South Coast AQMD’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Plan for the 2016 AQMP, and SCAG’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
for the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS, or as otherwise identified by South Coast AQMD).
Future Project Applicant Prior to project approval City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.3-2: Applicants for future discretionary development projects that would generate
construction-related emissions that exceed applicable thresholds, will include, but
are not limited to, the mitigation measures recommended by South Coast AQMD
(in its CEQA Air Quality Handbook or otherwise), to the extent feasible and
applicable to the project. The types of measures shall include but are not limited
to: maintaining equipment per manufacturer specifications; lengthening
Future Project Applicant Prior to construction activities City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Page 360
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 14 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
construction duration to minimize number of vehicle and equipment operating at
the same time; requiring use of construction equipment rated by the EPA as having
Tier 3 (model year 2006 or newer) or Tier 4 (model year 2008 or newer) emissions
limits, applicable for engines between 50 and 750 horsepower; and using electric-
powered or other alternative-fueled equipment in place of diesel-powered
equipment (whenever feasible). Tier 3 equipment can achieve average emissions
reductions of 57 percent for NOx, 84 percent for VOC, and 50 percent for
particulate matter compared to Tier 1 equipment. Tier 4 equipment can achieve
average emissions reductions of 71 percent for NOx, 86 percent for VOC, and 96
percent for particulate matter compared to Tier 1 equipment.
5.3-3: The City shall ensure that discretionary development that will generate
fugitive dust emissions during construction activities will, to the extent feasible,
incorporate BMPs that exceed South Coast AQMD’s Rule 403 requirements to
reduce emissions to be less than applicable thresholds.
Future Project Applicant Prior to construction activities City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.3-4: Applicants for future discretionary development projects which will generate
construction-related fugitive dust emissions that exceed applicable thresholds will
include, but are not limited to, the mitigation measures recommended by South
Coast AQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook, to the extent feasible and applicable:
• The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation
operations shall be minimized to prevent excess amounts of dust.
• Pre-grading/excavation activities shall include watering the area to be graded
or excavated before commencement of grading or excavation operations.
Application of watering (preferably reclaimed, if available) should penetrate
sufficiently to minimize fugitive dust during grading activities. This measure
can achieve PM10 reductions of 61 percent through application of water every
three hours to disturbed areas.
• Fugitive dust produced during grading, excavation, and construction activities
shall be controlled by the following activities:
• All trucks shall be required to cover their loads as required by California
Vehicle Section 23114. Covering loads and maintaining a freeboard height of
Future Project Applicant Prior to construction activities City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Page 361
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 15
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
12 inches can reduce PM10 emissions by 91 percent.
• All graded and excavated material, exposed soil areas, and active portions of
the construction site, including unpaved on-site roadways, shall be treated to
prevent fugitive dust. Treatment shall include, but not necessarily be limited to,
periodic watering, application of environmentally-safe soil stabilization
materials, and/or roll-compaction as appropriate. Watering shall be done as
often as necessary and reclaimed water shall be used whenever possible.
Application of water every three hours to disturbed areas can reduce PM10
emissions by 61 percent.
• Graded and/or excavated inactive areas of the construction site shall be
monitored at least weekly for dust stabilization. Soil stabilization methods,
such as water and roll-compaction, and environmentally-safe dust control
materials, shall be periodically applied to portions of the construction site that
are inactive for over four days. If no further grading or excavation operations
are planned for the area, the area should be seeded and watered until grass
growth is evident, or periodically treated with environmentally-safe dust
suppressants, to prevent excessive fugitive dust. Replacement of ground
cover in disturbed areas can reduce PM10 emissions by 5 percent.
• Signs shall be posted on-site limiting traffic to 15 miles per hour or less. This
measure can reduce associated PM10 emissions by 57 percent.
• During periods of high winds (i.e., wind speed sufficient to cause fugitive dust
to impact adjacent properties), all clearing, grading, earth-moving, and
excavation operations shall be curtailed to the degree necessary to prevent
fugitive dust created by on-site activities and operations from being a nuisance
or hazard off-site or on-site. The site superintendent/supervisor shall use
his/her discretion in conjunction with South Coast AQMD when winds are
excessive.
• Adjacent streets and roads shall be swept at least once per day, preferably at
the end of the day, if visible soil material is carried over to adjacent streets and
roads.
Page 362
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 16 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
• Personnel involved in grading operations, including contractors and
subcontractors, should be advised to wear respiratory protection in
accordance with California Division of Occupational Safety and Health
regulations.
Applicable General Plan Policies
LC-1.1: Complete Places. Ensure that a broad range of recreational, commercial,
education, and civic amenities are nearby and easily accessible to residents and
workers in each neighborhood and each employment district.
LC-1.3: Quality of Public Space. Require that new development incorporate the
adjacent street and open space network into their design to soften the transition
between private and public realm and create a greener, more human-scale
experience.
LC-1.4: Connectivity and Mobility. Work to complete a network of pedestrian-
and bike-friendly streets and trails, designed in concert with adjacent land uses,
using the public realm to provide more access options.
LC-1.9: Infill Development. Enable and encourage infill development with vacant
and underutilized properties through flexible design requirements and potential
incentives.
LC-1.12: Adaptive Reuse. Support the adaptive reuse of historic properties
consistent with neighborhood character.
LC-1.13: Improved Public Realm. Require that new development extend the
“walkable public realm” into previously vacant and/or parking-lot-dominant large
single-use parcels of land.
LC-2.3: Streetscape. Enhance the pedestrian experience through streetscape
improvements such as enhanced street lighting, street trees, and easement
Page 363
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 17
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
dedications to increase the widths of the sidewalks, provide side access parking
lanes, and other pedestrian and access amenities.
LC-2.4: Tree Planting. Require the planting of trees that shade the sidewalks,
buffer pedestrians from traffic, define the public spaces of streets, and moderate
high temperatures and wind speeds throughout the city.
LC-2.11: Park-Once. Allow and encourage strategies that enable adjacent uses
and properties to flexibly share parking facilities, so that users can park once and
pursue multiple activities on foot before returning to their car, such as:
Unbundling parking from development.
Considering parking “districts” demonstrating sufficient parking within a
convenient walking distance.
LC-4.2: Connected Neighborhoods. Require that each new increment of
residential development make all possible street, trail, and open space
connections to existing adjoining parcels.
LC-4.3: Complete Neighborhoods. Strive to ensure that all new neighborhoods,
and infill development within or adjacent to existing neighborhoods, are complete
and well structured such that the physical layout and land use mix promote walking
to services, biking and transit use, and have the following characteristics:
Be organized into human-scale, walkable blocks, with a high level of
connectivity for pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles.
Be organized in relation to one or more focal activity centers, such as a park,
school, civic building, or neighborhood retail, such that most homes are no
further than one-quarter mile.
Require development patterns such that 60 percent of dwelling units are within
one-half mile walking distance to neighborhood goods and services, such as
Page 364
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 18 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
markets, cafes, restaurants, churches, dry cleaners, laundromats, farmers
markets, banks, hair care, pharmacies, and similar uses.
Access to goods and services within a safe, comfortable walking distance.
Provide as wide a diversity of housing styles and types as possible, and
appropriate to the existing neighborhood context.
Provide homes with entries and windows facing the street, with driveways and
garages generally deemphasized in the streetscape composition.
LC-4.8: Solar Orientation. Street, block, and lot layouts should orient a majority
of lots within 20 degrees of a north-south orientation for increased energy
conservation.
LC-4.11: Conventional Suburban Neighborhood Design. Discourage the
construction of new residential neighborhoods that are characterized by sound wall
frontages on any streets, discontinuous cul-de-sac street patterns, long block
lengths, single building and housing types, and lack of walking or biking access to
parks, schools, goods, and services.
LC-5.1: Improved Street Network. Systematically extend and complete a
network of complete streets to ensure a high-level of multi-modal connectivity
within and between adjacent Neighborhoods, Centers and Districts. Plan and
implement targeted improvements to the quality and number of pedestrian and
bicycle routes within the street and trail network, prioritizing connections to
schools, parks, and neighborhood activity centers.
LC-5.2: Connections Between Development Projects. Require the continuation
and connectivity of the street network between adjacent development projects and
discourage the use of cul-de-sacs or other dead-end routes.
LC-5.3: Green Public Realm. Ensure that a significant tree canopy and
landscaping are provided along corridors and linkages between land uses, to
Page 365
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 19
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
provide shade and wind protection for pedestrians and bicyclists, and to define
these corridors as the “outdoor living rooms” of the city.
LC-5.4: Multifamily Development. Focus new multifamily housing development
along corridors between commercial nodes and centers and ensure that it is well
connected to adjoining neighborhoods and centers by high-quality walking and
biking routes.
LC-5.6: Foothill Boulevard as a Connector. Transition Foothill Boulevard from
a “divider” to a “connector” that brings the north and south sides together. Ensure
that new development along the Foothill Corridor generates a high-quality
pedestrian- and transit-oriented environment and a concentration of commercial
and civic amenities and community gathering places for residents from all parts of
the city.
LC-6.1: Diverse Centers. Encourage the development of neighborhood-serving,
community-serving, and city-serving centers that address the full range community
needs and market sectors.
LC-6.3: Evolving Centers. Encourage the improvement of existing commercial
centers to provide more active, human-scale environments and community
gathering places, including the potential for infill housing and office use.
LC-6.4: Access to Transit. Encourage the development of commercial and
mixed-use centers that are located and organized in relation to existing or planned
transit stops, especially along Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue.
LC-6.5: Walkable Environments. Centers should include very walkable and
pedestrian-friendly streets with active building frontages along primary corridors
and internal streets. In some cases, side access lanes may be inserted between
existing major streets and building frontages, providing a low-speed environment
Page 366
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 20 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
that is very safe and comfortable for pedestrians and bicyclists, with pedestrian-
oriented building frontages.
LC-7.2: Unify and Connect Development. Require that new development in the
21st Century Employment District land use designation unify and connect
development along the Haven Avenue Corridor.
LC-7.5: Adaptive Industrial Reuse. Encourage adaptive reuse with residential
and live/work units, and local serving commercial, in existing industrial structures,
particularly in the Central South Community Planning Area.
OS-2.1: Trail Corridors. Extend, improve and complete the multi-purpose trail
network, wherever possible, by utilizing existing flood control channel and utility
corridor rights-of-way as public trail corridors.
OS-2.2: Connectivity. Connect trails in Rancho Cucamonga to trails in the San
Bernardino National Forest and other hillside open space areas.
OS-2.3: Trailheads. Provide trailhead amenities such as parking, restrooms,
information boards, and maps.
OS-2.4: Equestrian Trails. Continue to maintain and pursue the development of
planned trails and facilities for equestrian use.
OS-2.6: Design for Heat. Consider extreme heat in the design of streets, parks,
trails, and playgrounds to support activity throughout the year and in all weather
conditions by including shade trees, shade structures, water fountains, splash
pads, lighting for night play in most spaces.
OS-2.7: Access. Require new development to provide access to existing or future
trails and provide appropriate trail amenities (e.g., benches, drinking fountains,
Page 367
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 21
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
hitching posts, bike stands, and other amenities).
MA-1.2: Rancho Cucamonga Station Redevelopment. Support redevelopment
in and around the Rancho Cucamonga Station to support transit-oriented
development.
MA-1.4: Local Mobility Hub. Require new development at mobility hubs and key
stops along the future bus rapid transit and future circulatory system to facilitate
first mile/last mile connectivity to neighborhoods.
MA-1.5: Provide Mobility Options. Provide roadway connections and local
mobility hubs designed to capture 80 percent of the population and employment
south of Base Line Road.
MA-1.6: Transit Boulevard Implementation. Require high-quality transit streets
to not only account for how transit is impacted by the geometry of the corridor, but
also by signal timing, signal phasing, turns, and other operations that may
jeopardize the quality of service.
MA-2.1: Complete Streets. Require that new roadways include provisions for
complete streets, balancing the needs of all users of all ages and capabilities.
MA-2.3: Street Connectivity. Require connectivity and accessibility to a mix of
land uses that meets residents’ daily needs within walking distance.
MA-2.4: Street Vacations. Prioritize pedestrian and utility connectivity over street
vacations.
MA-2.5: Context. Ensure that complete streets applications integrate the
neighborhood and community identity into the street design. This can include
special provisions for pedestrians and bicycles.
Page 368
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 22 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
MA-2-6: Roadway Scale. Balance roadway size and design configuration to
ensure that vehicular speeds, volumes and turning movements do not compromise
the safety and comfort of pedestrians and bicyclists.
MA-2.9: Block Pattern. Require development projects to arrange streets in an
interconnected block pattern, so that pedestrians, bicyclists, and drivers are not
forced onto arterial streets for inter- or intra- neighborhood travel (see Placemaking
toolkit in Vol. 4 for more information).
MA-2.10: Master Planning. Master plan sites so as to ensure a well-structured
network and block pattern with sufficient access and connectivity, especially in all
focus areas, including the Cucamonga Town Center, Etiwanda Heights Town
Center, and the Southeast Industrial Area.
MA-2.11: Transportation Demand Management. Require new projects to
implement Transportation Demand Management strategies, such as employer-
provided transit pass/parking credit, low-speed communications infrastructure for
telecommuting, carpooling incentive, etc.
MA-2.12: Healthy Mobility. Provide pedestrian facilities and class II buffered bike
lanes (or separated bikeways) on auto-priority streets where feasible to promote
active transportation.
MA-3.1: Pedestrian and Bicycle Networks. Maintain the Active Transportation
Plan supporting safe routes to school and a convenient network of identified
pedestrian and bicycle routes with access to major employment centers, shopping
districts, regional transit centers, and residential neighborhoods.
MA-3.2: Traffic Safety. Prioritize transportation system improvements that help
eliminate traffic-related fatalities and severe injury collisions.
Page 369
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 23
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
MA-3.3: Vulnerable User Safety. Prioritize pedestrian improvements in the
Pedestrian Priority Area shown on Figure 8 to promote safety in the southwest
area of the city.
MA-5.1: Land Use Supporting Reduced VMT. Work to reduce VMT through land
use planning, enhanced transit access, localized attractions, and access to non-
automotive modes.
MA-5.3: Funding. Remain flexible in the pursuit and adoption of transportation
funding mechanisms that fund innovative transportation solutions.
MA-5.4: Intelligent Systems Preparation. Upgrade the City’s ATMS [Advanced
Traffic Management System] and communications systems to ensure that the City
meets the intelligent transportation system demands of today while planning for
future demands associated with AVs and CVs.
PF-6.1: Recycling. Encourage recycling and organics collection and processing
in all sectors of the community to divert items from entering landfills.
PF-6.2: Refuse Facilities. Consult with public agencies and private contractors to
ensure adequate organics processing facilities are available.
RC-5.1: Pollutant Sources. Minimize increases of new air pollutant emissions in
the city and encourage the use of advance control technologies and clean
manufacturing techniques.
RC-5.2: Air Quality Land Use Compatibility. Avoid siting of homes, schools,
hospitals, and childcare facilities and land uses within 500 feet of land uses that
are considered large emitters.
RC-5.3: Barriers and Buffers. Require design features such as site and building
orientation, trees or other landscaped barriers, artificial barriers, ventilation and
Page 370
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 24 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
filtration, construction, and operational practices to reduce air quality impacts
during construction and operation of large stationary and mobile sources.
RC-5.4: Health Risk Assessment. Consider the health impacts of development
of sensitive receptors within 500 feet of a freeway, rail line, arterial, collector or
transit corridor sources using health risk assessments to understand potential
impacts.
RC-5.5: Community Benefit Plan. Require that any land use generating or
accommodating more than 100 trucks per day, more than 40 trucks with operating
transport refrigeration units (TRUs) per day, or where TRU unit operations exceed
300 hours per week, provide a community benefit plan demonstrating an offset to
community impacts of the truck traffic.
RC-5.6: New Sensitive Receptors Near Existing Industrial Uses. Avoid
placing homes, schools, hospitals, and childcare facilities within 1,000 feet of a
land use that accommodates more than 100 trucks per day, more than 40 trucks
with operating transport refrigeration units (TRUs) per day, or where TRU unit
operations exceed 300 hours per week.
RC-5.7: New Localized Air Pollution Sources Near Existing Sensitive
Receptors. Avoid placing land uses that accommodate more than 100 trucks per
day, more than 40 trucks with operating transport refrigeration units (TRUs) per
day, or where TRU unit operations exceed 300 hours per week within 1,000 feet
of homes, schools, hospitals, and childcare facilities.
RC-5.8: Truck Hook-Ups at New Industrial or Commercial Developments.
Require new industrial or commercial developments at which heavy-duty diesel
trucks idle on-site to install electric truck hook-ups in docks, bays, and parking
areas.
RC-5.9: Clean and Green Industry. Prioritize non-polluting industries and
Page 371
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 25
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
companies using zero or low air pollution technologies.
RC-5.10: Dust and Odor. Require new construction to include measures to
minimize dust and odor during construction and operation.
RC-6.1: Climate Action Plan. Maintain and implement a Climate Action Plan
(CAP) that provides best management practices for reducing greenhouse gas
emissions.
RC-6.2: Renewable Energy. Encourage renewable energy installations and
facilitate green technology and business.
RC-6.3: Reduce Energy Consumption. Encourage a reduction in community-
wide energy consumption.
RC-6.4: Urban Forest. Protect the city’s healthy trees and plant new ones to
provide shade, carbon sequestration, and purify the air.
RC-6.5: GHG Reduction Goal. Reduce emissions to 80 percent below 1990
levels by 2050 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2045.
RC-6.6: Co-benefits. Prioritize the development and implementation of GHG
reduction measures that also achieve economic, health, social, environmental,
and other co-benefits for the City and its residents and businesses.
RC-6.7: Structural Equity. Encourage GHG reduction and climate adaptation
measures such as trail completion, equipment upgrade, sidewalk connectivity, tree
planting, and buffers be included in the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
to improve areas of the City where these features are lacking.
RC-6.8: Reduce Vehicle Trips. Require Transportation Demand Management
strategies such as employer provided transit pass/parking credit, bicycle parking,
Page 372
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 26 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
bike lockers, high-speed communications infrastructure for telecommuting,
carpooling incentive, etc. for large office, commercial, and industrial uses.
RC-6.9: Access. Require pedestrian, vehicle, and transit connectivity of streets,
trails, and sidewalks, as well as between complementary adjacent land uses.
RC-6.10: Green Building. Encourage the construction of buildings that are
certified LEED or equivalent, emphasizing technologies that reduce GHG
emissions.
RC-6.11: Climate-Appropriate Building Types. Encourage alternative building
types that are more sensitive to and designed for passive heating and cooling
within the arid environment found in Rancho Cucamonga.
RC-6.12: Reduced Water Supplies. When reviewing development proposals,
consider the possibility of constrained future water supplies and require enhanced
water conservation measures.
RC-6.13: Designing for Warming Temperatures. When reviewing development
proposals, encourage applicants and designers to consider warming temperatures
in the design of cooling systems.
RC-6.14: Designing for Changing Precipitation Patterns. When reviewing
development proposals, encourage applicants to consider stormwater control
strategies and systems for sensitivity to changes in precipitation regimes and
consider adjusting those strategies to accommodate future precipitation regimes.
RC-6.15: Heat Island Reductions. Require heat island reduction strategies in
new developments such as light-colored paving, permeable paving, right-sized
parking requirements, vegetative cover and planting, substantial tree canopy
coverage, and south and west side tree planting.
Page 373
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 27
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
RC-6.16: Public Realm Shading. Strive to improve shading in public spaces,
such as bus stops, sidewalks and public parks and plazas, through the use of
trees, shelters, awnings, gazebos, fabric shading and other creative cooling
strategies.
RC-6.17: Off-site GHG Mitigation. Allow the use of creative mitigation efforts
such as offsite mitigation and in lieu fee programs as mechanisms for reducing
project-specific GHG emissions.
RC-6.18: Water Sources with Low GHG Emissions. Encourage local and
regional water utilities to obtain water from sources with low or no GHG emissions.
RC-7.1: Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging on City Property. As funding is
available, encourage the installation of publicly available electric vehicle charging
stations at City-owned buildings, facilities, property, and in the public right-of-way.
RC-7.2: New EV Charging. Require new multifamily residential, commercial,
office, and industrial development to include charging stations, or include the
wiring for them.
RC-7.3: EV Charging Retrofits. Encourage existing development to retrofit to
include charging stations.
RC-7.4: New Off-Road Equipment. When feasible, require that off-road
equipment such as forklifts and yard tugs necessary for the operations of all new
commercial and industrial developments be electric or fueled using clean fuel
sources.
RC-7.5: Municipal Vehicle Fleet. Reduce fossil fuel consumption of the City’s
vehicle fleet by increasing the number of electric or zero emissions vehicles.
RC-7.6: Efficiency Retrofits. Encourage existing private property owners to
Page 374
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 28 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
implement energy efficiency retrofits during substantial improvement as defined by
the California Building Code.
RC-7.7: Sustainable Design. Encourage sustainable building and site design that
meets the standards of Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED),
Sustainable Sites, Living Building Challenge, or similar certification.
RC-7.8: Farmers Market, Fork to Table. Support microscale agriculture and
farmers markets, and similar methods of encouraging locally grown and consumed
produce.
RC-7.9: Passive Solar Design. Require new buildings to incorporate energy
efficient building and site design strategies for the arid environment that include
appropriate solar orientation, thermal mass, use of natural daylight and ventilation,
and shading.
RC-7.10: Alternative Energy. Continue to promote the incorporation of alternative
energy generation (e.g., solar, wind, biomass) in public and private development.
RC-7.11 : Community Development Subdivisions. When reviewing applications
for new subdivisions, require residences be oriented along an east-west access,
minimizing western sun exposure, to maximize energy efficiency.
RC-7.12: Solar Access. Prohibit new development and renovations that impair
adjacent buildings’ solar access, unless it can be demonstrated that the shading
benefits substantially offset the impacts of solar energy generation potential.
RC-7.13: Energy-Efficient Infrastructure. Whenever possible, use energy-
efficient models and technology when replacing or providing new city infrastructure
such as streetlights, traffic signals, water conveyance pumps, or other public
infrastructure.
Page 375
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 29
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Standard Conditions of Approval
5.4-1: Special status plant and wildlife species have the potential to occur within
the proposed General Plan Update Study Area. Any project that involves the
removal of habitat must consider if any special status species (e.g., Threatened or
Endangered species, CNPS List 1B and 2 plants, or species protected under
Section 15380 of CEQA) are potentially present on the project site and if the project
impacts could be considered significant by the City. If potential habitat is present
in an area, focused surveys shall be conducted prior to construction activities in
order to document the presence or absence of a species on the project site.
Botanical surveys shall be conducted during the appropriate blooming period for a
species. If no special status species are found on the project site, no additional
action is warranted. If special status species are found, appropriate mitigation
would be required in coordination with the City, consistent with its performance
criteria of mitigating lost habitat at a ratio no less than one to one (one acre
restored for every acre impacted).
Qualified Biologist Prior to construction activities City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.4-2: Any project within the proposed General Plan Update Study Area that
impacts a Federally listed species, based on a biological survey or other analysis
of the project, shall be required to secure take authorization through Section 7 or
Section 10 of the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) prior to project
implementation. Compensation for impacts to the listed species and their habitat
shall be mitigated at a ratio no less than one to one (one acre restored for every
acre impacted). Project applicants shall be required to plan, implement, monitor,
and maintain the mitigated habitat according to the requirements of the Biological
Opinion (Section 7) or Habitat Conservation Plan (Section 10) for the project. Prior
to issuance of the first action and/or permit which would allow for site disturbance
(e.g., grading permit), a detailed mitigation plan shall be prepared by a qualified
biologist for approval by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the USFWS, and
shall include: (1) the responsibilities and qualifications of the personnel to
implement and supervise the plan; (2) site selection; (3) site preparation and
Qualified Biologist Prior to issuance of the first
action and/or permit which
would allow for site
disturbance
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Page 376
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 30 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
planting implementation; (4) a schedule; (5) maintenance plan/guidelines; (6) a
monitoring plan; and (7) long-term preservation requirements.
5.4-3: Any project within the proposed General Plan Update Study Area that
impacts a State-listed Threatened or Endangered species shall be required to
obtain take authorization (through an Incidental Take Permit) pursuant to the
California Endangered Species Act (CESA) and Section 2081 of the California Fish
and Game Code. If the species is also listed under the FESA, a consistency finding
per Section 2080.1 of CESA is issued when a project receives the USFWS
Biological Opinion. Compensation for impacts to the listed species and their habitat
shall be mitigated at a ratio no less than one to one (one acre restored for every
acre impacted). Project applicants shall be required to plan, implement, monitor,
and maintain the mitigated habitat according to the requirements of the 2080
CESA process. Prior to issuance of the first action and/or permit which would allow
for site disturbance (e.g., grading permit), a detailed mitigation plan shall be
prepared by a qualified biologist for approval by the City of Rancho Cucamonga
and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and shall include: (1) the
responsibilities and qualifications of the personnel to implement and supervise the
plan; (2) site selection; (3)site preparation and planting implementation; (4) a
schedule; (5) a maintenance plan/guidelines; (6) a monitoring plan; and (7) long-
term preservation requirements.
Qualified Biologist Prior to issuance of the first
action and/or permit which
would allow for site
disturbance
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.4-4: To avoid conflicts with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Bald/Golden Eagle
Protection Act, construction activities involving vegetation removal shall be
conducted between September 16 and March 14. If construction occurs inside the
peak nesting season (between March 15 and September 15), a preconstruction
survey (or possibly multiple surveys) by a qualified biologist is recommended prior
to construction activities to identify any active nesting locations. If the biologist
does not find any active nests within the project site, the construction work shall
be allowed to proceed. If the biologist finds an active nest within the project site
and determines that the nest may be impacted, the biologist shall delineate an
appropriate buffer zone around the nest; the size of the buffer zone shall depend
Qualified Biologist Vegetation removal shall be
be conducted between
September 16 and Match 14;
or a preconstruction survey
shall be conducted during
peak nesting season (March
15 and September 15)
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Page 377
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 31
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
on the affected species and the type of construction activity. Any active nests
observed during the survey shall be mapped on an aerial photograph. Only
construction activities (if any) that have been approved by a biological monitor shall
take place within the buffer zone until the nest is vacated. The biologist shall serve
as a construction monitor when construction activities take place near active nest
areas to ensure that no inadvertent impacts on these nests occur. Results of the
pre-construction survey and any subsequent monitoring shall be provided to the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the City.
5.4-5: A jurisdictional delineation shall be conducted if a project will impact
jurisdictional resources. Permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) shall be required for impacts
on areas within these agencies’ jurisdiction. Acquisition and implementation of the
permits may require mitigation. Compensation for impacts to jurisdictional
resources shall be mitigated at a ratio no less than one to one (one acre restored
for every acre impacted). Project applicants shall be required to plan, implement,
monitor, and maintain the mitigated jurisdictional resource according to the
requirements of USACE and RWQCB. Prior to issuance of the first action and/or
permit that would allow for site disturbance (e.g., grading permit), a detailed
mitigation plan shall be prepared by a qualified biologist for approval by the City of
Rancho Cucamonga and the appropriate resource agencies, and shall include: (1)
the responsibilities and qualifications of the personnel to implement and supervise
the plan; (2) site selection; (3) site preparation and planting implementation; (4) a
schedule; (5) maintenance plan/guidelines; (6) a monitoring plan; and (7) long-
term preservation requirements.
Qualified Biologist Prior to issuance of the first
action and/or permit which
would allow for site
disturbance
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.4-6: The Porter-Cologne Act and Sections 1600 to 1616 of the California Fish
and Game Code protect “waters of the State.” Agreements (Streambed Alteration
Agreements) from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) shall be
required for impacts on areas in CDFW’s jurisdiction. Acquisition and
implementation of the agreement may require mitigation. Compensation for
impacts to CDFW resources shall be mitigated at a ratio no less than one to one
Qualified Biologist Prior to issuance of the first
action and/or permit which
would allow for site
disturbance
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Page 378
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 32 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
(one acre restored for every acre impacted). Project applicants shall be required
to plan, implement, monitor, and maintain the mitigation areas according to CDFW
requirements. Prior to issuance of the first action and/or permit which would allow
for site disturbance (e.g., grading permit), a detailed mitigation plan shall be
prepared by a qualified biologist for approval by the City of Rancho Cucamonga
and CDFW, and shall include: (1) the responsibilities and qualifications of the
personnel to implement and supervise the plan; (2) site selection; (3) site
preparation and planting implementation; (4) a schedule; (5) maintenance
plan/guidelines; (6) a monitoring plan; and (7) long-term preservation
requirements.
5.4-7: The City of Rancho Cucamonga shall require a habitat connectivity/wildlife
corridor evaluation for future development projects that may impact existing
connectivity areas and wildlife linkages identified in Figure 5.4-6, Wildlife
Movement Linkages Map. The results of the evaluation shall be incorporated into
the project’s biological report required under standard condition of approval 5.4-1.
The evaluation shall also identify project design features that would reduce
potential impacts and maintain habitat and wildlife movement. To this end, the City
shall incorporate the following measures, to the extent practicable, for projects
impacting wildlife movement corridors:
Adhere to low density zoning standards
Encourage clustering of development
Avoid known sensitive biological resources
Provide shielded lighting adjacent to sensitive habitat areas
Encourage development plans that maximize wildlife movement
Provide buffers between development and wetland/riparian areas
Protect wetland/riparian areas through regulatory agency permitting process
Encourage wildlife-passable fence designs (e.g., 3-strand barbless wire fence)
on property boundaries
Qualified Biologist Prior to construction activities City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Page 379
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 33
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
Encourage preservation of native habitat on the undeveloped remainder of
developed parcels
Minimize road/driveway development to help prevent loss of habitat due to
roadkill and habitat loss
Use native, drought-resistant plant species in landscape design
Encourage participation in local/regional recreational trail design efforts.
Applicable General Plan Policies
RC-3.1: Sensitive Habitat. Encourage the preservation of the integrity of sensitive
land resources that have significant native vegetation and/or habitat value such as
riparian habitat areas, creek corridors, Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub
(RAFSS), wetlands, and sensitive wildlife habitat that supports biological
resources.
RC-3.2: Biological Preserves. Allow and encourage the expansion of sensitive
biological preserve areas (e.g., North Etiwanda Preserve, Day Creek Preserve,
and San Sevaine Preserve) and other important habitat areas with an emphasis
on wildlife connectivity between habitats and connectivity to the national forest.
RC-3.3: Wildlife Corridors. Encourage the creation, maintenance, and protection
of open space areas that provide strategic wildlife corridors and vital connectivity
between habitat areas.
RC-3.4: Landscape Design. Encourage new development to incorporate native
vegetation materials into landscape places and prohibit the use of species known
to be invasive according to the California Invasive Plant Inventory.
RC-3.5: Buffers from New Development. Require new developments adjacent
to identified plant and wildlife habitat areas to establish and maintain a protective
buffer.
Page 380
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 34 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
RC-3.6: Grading and Vegetation Removal. Limit grading and vegetation removal
of new development activities to the minimum extent necessary for construction
and to reduce erosion and sedimentation.
RC-3.7: Urban Forestry Plan. Minimize damage associated with wind- and fire-
related hazards and risks and address climate change and urban heat island
effects through the development of an urban forestry plan that addresses a proper
and appropriate landscaping, plant and tree selection and replacement, and
planting and vegetation management techniques.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Standard Conditions of Approval
5.5-1: If a future project pursuant to the General Plan Update contains a
designated Historical Landmark, the site shall be developed and maintained in
accordance with the applicable Historic Landmark Alteration Permit. Any further
modifications to the site including, but not limited to, exterior alterations and/or
interior alterations which affect the exterior of the buildings or structures, removal
of landmark trees, demolition, relocation, reconstruction of buildings or structures,
or changes to the site, shall require a modification to the Certificate of
Appropriateness subject to Historic Preservation Commission review and
approval.
Qualified Historian Prior to construction activities City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.5-2: If human remains or funerary objects are encountered during any activities
associated with the project, work in the immediate vicinity (within a 100-foot buffer
of the find) shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to
State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and that code enforced for the duration of
the project.
County Coroner If human remains or funerary
objects are encountered
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.5-3: If a building within the project area was constructed more than 50 years ago,
the City will require a determination of whether the building, or site, could be
considered historic. If the project is considered historic Chapter 17.18 Historic
Preservation will apply.
Qualified Historian Prior to construction activities City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Page 381
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 35
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
5.5-4: Prior to any construction activities that may affect historical resources (i.e.,
structures 45 years or older), a historical resources assessment shall be performed
by an architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s
Professionally Qualified Standards in architectural history or history. This shall
include a records search to determine if any resources that may be potentially
affected by the project have been previously recorded, evaluated, and/or
designated in the National Register of Historic Places, California Register of
Historic Resources, or a local register. Following the records search, the qualified
architectural historian shall conduct a reconnaissance-level and/or intensive-level
survey in accordance with the California Office of Historic Preservation guidelines
to identify any previously unrecorded potential historical resources that may be
potentially affected by the proposed project. Pursuant to the definition of a
historical resource under CEQA, potential historical resources shall be evaluated
under a developed historic context.
Qualified Historian Prior to construction activities City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.5-5: To ensure that projects requiring the relocation, rehabilitation, or alternation
of a historical resource not impact its significant, the Secretary of Interior’s
Standards for the Treatments of Historic Properties shall be used to the maximum
extent possible. The application of the standards shall be overseen by a qualified
architectural historian or historic architect meeting the Professionally Qualified
Standards. Prior to any construction activities that may affect the historical
resource, a report identifying and specifying the treatment of character-defining
features and construction activities shall be provided to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga.
Qualified Historian Prior to construction activities City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.5-6: If a proposed project would result in the demolition or significant alteration
of historical resource, it cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level.
However, recordation of the resource prior to construction activities will assist in
reducing adverse impacts to the resource to the greatest extent possible.
Recordation shall take the form of Historic American Buildings Survey, Historic
American Engineering Record, or Historic American Landscape Survey
documentation, and shall be performed by an architectural historian or historian
who meets the Professionally Qualified Standards. Documentation shall include
Qualified Historian Prior to demolition City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Page 382
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 36 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
an architectural and historical narrative; medium- or large-format black and white
photographs, negatives, and prints; and supplementary information such as
building plans and elevations, and/or historical photographs. Documentation shall
be reproduced on archival paper and placed in appropriate local, state, or federal
institutions. The specific scope and details of documentation would be developed
at the project level.
5.5-7: If cultural resources that are eligible for listing to the National Register of
Historic Places, California Register of Historic Resources, or a local register are
identified within or adjacent to the proposed development, the construction limits
shall be clearly flagged to ensure impacts to eligible cultural resources are avoided
or minimized to the extent feasible. Prior to implementing construction activities, a
qualified archaeologist shall verify that the flagging clearly delineates the
construction limits and eligible resources to be avoided. Since the location of some
eligible cultural resources is confidential, these resources will be flagged as
environmentally sensitive areas.
Qualified Archaeologist Prior to construction activities City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.5-8: To determine the archaeological sensitivity for discretionary projects within
the city, an archaeological resources assessment shall be performed under the
supervision of an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s
Professionally Qualified Standards (PQS) in either prehistoric or historic
archaeology. The assessments shall include a California Historical Resources
Information System (CHRIS) records search and a search of the Sacred Lands
File (SLF) maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The
records searches shall determine if the proposed project has been previously
surveyed for archaeological resources, identify and characterize the results of
previous cultural resource surveys, and disclose any cultural resources that have
been recorded and/or evaluated. A Phase I pedestrian survey shall be undertaken
in areas that are undeveloped to locate any surface cultural materials.
If potentially significant archaeological resources are identified through an
archaeological resources assessment, and impacts to these resource cannot
be avoided, a Phase II Testing and Evaluation investigation shall be performed
Qualified Archaeologist Prior to construction activities City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Page 383
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 37
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
by an archaeologist who meets the PQS prior to any construction-related
ground-disturbing activities to determine significance. If resources determined
significant or unique through Phase II testing, and site avoidance is not
possible, appropriate site-specific mitigation measures shall be established
and undertaken. These might include a Phase III data recovery program that
would be implemented by a qualified archaeologist and shall be performed in
accordance with the Office of Historic Preservation’s Archaeological Resource
Management Reports (ARMR): Recommended Contents and Format (1990)
and Guidelines for Archaeological Research Designs (1991).
If the archaeological assessment did not identify potentially significant
archaeological resources within the proposed General Plan area but indicated
the area to be highly sensitive for archaeological resources, a qualified
archaeologist shall monitor all ground-disturbing construction and pre-
construction activities in areas with previously undisturbed soil. The
archaeologist shall inform all construction personnel prior to construction
activities of the proper procedures in the event of an archaeological discovery.
The training shall be held in conjunction with the project’s initial onsite safety
meeting, and shall explain the importance and legal basis for the protection of
significant archaeological resources. In the event that archaeological
resources (artifacts or features) are exposed during ground-disturbing
activities, construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall
be halted while the resources are evaluated for significance by an
archaeologist who meets the PQS. If the discovery proves to be significant, it
shall be curated with a recognized scientific or educational repository.
If the archaeological assessment did not identify potentially significant
archaeological resources, but indicates the area to be of medium sensitivity for
archaeological resources, an archaeologist who meets the PQS shall be
retained on an on-call basis. The archaeologist shall inform all construction
personnel prior to construction activities about the proper procedures in the
event of an archaeological discovery. The training shall be held in conjunction
Page 384
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 38 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
with the project’s initial on-site safety meeting, and shall explain the importance
and legal basis for the protection of significant archaeological resources. In the
event that archaeological resources (artifacts or features) are exposed during
ground-disturbing activities, construction activities in the immediate vicinity of
the discovery shall be halted while the on-call archaeologist is contacted. If the
discovery proves to be significant, it shall be curated with a recognized
scientific or education repository.
Applicable General Plan Policies
LC-1.2: Quality of Place. Ensure that new infill development is compatible with
the existing, historic, and envisioned future character and scale of each
neighborhood.
LD-1.12: Adaptive Reuse. Support the adaptive reuse of historic properties
consistent with neighborhood character.
RC-4.1: Disturbance of Human Remains. In areas where there is a high chance
that human remains may be present, the City will require proposed projects to
conduct a survey to establish occurrence of human remains, and measures to
prevent impacts to human remains if found.
RC-4.2: Discovery of Human Remains. Require that any human remains
discovered during implementation of public and private projects within the City be
treated with respect and dignity and fully comply with the California Native
American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act and other appropriate laws.
RC-4.3: Protected Sites. Require sites with significant cultural resources to be
protected.
RC-4.4: Preservation of Historic Resources. Encourage the preservation of
historic resources, buildings, and landscape.
Page 385
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 39
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
RC-4.5: Historic Buildings. Encourage the rehabilitation and reuse of older
buildings.
Page 386
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 40 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Page 387
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 41
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
Standard Conditions of Approval
5.7-1: Development of projects pursuant to the General Plan Update shall comply
with the City’s modifications to the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Act that
call for geotechnical investigations for all proposed structures designed for human
occupancy within the expanded AP Zones, including a zone along a splay of the
Cucamonga Fault and another zone along the scarp at Red Hill. Also, geotechnical
investigations are required for essential and critical facilities along the
buried/uncertain segment of the Red Hill Fault, with a setback requirement of at
least 50 feet.
Qualified
Geologist/Engineer
Prior to issuance of building
permits
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.7-2: All future building pads shall be seeded and irrigated for erosion control.
Detailed plans shall be included in the landscape and irrigation plans to be
submitted for Planning Department approval prior to the issuance of building
permits.
Project Applicant Prior to issuance of building
permits
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.7-3: A geological report shall be prepared for an individual project by a qualified
engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan
check.
Qualified
Geologist/Engineer
During grading plan check City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.7-4: The final grading plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports
shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official
prior to the issuance of building permits.
Project Applicant Prior to issuance of building
permits
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department,
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Building
Department
5.7-5: A separate grading plan check submittal is required for all new construction
projects and for existing buildings where improvements being proposed will
generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The grading plan shall
be prepared, stamped, and signed by a California registered Civil Engineer.
Qualified Engineer Prior to construction activities City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.7-6: A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the
State of California to perform such work.
Qualified Engineer Prior to construction activities City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Page 388
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 42 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
5.7-7: If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered
before or during grading, the developer shall retain a qualified paleontologist to
monitor construction activities, and take appropriate measures to protect or
preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that
will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures
(i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation
monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the
following measures:
Assign a paleontological monitor, trained, and equipped to allow the rapid
removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during
the interval of earth-disturbing activities.
Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth-
disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If
construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should
immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find.
Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the
summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino
County Museum).
Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected
specimens with a copy to the report to San Bernardino County Museum.
Qualified Paleontologist Before or during grading City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Applicable General Plan Policies
SE-2.1: Fault Setbacks. Require minimum setbacks for structures proposed for
human occupancy within State and City Special Study Zones. Setbacks will be
based on minimum standards established under State law and recommendations
of a Certified Engineering Geologist and/ or Geotechnical Engineer.
SE-2.2: Building Functionality. Require enhanced siting, design, and
construction standards that focus on building functionality for new critical public
Page 389
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 43
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
facilities and key essential (private) facilities after a seismic event.
SE-2.3: Seismically Vulnerable Buildings. Prioritize the retrofit of seismically
vulnerable buildings (unreinforced masonry, soft-story construction, non-ductile
concrete, etc.) as better information and understanding becomes available.
SE-2.4: Transfer of Development Rights. Promote and allow for the use of
transfer of development rights in areas of significant seismic and geologic hazards.
SE-2.5: Hillside Hazards. Prioritize regulations and strategies that reduce
geologic hazard risk to properties and loss of life.
SE-5.3: Soil Transport. Require properties with high wind-blown soil erosion
potential (agricultural operations, construction sites, etc.) prevent soil transport and
dust generation.
Page 390
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 44 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Page 391
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 45
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
Standard Conditions of Approval
5.9-1: Future development shall prepare a Fire Protection Plan that includes
measures consistent with the unique problems resulting from the location,
topography, geology, flammable vegetation, and climate of the proposed
development site. The Plan must also address water supply, access, building
ignition fire resistance, fire protection systems and equipment, defensible space,
and vegetation management. Maintenance requirements for incinerators, outdoor
fireplaces, permanent barbeques and grills, and firebreak fuel modification areas
are imposed on new developments.
Project Applicant Prior to construction activities City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.9-2: With respect to all open space, recreational, or parkland uses, the City will
ensure through project design features and conditions of approval that Southern
California Edison (SCE) has 24/7 downline access by SCE facilities and
operations.
Project Applicant Prior to issuance of building
permits
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.9-3: With respect to parkland proposed within utility corridors, anti-climbing
sharks teeth style barriers, or their equivalent, shall be installed on all transmission
towers. Anti-climbing devices shall conform to the California Public Utilities
Commission guidance that is in effect at the time of parkland project
implementation. The cost of anti-climbing guards and installation shall be borne by
the project proponent.
Project Applicant Prior to issuance of building
permits
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.9-4: Any proposed trees within utility corridors should be maintained at a height
not to exceed 15 feet.
Project Applicant Ongoing City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.9-5: With the exception of utility infrastructure and other public improvements
that do not interfere with such infrastructure, permanent structures are not allowed
within utility corridors.
Project Applicant During plan check City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.9-6: Southern California Edison (SCE) shall be notified in writing of any proposal
to locate parkland or recreational uses within a utility corridor. If the use is located
on SCE property or if otherwise required by law or the terms of a utility easement,
SCE’s written approval of such uses shall be obtained prior to the issuance of any
CEQA approval or permit or other ministerial or discretionary City approval.
Project Applicant Prior to issuance of any
CEQA approval or permit or
other ministerial or
discretionary City approval
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Page 392
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 46 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
Applicable General Plan Policies
S-5.1: Future Conditions. Ensure future climatic conditions and public health
emergencies are considered as part of community resilience and investment
efforts.
S-5.2: Urban Forestry Plan. Minimize damage associated with wind related
hazards and address climate change and urban heat island effects through the
development of an urban forestry plan and proper landscaping planting and
management techniques.
S-5.3: Soil Transport. Require that properties with high wind-blown soil erosion
potential such as agricultural operations and construction sites prevent soil
transport and dust generation wherever possible.
S-5.4: Extreme Heat Vulnerabilities. Require that new developments, major
remodels, and redevelopments address urban heat island issues and reduce
urban heat island effects for the proposed project site and adjacent properties.
S-5.5: Resilience Resources. Require new developments and redevelopments
to incorporate resilience amenities such as, but not limited to community cooling
centers, emergency supplies, and backup power that can be used by residents
and businesses within a 1/4-mile radius of the location.
S-5.6: Underground Utilities. Promote the undergrounding of utilities for new
development, major remodels, and redevelopment.
S-5.7: Future Adaptation. Future climate adaptation-oriented projects will
incorporate natural infrastructure to the greatest extent practicable.
S-5.8: Climate Resiliency. Address climate resiliency and inequities through the
planning and development process.
Page 393
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 47
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
S-5.9: Address High Winds. Require buildings and developments exposed to
high wind conditions to incorporate design elements and features that minimize or
reduce damage to people, structures, and the community.
S-6.1: Planned Development. Promote development patterns that integrate
Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles that reduce
the potential for human-caused hazards.
S-6.2: Neighboring Properties. Encourage properties that store, generate, or
dispose of hazardous materials to locate such operations as far away as possible
from areas of neighboring properties where people congregate.
S-6.3: Site Remediation. Encourage and facilitate the adequate and timely
cleanup of existing and future contaminated sites and the compatibility of future
land uses.
S-6.4: Airport Planning. Protect Rancho Cucamonga interests regarding land use
and safety by participating in the airport land use planning process for Ontario
International Airport.
S-6.5: Height Restrictions. Require proposed developments within the Ontario
Airport Influence Area meet the height requirements associated with FAR Part 77
standards.
S-6.6: Development Near Airport. New development within the Ontario Airport
Influence Area shall be consistent with the approved Airspace Protection Zones
identified in the latest version of the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
S-6.7: Railroad Safety. Minimize potential safety issues and land use conflicts
when considering development adjacent to the railroad right-of-way.
Page 394
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 48 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Standard Conditions of Approval
5.10-1: A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City
Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever
occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City
Engineer.
Qualified Hydrologist Prior to final map approval or
issuance of building permits,
whichever occurs first
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department,
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Engineering
Department
5.10-2: Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface
drainage entering the property from adjacent areas.
Project Applicant Prior to construction activities City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department,
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Engineering
Department
Applicable General Plan Policies
OS-1.9: Joint Use. Pursue and expand joint use of public lands that are available
and suitable for recreational purposes, including school district properties and
flood control district, water district, and other utility properties.
RC-2.1: Water Supplies. Protect lands critical to replenishment of groundwater
supplies and local surface waters (Figure RC-3).
RC-2.2: Groundwater Recharge. Preserve and enhance the existing system of
stormwater capture for groundwater recharge.
RC-2.3: Riparian Resources. Promote the retention and protection of natural
stream courses from encroachment, erosion, and polluted urban runoff.
RC-2.4: Waterways as Amenities. When considering new development
applications and infrastructure improvements where waterways are onsite,
adjacent, or nearby, incorporate the waterway into the design as a feature.
Page 395
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 49
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
RC-2.5: Water Conservation. Require the use of cost-effective methods to
conserve water in new developments and promote appropriate water conservation
and efficiency measures for existing businesses and residences.
RC-2.6: Irrigation. Encourage the conversion of water-intensive turf/landscape
areas to landscaping that uses climate- and wildlife-appropriate native or non-
invasive plants, efficient irrigation systems, greywater, and water efficient site
maintenance.
RC-2.7: Greywater. Allow and encourage the use of greywater to meet or offset
onsite non-potable water demand.
RC-6.12: Reduced Water Supplies. When reviewing development proposals,
consider the possibility of constrained future water supplies and require enhanced
water conservation measures.
RC-6.14: Designing for Changing Precipitation Patterns. When reviewing
development proposals, encourage applicants to consider stormwater control
strategies and systems for sensitivity to changes in precipitation regimes and
consider adjusting those strategies to accommodate future precipitation regimes.
RC-6.18: Water Sources with Low GHG Emissions. Encourage local and
regional water utilities to obtain water from sources with low or no GHG emissions.
S-4.1: New Essential Facilities (Flood). Prohibit the siting and construction of
new essential public facilities within flood hazard zones, when feasible. If an
essential facility must be located within a flood hazard zone, incorporate flood
mitigation to the greatest extent practicable.
S-4.2: Flood Risk in New Development. Require all new development to
minimize flood risk with siting and design measures, such as grading that prevents
Page 396
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 50 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
adverse drainage impacts to adjacent properties, on-site retention of runoff, and
minimization of structures located in floodplains.
S-4.3: 500-Year Floodplain. Promote the compliance of 100-year floodplain
requirements on properties located within the 500-year floodplain designation.
S-4.4: Flood Infrastructure. Require new development to implement and
enhance the Storm Drain Master Plan by constructing stormwater management
infrastructure downstream of the proposed site.
S-4.5: Property Enhancements. Require development within properties located
adjacent, or near flood zones and areas of frequent flooding to reduce or minimize
run-off and increase retention onsite.
S-4.6: Regional Coordination. Promote regional flood management and
mitigation projects with other agencies (San Bernardino County Flood Control,
Army Corps of Engineers, and adjacent jurisdictions) to address flood hazards
holistically.
S-4.7: Dam Operators. Coordinate with agencies operating or managing dam
facilities that can inundate the city, on operations, maintenance, and training
activities and provide the latest Emergency Action Plans annually.
NOISE
Standard Conditions of Approval
5.13-1: For construction activities that do not involve pile driving occurring within
580 feet residential, schools, churches, or similar uses or within 330 feet of
commercial/industrial uses or for construction activities involving pile driving
occurring within 1,000 feet of residential, schools, churches, or similar uses, or
within 330 feet of commercial/industrial uses, or nighttime construction activities,
as defined in Development Code Section 17.66.050), the City shall require that
Project Applicant,
Construction Contractor
Prior to project approval City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Page 397
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 51
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
project applicants prepare a site-specific construction noise analysis
demonstrating compliance with the noise standards of Development Code Section
17.66.050, as determined by the City. The analysis shall be completed prior to
project approval and can be completed as part of the environmental review
process for projects subject to CEQA. Potential project-specific actions that can
feasibly achieve compliance include, but are not limited to, restrictions on
construction timing to avoid nighttime hours, restrictions on the location of
equipment and vehicle use within the construction site, installing noise mufflers on
construction equipment, use of electric-powered vehicles and equipment, use of
sound blankets on construction equipment, and the use of temporary walls or noise
barriers to block and deflect noise.
5.13-2: To avoid or substantially lessen exposure to substantial permanent
increases in traffic noise, the City shall, at the time of development application
submittal, require the preparation of a traffic noise study that includes (1) the
evaluation of potential traffic noise impacts of new noise sources (e.g., project-
generated traffic noise increases) on nearby existing noise sensitive receptors
(such as residential neighborhoods) and (2) require noise reduction measures
(e.g., sound walls, rubberized asphalt) to prevent exposure of noise sensitive
receptors to substantial noise increases, consistent with Table N-1 and
incremental increase standards of no greater than 3 dB where existing levels are
below 65 dBA CNEL, 1 dB where existing levels are between 70 dBA CNEL and
75 dBA and any increase where existing levels are above 75 dBA CNEL, as
determined by the City.
Project Applicant,
Traffic Engineer
At the time of development
application submittal
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.13-3: The City shall require that project applicants analyze and mitigate potential
noise impacts from new stationary noise sources (e.g., loading docks at
commercial and industrial uses, mechanical equipment associated with all building
types), to, as determined by the City, comply with the City’s daytime (7:00 a.m. to
10:00 p.m.) standards of 65 dBA Leq/50 dBA Leq (exterior/interior) and nighttime
(10:00 p.m.-7:00 a.m.) standards of 60 dBA Leq/45 dBA Leq (exterior/interior),
described in Development Code Section 17.66.050(F). The analysis shall be
Project Applicant,
Qualified Acoustical
Engineer
Prior to project approval City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Page 398
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 52 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer or noise specialist and completed prior
to project approval and can be completed as part of the environmental review
process for projects subject to CEQA. Potential project-specific actions that can
feasibly achieve compliance include, but are not limited to, the use of enclosures
or screening materials (e.g., landscape buffers, parapets, masonry walls) around
stationary noise sources (e.g., heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems,
generators, heating boilers, loading docks) or of noise suppression devices (e.g.,
acoustic louvers, mufflers).
5.13-4a: The City shall, at the time of development project application submittal,
evaluate the compatibility of proposed noise sensitive uses (e.g., residences,
lodging, schools, parks) with the noise environment to ensure noise compatibility
standards (Table N-1) are met.
Project Applicant At the time of development
project application
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.13-4b: Applicants for development projects shall, at the time of application
submittal, evaluate noise impacts for compliance with noise compatibility
standards (Table N-1), and when noise attenuation measures are required,
prioritize site planning that reduces noise exposure over other attenuation
measures, particularly the location of parking, ingress/egress/loading, and refuse
collection areas relative to surrounding residential development and other noise-
sensitive land uses.
Project Applicant At the time of development
project application
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.13-4c: Applicants for development projects shall, at the time of application
submittal, evaluate noise impacts for compliance with noise compatibility
standards (Table N-1), and when noise attenuation measures are required,
incorporate building orientation, design, and interior layout into the project to
achieve compatible noise levels. For example, noise insulation materials (e.g.,
double-glazed windows and well-sealed doors) substantially lessen interior noise
levels. In addition, interior building layouts that place active rooms, such as
kitchens, between noise-sensitive rooms, such as bedrooms, and exterior noise
sources, such as roadways, substantially lessen interior noise levels within the
noise-sensitive rooms.
Project Applicant At the time of development
project application
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Page 399
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 53
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
5.13-4d: The City shall require that mixed-use development be designed to
minimize exposure of noise-sensitive uses from adjacent noise sources and
require full disclosure of the potential noise impacts of living in a mixed-use
development by requiring residential disclosure notices within deeds and lease
agreements as a condition of project approval.
Project Applicant Prior to occupancy City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.13-4e: The City shall review and comment on transportation capital projects and
operations sponsored by Caltrans and other agencies to minimize exposure of
noise-sensitive uses within the city to adverse levels of transportation-related
noise, including noise associated with freeways, major arterials, bus transit, and
rail lines.
City of Rancho
Cucamonga
Prior to construction activities City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.13-5a: For development involving construction activities within 500 feet of
existing sensitive land uses (places where people sleep or buildings containing
vibration-sensitive uses), the City shall require applicants, at the time of application
submittal, to prepare a project-specific vibration analysis that identifies vibration-
reducing measures to ensure the project construction does not exceed applicable
vibration criteria (e.g., FTA, Caltrans) for the purpose of preventing disturbance to
sensitive land uses and structural damage. The analysis shall include, but is not
limited to, the following requirements:
Ground vibration-producing activities, such as pile driving, shall be limited to
the daytime hours between 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and prohibited
on Sundays and holidays.
If pile driving is used, pile holes shall be predrilled to the maximum feasible
depth to reduce the number of blows required to seat a pile.
Maximize the distance between construction equipment and vibration-
sensitive land uses.
Earthmoving, blasting and ground-impacting activities shall be prohibited from
occurring at the same time if simultaneous activity would result in exceedance
of vibration criteria.
Where pile driving is proposed, alternatives to traditional pile driving (e.g.,
Project Applicant At the time of development
project application
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Page 400
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 54 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
sonic pile driving, jetting, cast-in-place or auger cast piles, nondisplacement
piles, pile cushioning, torque or hydraulic piles) shall be implemented when the
project cannot otherwise demonstrate vibration levels in compliance with the
structural damage threshold.
Minimum setback requirements for different types of ground vibration-
producing activities (e.g., pile driving) for the purpose of preventing damage to
nearby structures shall be established. Factors to be considered include the
specific nature of the vibration producing activity (e.g., type and duration of pile
driving), soil conditions, and the fragility/resiliency of the nearby structures.
Established setback requirements (100 feet for pile driving, 25 feet for other
construction activity) can be revised only if a project-specific analysis is
conducted by a qualified geotechnical engineer or ground vibration specialist
that demonstrates, as determined by the City, that the structural damage
vibration threshold would not be exceeded.
Minimum setback requirements for different types of ground vibration
producing activities (e.g., pile driving) for the purpose of preventing negative
human response shall be established based on the specific nature of the
vibration producing activity (e.g., type and duration of pile driving), soil
conditions, and the type of sensitive receptor. Established setback
requirements (500 for pile driving, 80 for other construction) can be revised
only if a project-specific ground vibration study demonstrates, as determined
by the City, that receptors would not be exposed to ground vibration levels in
excess of negative human response vibration threshold levels, depending on
the frequency of the event and receiver type.
All vibration-inducing activity within the established setback distances for
preventing structural damage and negative human response shall be
monitored and documented to compare recorded ground vibration noise and
vibration noise levels at affected sensitive land uses to the applicable vibration
threshold values. The results included recorded vibration data shall be
Page 401
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 55
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
submitted to the City.
5.13-5b: For projects proposed within 600 feet of commuter rail/high-speed
rail/freight rail, or rail with combined services, the City shall require applicants, at
the time of application submittal, to prepare a project-specific vibration analyses to
evaluate vibration exposure from nearby transit sources. The vibration assessment
shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer or noise specialist in
accordance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) vibration impact criteria, or
other applicable City policy in place at the time of project application submittal. The
assessment shall determine vibration levels at specific building locations and
identify structural mitigation measures (e.g., isolation strip foundations, insulated
windows and walls, sound walls or barriers, distance setbacks, or other
construction or design measures) that would reduce vibration to acceptable levels
for the receptor and source type.
Project Applicant,
Qualified Acoustical
Engineer
At the time of development
project application
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.13-5c: The City shall evaluate new transportation capital projects and operations
sponsored by other agencies for structural vibration impacts and vibration
annoyance impacts, consistent with City-approved methodologies (e.g., Caltrans,
FTA guidance).
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Prior to construction activities City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Applicable General Plan Policies
N-1.1: Noise Levels. Require new development to meet the noise compatibility
standards identified in Table N-1.
N-1.2: Noise Barriers, Buffers and Sound Walls. Require the use of integrated
design-related noise reduction measures for both interior and exterior areas prior
to the use of noise barriers, buffers, or walls to reduce noise levels generated by
or affected by new development.
N-1.3: Non-Architectural Noise Attenuation. Non-architectural noise
attenuation measures such as sound walls, setbacks, barriers, and berms shall be
discouraged in pedestrian priority areas (or other urban areas or areas where
Page 402
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 56 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
pedestrian access is important).
N-1.4: New Development Near Major Noise Sources. Require development
proposing to add people in areas where they may be exposed to major noise
sources (e.g., roadways, rail lines, aircraft, industrial or other non-transportation
noise sources) to conduct a project level noise analysis and implement
recommended noise reduction measures.
N-1.5: Urban and Suburban Development Near Transit. Allow development
located in infill areas, near transit hubs, or along major roadways an exemption
from exterior noise standards for secondary open space areas (such as front
yards, parking lots, stoops, porches, or balconies), if noise standards can be met
for primary open space.
N-1.6: Rail Crossing Quiet Zones. Allow the establishment of a full or partial at-
grade rail crossing or quiet zone near transit hubs or residential development.
N-1.7: Entertainment. Establish different standards for exterior noise consistent
with the place type.
N-1.8: Vibration Impact Assessment. Require new development to reduce
vibration to 85 VdB or below within 200 feet of an existing structure.
Page 403
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 57
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
TRANSPORTATION
Page 404
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 58 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
Standard Conditions of Approval
5.17-1: Future development applications in the City shall be required to provide
traffic impact analyses for review and approval by the City during the permit
process to identify the traffic impacts of the project and the needed roadway and
intersection improvements. Any identified on-site improvements and
improvements to abutting roadways would need to be made part of the
development. Coupled with the payment of DIF for the improvement of off-site
roadways and intersections, traffic impacts would be mitigated on a project-by-
project basis.
Project Applicant,
Traffic Engineer
During permit process City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.17-2: Future developments with 250 employees or more shall comply with the
South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD’s) Rule 2202, which
requires the implementation of trip reduction measures as a means of reducing
pollutant emission in the air basin. An employer subject to this Rule shall
annually register with the SCAQMD to implement an emission reduction
program, in accordance with this Rule.
Project Applicant Prior to construction activities City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.17-3: Individual projects shall provide the following, as determined applicable
by City staff:
Provide car-sharing, bike sharing, and ride-sharing programs;
Improve or increase access to transit;
Incorporate neighborhood electric vehicle networks into the project;
Include project measures to reduce transportation requirements such as work
from home and flexible work schedules;
Link to existing pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service; and/or
Provide traffic calming.
Project Applicant Prior to construction activities City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Applicable General Plan Policies
OS-1.1: Equitable Access to Parks. Strive to ensure that at least one park or
other public open space is within 1/2 mile or a 10-minute walk from homes and
Page 405
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 59
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
jobs, without crossing major streets except at signalized crossings.
OS-1.2: Underserved Communities. Prioritize the provision of new trails, parks,
plazas, and other open space types in areas of the City that are underserved by
parks, services, and amenities.
OS-2.1: Trail Corridors. Extend, improve and complete the multi-purpose trail
network, wherever possible, by utilizing existing flood control channel and utility
corridor rights-of-way as public trail corridors.
OS-2.2: Connectivity. Connect trails in Rancho Cucamonga to trails in the San
Bernardino National Forest and other hillside open space areas.
OS-2.3: Trailheads. Provide trailhead amenities such as parking, restrooms,
information boards, and maps.
OS-2.4: Equestrian Trails. Continue to maintain and pursue the development of
planned trails and facilities for equestrian use.
OS-2.5: Utility Corridors. Preserve the primary function of utility corridors while
providing every reasonable opportunity for shared public use for active mobility
and recreational purposes.
OS-2.6: Design for Heat. Consider extreme heat in the design of streets, parks,
trails, and playgrounds to support activity throughout the year and in all weather
conditions by including shade trees, shade structures, water fountains, splash
pads, lighting for night play in most spaces.
OS-2.7: Access. Require new development to provide access to existing or future
trails and provide appropriate trail amenities (e.g., benches, drinking fountains,
hitching posts, bike stands, and other amenities).
Page 406
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 60 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
OS-2.9: Trail and Park Sponsorship. Support the creation of partnerships with
organizations to sponsor and maintain green spaces, parks, trails, and community
gardens.
MA-1.1: Transportation Leadership. Take a leadership role in local and regional
transportation related planning and decision making.
MA-1.2: Rancho Cucamonga Station Redevelopment. Support redevelopment
in and around the Rancho Cucamonga Station to support transit-oriented
development.
MA-1.3: Funding. Support federal, statewide, and regional infrastructure funding
for transit and transportation.
MA-1.4: Local Mobility Hub. Require new development at mobility hubs and key
stops along the future bus rapid transit and future transit circulator system to
facilitate first mile/last mile connectivity to neighborhoods.
MA-1.5: Provide Mobility Options. Provide roadway connections and local
mobility hubs designed to capture 80% of the population and employment south
of Base Line Road.
MA-1.6: Boulevard Implementation. Require boulevards with high-quality transit
to not only account for how transit service is impacted by the geometry of the
corridor, but also by signal timing, signal phasing, turns, and other operations that
may jeopardize the quality of service.
MA-2.1: Complete Streets. Require that new roadways include provisions for
complete streets, balancing the needs of all users of all ages and capabilities.
MA-2.2: Street Design. Implement innovative street and intersection designs to
Page 407
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 61
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
maximize efficiency and safety in the city.
MA-2.3: Street Connectivity. Require connectivity and accessibility to a mix of
land uses that meets residents’ daily needs within walking distance.
MA-2.4: Street Vacations. Prioritize pedestrian and utility connectivity over street
vacations.
MA-2.5: Context. Ensure that complete streets applications integrate the
neighborhood and community identity into the street design. This can include
special provisions for pedestrians and bicycles.
MA-2-6: Roadway Scale. Balance roadway size and design configuration to
ensure that vehicular speeds, volumes and turning movements do not compromise
the safety and comfort of pedestrians and bicyclists.
MA-2.7: Facility Service Levels. Maintain level of service (LOS) D for priority
modes on each street; LOS E or F may be acceptable at intersections or segments
for modes that are not prioritized. The City will develop a list of intersections and
roadways that are protected from this level of service policy.
MA-2.8: New Streets. Require new roadway connections to improve emergency
accessibility and roadway connectivity north of State Route 210 and within the
Southeast Area.
MA-2.9: Block Pattern. Require development projects to arrange streets in an
interconnected block pattern, so that pedestrians, bicyclists, and drivers are not
forced onto arterial streets for inter- or intra- neighborhood travel.
MA-2.10: Master Planning. Master plan sites so as to ensure a well-structured
network and block pattern with sufficient access and connectivity.
Page 408
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 62 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
MA-2.11: Transportation Demand Management. Require new projects to
implement Transportation Demand Management strategies, such as employer
provided transit pass/parking credit, low-speed communications infrastructure for
telecommuting, carpooling incentive, etc.
MA-3.1: Pedestrian and Bicycle Networks. Maintain the Active Transportation
Plan supporting safe routes to school, and a convenient network of identified
pedestrian and bicycle routes with access to major employment centers, shopping
districts, regional transit centers, and residential neighborhoods.
MA-3.2: Traffic Safety. Prioritize transportation system improvements that help
eliminate traffic-related fatalities and severe injury collisions.
MA-3.3: Vulnerable User Safety. Prioritize pedestrian improvements in the
Pedestrian Priority Area shown on Figure 8 to promote safety in the southwest
area of the City.
MA-3.4: Emergency Access. Prioritize development and infrastructure
investments that work to implement, maintain, and enhance emergency access
throughout the community.
MA-4.1: Truck Network. Avoid designating truck routes that use collector or local
streets that primarily serve residential uses and other sensitive receptors.
MA-4.2: Southeast Area Connectivity. Require new development in the
Southeast Area to provide the necessary infrastructure to maintain access and
public safety as shown on Figure M-8.
MA-4.3: Future Logistics Technology. Support and plan for electrification and
autonomy of the truck fleet.
MA-4.4: Rail Access. Avoid abandonment of rail access to industrial parcels or
Page 409
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 63
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
utilize such right of way to balance and enhance other connectivity goals within the
City (such as pedestrian/bicycle trails).
MA-4.5: Grade Separation. Support the construction of grade separations of
roadways and trails from rail lines.
MA-5.1: Land Use Supporting Reduced VMT. Work to reduce VMT through land
use planning, enhanced transit access, localized attractions, and access to non-
automotive modes.
MA-5.17: Emerging Technologies. Prioritize investments in critical infrastructure
and pilot programs to leverage proven new transportation technology.
MA-5.3: Funding. Remain flexible in the pursuit and adoption of transportation
funding mechanisms that fund innovative transportation solutions.
MA-5.4: Intelligent Systems Preparation. Upgrade the City’s ATMS and
communications systems to ensure that the City meets the intelligent
transportation system demands of today while planning for future demands
associated with AVs and CVs.
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Standard Conditions of Approval
5.18-1: Inadvertent Archeological Find. If during ground disturbance activities,
cultural resources are discovered that were not assessed by the archaeological
report(s) and/or environmental assessment conducted prior to project approval,
the following procedures shall be followed. Cultural resources are defined as
being multiple artifacts in close association with each other, but also include
fewer artifacts if the area of the find is determined to be of significance due to its
sacred or cultural importance as determined in consultation with the Native
American Tribe(s).
Project Applicant,
Registered Professional
Archaeologist, Tribal
Representative(s)
During Ground Disturbing
Activities
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Page 410
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 64 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
a. All ground disturbance activities within 100 feet of the discovered cultural
resources shall be halted until a meeting is convened between the developer,
the archaeologist, the tribal representative(s) and the Planning Director to
discuss the significance of the find.
b. At the meeting, the significance of the discoveries shall be discussed and
after consultation with the tribal representative(s) and the archaeologist, a
decision shall be made, with the concurrence of the Planning Director, as to
the appropriate mitigation (documentation, recovery, avoidance, etc.) for the
cultural resources.
c. Grading or further ground disturbance shall not resume within the area of the
discovery until an agreement has been reached by all parties as to the
appropriate mitigation. Work shall be allowed to continue outside of the buffer
area and will be monitored by additional Tribal monitors if needed.
d. Treatment and avoidance of the newly discovered resources shall be
consistent with the Cultural Resources Management Plan and Monitoring
Agreements entered into with the appropriate tribes. This may include
avoidance of the cultural resources through project design, in-place
preservation of cultural resources located in native soils and/or re-burial on
the Project property so they are not subject to further disturbance in
perpetuity as identified in Non-Disclosure of Reburial Locations Condition.
e. If the find is determined to be significant and avoidance of the site has not
been achieved, a Phase III data recovery plan shall be prepared by the
project archaeologist, in consultation with the Tribe, and shall be submitted
to the City for their review and approval prior to implementation of the said
plan.
f. Pursuant to Calif. Pub. Res. Code § 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred
method of preservation for archaeological resources and tribal cultural
Page 411
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 65
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
resources. If the landowner and the Tribe(s) cannot agree on the significance
or the mitigation for the archaeological or tribal cultural resources, these
issues will be presented to the Planning Director for decision. The City’s
Planning Director shall make the determination based on the provisions of
the California Environmental Quality Act with respect to archaeological and
tribal cultural resources, recommendations of the project archaeologist, and
shall take into account the cultural and religious principles and practices of
the Tribe. Notwithstanding any other rights available under the law, the
decision of the City Planning Director shall be appealable to the City Planning
Commission and/or City Council.
5.18-2: Cultural Resources Disposition. In the event that Native American
cultural resources are discovered during the course of grading (inadvertent
discoveries), the following procedures shall be carried out for final disposition of
the discoveries:
g. One or more of the following treatments, in order of preference, shall be
employed with the tribes. Evidence of such shall be provided to the City of
Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department:
i. Preservation-In-Place of the cultural resources, if feasible. Preservation
in place means avoiding the resources, leaving them in the place where
they were found with no development affecting the integrity of the
resources.
ii. Reburial of the resources on the Project property. The measures for
reburial shall include, at least, the following: Measures and provisions
to protect the future reburial area from any future impacts in perpetuity.
Reburial shall not occur until all legally required cataloging and basic
recording has been completed, with an exception that sacred items,
burial goods, and Native American human remains are excluded. Any
reburial process shall be culturally appropriate. Listing of contents and
location of the reburial shall be included in the confidential Phase IV
Project Applicant,
Registered Professional
Archaeologist, Tribal
Representative(s)
During Grading Activities City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Page 412
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 66 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
report. The Phase IV Report shall be filed with the City under a
confidential cover and not subject to Public Records Request.
iii. If preservation in place or reburial is not feasible then the resources
shall be curated in a culturally appropriate manner at a San Bernardino
County curation facility that meets State Resources Department Office
of Historic Preservation Guidelines for the Curation of Archaeological
Resources ensuring access and use pursuant to the Guidelines. The
collection and associated records shall be transferred, including title,
and are to be accompanied by payment of the fees by the Applicant
necessary for permanent curation. Evidence of curation in the form of a
letter from the curation facility stating that subject archaeological
materials have been received and that all fees have been paid, shall be
provided by the landowner to the City. There shall be no destructive or
invasive testing on sacred items, burial goods, and Native American
human remains, as defined by the cultural and religious practices of the
Most Likely Descendant. Results concerning finds of any inadvertent
discoveries shall be included in the Phase IV monitoring report.
5.18-3: Archaeologist Retained. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the
project applicant shall retain a qualified Registered Professional Archaeologist
(RPA), to monitor all ground disturbing activities in an effort to identify any
unknown archaeological resources. The Registered Professional Archaeologist
and the Tribal monitor(s) shall manage and oversee monitoring for all initial
ground disturbing activities and excavation of each portion of the project site
including clearing, grubbing, tree removals, mass or rough grading, trenching,
stockpiling of materials, rock crushing, structure demolition and etc. The
Registered Professional Archaeologist and the Tribal monitor(s), shall
independently have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect, or halt the ground
disturbance activities to allow identification, evaluation, and potential recovery of
cultural resources in coordination with any required special interest or tribal
monitors. The developer/permit holder shall submit a fully executed copy of the
Project Applicant,
Registered Professional
Archaeologist, Tribal
Representative(s)
Prior to Issuance of Grading
Permit
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Page 413
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 67
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
contract to the Planning Department to ensure compliance with this condition of
approval. Upon verification, the Planning Department shall clear this condition. In
addition, the Registered Professional Archaeologist, in consultation with the
Consulting Tribe(s), the contractor, and the City, shall develop a Cultural
Resources Management Plan (CRMP) in consultation pursuant to the definition
in AB 52 to address the details, timing, and responsibility of all archaeological
and cultural activities that will occur on the project site. A consulting tribe is
defined as a tribe that initiated the AB 52 tribal consultation process for the
Project, has not opted out of the AB 52 consultation process, and has completed
AB 52 consultation with the City as provided for in Cal Pub Res Code Section
21080.3.2(b)(1) of AB52. Details in the Plan shall include:
a. Project grading and development scheduling;
b. The Project archaeologist and the Consulting Tribes(s) shall attend the pre-
grading meeting with the City, the construction manager and any contractors,
and will conduct a mandatory Cultural Resources Worker Sensitivity Training
to those in attendance. The Training will include a brief review of the cultural
sensitivity of the Project and the surrounding area; what resources could
potentially be identified during earthmoving activities; the requirements of the
monitoring program; the protocols that apply in the event inadvertent
discoveries of cultural resources are identified, including who to contact and
appropriate avoidance measures until the find(s) can be properly evaluated;
and any other appropriate protocols. All new construction personnel that will
conduct earthwork or grading activities that begin work on the Project
following the initial Training must take the Cultural Sensitivity Training prior
to beginning work and the Project archaeologist and Consulting Tribe(s) shall
make themselves available to provide the training on an as-needed basis;
c. The protocols and stipulations that the contractor, City, Consulting Tribe(s)
and Project archaeologist will follow in the event of inadvertent cultural
Page 414
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 68 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
resources discoveries, including any newly discovered cultural resource
deposits that shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation.
5.18-4: Native American Monitoring. Tribal monitor(s) shall be required on-site
during all ground-disturbing activities, including grading, stockpiling of materials,
engineered fill, rock crushing, etc. The land divider/permit holder shall retain a
qualified tribal monitor(s) from the requesting Tribe. Prior to issuance of a
grading permit, the developer shall submit a copy of a signed contract between
the Tribe and the land divider/permit holder for the monitoring of the project to
the Planning Department and to the Engineering Department. The Tribal
Monitor(s) shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt the
ground-disturbance activities to allow recovery of cultural resources, in
coordination with the Project Archaeologist.
Project Applicant,
Registered Professional
Archaeologist, Tribal
Representative(s)
During Ground Disturbing
Activities
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.18-5: Archeology Report - Phase III and IV. Prior to final inspection, the
developer/permit holder shall prompt the Project Archeologist to submit two (2)
copies of the Phase III Data Recovery report (if required for the Project) and the
Phase IV Cultural Resources Monitoring Report that complies with the
Community Development Department's requirements for such reports. The
Phase IV report shall include evidence of the required cultural/historical
sensitivity training for the construction staff held during the pre-grade meeting.
The Planning Department shall review the reports to determine adequate
mitigation compliance. Provided the reports are adequate, the Community
Development Department shall clear this condition. Once the report(s) are
determined to be adequate, two (2) copies shall be submitted to the South
Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) at California State University,
Fullerton and one (1) copy shall be submitted to the Consulting Tribe(s) Cultural
Resources Department(s).
Project Applicant,
Registered Professional
Archaeologist
Prior to Final Inspection City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
5.18-6: Human Remains. If human remains are encountered, State Health and
Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until
the San Bernardino County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to
origin. Further, pursuant to Public Resource Code Section 5097.98(b) remains
Project Applicant,
County Coroner
If Human Remains are
Encountered
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Page 415
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 69
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the
treatment and disposition has been made. If the San Bernardino County Coroner
determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage
Commission shall be contacted within the period specified by law (24 hours).
Subsequently, the Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the "most
likely descendant." The most likely descendant shall then make
recommendations and engage in consultation concerning the treatment of the
remains as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.
5.18-7: Non-Disclosure of Reburial Locations. It is understood by all parties
that unless otherwise required by law, the site of any reburial of Native American
human remains or associated grave goods shall not be disclosed and shall not
be governed by public disclosure requirements of the California Public Records
Act. The Coroner, pursuant to the specific exemption set forth in California
Government Code 6254 (r)., parties, and Lead Agencies, will be asked to
withhold public disclosure information related to such reburial, pursuant to the
specific exemption set forth in California Government Code 6254 (r).
Project Applicant,
County Coroner
If Human Remains are
Encountered
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Applicable General Plan Policies
RC-4.1: Disturbance of Human Remains. In areas where there is a high chance
that human remains may be present, the City will require proposed projects to
conduct a survey to establish occurrence of human remains, and measures to
prevent impacts to human remains if found.
RC-4.2: Discovery of Human Remains. Require that any human remains
discovered during implementation of public and private projects within the city be
treated with respect and dignity and fully comply with the California Native
American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act and other appropriate laws.
WILDFIRE
Standard Conditions of Approval
Page 416
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 70 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
5.9-1: Future development shall prepare a Fire Protection Plan that includes
measures consistent with the unique problems resulting from the location,
topography, geology, flammable vegetation, and climate of the proposed
development site. The Plan must also address water supply, access, building
ignition fire resistance, fire protection systems and equipment, defensible space,
and vegetation management. Maintenance requirements for incinerators, outdoor
fireplaces, permanent barbeques and grills, and firebreak fuel modification areas
are imposed on new developments.
Project Applicant Prior to issuance of building
permit
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Community
Development Department
Applicable General Plan Policies
LC-2.9: Buffer Zones. Require development projects to incorporate buffer zones
when determined to be necessary or desirable to serve as managed open space
for wildfire safety and vegetation fuel modification.
OS-1.10: Buffer Zones. Provide buffer zones, as appropriate and necessary, to
serve as managed open space for wildfire safety and vegetation fuel modification.
Buffer zones may include trails, small recreational amenities, information kiosks
and signage, and even staging points for fire vehicles.
MA-2.8: New Streets. Require new roadway connections to improve emergency
accessibility and roadway connectivity north of State Route 210 and within the
Southeast Area.
MA-3.4: Emergency Access. Prioritize development and infrastructure
investments that work to implement, maintain, and enhance emergency access
throughout the community.
H-3.1: Homeless Services. Provide assistance as it becomes available towards
efforts of local organizations and community groups to provide emergency
shelters, transitional housing opportunities, and services to the city’s homeless
Page 417
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 71
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
population and those at-risk of homelessness.
H-5.3: Development Review Process. Facilitate the development review process
for new housing through multiple techniques, including staff assistance, public
information, articles in the City’s newsletter, informal meetings with applicants, and
Preliminary Review applications to address technical issues and facilitate the
production of quality housing.
RC-3.7: Urban Forestry Plan. Minimize damage associated with wind-and fire-
related hazards and risks and address climate change and urban heat island
effects through the development of an urban forestry plan that addresses and
proper and appropriate landscaping, plant and tree selection and replacement,
planting and vegetation management techniques.
S-1.1: City Staff Readiness. Ensure City staff and departments demonstrate a
readiness to respond to emergency incidents and events.
S-1.2: Culture of Preparedness. Promote a culture of preparedness for
businesses and residents that empowers them to increase their resilience to
hazard related events and a changing climate.
S-1.3: Evacuation Capacity. Require new developments, redevelopments, and
major remodels to enhance the city’s evacuation network and facilities and comply
with the City’s Evacuation Assessment.
S-1.4: WUIFA Access Points. Require all new developments and
redevelopments within the WUIFA to provide a minimum of two points of access
by means of public roads that can be used for emergency vehicle response and
evacuation purposes.
S-1.5: Enhanced Circulation. In areas of the city with limited access routes and
Page 418
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Page 72 PlaceWorks
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
circulation challenges, require additional roads and improvements to ensure
adequate emergency vehicle response and evacuation.
S-1.6: Evacuation Road Widths. Require any roads used for evacuation
purposes to provide at least 26 feet of unobstructed pavement width.
S-1.7: Maintenance of Plans. Maintain and regularly update the City’s Local
Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) as an integrated component of the General Plan,
in coordination with the Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP), the
Emergency Operations Plan (EOP), the Evacuation Plan, and Standardized
Emergency Management System (SEMS) compliant disaster plans to maintain
eligibility for grant funding.
S-1.8: Regional Coordination. Ensure regional coordination continues with
neighboring jurisdictions, County, State, and Federal agencies on emergency
management and risk reduction planning and activities.
S-1.9: Mutual Aid. Ensure mutual aid agreements with Federal, State, local
agencies, and the private sector establish responsibility boundaries, joint response
services, and multi-alarm and station coverage capabilities.
S-3.1: Fire Risk Reduction. Apply all state and local codes and regulations (fire
safe design, adherence to Standard 49-1) to new development, redevelopment,
major, and existing non-conforming uses remodels in the WUIFA.
S-3.2: Fire Protection Plans. All new development, redevelopment, and major
remodels in the WUIFA will require the preparation of Fire Protection Plans (FPPs)
to reduce fire threat, in accordance with Fire District policies and procedures.
S-3.3: Vegetation Management. Owners of properties and public/ private roads
within and adjacent to the WUIFA are required to conduct brush clearance and
Page 419
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
December 2021 Page 73
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Standard Conditions of Approval/General Plan Policies Responsibility for Implementation Timing Responsibility for Monitoring
Monitor (Signature Required) (Date of Compliance)
fuel modification to reduce fire ignition potential and spread.
S-3.4: Buffer Zones. Require development projects to incorporate buffer zones
as deemed necessary by the City’s Fire Marshal for fire safety and fuel
modification.
S-3.5: Water Supply. All developments will meet fire flow requirements identified
in the Fire Code.
S-3.6: Coordination with Agencies. Coordinate with State, regional, and local
agencies and service providers on fire risk reduction planning and activities.
S-3.7: Wildfire Awareness. Assist residents and property owners with being
better informed on fire hazards and risk reduction activities in the WUIFA.
S-3.8: New Essential Facilities (WUIFA). Prohibit the siting of new essential
public facilities (including, but not limited to, hospitals and health care facilities,
emergency shelters, emergency command centers, and emergency
communications facilities) within the WUIFA, unless appropriate construction
methods or strategies are incorporated to minimize impacts.
Page 420
December 2021 Page 74
Page 421
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-133
A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY
COUNCIL ADOPTING THE 2020 PLANRC GENERAL PLAN
UPDATE, 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT, AND CLIMATE
ACTION PLAN, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT
THEREOF
A. Recitals.
WHEREAS, the PlanRC General Plan Update is a comprehensive update to the City of
Rancho Cucamonga (the “City”) General Plan which serves to build on our success as a world-
class community, to create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant city, rich in opportunity for all to
thrive; and
WHEREAS, The PlanRC General Plan Update would improve the City’s economic base by
creating opportunities for development and redevelopment in a well-planned community; and
WHEREAS, the General Plan applies to lands within City limits and also certain lands
outside the City limits within the Sphere of Influence, which collectively comprise the City’s Planning
Area, covering a total of 31,627 gross acres (46.5 square miles); and
WHEREAS, although in person engagement was limited due to COVID-19, the City
engaged the community regarding the PlanRC General Plan Update through a variety of digital
platforms including 72 virtual workshops, meetings, webinars and pop-ups and 17 online surveys
netting input from over 2,300 community members and over 1 million digital impressions through
various social media platforms; and
WHEREAS, in conformance with Government Code sections 65351 through 65352.5, the
City has provided opportunities for public input and involvement in the PlanRC General Plan Update
and provided opportunities for consultation to affected public agencies and California Native
American Tribes; and
WHEREAS, the 2021-2029 Housing Element represents the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s
satisfaction of the requirements under state housing element law to meet the mandate that all cities
and counties prepare a Housing Element as part of a comprehensive General Plan to meet the plan
for new housing growth mandated through the Regional Housing Needs Assessment, of which
Rancho Cucamonga is allocated 10,525 units; and
WHEREAS, the City submitted the Housing Element to the California Department of
Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) on June 3, 2021 and revised version on September
2, 2021. The City received its second review letter on November 2, 2021. Revisions requested by
HCD have been incorporated into the final document; and
WHEREAS, the City has prepared a Climate Action Plan (“CAP”) as a companion to the
General Plan to reduce the community’s contributions to climate change grounded it the General
Plan’s core community values of Health, Equity and Stewardship and to build on the broad climate
change policies set forth in the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, on November 10, 2021, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed
public hearing and considered the PlanRC General Plan Update, 2021-2029 Housing Element, and
Climate Action Plan and related Program Environmental Impact Report prepared pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). The Planning Commission concluded the hearing
Page 422
Resolution No. 2021-133 – Page 2 of 4
on the same date and thereafter adopted Resolution No. 21-71, recommending that the City Council
certify the Environmental Impact Report, make findings pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act, adopt a statement of overriding considerations, and recommending that the City
Council adopt the PlanRC General Plan Update, 2021-2029 Housing Element and Climate Action
Plan.
WHEREAS on December 15, 2021 the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing
on the PlanRC General Plan Update, 2021-2029 Housing Element, and Climate Action Plan, and
concluded said hearing on that date. At the conclusion of this hearing, the City Council certified the
Final Program Environmental Impact Report, and adopted the findings, statement of overriding
considerations, and mitigation monitoring and reporting program for the PlanRC General Plan
Update, 2021-2029 Housing Element, and Climate Action Plan.
8. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Council of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. Recitals. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth
in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. CEQA. The PlanRC General Plan Update, 2021-2029 Housing Element, and
Climate Action Plan (collectively, the “Project”) have been environmentally reviewed pursuant to the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the
City’s Local CEQA Guidelines. The City prepared an Program EIR for the Project in order to
analyze the Project’s potential impacts on the environment. A Draft Program EIR was prepared and
circulated for public review and comment, and a Final FEIR was reviewed by the City Council. By
separate Resolution No. 2021-132, the City Council has: (i) made the required CEQA findings and
determinations, (ii) certified the Final Program EIR; (iii) adopted a Statement of Overriding
Considerations and (d) adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project.
Resolution No. 2021-132 is incorporated herein by reference, and made a part hereof as if fully set
forth herein. The documents and other materials that constitute the record on which this
determination was made are located in the Planning Department and are in the custody of the
Planning Director. Further, the mitigation measures and related standard conditions of approval set
forth therein are made applicable to the Project and will be incorporated into future development as
appropriate.
3. Findings. Based upon all available evidence presented to the City Council
during the above-referenced public hearing on December 15, 2021, including written and oral staff
reports, together with public testimony, the City Council hereby specifically finds as follows:
A. General Plan. As a comprehensive update to the City’s General Plan, the
PlanRC General Plan Update has been written a unified document to ensure that the General Plan
as amended will remain internally consistent. Adoption of the PlanRC General Plan Update is in the
public interest because it provides goals and policies that would facilitate the following:
1. Human-scaled design, with buildings and outdoor spaces oriented towards
people connected by safe and comfortable streets, pathways, and trails that provide equitable
access for all;
2. Focus transformative growth along major corridors and allow incremental
change in neighborhoods;
Page 423
Resolution No. 2021-133 – Page 3 of 4
3. Increase jobs in the City to encourage more residents to work locally and
reduce commuting out of the City to work;
4. Maintain and enhance conservation areas; and
5. Create vibrant activity nodes and a “real downtown” with one or several
major activity centers with varied cultural opportunities and public art providing areas for social,
civic, and commercial activity.
B. Housing Element. The 2021-2029 Housing Element has been written in
conjunction with the PlanRC General Plan Update to ensure that it remains internally consistent
with the General Plan, as amended. The 2021-2029 Housing Element works is a comprehensive
housing element that meets the requirements of state law and, together with the PlanRC General
Plan Update, demonstrates that the City has planned for the required number of housing units at all
income levels to meet the City’s RHNA obligations. It will therefore help alleviate the state and
regional housing crisis. For that reason, adoption of the 2021-2029 Housing Element is in the
public interest.
C. Climate Action Plan. The Climate Action Plan will help ensure that future
development within the City does not unduly contribute to greenhouse gas emissions and is needed
to help facilitate the policies and standard conditions of approval outlined in the PlanRC General
Plan Update and Program EIR.
4. Adoption. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to the City Council
during the above-referenced public hearing on December 15, 2021, including written and oral staff
reports, together with public testimony, and the recommendation from the Planning Commission,
the City Council hereby adopts the PlanRC General Plan Update as a comprehensive update to the
City of Rancho Cucamonga’s General Plan, 2021-2029 Housing Element, and Climate Action Plan,
as attached to the staff report accompanying this Resolution and incorporated herein by this
reference.
5. HCD Submittal Authorization. The City Council authorizes the City Manager, or the
City Manager’s designee, to submit the 2021-2029 Housing Element to HCD for final approval and
make revisions or additions to the adopted Housing Element to facilitate final certification of the
Housing Element by HCD.
6. Location of Records. The PlanRC General Plan, 2021-2029 Housing Element and
Climate Action Plan shall be available for public inspection at the Rancho Cucamonga City Hall, at
the Planning Department, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730.
7. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021.
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
L. Dennis Michael, Mayor
I, Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the City Council of
Page 424
Resolution No. 2021-133 – Page 4 of 4
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 15th day of
December 2021, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ATTEST:
City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Page 425
2021-12-15 - REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - ITEM G1 - ADDITIONAL MATERIAL
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Rancho Cucamonga
General Plan Update
City Council Hearing
December 15, 2021
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
What is a General Plan?
•State-required “constitution” of the City
•Establishes the City’s vision and priorities for the next 10-20 years
•Guides future actions (policy choices + development applications)
•Preserves and enhances community strengths
•Addresses several topics of concern
•Enables the community to come together to develop a shared vision for the future
•8 required Elements or Topics:
5. Conservation
6. Safety
7. Open Space
8. Environmental Justice
1. Land Use
2. Circulation
3. Housing
4. Noise
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Why Update the General Plan?
•Update existing General Plan
o Apply what learnings from the past
o Address emerging trends & ideas
•Hold a “community conversation” about the
future
•Address new State requirements
•Integrate the General Plan with other documents
and processes
•Focus on implementation and clear decision-
making
•Address critical topics affecting Rancho
o Economic development
o Housing
o Wildfire risk
o Mobility
o Health and equity
o Community character and sense of place
o Resilience from the Covid-19 Pandemic
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Process and Engagement
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Throughout the process, the community has
been invited to engage via robust online
surveys, virtual workshops, zoom meetings,
pop-ups, social media, videos & more
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
The General Plan
expresses
views and values
from the
Rancho
Cucamonga
community!
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Guiding Community Themes
HOUSING NEIGHBORHOOD AMENITIES
QUALITY OF LIFE
ACTIVITY CENTERS
COMMUNITY & CULTURE
MOBILITY
HEALTH
EQUITY
JOBS
RESILIENCE & SUSTAINABILITY
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
General Plan Organization
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Volume 1: Vision
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Vision and Community Values
Build on our success as a world class community to
create an equitable, sustainable and vibrant city, rich
in opportunity for all to thrive.
Volume 1: Vision
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
DESIGN FOR
PEOPLE FIRST
Big Ideas
PROVIDE
CONNECTIVITY
AND
ACCESSIBILITYCREATE
DESTINATIONS
ESTABLISH RC AS THE
CULTURAL AND
ECONOMIC HUB OF
THE INLAND EMPIRE
ADDRESS
ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE
Volume 1: Vision
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Big Ideas
DESIGN FOR PEOPLE FIRST
Volume 1: Vision
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Big Ideas
PROVIDE CONNECTIVITY AND ACCESSIBILITY
Volume 1: Vision
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Big Ideas
CREATE DESTINATIONS
Volume 1: Vision
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Big Ideas
ESTABLISH RC AS THE CULTURAL AND ECONOMIC
HUB OF THE INLAND EMPIRE
Volume 1: Vision
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Big Ideas
ADDRESS ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Volume 1: Vision
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Putting the Plan Into Action
Volume 1: Vision
Limited Change
Significant Change
Moderate Change
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Putting the Plan Into Action
Volume 1: Vision
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Volume 2: Built Environment
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Land Use & Community Character
Volume 2: Built Environment
•Describes and defines the distinct types of places (“place types”)
the City aims to create to achieve the community’s vision
•Unifies land use, community character and design into a
single chapter to ensure uses, experiences, and activities
maintain desired look, feel, character, and ambiance
•Preserves the character and strengths of each neighborhood and
recommends appropriate change—small in some cases, larger in
others
Place type designations go beyond conventional land use
designations to better define the existing and intended
character, form, and function of each part of the city.
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
General Plan Designations
Volume 2: Built Environment
*Open Space Designations in separate Open Space Chapter
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Land Plan
Volume 2: Built Environment
Also available online at the City’s GIS Open Portal: https://bit.ly/gplandplan
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Focus Areas
Volume 2: Built Environment
•Specific parts of the city where the
vision indicates focused change
•Near-term improvement is supported by
a broad cross section of the community
•Higher level of detail and strategic
recommendations to prioritize these
areas to help “jump-start”
implementation
This General Plan recognizes that the
value of coordinated private and public
investment is especially high in focused
areas of the city
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Focus Area 1: Downtown Rancho Cucamonga
Volume 2: Built Environment
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Focus Area 2: Civic Center
Volume 2: Built Environment
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Focus Area 3: HART District (Cucamonga Station Area)
Volume 2: Built Environment
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Focus Area 4: Red Hill Gateway
Volume 2: Built Environment
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Focus Area 5: Cucamonga Town Center
Volume 2: Built Environment
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Focus Area 6: Alta Loma Town Center
Volume 2: Built Environment
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Focus Area 7: Etiwanda Heights Town Center
Volume 2: Built Environment
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Focus Area 8: Southeast Industrial Area
Volume 2: Built Environment
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Open Space
Volume 2: Built Environment
•Intent is to preserve the natural environment, water courses, and
rural areas of the city, as well as preserve and enhance park space
for recreation
•Plan makes use of large and small areas giving people the ability to
enjoy the beauty of the city and foster healthy living
•Emphasis on connectivity to provide a variety of trails and paths
connecting open space with existing and new neighborhoods
The General Plan is intentional in weaving open space
into every land use designation and Focus Area,
connecting people to the outside
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Mobility and Access
Volume 2: Built Environment
•Intend to provide for a safe, enjoyable, and balanced multimodal
transportation network
•Focus on repurposing or reconfiguring roadways to provide additional
bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities
•Goal to make Rancho Cucamonga the mobility center of Inland Empire:
Brightline high speed rail connection
Boring Company’s tunnel to airport
Regional north/south transit connection from the Cucamonga
Station to Riverside County paralleling the I-15 corridor
Mobility needs to connect people to places. This
includes connecting residents to their employers, connecting
residents to destinations within the city, and connecting the
rest of the Inland Empire to Rancho Cucamonga
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Housing
Volume 2: Built Environment
•Housing chapter of General Plan provides overview,
goals and policies.
•State mandated analysis (Appendix to General Plan)
provides an assessment of City’s housing needs and
how best to accommodate the housing needs of
existing and future residents
Local governments must adopt plans that provide
opportunities for housing development. A key component of
housing planning for Rancho Cucamonga is identifying the
amount and location of new housing in the community.
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Housing -Meeting the RHNA
Extremely Low/
Very Low
(Below 50% AMI)
Low
(51-80% AMI)
Moderate
(81-120% AMI)
Above
Moderate
(Over 120% AMI)
Total
RHNA 3,245 1,920 2,038 3,322 10,525
Potential ADUs 36 56 56 12 160
Entitlements 0 0 2,000 3,085 5,085
The Resort 0 0 2,000 0 2,000
Victoria Gardens 0 0 0 385 385
Etiwanda Heights 0 0 0 2,700 2,700
Remaining Need 3,209 1,864 0 225 5,280
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Public Facilities
Volume 2: Built Environment
•Public facilities include the Civic Center, community
sports complexes, family resource center, cultural and senior
centers,fire stations, public works facilities,and libraries
•Efficient and reliable system of public facilities and infrastructure
is essential as the city grows
•Policies in this chapter ensure that future growth does not
negatively affect the facilities or reduce services
Goal is to continue to be a city where residents enjoy state-
of-the-art facilities that support existing programs,
accommodate future needs, and are accessible to all
members of the community
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Volume 3: Environmental Performance
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Resource Conservation
Volume 3: Environmental Performance
•Addresses the use and stewardship of natural resources:
Water
Forests
Soils
Rivers and other waters
Wildlife
Minerals
•Identifies water courses, flood corridors, riparian habitats, and land
that may accommodate floodwater for purposes of groundwater
recharge and stormwater management
•Also addresses historic,cultural, and tribal resources “I would like Rancho [Cucamonga] to be
known for having the ideal balance between
nature and infrastructure.”
-Community Member
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Safety
Volume 3: Environmental Performance
•Identifies relevant issues and hazards:
Seismic and geologic hazards
Flooding
Wildland and urban fires
Evacuation routes
Climate adaptation
Human-caused hazards
•Includes policies intended to reduce injury to people and
damage to the city
•To implement policies, also developed and adopted:
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP)
Emergency Operations Plan (EOP)
Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP)
Evacuation Assessment
“Public safety needs to keep up
with population growth; people
want to move to a safe
community.”
–Community Member
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Noise
Volume 3: Environmental Performance
•Identifies noise from variety of sources
•Supports a pattern of land uses designed to minimize
exposure of residents to excessive noise.
•Includes policies to address existing and foreseeable
noise problems
•Establishes areas where more noise may be acceptable
The approach is to differentiate between good noise and
bothersome noise and to develop a city with appropriate noise
and vibration levels that support a range of places from quiet
neighborhoods to active, exciting districts
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Volume 4: Implementation
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
General Plan Work Plan
•Guide that lays out specific actions and steps
required to achieve the goals set forth in
the General Plan.
•Organized into the follow topics:
Funding
Improvements
Process & Information
Rules & Coordination
Focus Area Implementation
Standard Conditions of Approval
Volume 4: Implementation
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Placemaking Toolkit
Volume 4: Implementation
•Illustrates the types of development patterns,
forms and strategies that will result in human-
scale, pedestrian-oriented places
•Focuses on three high-priority topics:
1)Activating the public realm
2)Rebalancing streets and public spaces
3)Completing the community fabric
The Placemaking Toolkit is set of implementation
tools to help ensure the making of great places of
strong and enduring value
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Activating the Public Realm
Volume 4: Implementation
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Rebalancing Streets and Public Spaces
Volume 4: Implementation
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Completing the Community Fabric
Volume 4: Implementation
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Environmental Justice Strategy
Volume 4: Implementation
•By law, the General Plan must address the following five health
and environmental justice outcomes:
1)Reduction of pollution exposure
2)Improvement of public facilities
3)Promotion of food access
4)Promotion of safe and sanitary homes
5)Promotion of physical activity
•Environmental justice goals and policies within each chapter of
the General Plan, and organized in one location in Volume 4.
With this General Plan, the City is striving to reduce and
eliminate disproportionate burdens to living,
participating and thriving in this city.
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Fiscal Performance
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Fiscal Impact Analysis
•Analysis confirmed that the General Plan
buildout program will result in a significantly
positive net fiscal impact
•Expected to generate about $25.2 million
net annual revenue at full build-out
•Cost of providing services for new growth in
the buildout program will be significantly
lower than the additional revenue
generated by growth
Revenue or Expense Item General Fund
Fire Protection
District Total
Revenue
Property Tax $4,989,000 $18,872,000 $23,861,000
Property Transfer Tax $691,000 --$691,000
Sales Tax (including Prop 172 1/2 cent sales
tax)$6,689,000 --$6,689,000
Property Tax In Lieu of VLF $13,471,000 --$13,471,000
Transient Occupancy Tax $4,422,000 --$4,422,000
Other Recurring Revenues $5,220,000 $119,000 $5,338,000
CFD 85-1 --$2,201,000 $2,201,000
CFD 88-1 --$477,000 $477,000
Total Revenues $35,482,000 $21,669,000 $57,150,000
Expenditures
Sheriff's Department $13,499,000 --$13,499,000
Fire Department --$10,373,000 $10,373,000
Public Works $3,670,000 --$3,670,000
Other Recurring Expenditures $4,384,000 --$4,384,000
Total Expenditures $21,554,000 $10,373,000 $31,927,000
Net Revenue $13,928,000 $11,296,000 $25,223,000
Net Revenue as % of Total Revenue 39%52%44%
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
General Plan Buildout
Total Value: $32.4 billion
Avg. Value/Acre: $10.7 million
Peak Value/Acre: $58.4 million
New Value Created: $4.7 billion
Rancho Cucamonga Current
Total Value: $27.7 billion
Avg. Value/Acre: $1.3 million
Peak Value/Acre: $13.9 million
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Riverside County
(inland empire portion)
1.5 million
San Bernardino County
(inland empire portion)
1.5 million
Rancho
Cucamonga
Redlands
Riverside
Temecula
Corona
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Related and Implementing Plans
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Implementing Plans
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Climate Action Plan
•CAP’s measures to reduce community’s contributions to
climate change are grounded in the General Plan’s core
community values of Health, Equity, and Stewardship.
•CAP builds on the broad climate change policies set forth
in the General Plan.
•Also implements the General Plan by including the
elements of a “qualified” plan under State regulations
•Unlocks project-level environmental review streamlining
benefits for development consistent with General Plan.
General Plan envisions a world-class
community, in part, as one that reduces its
contributions to a changing climate
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Development Code Update
•Create consistency with new General Plan
•Incorporate form-based zoning elements for
mixed-use urban corridors
•Improve administration and permit
procedures to increase certainty in
development review process for projects
consistent with the General Plan
•Ensure compliance with new State laws
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Environmental Impact Report
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
Primary purpose of an EIR is to identify potential significant
environmental effects of the General Plan and identify
possible ways to reduce or avoid them.
Prepare
General Plan
(GP) & Tools
Environmental
Analysis of GP
& Tools (EIR)
Revisions to
EIR & GP &
Tools
Consider, discuss, and
address possible
environmental
impacts along the way
Analyze policies and
programs to ensure
GP effectively deals
with environmental
implications
Revise GP and EIR (and
other tools) to ensure
mitigation can be
achieved
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Topics Covered in the EIR
•Aesthetics (Visual)
•Agricultural & Forestry Resources
•Air Quality
•Biological Resources
•Cultural Resources
•Energy
•Geology & Soils
•Greenhouse Gas Emissions
•Hazards & Hazardous Materials
•Hydrology & Water Quality
•Land Use & Planning
•Mineral Resources
•Noise
•Population & Housing
•Public Services
•Recreation
•Transportation
•Utilities & Service Systems
•Tribal Cultural Resources
•Wildfire
Underline Significant in Current and This General Plan EIRNewly Significant in this EIR
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
EIR Public Review Period
•EIR Public Review Period was September 10 -
October 25, 2021
•6 comment letters received and 2 comments
through EIR comment portal
•All comments on the EIR logged and responses
included in the Final EIR document
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Revisions Made After Planning Commission Hearing
Volume Chapter Page Revision
1 Acknowledgements v Correct misspelling of two names
1 2 36 Central North Planning Area –Correct name of “Victoria Gardens Community Center” to “Victoria
Gardens Cultural Center”
1 2 37 Central South Planning Area –Correct name of “Rancho Cucamonga Station” to “Cucamonga Station”
2 1 60 Change Land Plan Designation for APN: 0201-102-89 (9885 Vía Esperanza) from General Open Space
and Facilities to Suburban Neighborhood -Very Low (change also applied to Figures LC-1, FA -1, OS-2,
and V-2)
2 1 62 Clarify language in the Use-Mix Ratio section to provide a clear statement about the primary purpose
of establishing overall use mix targets to maintain citywide fiscal sustainability, per Land Use Policy LU-
3.5.
2 1 82 Correct District designations to reflect target use mix ratio of 0/100 (res/non-res)
2 1 88 Rephrase discussion for Industrial Employment District regarding types of uses intended
2 1 90 Policy LC-2.5, “transition gradually to a complement the adjacent residential uses”
3 1 213 Add language describing the tribal resources of the area as explained in the EIR
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Next Steps
•Continue to work on the Development Code
Update, a key implementing tool of
the updated General Plan
Public review draft Development Code
Winter 2022
Public hearings on Development Code
Spring-Summer 2022
•Implement the Vision and
Goals of the General Plan
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Update
Recommendations
•Planning Commission and Staff recommend that the City Council adopt resolutions to:
Certify the Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan
Adopt the General Plan Update, 2021-2029 Housing Element and Climate Action Plan
DATE:December 15, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Lori Sassoon, Deputy City Manager, Administrative Services
Matthew R. Burris, Deputy City Manager, Economic and Community
Development
Jennifer Nakamura, Management Analyst II
SUBJECT:Continued Public Hearing to Consider First Reading of Ordinance 991, to
be Read by Title Only and Waive Further Reading, Adding Chapter 3.76
to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to Establish a Non-Residential
Affordable Housing Development Impact Fee, and Resolution 2021-131,
Establishing Non-Residential Affordable Housing Development Impact
Fees. (ORDINANCE NO. 991) (RESOLUTION NO. 2021-131)
(Continued Public Hearing from December 1, 2021 City Council Meeting)
(CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council do the following:
1. Conduct first reading of Ordinance No. 991, to be read by title only, to establish a non-
residential affordable housing development impact fee.
2. Adopt Resolution No. 2021-131 to set the non-residential affordable housing development
impact fee rates.
3. Direct staff to research residential inclusionary housing ordinances that include an in-lieu
fee option, determine fee viability and present findings and recommendations to City
Council before September 2022.
BACKGROUND:
Development Impact Fees are one-time fees paid by new development to fund the cost of
providing services to serve that development. This authorization exists through the enactment of
the California Government Code sections 66001 through 66025, also known as the Mitigation Fee
Act. The Mitigation Fee Act is based on the concept that new development has to mitigate its own
impacts to the system.
Rancho Cucamonga has been facing an escalating shortage of affordable housing with increasing
demand to meet the lower income socioeconomic segments of the community. Housing is
generally considered affordable if a household spends no more than 30% of its gross household
income on housing costs (rent or mortgage, utilities, taxes, and insurance). Housing costs in the
City have accelerated rapidly in recent years, much like the rest of California. Between 2019 and
2020, the median home price in Rancho Cucamonga increased by 15% from $500,000 to
Page 426
Page 2
1
0
5
1
$575,000. In 2021 home costs have escalated as much or more.
According to our draft 6th cycle Housing Element, 38% of all households in the city are expending
more than 30% of their gross income on housing and 17% are spending more than 50% of their
gross income to pay for housing. The need for more affordable housing has been growing in
Rancho Cucamonga, but funding remains challenging as land values and construction costs have
risen. With the loss of redevelopment in 2012, the City has been unable to meet the growing
demands for affordable housing in the city. In the last housing cycle, less than 40% of the very-
low, low and moderate units designated under the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA)
were permitted for construction.
5th Cycle (2013-2021) RHNA for Below Market Rate Housing
Income Level
Units
Allocated
Units
Permitted % of RHNA
Very Low 209 18 9%
Low 141 11 8%
Moderate 158 171 108%
Total 508 200 39%
The state declared a housing crisis in 2017 and as a result, RHNA allocations for the 6th housing
cycle beginning in October 2021 have drastically increased from the previous period as shown
below.
6th Cycle (2021-2029) RHNA Allocations
Income Group
Total Housing
Units Allocated
Percentage
of Units
Extremely/Very Low 3,245 31%
Low 1,920 18%
Moderate 2,038 19%
Above Moderate 3,322 32%
Total 10,525 100%
To help illustrate the magnitude of concern, the following table shows the calculated cost of
meeting affordability gaps at each level, multiplied against the total number of RHNA units to show
the total public subsidy necessary to meet the City’s RHNA obligation.
Public Subsidy Estimated to Meet RHNA Housing Allocations
Income Group
Total Housing
Units Allocated
Affordability
Gap
Total Public
Subsidy
Extremely Low1 1623 $272,700 $442,592,100
Very Low1 1622 $219,300 $355,704,600
Low 1,920 $192,600 $369,792,000
Moderate 2,038 $205,600 $419,012,800
Total 7,203 $1,587,101,500
1The RHNA allocation combines these two categories for a total of 3,245 units. State law defines the units to
be split with 50% allocated to Extremely Low incomes.
Page 427
Page 3
1
0
5
1
The 5th cycle Housing Element included a program (HE-11) to establish a committee to evaluate
the adoption of an Inclusionary Ordinance as a means to create opportunities for the development
of affordable housing units. An inclusionary housing policy ad hoc committee was convened in
2020 and included residential developers, industrial developers and affordable housing
advocates. Over a series of meetings, the committee reviewed inclusionary housing ordinances,
debated the pros and cons of inclusionary housing and explored other options the city could
pursue to increase the development of affordable housing. The development of an inclusionary
housing ordinance to require some units of future housing projects to be set aside for affordable
housing, such as Attachment 1, was considered. One pressing concern identified by the
committee was how an inclusionary housing requirement might increase the cost of housing and
further depress the production of housing.
In response, the committee recommended that the City explore a non-residential affordable
housing linkage fee as a means to support affordable housing development. A program was
added to the 6th cycle housing element to initiate a linkage fee study for non-residential
development. The inclusionary housing program that was in the 5th cycle Housing Element was
carried over to the 6th cycle housing element to reconvene the inclusionary housing policy ad hoc
committee as needed to continue to explore additional avenues to increase the development of
affordable housing.
This public hearing was originally opened on December 1, 2021. At the request of staff, the
hearing was continued until December 15, 2021, to allow additional time for discussions with
various stakeholders in the industrial development sector.
ANALYSIS:
Non-Residential Affordable Housing fees are a type of development impact fee assessed on new
construction of commercial and residential buildings to mitigate the impact of the additional
demand for affordable housing caused by such activity. New non-residential construction creates
new jobs in the city, some of which will have wage levels that qualify households as low or
moderate incomes. As a result, the demand for affordable housing in the city increases. Due to
the gap between housing development costs and affordability levels,, new affordable housing
must otherwise be subsidized by public funding. Through the development of the nexus study
that examines the relationship between affordable housing and new non-residential development,
a fee is established that requires developers of new non-residential buildings to contribute to a
dedicated fund to offset a portion of the needed housing.
To assist in the development of the draft ordinance, the City contracted with Keyser Marston to
prepare a Non-Residential Affordable Housing Fee Nexus Study. The purpose of the nexus
analysis is to quantify and document the linkages among the construction of new non-residential
projects, the employees that work in them and the increased demand for affordable housing.
The analysis evaluates a cross section of the various non-residential development types that have
occurred in Rancho Cucamonga in recent years or are expected to be built in the near term,
including: retail/commercial, office, industrial, warehouse, and research and development. The
study identifies the maximum legally supportable non-residential linkage fee amounts and are
shown in the table below.
Page 428
Page 4
1
0
5
1
Maximum Non-Residential Affordable Housing Fee Amounts
Development Type
Maximum Fee
per Sq. Ft.
Retail/Commercial $157
Office $162
Industrial $127
Warehouse $37
Research and Development $33
Job creation within the city has been focused on wholesale trade, logistics, dining,
accommodations and retail. Over 60% of all jobs in Rancho Cucamonga are within these
categories. The City has encouraged development patterns to diversify employment opportunities
across professional sectors. Haven Avenue (south of Foothill Boulevard) is currently designated
to be a high-quality office corridor to attract white collar jobs providers, however, the Great
Recession significantly slowed office development and now COVID-19 has injected additional
uncertainty into the office market, further dragging down short, and possibly long term office
development. COVID-19 has also slowed growth in the dining, accommodations and retail
industries. However, industrial development has continued to grow due to the shift in online retail
as well as the city’s proximity to major ports and transportation routes.
In addition to the nexus study, Keyser Marston conducted analysis to determine the impact of a
linkage fee on the financial feasibility of non-residential development types. The addition of a
linkage fee would further inhibit development of those uses, which are already below the line of
viability in the current market. The impact, however, of a modest fee would be nominal and
instead would further equity goals among the sectors. In contrast, industrial, warehouse and
research and development prototypes would continue to have strong feasibility with the
implementation of a linkage fee. Staff has reviewed the nexus study and evaluated employment
and development trends and recommends initial linkage fees to be set at the following levels for
the following uses:
Proposed Non-Residential Affordable Housing Fee Amounts
Development Type
Proposed Fee
per Sq. Ft.
Retail/Commercial $1.00
Office $1.00
Industrial $6.00
Warehouse $6.00
Research and Development $6.00
In discussions with non-residential development stakeholders, a consistent sentiment shared is
that given the great need for affordable housing in the community, all developers – including
residential developers – should be participating in the solutions. To that end, it is recommended
that the Council direct staff to study the option of an inclusionary housing ordinance that would
Page 429
Page 5
1
0
5
1
include the ability to pay a fee in lieu of providing affordable units pursuant to the ordinance. A
fee study will need to be prepared before this matter can be brought back to the City Council.
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65090, this public hearing was advertised twice in the
Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper. In addition, staff contacted both NAIOP and BIA on or
about November 12, 2021, to provide those stakeholders an opportunity for discussion with staff.
On November 18, 2021 the nexus study was provided to the public on the city’s website and
placed on file with the City Clerk.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The new Affordable Housing Impact Fee revenues will vary with the level of non-residential
construction activity from year to year.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
Establishing an affordable housing fund and implementing a non-residential linkage fee creates
an opportunity for the City to move the needle on the development of affordable housing within
the City, supporting the council’s core value of equitable prosperity for all.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – Nexus Study
Attachment 2 – Feasibility Analysis
Attachment 3 – Survey of Affordable Housing Impact Fees
Attachment 4 – Ordinance No. 991
Attachment 5 – Resolution No. 2021-131
Page 430
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE
NEXUS STUDY
Prepared for:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Prepared by:
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
October 5, 2021
Page 431
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................1
A. Non-Residential Nexus Study ............................................................................................... 1
B. Building Types and Affordability Levels ............................................................................... 1
C. Maximum Nexus Costs ......................................................................................................... 2
D. Financially Feasible Non-Residential Linkage Fees .............................................................. 2
E. Recommended Non-Residential Linkage Fees..................................................................... 4
II. INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW .................................................................................................5
A. Benefits of Affordable Housing to Non-Residential Development ...................................... 5
B. Analysis Organization ........................................................................................................... 6
C. Data Sources and Qualifications .......................................................................................... 6
III. THE NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY .........................................................................................7
A. The Nexus Concept .............................................................................................................. 7
B. Non-Residential Nexus Analysis ......................................................................................... 12
C. Maximum Nexus Costs ....................................................................................................... 27
IV. RECOMMENDED NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE LEVELS .......................................................... 29
A. Fee-Setting Context ........................................................................................................... 29
B. Financial Feasibility Analysis .............................................................................................. 30
C. Fees in Other Jurisdictions ................................................................................................. 32
D. Recommended Fee Levels ................................................................................................. 34
E. Potential Indices for Annual Updates to Non-Residential Linkage Fees ........................... 34
V. ADDENDUM: FACTORS RELATING TO THE NEXUS CONCEPT ....................................................... 36
VI. MITIGATION FEE ACT FINDINGS ................................................................................................ 40
Page 432
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Non-Residential Nexus Study Tables
Appendix B: Retail/Commercial Land Use Tables
Appendix C: Office Land Use Tables
Appendix D: Industrial Land Use Tables
Appendix E: Warehouse Land Use Tables
Appendix F: Research and Development Land Use Tables
Appendix G: Worker Household Distribution
Appendix H: Affordability Gap Analysis
Page 433
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 1
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The following report summarizes an analysis of the linkages between non-residential
development in Rancho Cucamonga and the demand for additional affordable housing. The
analysis, which demonstrates support for a “Non-Residential Linkage Fee,” has been prepared
by Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. (KMA) for the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City) in
accordance with a contractual agreement.
A. Non-Residential Nexus Study
The purpose of a nexus analysis is to quantify and document the linkages among the
construction of new non-residential projects (e.g. retail/commercial, office, industrial,
warehouse, and research and development), the employees that work in them, and the
increased demand for affordable housing. Since the jobs in these types of projects cover a
range in compensation levels, and the households of the workers range in size, housing needs
are generated at all affordability levels. This analysis quantifies the need for affordable housing
created by each type of workplace building.
This analysis is conducted to meet the requirements imposed by several United States Supreme
Court decisions, and by California Government Code Section 66000 et seq., which is sometimes
referred to as “the Mitigation Fee Act.” These analyses are commonly referred to as linkage or
nexus analyses.
B. Building Types and Affordability Levels
This analysis evaluates a cross section of non-residential development types that have occurred
in Rancho Cucamonga in recent years, and/or that are expected to be built in the near-term
future. For the purposes of the analysis, the following building types were identified:
• Retail/Commercial
• Office
• Industrial
• Warehouse
• Research and Development (R&D)
Page 434
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 2
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
The household income categories addressed in the analysis include: Extremely Low Income,
Very Low Income, Low Income, and Moderate Income.
C. Maximum Nexus Costs
The following table identifies the maximum legally supportable nexus costs derived from the
Non-Residential Nexus Study. These nexus costs represent the maximum legally supportable
Non-Residential Linkage Fee amounts:
Table 1: Maximum Legally Supportable Non-Residential
Linkage Fees Per Square Foot 1
Retail/Commercial $157
Office $162
Industrial $127
Warehouse $37
Research and Development $53
D. Financially Feasible Non-Residential Linkage Fees
As indicated in the previous section, the nexus analysis establishes the maximum legally
supportable Non-Residential Linkage Fee levels. These amounts reflect the full cost associated
with fulfilling the need for affordable housing created by the new non-residential development.
However, this does not take into account the impact the Non-Residential Linkage Fee will have
on the financial feasibility of new development. It is important to establish a balance between
the public policy objectives and the economic impact that will be experienced by property
owners and developers.
To that end, KMA prepared a financial feasibility analysis (See “Financial Feasibility Analysis of
Non-Residential Linkage Fees”) to assess the impact of proposed Non-Residential Linkage Fee
amounts on each non-residential land use.
The most common approach to establishing fee levels is based on comparing the Non-
Residential Linkage Fee against the development costs associated with each land use. This
1 Fee amounts are rounded down to whole numbers.
Page 435
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 3
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
approach facilitates an evaluation of whether the amount is likely to affect development
decisions.
As such, KMA first prepared a base pro forma analysis of each land use prototype that does not
include a Non-Residential Linkage Fee. Next, KMA estimated a range of potential Non-
Residential Linkage Fees based on a percentage of total development costs ranging from 0.5%
to 3% of total development costs.
Table 2: Non-Residential Linkage Fee Per SF as a Percentage of Development Costs (Base Scenario)
% Of Development Costs
Retail /
Commercial
Prototype
Office
Prototype
Industrial
Prototype
Warehouse
Prototype
Research and
Development
Prototype
0.5% of Development Costs $2.21 $1.98 $0.70 $0.66 $0.69
1.0% of Development Costs $4.41 $3.96 $1.39 $1.33 $1.38
1.5% of Development Costs $6.62 $5.95 $2.09 $1.99 $2.07
2.0% of Development Costs $8.82 $7.93 $2.78 $2.66 $2.76
2.5% of Development Costs $11.03 $9.91 $3.48 $3.32 $3.45
3.0% of Development Costs $13.23 $11.89 $4.17 $3.99 $4.14
Based on these estimates and discussions with City staff, KMA analyzed the impact on each
development prototype’s financial feasibility for the following Non-Residential Linkage Fee
amounts: $1 per square foot, $2 per square foot, and $3 per square foot.
For reference, to evaluate the financial feasibility of each fee amount, KMA set the threshold
return requirements for each development prototype as follows:
Table 3: Threshold Return Requirements
Retail /
Commercial
Prototype
Office
Prototype
Industrial
Prototype
Warehouse
Prototype
Research and
Development
Prototype
Feasible Range (Green) ≥ 8.00% ≥ 9.00% ≥ 6.50% ≥ 6.50% ≥ 6.50%
Marginally Feasible Range (Yellow) 7.00% - 7.99% 8.00% - 8.99% 6.00% - 6.49% 6.00% - 6.49% 6.00% - 6.49%
Infeasible Range (Red) ≤ 6.99% ≤ 7.99% ≤ 5.99% ≤ 5.99% ≤ 5.99%
Page 436
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 4
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
The following table summarizes the results of the financial feasibility analysis:
Table 4: Estimated Returns on Investment By Non-Residential Linkage Fee Amount
Retail /
Commercial
Prototype
Office
Prototype
Industrial
Prototype
Warehouse
Prototype
Research and
Development
Prototype
Base: No Linkage Fee 5.67% 3.40% 7.28% 8.16% 6.81%
Linkage Fee @ $1/SF 5.65% 3.39% 7.22% 8.10% 6.76%
Linkage Fee @ $2/SF 5.64% 3.38% 7.17% 8.03% 6.71%
Linkage Fee @ $3/SF 5.63% 3.37% 7.11% 7.97% 6.65%
E. Recommended Non-Residential Linkage Fees
In summary, the following factors were considered in establishing recommended Non-
Residential Linkage Fee amounts:
1. The strength of the local real estate market for the building types that will pay the fee2;
and
2. The local policy objectives
Based on the preceding factors, KMA recommends that the City set the Non-Residential Linkage
Fee amounts as follows:
Table 5: Recommended Non-Residential Linkage
Fees Per Square Foot
Retail/Commercial No Fee
Office No Fee
Industrial $1 - $3
Warehouse $1 - $3
Research and Development $1 - $3
2 See Financial Feasibility Analysis of Non-Residential Linkage Fees .
Page 437
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 5
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
It is important to note that this recommendation does not take into account any other public
fees that may be under review by the City. Any changes in other fee levels may impact this
recommendation.
II. INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
As the region recovers from the global coronavirus pandemic, it is expected that non-residential
development will continue to escalate. This non-residential development supports additional
jobs within Rancho Cucamonga, which generates a need for additional housing accessible to all
income levels.
Similarly, the recovery from the pandemic will likely result in a rapid escalation of residential
rents and sales prices in Rancho Cucamonga. However, as rents and sales prices increase, it
becomes exponentially more difficult to achieve the Regional Housing Needs Assessment
(RHNA) goals for extremely low, very low, low and moderate income units.
Typically, outside affordable housing resources are utilized to assist in the development of
affordable units. Recently, the State of California (State) and the Federal government have
increased the amount of financial resources available for affordable housing. However, the
need for affordable housing continues to outpace the outside financial resources available to
the City. As such, the City has begun exploring the options for generating additional revenue to
be utilized for the creation of additional affordable housing.
The purpose of this Non-Residential Nexus Study is to provide the City with a legal basis to levy
Non-Residential Linkage Fees on non-residential development. It is assumed that a non-
residential linkage fee program will be one piece of the City’s comprehensive affordable
housing program.
A. Benefits of Affordable Housing to Non-Residential Development
The primary objective for implementing a Non-Residential Linkage Fee on non-residential
development is to increase the amount of affordable housing within Rancho Cucamonga. This
increase in affordable housing benefits non-residential development by strengthening the local
jobs-housing balance, which benefits both employers and workers. With a larger and more
diverse pool of Rancho Cucamonga residents to draw upon, employers will have increased
ability to fill job openings.
Page 438
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 6
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
A lack of local affordable housing can result in overcrowded living conditions, or workers that
must endure long commutes. Both of these conditions affect a worker’s quality of life, which
may ultimately force a worker to quit their job. Giving workers access to affordable housing
opportunities close to their place of employment can result in greater workplace stability, and
less worker turnover for the employer. It has been estimated that it can cost between 15% and
30% of a worker’s annual salary to replace that worker. As such, limiting worker turnover with
the development of affordable housing can produce meaningful cost savings for employers.
B. Analysis Organization
The non-residential uses that are the subject of this analysis represent a cross section of typical
non-residential development that has occurred in Rancho Cucamonga in recent years and/or is
expected to be built in the near-term future. For the purposes of the analysis, the following
building types were identified:
• Retail/Commercial
• Office
• Industrial
• Warehouse
• Research and Development
The household income categories addressed in the analysis include: Extremely Low Income,
Very Low Income, Low Income and Moderate Income.
C. Data Sources and Qualifications
The analyses in this report have been prepared using the best and most recent data available.
Local and current data was used whenever possible. Sources such as the 2010 United States
Census (Census), the 2015-2019 American Community Survey of the Census (ACS), California
Employment Development Department (EDD) and the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics
(BLS) data were used extensively. Other sources and analyses are noted when used in the text
and footnotes. The data sources and uses are those that provide a reasonable basis to support
the nexus between jobs and housing.
Page 439
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 7
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
While we believe all sources utilized are sufficiently accurate for the purposes of the analyses,
we cannot guarantee their accuracy. KMA assumes no liability for information from these and
other sources.
III. THE NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
A. The Nexus Concept
Introduction
This section outlines the nexus concept and some of the key issues surrounding the linking of
new non-residential development to the demand for affordable residential units in Rancho
Cucamonga. The nexus analysis and discussion focus on the relationships among development
growth, employment, income of workers and demand for affordable housing. The analysis
connects the new construction of the types of buildings in which there are workers to the need
for additional affordable housing. This connection is quantified both in terms of number of
units, and the amount of subsidy assistance needed to make the units affordable.
The Legal Basis and Context
The first jobs-housing linkage programs were adopted in the cities of San Francisco and Boston
in the mid-1980s. To support the linkage between non-residential development and the
demand for affordable housing, the City of San Francisco commissioned an analysis to show the
relationships, or what might now be characterized as an early version of a nexus analysis. Since
that time there have been several court cases and California statutes that affect what local
jurisdictions must demonstrate when imposing impact fees on development projects.
The most important United States Supreme Court cases are Nollan v. California Coastal
Commission and Dolan v. City of Tigard (Oregon). The rulings on these cases, and others, help
clarify what governments must find in the way of the nature of the relationship between the
problem to be mitigated and the action contributing to the problem. Here, the problem is the
shortage of affordable housing, and the action contributing to the problem is building
workspaces that create more jobs and worker households needing affordable housing.
Following the Nollan decision in 1987, the California legislature enacted AB 1600, which
requires local agencies proposing an impact fee on a development project to identify the
purpose of the fee, the use of the fee, and to determine that there is a reasonable relationship
between the fee’s use and the development project on which the fee is imposed. The local
Page 440
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 8
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
agency must also demonstrate that there is a reasonable relationship between the fee amount
and the cost of mitigating the problem that the fee addresses. Studies by local governments
designed to fulfill the requirements of AB 1600 are often referred to as “AB 1600” or “Nexus”
studies.
One court case that involved housing linkage fees was Commercial Builders of Northern
California v. City of Sacramento. The commercial builders of Sacramento sued the City of
Sacramento following the City’s adoption of a housing linkage fee. Both the United States
District Court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the City of Sacramento, and
rejected the builders’ petition. The United States Supreme Court denied a petition to hear the
case, letting stand the lower court’s opinion.
Since the Sacramento case in 1991, there have been several additional court rulings reaffirming
and clarifying the ability of California cities to adopt impact fees. Notable cases can be
described as follows:
1. In 2004, in San Remo Hotel v. the City and County of San Francisco, the court upheld the
impact fee levied by the City and County of San Francisco on the conversion of residence
hotels to tourist hotels and other uses. The court found that a suitable nexus, or
deleterious impact, had been demonstrated.
2. In 2009, in Building Industry Association of Central California v. the City of Patterson, the
Court invalidated the City of Patterson’s fee because a valid nexus linking the impact of
the proposed project to the fee had not been demonstrated.
3. In 2010, a court ruling upheld most of the impact fees levied by the City of Lemoore, in
Southern California. Of particular note is the judges’ opinion that a “fee” may be
“established for a broad class of projects by legislation of general applicability….the fact
that specific construction plans are not in place does not render the fee unreasonable.”
In other words, cities do not have to identify specific affordable housing projects to be
constructed at the time of adoption of an impact fee.
In summary, the case law at this time appears to be fully supportive of the imposition of non-
residential linkage Fees.
Page 441
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 9
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
The Nexus Methodology
An overview of the basic nexus concept and methodology is helpful to understand the
discussion and concepts presented in this section. This overview consists of a quick “walk
through” of the major steps of the analysis. The nexus analysis links new non-residential
buildings with new workers in the City; these workers demand additional housing in proximity
to the jobs, a portion of which needs to be affordable to the workers in lower income
households.
The methodology utilized in this analysis is a “micro” analysis that examines individual
buildings. The micro nexus analysis readily lends itself to quantification that serves as a basis for
the nexus cost, or the maximum fee amount for each building type.
To illustrate the micro nexus analysis, very simply, we can walk through the major calculations
of the analysis. We begin by assuming a prototypical building of a defined size, and then we
make the following calculations:
1. We estimate the total number of employees working in the building based on average
employment density data.
2. We use occupation and income information for typical job types in the building to
calculate how many of those jobs pay compensation at the levels addressed in the nexus
analysis.
a. Compensation data is provided by EDD, and is specific to the Riverside-San
Bernardino-Ontario Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) as of 2021.
b. Worker occupations by building type are derived from the 2020 Occupational
Employment Survey (OES) prepared by the BLS.
3. We know from the Census that many workers are members of households where more
than one person is employed, and there is also a range of household sizes. We use
factors derived from the Census to translate the number of workers into households of
various sizes represented in each income category.
4. Then, we calculate how many of the Extremely Low, Very Low, Low, and Moderate
Income households are associated with the building and divide by the building size to
arrive at coefficients of housing units per square foot of building area.
Page 442
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 10
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
5. In the last step, we multiply the identified number of households times the cost of
delivering housing units affordable to these income groups.
The Relationship Between Construction and Job Growth
Many factors underlie the reasons for employment growth in a given region; these factors are
complex, interrelated, and often associated with forces at the national and international levels.
The nexus argument does not make the case that the construction of new buildings is solely
responsible for employment growth. However, new construction is uniquely important in the
equation, first, as one of the factors contributing to growth, and second, as a unique and
essential condition precedent to growth.
As to the first, construction itself encourages growth. When the state economy is growing, the
areas that experience the most rapid growth are those where new construction activity is
vigorous and acts as a vital industry. In regions such as San Bernardino County, where multiple
forces of growth exist, the development industry frequently serves as a proactive force inducing
growth to occur, or to be attracted to specific areas, by providing new workspaces, particularly
those of a speculative nature.
Second, the development of workplace buildings bears a direct relationship to job growth,
because job growth does not occur in modern service economies without buildings to house
new workers. Unlike other growth factors, new buildings play a unique role in that employment
growth cannot occur without them for a sustained period of time. Conversely, it is well
established that the inability to construct new workplace buildings will constrain, or even halt,
job growth.
Discount for Changing Industries
The local economy, like that of the United States as a whole, is constantly evolving. In San
Bernardino County, over the past 20 years, employment in various sectors of the economy has
declined. However, jobs lost over the last decade in these declining sectors were replaced by
job growth in other industry sectors.
Long-term declines in employment experienced in some sectors of the economy mean that
some of the jobs created in burgeoning industries are being filled by workers that have been
displaced from another industry and who are presumed to already be housed locally.
Recognizing that jobs added in the community are not necessarily net new jobs, this step in the
Page 443
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 11
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
analysis makes an adjustment to take these declines, changes and shifts within all sectors of the
economy into account.
To assist in making the adjustment, KMA analyzed data published by the EDD annually for San
Bernardino County for the 20 year period between 2000 and 2019. Over this period,
approximately 17,600 jobs were lost in declining industry sectors while growing and stable
industries added 274,700 jobs over the same period. The decline was largely focused in the
manufacturing sector. The figures are used to establish the ratio between jobs lost in declining
industries to jobs gained in growing and stable industries at 10%.3 In effect, this adjustment
assumes that 10% of new jobs are filled by a worker downsized from a declining industry and
who already lives locally. As the objective is to identify longer-term declines, the declines in
employment that occurred after March 2020 due to the coronavirus pandemic were not used
as the basis for this adjustment as many of the jobs lost have been or are expected to be
restored as the economy recovers from damage caused by the pandemic.
The discount for changing industries represents a conservative assumption because many
displaced workers may exit the workforce entirely by retiring. Development of new workspace
buildings will typically occur only to the extent that there is positive net demand after re-
occupancy of buildings vacated by businesses in declining sectors of the economy. To the
extent buildings are re-occupied, the discount for changing industries is unnecessary because
new buildings would represent net new growth in employment. The 10% adjustment is
conservative in that it is mainly necessary to cover a special case in which buildings vacated by
declining industries cannot be readily occupied by other uses due to their special purpose
nature, because of obsolescence, or because they are torn down or converted to a residential
use.
Other Factors and Assumptions
The “Addendum” at the end of this report provides a discussion of other specific nexus
concepts that must also be considered. These factors include:
1. Addressing the housing needs of a new population versus the existing population;
2. Substitution factor, indirect employment and multiplier effects;
3 The 10% ratio is calculated as 17,600 jobs lost in declining sectors divided by 274,700 jobs gained in
growing and stable sectors = 6% (rounded up to 10%).
Page 444
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 12
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
3. Changes in labor force participation;
4. Commuting; and
5. Economic cycles.
B. Non-Residential Nexus Analysis
This section presents a summary of the analysis of the linkage between the five types of
workplace buildings, and the estimated number of worker households in the income categories
that will, on average, be employed within those buildings. This section should not be read or
reproduced without the narrative presented in the previous sections of this study.
Analysis Approach and Framework
The analysis establishes the jobs-housing linkages for individual building types or land use
activities. In turn, this is used to quantify the connection between employment growth in
Rancho Cucamonga and the resulting demand for affordable housing.
The analysis approach is to examine the employment associated with the development of
workplace building prototypes. Then, through a series of linkage steps, the number of
employees is converted to households and housing units by affordability level. The findings are
expressed in terms of numbers of households related to building area. In the final step, we
convert the number of households for an entire building to the number of households per
square foot of building area. For ease of understanding, KMA conducts the analysis on 100,000
square foot building modules. The building size is used solely to facilitate understanding of the
analysis by being able to avoid cumbersome fractions.
The prototypes are meant to cover a wide variety of building types. Together, the five
categories are designed to encompass most new non-residential buildings to be constructed by
the private sector in Rancho Cucamonga. The categories under analysis are:
1. The Retail/Commercial category includes retail, restaurants, dry cleaners, health clubs
and other personal care and service uses that commonly occupy retail/commercial
space.
2. The Office category is designed to represent the range of office tenants locating in
Rancho Cucamonga, from small professional offices to larger corporate and medical
offices.
Page 445
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 13
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
3. The Industrial category encompasses a broad range of uses occupying industrial
buildings as well as auto repair and service, and other uses of a semi-industrial
character.
4. The Warehouse category represents large structures primarily devoted to storage or
logistics activities, typically with a small amount of office space.
5. The Research and Development covers facilities for scientific or medical research,
product design, prototype production, development and testing.
Household Income Limits
When workers form households, their income, either alone or in combination with other
workers, produces the household income. In addition, of course, there may be children and/or
other household members who are not employed. The nexus analysis estimates demand for
affordable housing focusing on the following household income categories:
• Extremely Low Income
• Very Low Income
• Low Income
• Moderate Income
Household income criteria for these affordability categories are based on the San Bernardino
County area median income (Median) as published by the California Department of Housing
and Community Development (HCD). The income categories presented in the following table
are applied for most housing programs administered by HCD and by the United States
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). For a four-person household, the
maximum qualifying income levels for 2021 are:
Page 446
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 14
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
Table 6: Summary of Affordability Categories
Income Category Percent of Median
Income Range
(Four-Person Household)
Extremely Low Income 0% to 30% of Median $0 to $26,500
Very Low Income Above 30% to 50% of Median $26,501 to $39,500
Low Income Above 50% to 80% of Median $39,501 to $63,200
Moderate Income Above 80% to 120% of Median $63,201 to $93,000
Analysis Steps
The analysis is conducted using a model that KMA has developed for application in many
jurisdictions for which the firm has conducted similar analyses. The model inputs are comprised
of local data to the extent possible, and are fully documented.
Table 1 in Appendix A summarizes the nexus analysis steps for the five building types. Following
is a description of each step in the analysis:
Step 1 – Estimate of Total New Employees
Appendix A - Table 1 estimates the total number of employees who will work in the companies
that occupy the building types being analyzed. This is done by dividing the building size by the
average square feet of space provided to each employee. As the amount of space allocated to
each employee is reduced, the supportable nexus cost is increased. The employment densities
used in the analysis can be described as follows:
1. Retail/Commercial at 500 square feet per employee. This employment density estimate
reflects consideration of a range of sources including the Institute of Transportation
Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, restaurant employment densities derived from
National Association of Restaurants data, and the City’s parking requirements for retail
uses. The density range within this category is wide, with some types of retail such as
restaurant space as much as five times as dense as other types such as furniture or
building material supply stores. The estimate used is at the upper end of the range of
Page 447
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 15
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
sources considered and will tend to understate the number of employees relative to
many types of retail.
2. Office at 300 square feet per employee. For the purposes of this figure, KMA reviewed
employment density estimates from the ITE Trip Generation Manual as well as the City’s
parking requirements for office uses. The employment densities cited in these studies
ranged from approximately 200 square feet per employee to 330 square feet per
employee. The 300 square foot figure utilized by KMA in the nexus analysis is at the
upper end of this range.
3. Industrial at 500 square feet per employee. This density covers flex space, light
industrial and manufacturing activities. KMA reviewed planning documents for recent
projects proposed in Rancho Cucamonga, as well as the ITE Trip Generation Manual.
4. Warehouse at 2,000 square feet per employee. This reflects that the primary activity in
the building is assumed to be storage or logistics. A small amount of office or
administrative space is assumed within warehouse structures. Sources consulted include
the ITE Trip Generation Manual, a Portland Metro Employment Density Study, the
United States Department of Energy, the City’s parking requirements, and planning
documents for recent projects proposed in Rancho Cucamonga.
5. Research and Development at 500 square feet per employee. KMA reviewed the City’s
parking requirement for this use, as well as the ITE Trip Generation Manual.
The density factors used in this analysis represent averages, and individual uses can be
expected to be fairly divergent from the average from time to time. Specific projects may have
more or fewer employees than the employment densities assumed in this analysis. In these
instances, the City may wish to include a provision in the ordinance that provides a waiver or a
custom impact fee to adjust for employment densities that vary greatly from the averages used
in this analysis. That is, projects with much lower employment densities may be allowed to pay
a lower impact fee, and projects with much greater employment densities may be required to
pay a higher fee.
As discussed above, KMA conducted the analysis on 100,000 square foot prototype buildings.
The prototypes facilitate the presentation of the nexus findings, as it allows us to count jobs
and housing units in whole numbers that can be readily communicated and understood. At the
conclusion of the analysis, the findings are divided by the 100,000 square foot building size to
express the linkages per square foot, which are very small fractions of housing units.
Page 448
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 16
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
The following table summarizes the employment estimates used in the nexus analysis:
Table 7: Employment Estimate for Prototypical 100,000 Square Foot Buildings
Building Type
Employment
Density Number of Employees
Retail / Commercial 500 200
Office 300 333
Industrial 500 200
Warehouse 2,000 50
Research and Development 500 200
Potential Impacts of Coronavirus Pandemic
This Non-Residential Nexus Study was prepared during the coronavirus pandemic, which could
have implications regarding the density of employment in workplace buildings. Potential
impacts can be separated into short-term (during the pandemic) and longer-term (post-
pandemic). As the nexus analysis determines mitigation costs over the life of new buildings,
long-term effects are pertinent while short-term or temporary changes in response to the
pandemic would not warrant an adjustment.
The experience adapting to remote work during the coronavirus pandemic has led some
businesses to plan for remote work as a larger part of their operations post-pandemic. A trend
toward remote work would be expected to reduce demand for new non-residential buildings
overall, but does not necessarily reduce the impacts of non-residential buildings that are built.
A second potential long-term adjustment resulting from the pandemic is reduced employment
density, as employers make modifications to office layouts that increase the distance and
physical separation between employees. This potential effect is likely most relevant for office
building users that have transitioned to higher employment density office configurations. Office
employment density estimates used in this analysis are more representative of traditional office
layouts that have a mix of private offices and cubicles than higher employment density layouts
like “benching” where employees work side-by-side with no partitions or cubicles separating
them. Since high employment density office configurations are not assumed, a downward
adjustment in consideration of a possible reversal of trends toward lower density of
employment within offices is not warranted.
Page 449
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 17
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
Step 2 – Adjustment for Changing Industries
This step is an adjustment to take into account any declines, changes and shifts within all
sectors of the economy and to recognize that new space is not always 100% equivalent to net
new employees. As discussed previously, a 10% adjustment is utilized to recognize the long-
term shifts in employment occurring in the San Bernardino County region and the likelihood of
continuing changes to the local economy.
For demolition of existing structures, the City may wish to provide a credit or offset to the fee
when demolition of existing structures occurs as part of a project. Typically, the fee would only
be charged against net new space added by a project.
The following table summarizes the net new jobs after adjusting for declining industries:
Table 8: Net New Jobs
Building Type
Number of
Employees
Net New Employees
after 10% Declining
Industries Adjustment
Retail / Commercial 200 180
Office 333 300
Industrial 200 180
Warehouse 50 45
Research and Development 200 180
Step 3 – Adjustment from Employees to Employee Households
This step, as shown in Appendix A - Table 1, converts the number of employees to the number
of employee households that will work at or in the building type being analyzed. This step
recognizes that there is, on average, more than one worker per household, and thus the
number of housing units in demand for new workers must be reduced to reflect this fact.
The workers per household characteristic provides the link between the number of employees
and the number of households associated with the net new employees. Worker households are
defined as those households with one or more persons with work-related income, including the
self-employed, as reported in the 2015-2019 ACS. In other words, worker households are
distinguished from total households in that the universe of worker households does not include
elderly or other households in which members are retired or do not work for other reasons.
Student households and unemployed households on public assistance are also excluded from
Page 450
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 18
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
the definition of worker households. If the overall average number of workers per household
were used, it would have produced a greater demand for housing units.
The number of workers per household in a given geographic area is a function of household
size, labor force participation rate and employment availability, as well as other factors.
According to the 2015-2019 ACS, the average number of workers per worker household in San
Bernardino County was 1.84. Since workers employed in Rancho Cucamonga live all over San
Bernardino County and beyond, the County average is used in the analysis.
The following table summarizes the number of housing units needed:
Table 9: Number of Housing Units Needed
Building Type
Net New Jobs
(Table 4)
Housing Units Needed
(1.84 workers per unit)
Retail / Commercial 180 98.1
Office 300 163.5
Industrial 180 98.1
Warehouse 45 24.5
Research and Development 180 98.1
Step 4 – Occupational Distribution of Employees
Estimating the occupational breakdown of employees is the first step to arriving at estimated
income levels. The occupational make up of jobs by building type is estimated by combining
two data sources: BLS data on the distribution of occupations by industry category and data on
employment by industry for San Bernardino County from the Quarterly Census of Employment
and Wages (QCEW).4 Industry categories are weighted to reflect the mix of employers in San
Bernardino County. The occupations that reflect the expected mix of activities in the new
buildings are presented in Appendices B - F.
1. For retail/commercial buildings, a wide range of retail categories are included, as well as
restaurants and personal services.
2. For office buildings, the mix of industries reflects a wide range of financial, professional
service, technology and medical offices.
4 QCEW data was not available for the City.
Page 451
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 19
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
3. The industrial category encompasses a range of light industrial, wholesale,
manufacturing, automotive, and maintenance and repair services.
4. For warehouse, the applicable industry category is Warehouse & Storage.
5. Research and Development reflects the industry category for research and development
in the physical, engineering and life sciences.
Step 4 estimates are presented in Appendix A - Table 1 and Appendices B – F. The following
table summarizes the percentage distribution of jobs by occupation:
Table 10: Percent of Jobs by Occupation
Retail /
Commercial Office Industrial Warehouse R&D
Management Occupations 2.8% 9.3% 6.3% 2.4% 17.4%
Business and Financial 0.7% 13.4% 4.3% 2.1% 10.7%
Computer and Mathematical 0.1% 7.6% 2.1% 0.6% 12.9%
Architecture and Engineering 0.0% 3.5% 3.7% 0.2% 13.9%
Sciences 0.0% 1.0% 0.6% 0.1% 25.5%
Community & Social Services 0.0% 0.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2%
Legal 0.0% 2.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.6%
Education, and Library 0.0% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.3%
Arts, Design, Entertainment 0.4% 1.7% 0.7% 0.1% 1.2%
Healthcare Practitioners 1.8% 11.3% 0.1% 0.0% 2.5%
Healthcare Support 0.3% 6.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.9%
Protective Service 0.3% 0.8% 0.1% 0.7% 0.4%
Food Prep and Serving 39.9% 0.5% 0.7% 0.0% 0.1%
Building and Grounds. 0.4% 1.0% 0.4% 0.7% 0.3%
Personal Care and Service 2.8% 0.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2%
Sales and Related 30.9% 6.5% 10.5% 1.1% 1.7%
Office and Admin Support 4.9% 27.0% 12.1% 12.4% 7.4%
Farming, Fishing, Forestry 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.2%
Construction and Extraction 0.1% 0.5% 1.4% 0.1% 0.3%
Installation, Maint. and Repair 3.1% 3.3% 11.4% 2.6% 1.0%
Production 2.0% 0.9% 30.4% 1.9% 1.8%
Transportation 9.4% 1.3% 15.2% 74.9% 0.5%
Totals 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Page 452
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 20
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
To determine the distribution of worker households by occupation category, the percentage
distribution of workers’ occupations identified in Table 10 above is multiplied by the total
number of worker households in Table 9. The result is the distribution in the number of worker
households by worker occupation category as shown in the table below:
Table 11: Number of Worker Households by Worker Occupation Category
Retail /
Commercial Office Industrial Warehouse R&D
Management Occupations 2.7 15.1 6.2 0.6 17.1
Business and Financial 0.7 21.9 4.2 0.5 10.5
Computer and Mathematical 0.1 12.4 2.1 0.2 12.6
Architecture and Engineering 0.0 5.8 3.6 0.0 13.7
Sciences 0.0 1.6 0.6 0.0 25.0
Community & Social Services 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.2
Legal 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.6
Education, and Library 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.3
Arts, Design, Entertainment 0.4 2.7 0.7 0.0 1.1
Healthcare Practitioners 1.7 18.5 0.1 0.0 2.5
Healthcare Support 0.3 10.6 0.0 0.0 0.9
Protective Service 0.3 1.3 0.1 0.2 0.4
Food Prep and Serving 39.1 0.8 0.6 0.0 0.1
Building and Grounds. 0.4 1.6 0.4 0.2 0.3
Personal Care and Service 2.7 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.2
Sales and Related 30.3 10.7 10.3 0.3 1.7
Office and Admin Support 4.8 44.1 11.8 3.0 7.3
Farming, Fishing, Forestry 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2
Construction and Extraction 0.1 0.8 1.4 0.0 0.2
Installation, Maint. and Repair 3.0 5.3 11.2 0.6 1.0
Production 2.0 1.4 29.8 0.5 1.8
Transportation 9.2 2.2 14.9 18.4 0.5
Totals 98.1 163.5 98.1 24.5 98.1
Page 453
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 21
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
Step 5 – Estimate Of Employee Household Income
In this step, occupations are translated to incomes based on recent San Bernardino County
wage and salary information published by EDD for the first quarter of 2021 for the occupations
associated with each building type. This step in the analysis calculates the number of employee
households that fall into each income category.
For each occupational category shown in Tables 10 and 11, the OES data provides a distribution
of specific occupations within the category. For example, within the Food Preparation and
Serving Category, there are Supervisors, Cooks, Servers, Dishwashers, etc. Each of these
individual categories has a different distribution of wages which was obtained from EDD and is
specific to workers in San Bernardino County as of 2021. Worker compensations used in the
analysis assume full-time employment (40 hours per week) based on EDD’s convention for
reporting annual compensation. Compensations are adjusted where applicable to reflect the
current $14 per hour State minimum wage for businesses with 26 or more employees, which
results in a minimum annual income of $29,120 assuming full-time employment.
The following is a summary of the worker compensation levels for the top two occupation
groups by building type. The percentages refer to the share of employment within the building
in the occupation group. Appendices B – F show the more detailed wage and salary information
that were used as the income inputs to the model.
Page 454
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 22
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
Table 12: San Bernardino County Worker Compensation by Building Type (2021)
Building Type Major Occupation Group
% of
Employment
in Building
Average Annual
Worker
Compensation 5
Retail/Commercial Food Preparation and Serving 40% $32,200
Sales and Related Occupations 31% $37,100
Office Office and Administrative Support 27% $44,300
Business and Financial Operations 13% $75,000
Industrial Production Occupations 30% $41,900
Transportation and Material
Moving Occupations
15% $41,100
Warehouse Transportation and Material
Moving Occupations
75% $39,100
Office and Administrative Support 12% $43,700
Research and
Development
Life, Physical and Social Science
Occupations
26% $92,600
Management Occupations 17% $136,900
Source: California Employment Development Department, 2020 Occupational Employment
Statistics Survey, Wages First Quarter 2021
Employee income is then translated into an estimate of household income using ratios between
individual employee income and household income derived from Census data. Ratios reflect an
analysis of data for the workforce in San Bernardino County with annual household incomes
under $250,000. Households with income of $250,000 or more are not included to avoid a
disproportionate influence on averages by a small percentage of households with incomes well
over levels addressed in this analysis.
5 Compensation is based on the full-time equivalent of 40 hours per week.
Page 455
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 23
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
Table 13: Ratio of Household Income to Individual Worker Income
Individual Worker Income
One Worker
Households
Two Worker
Households
Three or More
Workers
$25,000 to $30,000 1.30 2.56 3.56
$30,000 to $40,000 1.26 1.32 3.04
$40,000 to $50,000 1.17 2.04 2.51
$50,000 to $60,000 1.14 1.92 2.24
$60,000 to $80,000 1.12 1.74 1.97
$80,000 to $100,000 1.07 1.63 1.80
$100,000 to $125,000 1.06 1.53 1.61
$125,000 to $150,000 1.07 1.45 1.51
$150,000 to $250,000 1.06 1.34 1.38
$250,000 and above 1.05 1.20 1.24
Source: KMA analysis of 2015 – 2019 American Community Survey PUMS data for San
Bernardino County
A ratio of 1.0 in Table 13 indicates that the household has no additional income beyond that of
the individual worker. A ratio of 2.0 means that total household income is twice what the
individual worker earns. With a two-earner household, a ratio of 2.0 indicates each worker in
the household earns about the same amount. A ratio above 2.0 would indicate the other
worker in the household earns more, on average, while a ratio less than 2.0 indicates the other
worker earned less. The ratio between worker income and overall household income decreases
as worker pay increases. This is because workers with higher pay are more likely to represent
the largest source of household income
The ratios adjust employee incomes upward even for households with only one worker. This is
in consideration of non-wage/salary income sources such as child support, disability, social
security income, investment income and others. Ratios for one-worker households at the lower
end of the compensation range tend to be larger, an indication that these workers are more
likely to derive a share of household income from non-employment sources such as social
security.
Household income estimates for workers within each detailed occupation category are
summarized in Appendix G. A separate estimate is provided for households with one, two, and
three or more workers. Estimates are compared to HUD income criteria summarized in the
following table to estimate the percent of worker households that would fall into each income
Page 456
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 24
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
category. This is done for each potential combination of household size and number of workers
in the household.
Table 14: 2021 Household Income Limits for San Bernardino County
Household Size (Persons)
Household Income Category 1 2 3 4 5 6 +
Extremely Low (Under 30% AMI) $16,600 $19,000 $21,960 $26,500 $31,040 $35,580
Very Low (30%-50% AMI) $27,650 $31,600 $35,550 $39,500 $42,700 $45,850
Low (50%-80% AMI) $44,250 $50,600 $56,900 $63,200 $68,300 $73,350
Moderate (80%-120% AMI) $65,100 $74,400 $83,700 $93,000 $100,450 $107,900
Median (100% of Median) $54,250 $62,000 $69,750 $77,500 $83,700 $89,900
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development.
At the end of Step 5, the nexus analysis has established the matrix indicating the percentages of
households that would qualify in each of the affordable income tiers for each occupation
category and each potential combination of household size and number of workers in the
household.
Step 6 – Estimate of Household Size Distribution
In this step, household size distribution is estimated using 2015 – 2019 ACS data for San
Bernardino County. Data for the County is used since workers are more representative of the
larger area in which workers live (the County) than the City of Rancho Cucamonga. In addition
to the distribution of household sizes, the data also accounts for a range in the number of
workers in households of various sizes. The following table indicates the percentage
distribution utilized in the analysis. Application of these percentage factors accounts for the
following:
1. Households have a range in size and a range in number of workers.
2. Larger households generally have more workers than smaller households.
Page 457
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 25
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
Table 15: Percent of Households by Size and No. of Workers
No. of Persons
in Household
No. of Workers in
Household
Percent of Total
Households
1 1 11.42%
2 1 13.15%
2 11.13%
3 1 8.75%
2 8.83%
3+ 2.46%
4 1 6.55%
2 7.44%
3+ 4.85%
5 1 4.31%
2 4.89%
3+ 3.19%
6 1 4.53%
2 5.15%
3+ 3.35%
Total 100%
Source: 2015-2019 American Community Survey for San
Bernardino County
The result of Step 6 is a distribution of working households by number of workers and
household size.
Step 7 – Estimate of Households that meet HCD Size and Income Criteria
Step 7 calculates the number of employee households that fall into each income category for
each size household. This calculation is based on combining the household income distribution
(Step 5) with the worker household size distribution (Step 6) to arrive at a distribution of
worker households by income category. These analyses are presented in Appendix A – Tables
2A – 2D, and summarized in Appendix A – Table 3.
Housing Demand by Income Level
Appendix A - Table 3 illustrates the results of the analysis for the four income categories and
the five prototypical buildings being analyzed in this study. The table presents the estimated
number of households in each affordability category, the total number up to 120% of the
Median, and the remaining households earning over 120% of Median.
Page 458
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 26
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
Table 16: Number of Households by Income Category Per 100,000 Square Feet of Building
Retail /
Commercial Office Industrial Warehouse R&D
Extremely Low 4.4 2.0 2.0 0.7 0.5
Very Low Income 20.5 10.4 10.3 3.6 1.7
Low Income 31.9 33.2 27.4 8.9 6.5
Moderate Income 19.0 34.4 22.7 5.0 17.2
Subtotal 75.8 80.0 62.5 18.2 25.9
Above 120% AMI 22.3 83.5 35.6 6.3 72.2
Total 98.1 163.5 98.1 24.5 98.1
Appendix A - Table 3 also presents the percentages of total new worker households that fall
into each income category. As indicated, approximately 75% of Retail/Commercial and
Warehouse worker households earn less than 120% of the Median. In addition, approximately
50% of Office and 65% Industrial worker households earn less than 120% of the Median.
Table 17: Percentage of Households by Income Category
Retail /
Commercial Office Industrial Warehouse R&D
Extremely Low 4.5% 1.2% 2.0% 2.7% 0.5%
Very Low Income 20.9% 6.3% 10.5% 14.7% 1.8%
Low Income 32.5% 20.3% 28.0% 36.2% 6.6%
Moderate Income 19.4% 21.0% 23.2% 20.6% 17.5%
Subtotal 77.2% 48.9% 63.7% 74.1% 26.4%
Above 120% AMI 22.8% 51.1% 36.3% 25.9% 73.6%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Page 459
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 27
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
Housing Demand by Square Foot Building Area
The analysis thus far has worked with 100,000 square foot prototypical buildings. In this step,
the conclusions are translated to a per-square-foot level and expressed as coefficients. These
coefficients state the portion of a household, or housing unit, by affordability level for which
each square foot of building area is associated (see Appendix A - Table 4).
This is the summary of the affordable housing nexus analysis, or the linkage of buildings to
employment growth to housing demand disaggregated by income level. We believe that our
analysis provides a conservative approximation (understates at the low end) of the households
by income and affordability levels associated with these building types.
Table 18: New Worker Households Per Square Foot
Retail /
Commercial Office Industrial Warehouse R&D
Extremely Low 0.0000437 0.0000204 0.0000201 0.0000065 0.0000051
Very Low Income 0.0002045 0.0001037 0.0001034 0.0000360 0.0000172
Low Income 0.0003192 0.0003318 0.0002743 0.0000888 0.0000648
Moderate Income 0.0001902 0.0003441 0.0002273 0.0000505 0.0001715
Total 0.0007576 0.0008000 0.0006250 0.0001818 0.0002587
C. Maximum Nexus Costs
This section takes the conclusions from the previous section on the number of households in
the Extremely Low, Very Low, Low, and Moderate Income categories associated with each
building type, and estimates the total cost of assistance required to make housing affordable.
This section puts a cost on the units at each income level to produce the “total affordable
housing nexus cost.”
Affordability Gaps
A key component of the analysis is the size of the gap between what households can afford and
the cost of producing additional housing in Rancho Cucamonga; this is known as the
“affordability gap.” The assumption is that the City will assist in the development of affordable
units at development cost levels based on similar development projects and the City’s recent
experience.
Page 460
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 28
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
KMA conducted a series of affordability gap analyses, which are presented in Appendix H. For
the Extremely Low Income and Very Low Income tiers it is assumed that Tax-Exempt
Multifamily Bonds and 4% Tax Credits will be available (leveraged projects). For the Low Income
tier, KMA analyzed both a leveraged project assuming rents set at 60% AMI and an unleveraged
project with rents set at 80% AMI. The leveraged project (at 60% AMI) had a lower affordability
gap than the unleveraged project, which is used in this analysis. Since 4% Tax Credits are not
available to units above 80% AMI, the Moderate Income tier is structured as an unleveraged
rental project.
The resulting affordability gaps per unit are presented in the following table:
Table 19: Affordability Gaps
Extremely Low Income (0% to 30% Median) ($272,700)
Very Low Income (Above 30% to 50% Median) ($219,300)
Low Income (Above 50% to 80% Median) ($192,600)
Moderate Income (Above 80% to 120% Median) ($205,600)
Total Affordable Housing Nexus Costs
Previous steps in the nexus analysis estimated the following:
1. The number of Extremely Low, Very Low, Low and Moderate Income households that
will be employed in each of the four types of buildings; and
2. The affordability gaps associated with providing housing at the various income levels.
The final step in the nexus analysis translates these factors into the estimated cost to fulfill the
affordable housing demand created by the prototype developments (Appendix A – Table 5).
These results are then converted into the affordability gaps per square foot of building area for
the new development of retail/commercial, office, industrial, warehouse, and research and
development uses. This is defined as the affordable housing nexus cost, which represents the
maximum allowable Non-Residential Linkage Fee. Based on the results of the KMA analysis, the
maximum fees for the five building types are as follows:
Page 461
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 29
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
Table 20: Maximum Fees Per Square Foot of Building Area 6
Retail/Commercial $157
Office $162
Industrial $127
Warehouse $37
R&D $53
Total nexus and mitigation costs are driven by employment densities, the compensation level of
jobs, and the cost of developing residential units. Higher employment densities contribute to
higher nexus costs. These fee amounts represent the maximum amounts that can be charged
under the nexus requirements imposed by the United States Supreme Court and the California
Government Code.
IV. RECOMMENDED NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE LEVELS
The following sections discuss methods in which the City could set the Non-Residential Linkage
Fee amounts:
A. Fee-Setting Context
The preceding study establishes the maximum fee amounts the City could charge under the
nexus requirements imposed by the United States Supreme Court and the California
Government Code. Recognizing that the Non-Residential Linkage Fee is not the only tool the
City will use to fulfill affordable housing needs, it is KMA’s assumption that the City will choose
to set the fee at less than the ceiling applied by the nexus test. In KMA’s opinion, the fee
amounts should be selected based on the following:
1. The strength of the local real estate market for the building types that will pay the fee;
2. The total fees imposed on new development as compared to jurisdictions that are
competing for the uses; and
3. The local policy objectives.
6 Fee amounts are rounded down to whole numbers.
Page 462
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 30
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
The following information is provided to assist the City in selecting the fee amounts to be
imposed.
B. Financial Feasibility Analysis
As indicated in the previous section, the nexus analysis establishes the maximum legally
supportable Non-Residential Linkage Fee levels. These amounts reflect the full cost associated
with fulfilling the need for affordable housing created by the new non-residential development.
However, this does not take into account the impact the Non-Residential Linkage Fee will have
on the financial feasibility of new development. It is important to establish a balance between
the public policy objectives and the economic impact that will be experienced by property
owners and developers.
To that end, KMA prepared a financial feasibility analysis (See “Financial Feasibility Analysis of
Non-Residential Linkage Fees”) to assess the impact of proposed Non-Residential Linkage Fee
amounts on each non-residential land use.
Development Cost Analysis
A common approach to establishing fee levels is based on comparing the Non-Residential
Linkage Fee against the development costs associated with each land use. This approach
facilitates an evaluation of whether the amount is likely to affect development decisions.
Based on a review of historical development project information provided by City staff, KMA
prepared prototypical projects and development budgets for representative non-residential
product types currently being developed in Rancho Cucamonga. These prototypes are utilized
as the basis for which to test the impact of potential impact fees on development costs.
The development prototypes utilized for this analysis are summarized as follows:
1. Retail/Commercial Prototype;
2. Office Prototype;
3. Industrial Prototype;
4. Warehouse Prototype; and
5. Research and Development Prototype.
s such,first prepared a base pro forma analysis ofeachland use prototype that does not include a on-esidential inkage ee.ext,estimateda range ofpotential on-esidential inkage ees based ona percentage oftotal development cost s ranging from .%to %oftotal development cost s.
Page 463
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 31
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
Table 21: Non-Residential Linkage Fee Per SF as a Percentage of Development Costs (Base Scenario)
% Of Development Costs
Retail /
Commercial
Prototype
Office
Prototype
Industrial
Prototype
Warehouse
Prototype
Research and
Development
Prototype
0.5% of Development Costs $2.21 $1.98 $0.70 $0.66 $0.69
1.0% of Development Costs $4.41 $3.96 $1.39 $1.33 $1.38
1.5% of Development Costs $6.62 $5.95 $2.09 $1.99 $2.07
2.0% of Development Costs $8.82 $7.93 $2.78 $2.66 $2.76
2.5% of Development Costs $11.03 $9.91 $3.48 $3.32 $3.45
3.0% of Development Costs $13.23 $11.89 $4.17 $3.99 $4.14
Based on these estimates and discussions with City staff, KMA analyzed the impact on each
development prototype’s financial feasibility for the following Non-Residential Linkage Fee
amounts: $1 per square foot, $2 per square foot, and $3 per square foot.
For reference, to evaluate the financial feasibility of each fee amount, KMA set the threshold
return requirements for each development prototype as follows:
Table 22: Threshold Return Requirements
Retail /
Commercial
Prototype
Office
Prototype
Industrial
Prototype
Warehouse
Prototype
Research and
Development
Prototype
Feasible Range (Green) ≥ 8.00% ≥ 9.00% ≥ 6.50% ≥ 6.50% ≥ 6.50%
Marginally Feasible Range (Yellow) 7.00% - 7.99% 8.00% - 8.99% 6.00% - 6.49% 6.00% - 6.49% 6.00% - 6.49%
Infeasible Range (Red) ≤ 6.99% ≤ 7.99% ≤ 5.99% ≤ 5.99% ≤ 5.99%
The following table summarizes the results of the financial feasibility analysis:
Table 23: Estimated Returns on Investment By Non-Residential Linkage Fee Amount
Page 464
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 32
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
Retail /
Commercial
Prototype
Office
Prototype
Industrial
Prototype
Warehouse
Prototype
Research and
Development
Prototype
Base: No Linkage Fee 5.67% 3.40% 7.28% 8.16% 6.81%
Linkage Fee @ $1/SF 5.65% 3.39% 7.22% 8.10% 6.76%
Linkage Fee @ $2/SF 5.64% 3.38% 7.17% 8.03% 6.71%
Linkage Fee @ $3/SF 5.63% 3.37% 7.11% 7.97% 6.65%
As such, KMA concludes that the retail/commercial and office land uses are likely to be
financially infeasible even without the imposition of a Non-Residential Linkage Fee. In contrast,
the imposition of a Non-Residential Linkage Fee in the range of $1 to $3 per square foot of
building area has a very minimal impact on the financial feasibility of the industrial, warehouse,
and research and development land uses.
C. Fees in Other Jurisdictions
It is important to note that historically Non-Residential Linkage Fee programs were primarily
found in Northern California jurisdictions. However, more Southern California jurisdictions
have enacted Non-Residential Linkage Fee programs in recent years. The following summarizes
the requirements of these programs:
Table 24: Comparison of Fees in Other Jurisdictions
Page 465
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 33
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
Jurisdiction
Fee Amount Per
Square Foot of GBA Exemptions
Culver City $5 • Non-residential developments less than 10,000
square feet
• Community land uses that serve the public
• Reconstruction of building area destroyed by
act of nature
• Housing portions of a mixed-use project
Los Angeles $3 - $5 • Non-residential developments less than 15,000
square feet
• Hospitals
• Grocery stores (if non within 1/3 mile)
• Public institutional projects
Glendale $4 • Non-residential developments less than 1,250
square feet
• Hotels
• Auto Dealerships
• Institutional Uses
• Reconstruction of building area destroyed by
act of nature
San Diego Office - $2.12 • Non-profit hospitals
Hotel - $1.28 • Manufacturing/warehouse uses
Research and
Development - $0.80
• Government uses
Retail - $1.28
Santa Monica Retail - $9.75 • Institutional Projects
Office - $11.21 • Commercial portions of apartment projects
developed by non-profit housing providers if
public assistance is provided
Hotel/Lodging - $3.07
Hospital - $6.15
Industrial - $7.53
Institutional - $10.23
Creative Office - $9.59
Medical Office - $6.89
West Hollywood $8.68 • Non-residential development less than 10,000
square feet
Page 466
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 34
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
The non-residential linkage fees in the six Southern California jurisdictions range from a low of
$0.80 per square foot of GBA for research and development uses in San Diego to a high of
$11.21 per square foot of GBA for office development uses in Santa Monica.
It should be noted that some jurisdictions set a threshold project size below which Commercial
Impact Fees are not imposed. A commonly used threshold is 10,000 square feet of GBA.
D. Recommended Fee Levels
Based on the context of the financial feasibility analysis, development cost analysis, the fees
survey for nearby jurisdictions, the relative strength of the Rancho Cucamonga real estate
market, and taking into account the City’s policy objectives, we recommend that the City
consider a fee in the $1 to $3 per square foot range for industrial, warehouse, and research and
development uses.
Table 25: Recommended Non-Residential Linkage
Fees Per Square Foot
Retail/Commercial No Fee
Office No Fee
Industrial $1 - $3
Warehouse $1 - $3
Research and Development $1 - $3
However, it is important to note that this recommendation does not take into account any
other fees currently under review by the City. Any changes on other fee levels would impact
this recommendation.
E. Potential Indices for Annual Updates to Non-Residential Linkage Fees
Administrative objectives that should be taken into consideration in selecting an appropriate
index for updating the Non-Residential Linkage Fees are as follows:
1. The update methodology should be simple and easily administered;
Page 467
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 35
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
2. The terms of the update should be clear and objective, not subject to interpretation;
and
3. The update should be tied to a readily accessible and neutral third-party published
source.
The following table summarizes common indices that could be used to adjust the Non-
Residential Linkage Fee amounts each year:
Table 26: Potential Indices for Annual Escalation
Index Concept/Description Advantages Disadvantages
Building Cost
Index (BCI)
• Fees go up or down based on
changes in building
construction costs
• Very well established • May not trend with
changes in development
cost components such as
land and soft costs
• Consistent fee burden
is imposed relative to
changes in construction
costs
• Published by Engineering
News Record (ENR)
• May not trend with the
cost associated with
producing affordable units
• Available as a national average
for 20 cities
Construction
Cost Index (CCI)
• Also published by ENR and
similar to the Building Cost
Index, but with different
weighting toward labor costs
• Very well established • The BCI is likely the more
appropriate of the two ENR
indices since it is more
closely linked to
commercial construction
costs
• Consistent fee burden
is imposed relative to
changes in construction
costs
Consumer Price
Index (CPI)
• Published by the United States
Bureau of Labor Statistics.
• Very well established • May not trend with
commercial construction
costs, or the cost to
produce affordable housing
units
• Tracks with inflation
generally
• Available for major
metropolitan areas
• Produced by a neutral
government agency
If the City uses one of the indices above to escalate other impact fees, KMA recommends using
that same index to escalate the Non-Residential Linkage Fee.
Page 468
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 36
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
V. ADDENDUM: FACTORS RELATING TO THE NEXUS CONCEPT
This Addendum provides a discussion of various specific factors and assumptions related to the
nexus concept. This discussion supplements the overview provided in the previous sections of
the report.
A. Addressing the Housing Needs of a New Population versus the Existing Population
The City, in its draft 2021-2029 Housing Element, has documented that the housing needs of
existing lower income households are not currently being met. The Housing Element states that
approximately 25% of all the households in Rancho Cucamonga are defined as extremely low,
very low or low income households. The existing housing shortage, especially at the lowest
income levels, is manifested in numerous ways such as residents paying far more than the
affordable rent set forth in federal and state guidelines, overcrowding, and other factors that
are extensively documented by the Census and other reports.
It is important to understand that this nexus study does not address the housing needs of the
existing population. Rather, the study focuses exclusively on documenting and quantifying the
housing needs of new households where an employee works in a new workplace building.
Local analyses of housing conditions indicate that new housing affordable to lower income
households is not being added to the supply in sufficient quantity to meet the needs of new
employee households. If significant numbers of units were being added to the supply to
accommodate the Extremely Low to Moderate Income groups, or if residential units in Rancho
Cucamonga were experiencing higher than typical long-term vacancy levels, particularly in
affordable units, then the need for new units would be questionable.
B. Substitution Factor
Any given new workplace buildings in Rancho Cucamonga may be occupied partly, or even
perhaps totally, by employees relocating from elsewhere in the city. Buildings are often leased
entirely to firms relocating from other buildings in the same jurisdiction. However, when a firm
relocates to a new building from elsewhere in the region, a vacant space is created that will
ultimately be occupied by another firm. In turn, that building may be filled with some
combination of newcomers to the area and existing workers. Somewhere in the chain there are
jobs new to the region. The net effect is that new buildings accommodate new employees,
although not necessarily inside of the new buildings themselves.
Page 469
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 37
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
C. Indirect Employment and Multiplier Effects
The multiplier effect refers to the concept that the income generated by a new job recycles
through the economy and results in additional jobs. The total number of jobs generated is
broken down into three categories – direct, indirect and induced. In the case of the nexus
analysis, the direct jobs are those located in the new workspace buildings that would be subject
to the impact fee. Multiplier effects encompass indirect and induced employment. Indirect jobs
are generated by suppliers to the businesses located in the new workspace buildings. Finally,
induced jobs are generated by local spending on goods and services by the employees in the
new businesses.
Multiplier effects vary by industry. Industries that draw heavily on a network of local suppliers
tend to generate larger multiplier effects. Industries that are labor intensive also tend to have
larger multiplier effects as a result of the induced effects of employee spending.
Theoretically, a non-residential nexus analysis could consider multiplier effects. However, the
potential for double counting exists to the extent indirect and induced jobs are added in other
new buildings in jurisdictions that have jobs-housing linkage fees. KMA chooses to omit the
multiplier effects (the indirect and induced employment impacts) to avoid potential double
counting.
In addition, the nexus analysis addresses direct “inside” employment only. In the case of an
office building, for example, direct employment covers the various managerial, professional and
clerical people that work in the building; it does not include the security guards, the delivery
services, the landscape maintenance workers, and many others that are associated with the
normal functioning of an office building. By confining the analysis to the “inside” direct
employees, the demand for affordable housing created by lower income workers associated
with each type of building will be understated. This provides a more conservative perspective
on the demand for affordable housing created by the development of new workplaces. If these
factors were included, the maximum allowable Non-Residential Linkage Fee would be higher
than the amount estimated in this report.
D. Changes in Labor Force Participation
In the 1960s through the 1980s, there were significant increases in labor force participation,
primarily among women. As a result, some of the new workers were entering the labor force
and already had local housing. This acts to reduce the demand for housing associated with job
growth. In earlier nexus analyses prepared by KMA, we would adjust the analysis to account for
Page 470
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 38
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
this factor. However, increases in participation rates by women have stabilized, and even
declined slightly, while labor force participation rates for men have been on a downward
trajectory since 1970. As such, an adjustment for increase in labor force participation is no
longer warranted in a nexus analysis.
E. Commuting
Workers in Rancho Cucamonga commute from locations throughout the San Bernardino County
region. Nexus analyses sometimes make a downward adjustment to reflect the fact that an
assumed portion of housing needs will be satisfied by other jurisdictions. Such an adjustment is
not required for nexus purposes; all housing demand generated by a project may be included in
the nexus. No adjustment for commuting has been reflected in the study.
F. Economic Cycles
A nexus analysis of this nature is intended to support the imposition of a one-time fee that
addresses the impacts generated over the 40+ year life of a project. Short-term conditions, such
as a recession or a vigorous boom period, are not appropriate bases for estimating impacts over
the life of a building. These cycles can produce impacts that are higher or lower on a temporary
basis.
Development of new workspace buildings tends to be minimal during a recession, and generally
remains minimal until conditions improve or there is confidence that improved conditions are
imminent. To the limited extent that new workspace buildings are built during a recession,
housing impacts from these new buildings may not be fully experienced immediately. New
buildings delivered during a recession can sometimes sit vacant for a period after completion.
Even if new buildings are immediately occupied, the net absorption of space can still be zero or
negative if other buildings are vacated in the process. Jobs added may also be filled in part by
unemployed or underemployed workers who are already housed locally.
As the economy recovers, firms will begin to expand and hire again filling unoccupied space as
unemployment is reduced. New space delivered during the recession still adds to the total
supply of employment space in the region. Though the jobs are not realized immediately, as the
economy recovers and vacant space is filled, this new employment space absorbs or
accommodates job growth. Although there may be a delay in time, the fundamental
relationship between new buildings, added jobs, and housing needs remains over the long
term.
Page 471
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 39
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
In contrast, during a vigorous economic boom period, conditions exist in which elevated
impacts are experienced on a temporary basis. As an example, compression of employment
densities can occur as firms add employees while making do with existing space. Compressed
employment densities mean more jobs are added for a given amount of building area. Boom
periods also tend to go hand-in-hand with rising development costs and increasing home prices.
These factors can bring market rate housing out of reach for a larger percentage of the
workforce and increase the cost of delivering affordable units.
G. Conservative Assumptions
KMA employed many conservative assumptions in the estimation of the total affordable
housing nexus costs. As a result, the total affordable housing nexus costs identified in this study
are significantly lower than the amounts that would have been derived if less conservative
assumptions had been applied. These conservative assumptions can be summarized as follows:
1. The study only counts employees that are employed in the companies that occupy the
new development. The development of new commercial space will also generate
indirect jobs from the suppliers to the businesses located in the new workspace
buildings, and induced jobs related to the local spending on goods and services by the
direct employees.
2. The annual incomes for workers used in this analysis reflect full-time employment based
on the California Employment Development Department’s convention for reporting
compensation information. Of course, many workers work less than full time; therefore,
the annual compensation estimates used in the analysis are overstated, especially for
retail/commercial uses, which tend to have a high number of part-time employees.
3. The conservative assumptions applied to the affordability gap analysis are:
a. The affordability gaps were estimated based on rents that are affordable to
households at the top of each income range. If the mid-point of the income
ranges had been used, the affordability gaps would have been larger, which
would increase the resulting nexus costs.
b. The affordability gap analysis for Extremely Low, Very Low and Low Income
households includes Tax-Exempt Multifamily Bonds and 4% Tax Credit financing.
The inclusion of these outside leveraging sources reduces the affordability gap
that would need to be filled by the city.
Page 472
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 40
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
VI. MITIGATION FEE ACT FINDINGS
This section provides findings language consistent with the requirements of the Mitigation Fee
Act as set forth in Government Code § 66000 et seq.
A. Identify the purpose of the fee (66001(a)(1)).
The purpose of the Non-Residential Linkage Fee is to fund construction of affordable housing to
mitigate the increased demand for affordable housing from workers in newly developed
workplace buildings.
B. Identify the use to which the fee is to be put (66001(a)(2)).
Non-Residential Linkage Fees are used to increase the supply of housing affordable to qualifying
Extremely Low, Very Low, Low and Moderate-Income households earning from 0% through
120% of median income.
C. Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the fee's use and the type
of development project on which the fee is imposed (66001(a)(3)).
The foregoing Non-Residential Nexus Study has demonstrated that there is a reasonable
relationship between the use of the fee, which is to increase the supply of affordable housing in
Rancho Cucamonga, and the development of new non-residential buildings which increases the
need for affordable housing. Development of new non-residential buildings increases the
number of jobs in Rancho Cucamonga. A share of the new workers in these new jobs will have
household incomes that qualify as Extremely Low, Very Low, Low and Moderate Income and
result in an increased need for affordable housing.
D. Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public
facility and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed
(66001(a)(4)).
The analysis has demonstrated that there is a reasonable relationship between the
development of non-residential workspace buildings in Rancho Cucamonga and the need for
additional affordable units. Development of new workspace buildings accommodates additional
jobs in Rancho Cucamonga. Five different non-residential development types were analyzed
(Retail/Commercial, Office, Industrial, Warehouse and Research and Development). The
number of jobs added in various types of new non-residential buildings is documented in
Appendix A – Table 1. Based on household income levels for the new workers in these new
Page 473
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 41
2108002v2.TRB October 5, 2021
jobs, a significant share of the need is for housing affordable to Extremely Low, Very Low, Low
and Moderate Income levels. The Non-Residential Nexus Study concludes that for every
100,000 square feet of new retail/commercial space, 75.8 incremental affordable units are
needed. Similarly, for office, 80.0 affordable units are needed per 100,000 square feet of space
developed, 62.5 for Industrial, 18.2 for Warehouse, and 25.9 for Research and Development.
E. Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and
the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility attributable to the
development on which the fee is imposed. (66001(b)).
There is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the needed
affordable housing attributable to the new non-residential development. The nexus analysis has
quantified the increased need for affordable units in relation to each type of new non-
residential use being developed and determined maximum fee levels based on the cost of
providing the needed affordable housing. Costs reflect the net subsidy required to produce the
affordable units based on recent cost information for development of affordable housing in
Rancho Cucamonga. Non-Residential Linkage Fees do not exceed the cost of providing the
affordable housing that is attributable to the new development.
F. A fee shall not include the costs attributable to existing deficiencies in public facilities
(66001(g)).
The nexus analysis quantifies only the net new affordable housing needs generated by new
non-residential development in Rancho Cucamonga. Existing deficiencies with respect to
housing conditions in Rancho Cucamonga are not considered nor in any way included in the
analysis.
Page 474
APPENDIX A
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Page 475
APPENDIX A - TABLE 1
NET NEW HOUSEHOLDS AND OCCUPATION DISTRIBUTION BY BUILDING TYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Per 100,000 SF of Building
Retail /
Commercial Office Industrial Warehouse
Research and
Development
Step 1 - Estimate of Number of Employees
Employment Density (SF/Employee)500 300 500 2,000 500
Number of Employees (100,000 SF Building)200 333 200 50 200
180 300 180 45 180
Step 3 - Adjustment for Number of Households (1.84)98.1 163.5 98.1 24.5 98.1
Step 4 - Percent of Jobs by Occupation (1)
Management Occupations 2.8%9.3%6.3%2.4%17.4%
Business and Financial Operations 0.7%13.4%4.3%2.1%10.7%
Computer and Mathematical 0.1%7.6%2.1%0.6%12.9%
Architecture and Engineering 0.0%3.5%3.7%0.2%13.9%
Life, Physical, and Social Science 0.0%1.0%0.6%0.1%25.5%
Community and Social Services 0.0%0.9%0.0%0.0%0.2%
Legal 0.0%2.1%0.1%0.0%0.6%
Education, Training, and Library 0.0%0.3%0.0%0.0%0.3%
Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media 0.4%1.7%0.7%0.1%1.2%
Healthcare Practitioners and Technical 1.8%11.3%0.1%0.0%2.5%
Healthcare Support 0.3%6.5%0.0%0.0%0.9%
Protective Service 0.3%0.8%0.1%0.7%0.4%
Food Preparation and Serving Related 39.9%0.5%0.7%0.0%0.1%
Building and Grounds Cleaning and Maint.0.4%1.0%0.4%0.7%0.3%
Personal Care and Service 2.8%0.8%0.0%0.0%0.2%
Sales and Related 30.9%6.5%10.5%1.1%1.7%
Office and Administrative Support 4.9%27.0%12.1%12.4%7.4%
Farming, Fishing, and Forestry 0.0%0.0%0.1%0.0%0.2%
Construction and Extraction 0.1%0.5%1.4%0.1%0.3%
Installation, Maintenance, and Repair 3.1%3.3%11.4%2.6%1.0%
Production 2.0%0.9%30.4%1.9%1.8%
Transportation and Material Moving 9.4%1.3%15.2%74.9%0.5%
Totals 100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%
Step 2 - Net New Employees after Declining
Industries Adjustment (10%)
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: Rancho Cucamonga Non-Res Nexus_10 5 21.xlsm; 1 Households; trb Page 476
APPENDIX A - TABLE 1
NET NEW HOUSEHOLDS AND OCCUPATION DISTRIBUTION BY BUILDING TYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Per 100,000 SF of Building
Retail /
Commercial Office Industrial Warehouse
Research and
Development
APPENDIX A - TABLE 1, PAGE 2
Step 4 - Number of Jobs by Occupation(1)
Management Occupations 2.7 15.1 6.2 0.6 17.1
Business and Financial Operations 0.7 21.9 4.2 0.5 10.5
Computer and Mathematical 0.1 12.4 2.1 0.2 12.6
Architecture and Engineering 0.0 5.8 3.6 0.0 13.7
Life, Physical, and Social Science 0.0 1.6 0.6 0.0 25.0
Community and Social Services 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.2
Legal 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.6
Education, Training, and Library 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.3
Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media 0.4 2.7 0.7 0.0 1.1
Healthcare Practitioners and Technical 1.7 18.5 0.1 0.0 2.5
Healthcare Support 0.3 10.6 0.0 0.0 0.9
Protective Service 0.3 1.3 0.1 0.2 0.4
Food Preparation and Serving Related 39.1 0.8 0.6 0.0 0.1
Building and Grounds Cleaning and Maint.0.4 1.6 0.4 0.2 0.3
Personal Care and Service 2.7 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.2
Sales and Related 30.3 10.7 10.3 0.3 1.7
Office and Administrative Support 4.8 44.1 11.8 3.0 7.3
Farming, Fishing, and Forestry 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2
Construction and Extraction 0.1 0.8 1.4 0.0 0.2
Installation, Maintenance, and Repair 3.0 5.3 11.2 0.6 1.0
Production 2.0 1.4 29.8 0.5 1.8
Transportation and Material Moving 9.2 2.2 14.9 18.4 0.5
Totals 98.1 163.5 98.1 24.5 98.1
Notes:
(1) Appendices B - F contain additional information regarding worker occupation categories.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: Rancho Cucamonga Non-Res Nexus_10 5 21.xlsm; 1 Households; trb Page 477
APPENDIX A - TABLE 2A
ESTIMATE OF QUALIFYING HOUSEHOLDS - EXTREMELY LOW INCOME
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Analysis for Households Earning up to 30% of Median
Retail /
Commercial Office Industrial Warehouse
Research and
Development
Per 100,000 SF Building
Households Earning up to 30% of Median (Step 5, 6, & 7) (1)
Management 0.02 0.02 - - -
Business and Financial Operations - 0.33 0.07 0.01 0.16
Computer and Mathematical - 0.07 0.01 - 0.03
Architecture and Engineering - 0.06 0.00 - 0.00
Life, Physical and Social Science - - - - 0.13
Community and Social Services - - - - -
Legal - 0.04 - - -
Education Training and Library - - - - -
Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media - - - - -
Healthcare Practitioners and Technical - 0.04 - - 0.02
Healthcare Support - 0.16 - - -
Protective Service - - - - -
Food Preparation and Serving Related 2.34 - - - -
Building Grounds and Maintenance - - - - -
Personal Care and Service 0.12 - - - -
Sales and Related 1.17 0.30 0.20 - -
Office and Admin 0.09 0.76 0.21 0.05 0.12
Farm, Fishing, and Forestry - - - - -
Construction and Extraction - - - - -
Installation Maintenance and Repair 0.03 0.07 0.15 0.00 -
Production 0.08 - 0.79 - -
Transportation and Material Moving 0.33 - 0.49 0.55 -
HH earning up to 30% of Median - major occupations 4.18 1.84 1.93 0.62 0.46
HH earning up to 30% of Median - all other occupations 0.19 0.19 0.08 0.04 0.05
Total Households Earning up to 30% of Median 4.4 2.0 2.0 0.7 0.5
Notes:
(1) Appendices B - F contain additional information on worker occupation categories, compensation levels and estimated household incomes.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: Rancho Cucamonga Non-Res Nexus_10 5 21.xlsm; 2A ELI; trb Page 478
APPENDIX A - TABLE 2B
ESTIMATE OF QUALIFYING HOUSEHOLDS - VERY LOW INCOME
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Analysis for Households Earning 30% to 50% of Median
Retail /
Commercial Office Industrial Warehouse
Research and
Development
Per 100,000 SF Building
Households Earning 30% to 50% of Median (Step 5, 6, & 7) (1)
Management 0.05 0.06 - - -
Business and Financial Operations - 0.90 0.20 0.02 0.48
Computer and Mathematical - 0.19 0.04 - 0.07
Architecture and Engineering - 0.22 0.01 - 0.02
Life, Physical and Social Science - - - - 0.31
Community and Social Services - - - - -
Legal - 0.10 - - -
Education Training and Library - - - - -
Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media - - - - -
Healthcare Practitioners and Technical - 0.22 - - 0.08
Healthcare Support - 1.25 - - -
Protective Service - - - - -
Food Preparation and Serving Related 9.88 - - - -
Building Grounds and Maintenance - - - - -
Personal Care and Service 0.59 - - - -
Sales and Related 6.19 1.30 0.86 - -
Office and Admin 0.58 4.78 1.33 0.35 0.59
Farm, Fishing, and Forestry - - - - -
Construction and Extraction - - - - -
Installation Maintenance and Repair 0.25 0.36 0.75 0.04 -
Production 0.37 - 4.31 - -
Transportation and Material Moving 1.68 - 2.41 2.99 -
HH earning 30% to 50% of Median - major occupations 19.58 9.38 9.91 3.39 1.56
HH earning 30% to 50% of Median - all other occupations 0.87 0.99 0.42 0.20 0.17
Total Households Earning 30% to 50% of Median 20.5 10.4 10.3 3.6 1.7
Notes:
(1) Appendices B - F contain additional information on worker occupation categories, compensation levels and estimated household incomes.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: Rancho Cucamonga Non-Res Nexus_10 5 21.xlsm; 2B VL; trb Page 479
APPENDIX A - TABLE 2C
ESTIMATE OF QUALIFYING HOUSEHOLDS - LOW INCOME
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Analysis for Households Earning 50% to 80% of Median
Retail /
Commercial Office Industrial Warehouse
Research and
Development
Per 100,000 SF Building
Households Earning 50% to 80% of Median (Step 5, 6, & 7) (1)
Management 0.28 0.50 0.16 0.02 0.17
Business and Financial Operations - 3.12 0.67 0.07 1.51
Computer and Mathematical - 0.76 0.15 - 0.37
Architecture and Engineering - 0.50 0.13 - 0.25
Life, Physical and Social Science - - - - 1.00
Community and Social Services - - - - -
Legal - 0.36 - - -
Education Training and Library - - - - -
Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media - - - - -
Healthcare Practitioners and Technical - 0.85 - - 0.35
Healthcare Support - 4.18 - - -
Protective Service - - - - -
Food Preparation and Serving Related 12.09 - - - -
Building Grounds and Maintenance - - - - -
Personal Care and Service 0.94 - - - -
Sales and Related 10.65 2.68 2.23 - -
Office and Admin 1.75 15.73 4.30 1.16 2.21
Farm, Fishing, and Forestry - - - - -
Construction and Extraction - - - - -
Installation Maintenance and Repair 0.84 1.34 2.60 0.17 -
Production 0.72 - 10.83 - -
Transportation and Material Moving 3.29 - 5.24 6.97 -
HH earning 50% to 80% of Median - major occupations 30.56 30.01 26.30 8.38 5.86
HH earning 50% to 80% of Median - all other occupations 1.36 3.17 1.12 0.50 0.62
Total Households Earning 50% to 80% of Median 31.9 33.2 27.4 8.9 6.5
Notes:
(1) Appendices B - F contain additional information on worker occupation categories, compensation levels and estimated household incomes.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: Rancho Cucamonga Non-Res Nexus_10 5 21.xlsm; 2C Low; trb Page 480
APPENDIX A - TABLE 2D
ESTIMATE OF QUALIFYING HOUSEHOLDS - MODERATE INCOME
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Analysis for Households Earning 80% to 120% of Median
Retail /
Commercial Office Industrial Warehouse
Research and
Development
Per 100,000 SF Building
Households Earning 80% to 120% of Median (Step 5, 6, & 7) (1)
Management 0.62 2.21 0.95 0.10 1.40
Business and Financial Operations - 5.99 1.20 0.15 2.88
Computer and Mathematical - 2.43 0.43 - 2.18
Architecture and Engineering - 1.12 0.80 - 2.30
Life, Physical and Social Science - - - - 4.31
Community and Social Services - - - - -
Legal - 0.53 - - -
Education Training and Library - - - - -
Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media - - - - -
Healthcare Practitioners and Technical - 1.55 - - 0.43
Healthcare Support - 2.30 - - -
Protective Service - - - - -
Food Preparation and Serving Related 7.13 - - - -
Building Grounds and Maintenance - - - - -
Personal Care and Service 0.50 - - - -
Sales and Related 5.80 2.59 2.46 - -
Office and Admin 1.15 10.84 2.83 0.68 2.00
Farm, Fishing, and Forestry - - - - -
Construction and Extraction - - - - -
Installation Maintenance and Repair 0.81 1.55 3.34 0.18 -
Production 0.37 - 6.53 - -
Transportation and Material Moving 1.83 - 3.25 3.66 -
HH earning 80% to 120% of Median - major occupations 18.21 31.12 21.80 4.76 15.51
HH earning 80% to 120% of Median - all other occupations 0.81 3.29 0.93 0.29 1.64
Total Households Earning 80% to 120% of Median 19.0 34.4 22.7 5.0 17.2
Notes:
(1) Appendices B - F contain additional information on worker occupation categories, compensation levels and estimated household incomes.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: Rancho Cucamonga Non-Res Nexus_10 5 21.xlsm; 2d mod; trb Page 481
APPENDIX A - TABLE 3
WORKER HOUSEHOLDS BY AFFORDABILITY LEVEL
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Per 100,000 S.F. Building
Retail /
Commercial Office Industrial Warehouse
Research and
Development
NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS BY INCOME TIER (1)
Up to 30% Median Income 4.4 2.0 2.0 0.7 0.5
30% to 50% Median Income 20.5 10.4 10.3 3.6 1.7
50% to 80% Median Income 31.9 33.2 27.4 8.9 6.5
80% to 120% Median Income 19.0 34.4 22.7 5.0 17.2
Subtotal to 120% of Median 75.8 80.0 62.5 18.2 25.9
Above 120% of Median 22.3 83.5 35.6 6.3 72.2
Total New Worker Households 98.1 163.5 98.1 24.5 98.1
PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLDS BY INCOME TIER
Up to 30% Median Income 4.5%1.2%2.0%2.7%0.5%
30% to 50% Median Income 20.9%6.3%10.5%14.7%1.8%
50% to 80% Median Income 32.5%20.3%28.0%36.2%6.6%
80% to 120% Median Income 19.4%21.0%23.2%20.6%17.5%
Subtotal to 120% of Median 77.2%48.9%63.7%74.1%26.4%
Above 120% of Median 22.8%51.1%36.3%25.9%73.6%
Total 100%100%100%100%100%
Notes:
(1) See Appendices B - G for information regarding worker compensation levels and estimated household incomes.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: Rancho Cucamonga Non-Res Nexus_10 5 21.xlsm; AFF SUM; trb Page 482
APPENDIX A - TABLE 4
HOUSING DEMAND NEXUS FACTORS PER SQ.FT. OF BUILDING AREA
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Retail /
Commercial Office Industrial Warehouse
Research and
Development
Up to 30% Median Income 0.00004369 0.00002040 0.00002010 0.00000655 0.00000511
30% to 50% Median Income 0.00020451 0.00010370 0.00010336 0.00003598 0.00001724
50% to 80% Median Income 0.00031916 0.00033179 0.00027427 0.00008881 0.00006482
80% to 120% Median Income 0.00019019 0.00034409 0.00022727 0.00005048 0.00017151
Total 0.00075755 0.00079999 0.00062499 0.00018181 0.00025868
Notes:
(1)Calculated by dividing number of household in Table 3 by 100,000 square feet to convert to households per square foot of building.
Number of Housing Units per Square Foot of Building Area(1)
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: Rancho Cucamonga Non-Res Nexus_10 5 21.xlsm; Demand; trb Page 483
APPENDIX A - TABLE 5
TOTAL HOUSING NEXUS COST
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
INCOME CATEGORY
Retail /
Commercial Office Industrial Warehouse
Research and
Development
Up to 30% Median Income $272,700 $11.90 $5.60 $5.50 $1.80 $1.40
30% to 50% Median Income $219,300 $44.80 $22.70 $22.70 $7.90 $3.80
50% to 80% Median Income $192,600 $61.50 $63.90 $52.80 $17.10 $12.50
80% to 120% Median Income $205,600 $39.10 $70.70 $46.70 $10.40 $35.30
$157.30 $162.90 $127.70 $37.20 $53.00
Notes:
2 Calculated by multiplying housing demand factors from Table 4 by the affordability gap per unit estimated in Appendix H.
1 See Appendix H for supporting analysis.
Total Mitigation Cost /
Maximum Supported Fee
Affordability
Gap Per Unit
1
Nexus Cost Per Sq.Ft. of Building Area2
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: Rancho Cucamonga Non-Res Nexus_10 5 21.xlsm; MAX FEE; trb Page 484
APPENDICES B - F
OCCUPATION AND COMPENSATION TABLES
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Page 485
APPENDIX B - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED WORKER OCCUPATION DISTRIBUTION, 2020
RETAIL/COMMERCIAL WORKERS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Worker Occupation Distribution
Retail
Major Occupations (2% or more)
Management Occupations 2.8%
Food Preparation and Serving Related Occupations 39.9%
Personal Care and Service Occupations 2.8%
Sales and Related Occupations 30.9%
Office and Administrative Support Occupations 4.9%
Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Occupations 3.1%
Production Occupations 2.0%
Transportation and Material Moving Occupations 9.4%
4.3%
TOTAL 100.0%
All Other Worker Occupations - Retail
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Rancho Cucamonga Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; trb
Page 486
APPENDIX B - TABLE 2
AVERAGE ANNUAL WORKER COMPENSATION AND ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD INCOME, 2021
RETAIL/COMMERCIAL WORKER OCCUPATIONS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2021 Avg.% of Total % of Total
Worker One Two Three+Occupation Retail
Occupation 3 Compensation1 Worker Workers Workers Group 2 Workers
Page 1 of 2
Management Occupations
General and Operations Managers $120,600 $128,000 $184,000 $195,000 55.3%1.5%
Sales Managers $121,300 $129,000 $185,000 $196,000 9.6%0.3%
Food Service Managers $57,400 $65,000 $110,000 $128,000 24.5%0.7%
Other Management Occupations $103,300 $110,000 $158,000 $167,000 10.5%0.3%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $103,300 $111,000 $163,000 $176,000 100.0%2.8%
Food Preparation and Serving Related Occupations
First-Line Supervisors of Food Preparation and Serving Workers $42,500 $50,000 $87,000 $107,000 8.2%3.3%
Cooks, Fast Food $30,000 $38,000 $70,000 $91,000 6.1%2.4%
Cooks, Restaurant $32,600 $41,000 $76,000 $99,000 11.0%4.4%
Food Preparation Workers $31,400 $39,000 $73,000 $96,000 6.4%2.6%
Bartenders $30,800 $39,000 $72,000 $94,000 3.2%1.3%
Fast Food and Counter Workers $31,700 $40,000 $74,000 $96,000 34.1%13.6%
Waiters and Waitresses $30,500 $38,000 $71,000 $93,000 18.6%7.4%
Dining Room and Cafeteria Attendants and Bartender Helpers $30,000 $38,000 $70,000 $91,000 2.7%1.1%
Dishwashers $29,800 $39,000 $76,000 $106,000 3.5%1.4%
Hosts and Hostesses, Restaurant, Lounge, and Coffee Shop $30,000 $38,000 $70,000 $91,000 3.2%1.3%
Other Food Preparation and Serving Related Occupations $32,200 $40,000 $75,000 $98,000 2.9%1.2%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $32,200 $40,000 $74,000 $96,000 100.0%39.9%
Personal Care and Service Occupations
Supervisors of Personal Service and Entertainment and Rec Workers $48,700 $57,000 $100,000 $122,000 6.0%0.2%
Animal Caretakers $33,200 $42,000 $77,000 $101,000 8.3%0.2%
Amusement and Recreation Attendants $31,200 $39,000 $72,000 $95,000 2.4%0.1%
Funeral Attendants $38,800 $49,000 $90,000 $118,000 2.7%0.1%
Morticians, Undertakers, and Funeral Arrangers $56,400 $64,000 $109,000 $126,000 2.1%0.1%
Barbers $33,700 $42,000 $78,000 $103,000 2.0%0.1%
Hairdressers, Hairstylists, and Cosmetologists $33,700 $42,000 $78,000 $103,000 38.5%1.1%
Manicurists and Pedicurists $30,000 $38,000 $70,000 $91,000 9.8%0.3%
Skincare Specialists $38,200 $48,000 $89,000 $116,000 4.8%0.1%
Exercise Trainers and Group Fitness Instructors $44,500 $52,000 $91,000 $112,000 4.7%0.1%
Other Personal Care and Service Occupations $35,900 $45,000 $83,000 $109,000 18.7%0.5%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $35,900 $44,000 $81,000 $106,000 100.0%2.8%
Sales and Related Occupations
First-Line Supervisors of Retail Sales Workers $53,900 $61,000 $104,000 $121,000 11.9%3.7%
Cashiers $32,800 $41,000 $76,000 $100,000 34.9%10.8%
Counter and Rental Clerks $41,600 $49,000 $85,000 $104,000 2.4%0.7%
Parts Salespersons $41,700 $49,000 $85,000 $105,000 2.7%0.8%
Retail Salespersons $35,500 $45,000 $82,000 $108,000 44.1%13.7%
Other Sales and Related Occupations $37,100 $47,000 $86,000 $113,000 4.0%1.2%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $37,100 $46,000 $83,000 $107,000 100.0%30.9%
Household Income Estimate 4
Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, California Employment Development Department
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Rancho Cucamonga Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; trb Page 487
APPENDIX B - TABLE 2
AVERAGE ANNUAL WORKER COMPENSATION AND ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD INCOME, 2021
RETAIL/COMMERCIAL WORKER OCCUPATIONS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2021 Avg.% of Total % of Total
Worker One Two Three+Occupation Retail
Occupation 3 Compensation1 Worker Workers Workers Group 2 Workers
Household Income Estimate 4
Page 2 of 2
Office and Administrative Support Occupations
First-Line Supervisors of Office and Admin Support Workers $63,300 $71,000 $110,000 $125,000 7.8%0.4%
Bookkeeping, Accounting, and Auditing Clerks $47,800 $56,000 $98,000 $120,000 11.3%0.6%
Customer Service Representatives $42,000 $49,000 $86,000 $105,000 27.9%1.4%
Receptionists and Information Clerks $33,900 $43,000 $79,000 $103,000 7.9%0.4%
Shipping, Receiving, and Inventory Clerks $37,900 $48,000 $88,000 $115,000 9.0%0.4%
Secretaries and Admin Assistants, Except Legal, Medical $44,800 $53,000 $92,000 $112,000 5.9%0.3%
Office Clerks, General $40,000 $47,000 $82,000 $100,000 16.5%0.8%
Other Office and Administrative Support Occupations $43,300 $51,000 $89,000 $109,000 13.8%0.7%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $43,300 $51,000 $89,000 $109,000 100.0%4.9%
Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Occupations
First-Line Supervisors of Mechanics, Installers, and Repairers $84,900 $91,000 $138,000 $153,000 7.9%0.2%
Computer, Automated Teller, and Office Machine Repairers $43,800 $51,000 $90,000 $110,000 2.8%0.1%
Automotive Body and Related Repairers $46,500 $55,000 $95,000 $117,000 3.5%0.1%
Automotive Service Technicians and Mechanics $51,200 $58,000 $99,000 $115,000 41.2%1.3%
Tire Repairers and Changers $34,200 $43,000 $79,000 $104,000 11.7%0.4%
Maintenance and Repair Workers, General $48,800 $57,000 $100,000 $123,000 7.8%0.2%
Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Workers, All Other $44,200 $52,000 $90,000 $111,000 2.6%0.1%
Other Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Occupations $51,100 $58,000 $98,000 $114,000 22.5%0.7%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $51,100 $58,000 $99,000 $117,000 100.0%3.1%
Production Occupations
First-Line Supervisors of Production and Operating Workers $69,300 $78,000 $121,000 $136,000 6.8%0.1%
Miscellaneous Assemblers and Fabricators $33,800 $42,000 $78,000 $103,000 3.8%0.1%
Bakers $34,400 $43,000 $80,000 $105,000 17.1%0.3%
Butchers and Meat Cutters $38,400 $48,000 $89,000 $117,000 20.7%0.4%
Meat, Poultry, and Fish Cutters and Trimmers $30,800 $39,000 $72,000 $94,000 2.8%0.1%
Food Batchmakers $36,000 $45,000 $84,000 $110,000 2.2%0.0%
Laundry and Dry-Cleaning Workers $31,400 $39,000 $73,000 $96,000 17.6%0.4%
Pressers, Textile, Garment, and Related Materials $30,600 $38,000 $71,000 $93,000 5.5%0.1%
Tailors, Dressmakers, and Custom Sewers $37,400 $47,000 $87,000 $114,000 3.5%0.1%
Inspectors, Testers, Sorters, Samplers, and Weighers $43,100 $51,000 $88,000 $108,000 2.6%0.1%
Other Production Occupations $37,700 $47,000 $88,000 $115,000 17.5%0.4%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $37,700 $46,000 $85,000 $109,000 100.0%2.0%
Transportation and Material Moving Occupations
First-Line Supervisors of Transportation & Material Moving Workers $61,800 $69,000 $108,000 $122,000 3.0%0.3%
Driver/Sales Workers $38,000 $48,000 $88,000 $116,000 11.7%1.1%
Light Truck Drivers $47,800 $56,000 $98,000 $120,000 10.6%1.0%
Automotive and Watercraft Service Attendants $35,000 $44,000 $81,000 $106,000 2.0%0.2%
Cleaners of Vehicles and Equipment $32,700 $41,000 $76,000 $99,000 4.8%0.5%
Laborers and Freight, Stock, and Material Movers, Hand $36,500 $46,000 $85,000 $111,000 8.7%0.8%
Packers and Packagers, Hand $30,500 $38,000 $71,000 $93,000 4.2%0.4%
Stockers and Order Fillers $35,200 $44,000 $82,000 $107,000 46.6%4.4%
Other Transportation and Material Moving Occupations $37,700 $47,000 $88,000 $115,000 8.3%0.8%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $37,700 $47,000 $85,000 $110,000 100.0%9.4%
95.7%
Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, California Employment Development Department
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Rancho Cucamonga Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; trb Page 488
APPENDIX B - TABLE 2
AVERAGE ANNUAL WORKER COMPENSATION AND ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD INCOME, 2021
RETAIL/COMMERCIAL WORKER OCCUPATIONS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2021 Avg.% of Total % of Total
Worker One Two Three+Occupation Retail
Occupation 3 Compensation1 Worker Workers Workers Group 2 Workers
Household Income Estimate 4
1
2
3 Including occupations representing 2% or more of the major occupation group.
4
The methodology utilized by the California Employment Development Department (EDD) assumes hourly paid employees are employed full-time. EDD data is adjusted by KMA to
reflect the State minimum wage. Annual compensation is calculated by EDD by multiplying hourly wages by 40 hours per work week by 52 weeks.
Occupation percentages are based on the 2020 National Industry - Specific Occupational Employment Survey compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Wages are based on
Occupational Employment Survey data applicable to San Bernardino County as of 2020 and are adjusted by EDD to the first quarter of 2021.
Household income estimated based average worker compensation and ratios between employee income and household income identified in Appendix G - Table 1.
Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, California Employment Development Department
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Rancho Cucamonga Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; trb Page 489
APPENDIX C - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED WORKER OCCUPATION DISTRIBUTION, 2020
OFFICE WORKERS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Worker Occupation Distribution
Office
Major Occupations (2% or more)
Management Occupations 9.3%
Business and Financial Operations Occupations 13.4%
Computer and Mathematical Occupations 7.6%
Architecture and Engineering Occupations 3.5%
Legal Occupations 2.1%
Healthcare Practitioners and Technical Occupations 11.3%
Healthcare Support Occupations 6.5%
Sales and Related Occupations 6.5%
Office and Administrative Support Occupations 27.0%
Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Occupations 3.3%
9.6%
TOTAL 100.0%
All Other Worker Occupations - Office
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Rancho Cucamonga Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; trb
Page 490
APPENDIX C - TABLE 2
AVERAGE ANNUAL WORKER COMPENSATION AND ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD INCOME, 2021
OFFICE WORKER OCCUPATIONS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2021 Avg.% of Total % of Total
Worker One Two Three+Occupation Office
Occupation 3 Compensation1 Worker Workers Workers Group 2 Workers
Page 1 of 4
Management Occupations
Chief Executives $206,700 $219,000 $278,000 $285,000 2.9%0.3%
General and Operations Managers $120,600 $128,000 $184,000 $195,000 26.6%2.5%
Marketing Managers $132,100 $142,000 $191,000 $199,000 5.1%0.5%
Sales Managers $121,300 $129,000 $185,000 $196,000 4.3%0.4%
Administrative Services and Facilities Managers $105,100 $112,000 $161,000 $170,000 4.0%0.4%
Computer and Information Systems Managers $141,200 $152,000 $204,000 $213,000 8.6%0.8%
Financial Managers $131,300 $141,000 $190,000 $198,000 13.7%1.3%
Human Resources Managers $121,800 $130,000 $186,000 $197,000 2.5%0.2%
Architectural and Engineering Managers $163,300 $173,000 $219,000 $225,000 3.0%0.3%
Medical and Health Services Managers $131,400 $141,000 $190,000 $198,000 5.4%0.5%
Property, Real Estate, and Community Association Managers $77,800 $87,000 $136,000 $153,000 10.3%1.0%
Personal Service Managers; Entertainment and Recr Managers $119,600 $127,000 $183,000 $193,000 5.5%0.5%
Other Management Occupations $124,000 $132,000 $189,000 $200,000 8.2%0.8%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $124,000 $133,000 $186,000 $196,000 100.0%9.3%
Business and Financial Operations Occupations
Buyers and Purchasing Agents $63,500 $71,000 $111,000 $125,000 2.2%0.3%
Claims Adjusters, Examiners, and Investigators $81,600 $87,000 $133,000 $147,000 4.4%0.6%
Compliance Officers $76,700 $86,000 $134,000 $151,000 2.5%0.3%
Human Resources Specialists $68,700 $77,000 $120,000 $135,000 6.0%0.8%
Management Analysts $87,700 $94,000 $143,000 $158,000 10.7%1.4%
Training and Development Specialists $70,400 $79,000 $123,000 $139,000 3.0%0.4%
Market Research Analysts and Marketing Specialists $56,600 $65,000 $109,000 $127,000 9.4%1.3%
Project Management and Business Operations Specialists $74,300 $83,000 $130,000 $146,000 14.1%1.9%
Accountants and Auditors $76,200 $85,000 $133,000 $150,000 19.2%2.6%
Loan Officers $81,600 $87,000 $133,000 $147,000 6.6%0.9%
Financial and Investment Analysts $79,600 $89,000 $139,000 $157,000 5.7%0.8%
Other Business and Financial Operations Occupations $75,000 $84,000 $131,000 $148,000 16.3%2.2%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $75,000 $83,000 $130,000 $146,000 100.0%13.4%
Computer and Mathematical Occupations
Computer Systems Analysts $92,000 $98,000 $150,000 $166,000 13.4%1.0%
Information Security Analysts $125,000 $134,000 $181,000 $189,000 3.7%0.3%
Computer Network Support Specialists $65,500 $73,000 $114,000 $129,000 4.2%0.3%
Computer User Support Specialists $63,000 $71,000 $110,000 $124,000 12.3%0.9%
Computer Network Architects $117,900 $126,000 $180,000 $190,000 4.1%0.3%
Network and Computer Systems Administrators $91,800 $98,000 $149,000 $165,000 7.3%0.6%
Database Administrators and Architects $103,500 $110,000 $158,000 $167,000 2.9%0.2%
Computer Programmers $92,500 $99,000 $150,000 $167,000 3.9%0.3%
Software Developers and Software Quality Assurance Analysts $104,600 $111,000 $160,000 $169,000 32.6%2.5%
Web Developers and Digital Interface Designers $69,400 $78,000 $121,000 $137,000 3.3%0.2%
Computer Occupations, All Other $83,000 $89,000 $135,000 $149,000 6.6%0.5%
Operations Research Analysts $92,800 $99,000 $151,000 $167,000 2.0%0.2%
Other Computer and Mathematical Occupations $92,800 $99,000 $151,000 $167,000 3.7%0.3%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $92,800 $100,000 $147,000 $160,000 100.0%7.6%
Household Income Estimate 4
Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, California Employment Development Department
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Rancho Cucamonga Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; trb Page 491
APPENDIX C - TABLE 2
AVERAGE ANNUAL WORKER COMPENSATION AND ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD INCOME, 2021
OFFICE WORKER OCCUPATIONS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2021 Avg.% of Total % of Total
Worker One Two Three+Occupation Office
Occupation 3 Compensation1 Worker Workers Workers Group 2 Workers
Household Income Estimate 4
Page 2 of 4
Architecture and Engineering Occupations
Architects, Except Landscape and Naval $29,100 $38,000 $74,000 $104,000 10.2%0.4%
Surveyors $96,300 $103,000 $156,000 $173,000 3.7%0.1%
Civil Engineers $116,700 $124,000 $178,000 $188,000 18.9%0.7%
Electrical Engineers $102,300 $109,000 $156,000 $165,000 6.3%0.2%
Electronics Engineers, Except Computer $117,600 $125,000 $180,000 $190,000 4.5%0.2%
Environmental Engineers $106,000 $113,000 $162,000 $171,000 2.7%0.1%
Industrial Engineers $84,000 $90,000 $137,000 $151,000 4.0%0.1%
Mechanical Engineers $92,600 $99,000 $150,000 $167,000 8.9%0.3%
Engineers, All Other $99,600 $106,000 $162,000 $179,000 4.1%0.1%
Architectural and Civil Drafters $57,400 $65,000 $110,000 $128,000 8.4%0.3%
Civil Engineering Technologists and Technicians $63,900 $72,000 $111,000 $126,000 3.6%0.1%
Electrical and Electronic Engineering Technologists $76,700 $86,000 $134,000 $151,000 2.6%0.1%
Surveying and Mapping Technicians $57,600 $66,000 $111,000 $129,000 4.0%0.1%
Calibration and Engineering Technologists, Technicians $81,600 $87,000 $133,000 $147,000 2.3%0.1%
Other Architecture and Engineering Occupations $85,700 $91,000 $139,000 $154,000 15.9%0.6%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $85,700 $93,000 $141,000 $156,000 100.0%3.5%
Legal Occupations
Lawyers $168,500 $179,000 $226,000 $232,000 57.8%1.2%
Paralegals and Legal Assistants $62,400 $70,000 $109,000 $123,000 33.6%0.7%
Title Examiners, Abstractors, and Searchers $55,400 $63,000 $107,000 $124,000 6.0%0.1%
Legal Support Workers, All Other $57,300 $65,000 $110,000 $128,000 2.0%0.0%
Other Legal Occupations $123,500 $132,000 $189,000 $199,000 0.6%0.0%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $123,500 $133,000 $177,000 $187,000 100.0%2.1%
Healthcare Practitioners and Technical Occupations
Dentists, General $179,900 $191,000 $242,000 $248,000 6.6%0.7%
Physician Assistants $142,100 $153,000 $206,000 $215,000 3.5%0.4%
Physical Therapists $105,800 $113,000 $162,000 $171,000 3.7%0.4%
Veterinarians $144,400 $155,000 $209,000 $218,000 2.1%0.2%
Registered Nurses $112,100 $119,000 $171,000 $181,000 11.9%1.3%
Nurse Practitioners $149,000 $160,000 $216,000 $225,000 5.4%0.6%
Family Medicine Physicians $263,600 $277,000 $316,000 $328,000 3.4%0.4%
Physicians, All Other; and Ophthalmologists, Except Pediatric $216,300 $230,000 $290,000 $298,000 9.2%1.0%
Dental Hygienists $114,300 $122,000 $175,000 $184,000 13.9%1.6%
Radiologic Technologists and Technicians $86,300 $92,000 $140,000 $155,000 2.1%0.2%
Veterinary Technologists and Technicians $39,600 $50,000 $92,000 $120,000 3.2%0.4%
Ophthalmic Medical Technicians $43,000 $50,000 $88,000 $108,000 2.5%0.3%
Licensed Practical and Licensed Vocational Nurses $63,500 $71,000 $111,000 $125,000 4.7%0.5%
Dosimetrists, Records Specialists, and Health Technologists $52,900 $60,000 $102,000 $118,000 4.6%0.5%
Other Healthcare Practitioners and Technical Occupations $129,500 $139,000 $187,000 $196,000 23.4%2.6%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $129,500 $139,000 $189,000 $199,000 100.0%11.3%
Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, California Employment Development Department
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Rancho Cucamonga Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; trb Page 492
APPENDIX C - TABLE 2
AVERAGE ANNUAL WORKER COMPENSATION AND ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD INCOME, 2021
OFFICE WORKER OCCUPATIONS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2021 Avg.% of Total % of Total
Worker One Two Three+Occupation Office
Occupation 3 Compensation1 Worker Workers Workers Group 2 Workers
Household Income Estimate 4
Page 3 of 4
Healthcare Support Occupations
Nursing Assistants $38,000 $48,000 $88,000 $116,000 2.1%0.1%
Physical Therapist Assistants $67,500 $76,000 $118,000 $133,000 3.2%0.2%
Physical Therapist Aides $35,600 $45,000 $83,000 $108,000 2.2%0.1%
Massage Therapists $50,800 $58,000 $98,000 $114,000 2.1%0.1%
Dental Assistants $41,500 $49,000 $85,000 $104,000 37.5%2.4%
Medical Assistants $39,000 $49,000 $91,000 $119,000 40.9%2.6%
Veterinary Assistants and Laboratory Animal Caretakers $36,000 $45,000 $84,000 $110,000 5.0%0.3%
Other Healthcare Support Occupations $41,000 $48,000 $84,000 $103,000 7.1%0.5%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $41,000 $50,000 $89,000 $112,000 100.0%6.5%
Sales and Related Occupations
First-Line Supervisors of Non-Retail Sales Workers $72,200 $81,000 $126,000 $142,000 4.2%0.3%
Counter and Rental Clerks $41,600 $49,000 $85,000 $104,000 8.9%0.6%
Retail Salespersons $35,500 $45,000 $82,000 $108,000 2.8%0.2%
Insurance Sales Agents $68,400 $77,000 $119,000 $135,000 19.6%1.3%
Securities, Commodities, Financial Services Sales Agents $65,900 $74,000 $115,000 $130,000 12.6%0.8%
Sales Representatives of Services $66,900 $75,000 $117,000 $132,000 20.3%1.3%
Sales Reps, Wholesale & Manufacturing, Technical $104,400 $111,000 $159,000 $168,000 2.1%0.1%
Sales Reps, Wholesale & Manufacturing, Non-Technical $74,800 $84,000 $130,000 $147,000 3.5%0.2%
Real Estate Brokers $29,100 $38,000 $74,000 $104,000 3.1%0.2%
Real Estate Sales Agents $29,100 $38,000 $74,000 $104,000 10.7%0.7%
Telemarketers $33,600 $42,000 $78,000 $102,000 3.1%0.2%
Other Sales and Related Occupations $58,200 $66,000 $112,000 $130,000 8.9%0.6%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $58,200 $66,000 $107,000 $126,000 100.0%6.5%
Office and Administrative Support Occupations
First-Line Supervisors of Office and Admin Support Workers $63,300 $71,000 $110,000 $125,000 8.5%2.3%
Billing and Posting Clerks $40,200 $47,000 $82,000 $101,000 4.8%1.3%
Bookkeeping, Accounting, and Auditing Clerks $47,800 $56,000 $98,000 $120,000 8.0%2.2%
Tellers $37,600 $47,000 $87,000 $114,000 5.2%1.4%
Customer Service Representatives $42,000 $49,000 $86,000 $105,000 16.2%4.4%
Loan Interviewers and Clerks $48,000 $56,000 $98,000 $121,000 2.2%0.6%
Receptionists and Information Clerks $33,900 $43,000 $79,000 $103,000 10.5%2.8%
Executive Secretaries and Executive Administrative Assistants $67,800 $76,000 $118,000 $133,000 2.4%0.6%
Medical Secretaries and Administrative Assistants $42,300 $50,000 $86,000 $106,000 7.5%2.0%
Secretaries/Admin Assistants, Except Legal/Med./Exec $44,800 $53,000 $92,000 $112,000 7.3%2.0%
Insurance Claims and Policy Processing Clerks $47,900 $56,000 $98,000 $120,000 2.5%0.7%
Office Clerks, General $40,000 $47,000 $82,000 $100,000 11.8%3.2%
Other Office and Administrative Support Occupations $44,300 $52,000 $91,000 $111,000 13.1%3.5%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $44,300 $52,000 $90,000 $110,000 100.0%27.0%
Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, California Employment Development Department
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Rancho Cucamonga Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; trb Page 493
APPENDIX C - TABLE 2
AVERAGE ANNUAL WORKER COMPENSATION AND ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD INCOME, 2021
OFFICE WORKER OCCUPATIONS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2021 Avg.% of Total % of Total
Worker One Two Three+Occupation Office
Occupation 3 Compensation1 Worker Workers Workers Group 2 Workers
Household Income Estimate 4
Page 4 of 4
Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Occupations
First-Line Supervisors of Mechanics, Installers, and Repairers $84,900 $91,000 $138,000 $153,000 8.5%0.3%
Telecom Equipment Installers/Repairers, Except Line Installers $58,300 $66,000 $112,000 $130,000 15.1%0.5%
Telecommunications Line Installers and Repairers $64,700 $72,000 $113,000 $127,000 9.0%0.3%
Maintenance and Repair Workers, General $48,800 $57,000 $100,000 $123,000 58.1%1.9%
Other Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Occupations $55,400 $63,000 $107,000 $124,000 9.3%0.3%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $55,400 $63,000 $107,000 $127,000 100.0%3.3%
90.4%
1
2
3 Including occupations representing 2% or more of the major occupation group.
4 Household income estimated based average worker compensation and ratios between employee income and household income identified in Appendix G - Table 1.
The methodology utilized by the California Employment Development Department (EDD) assumes hourly paid employees are employed full-time. EDD data is adjusted by
KMA to reflect the State minimum wage. Annual compensation is calculated by EDD by multiplying hourly wages by 40 hours per work week by 52 weeks.
Occupation percentages are based on the 2020 National Industry - Specific Occupational Employment Survey compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Wages are
based on Occupational Employment Survey data applicable to San Bernardino County as of 2020 and are adjusted by EDD to the first quarter of 2021.
Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, California Employment Development Department
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Rancho Cucamonga Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; trb Page 494
APPENDIX D - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED WORKER OCCUPATION DISTRIBUTION, 2020
INDUSTRIAL WORKERS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Worker Occupation Distribution
Industrial
Major Occupations (2% or more)
Management Occupations 6.3%
Business and Financial Operations Occupations 4.3%
Computer and Mathematical Occupations 2.1%
Architecture and Engineering Occupations 3.7%
Sales and Related Occupations 10.5%
Office and Administrative Support Occupations 12.1%
Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Occupations 11.4%
Production Occupations 30.4%
Transportation and Material Moving Occupations 15.2%
All Other Worker Occupations - Industrial 4.1%
TOTAL 100.0%
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Rancho Cucamonga Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; trb
Page 495
APPENDIX D - TABLE 2
AVERAGE ANNUAL WORKER COMPENSATION AND ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD INCOME, 2021
INDUSTRIAL WORKER OCCUPATIONS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2021 Avg.% of Total % of Total
Worker One Two Three+Occupation Industrial
Occupation 3 Compensation1 Worker Workers Workers Group 2 Workers
Page 1 of 3
Management Occupations
Chief Executives $206,700 $219,000 $278,000 $285,000 2.2%0.1%
General and Operations Managers $120,600 $128,000 $184,000 $195,000 44.6%2.8%
Marketing Managers $132,100 $142,000 $191,000 $199,000 3.6%0.2%
Sales Managers $121,300 $129,000 $185,000 $196,000 10.0%0.6%
Administrative Services and Facilities Managers $105,100 $112,000 $161,000 $170,000 2.8%0.2%
Computer and Information Systems Managers $141,200 $152,000 $204,000 $213,000 3.5%0.2%
Financial Managers $131,300 $141,000 $190,000 $198,000 5.4%0.3%
Industrial Production Managers $110,300 $117,000 $168,000 $178,000 10.6%0.7%
Purchasing Managers $128,700 $138,000 $186,000 $194,000 2.0%0.1%
Transportation, Storage, and Distribution Managers $99,400 $106,000 $162,000 $179,000 2.8%0.2%
Architectural and Engineering Managers $163,300 $173,000 $219,000 $225,000 4.7%0.3%
Personal Service & Entertainment Managers, Except Gambling $119,600 $127,000 $183,000 $193,000 3.7%0.2%
Other Management Occupations $124,500 $133,000 $190,000 $201,000 4.2%0.3%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $124,500 $132,000 $186,000 $197,000 100.0%6.3%
Business and Financial Operations Occupations
Buyers and Purchasing Agents $63,500 $71,000 $111,000 $125,000 18.7%0.8%
Compliance Officers $76,700 $86,000 $134,000 $151,000 2.5%0.1%
Cost Estimators $71,200 $80,000 $124,000 $140,000 8.1%0.4%
Human Resources Specialists $68,700 $77,000 $120,000 $135,000 8.0%0.3%
Logisticians $80,800 $86,000 $131,000 $145,000 6.0%0.3%
Management Analysts $87,700 $94,000 $143,000 $158,000 4.1%0.2%
Training and Development Specialists $70,400 $79,000 $123,000 $139,000 3.4%0.1%
Market Research Analysts and Marketing Specialists $56,600 $65,000 $109,000 $127,000 11.5%0.5%
Project Management and Business Operations Specialists $74,300 $83,000 $130,000 $146,000 15.7%0.7%
Accountants and Auditors $76,200 $85,000 $133,000 $150,000 16.7%0.7%
Financial and Investment Analysts, and Financial Specialists $79,600 $89,000 $139,000 $157,000 2.8%0.1%
Other Business and Financial Operations Occupations $70,800 $79,000 $124,000 $139,000 2.5%0.1%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $70,800 $79,000 $124,000 $140,000 100.0%4.3%
Computer and Mathematical Occupations
Computer Systems Analysts $92,000 $98,000 $150,000 $166,000 9.8%0.2%
Computer Network Support Specialists $65,500 $73,000 $114,000 $129,000 4.1%0.1%
Computer User Support Specialists $63,000 $71,000 $110,000 $124,000 17.9%0.4%
Computer Network Architects $117,900 $126,000 $180,000 $190,000 2.7%0.1%
Network and Computer Systems Administrators $91,800 $98,000 $149,000 $165,000 8.8%0.2%
Database Administrators and Architects $103,500 $110,000 $158,000 $167,000 2.5%0.1%
Computer Programmers $92,500 $99,000 $150,000 $167,000 4.3%0.1%
Software Developers and Software Quality Assurance Analysts $104,600 $111,000 $160,000 $169,000 35.5%0.7%
Web Developers and Digital Interface Designers $69,400 $78,000 $121,000 $137,000 2.9%0.1%
Computer Occupations, All Other $83,000 $89,000 $135,000 $149,000 5.6%0.1%
Other Computer and Mathematical Occupations $89,900 $96,000 $146,000 $162,000 5.9%0.1%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $89,900 $97,000 $144,000 $157,000 100.0%2.1%
Household Income Estimate 4
Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, California Employment Development Department
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Rancho Cucamonga Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; trb Page 496
APPENDIX D - TABLE 2
AVERAGE ANNUAL WORKER COMPENSATION AND ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD INCOME, 2021
INDUSTRIAL WORKER OCCUPATIONS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2021 Avg.% of Total % of Total
Worker One Two Three+Occupation Industrial
Occupation 3 Compensation1 Worker Workers Workers Group 2 Workers
Household Income Estimate 4
Page 2 of 3
Architecture and Engineering Occupations
Aerospace Engineers $119,300 $127,000 $182,000 $192,000 3.2%0.1%
Electrical Engineers $102,300 $109,000 $156,000 $165,000 8.7%0.3%
Electronics Engineers, Except Computer $117,600 $125,000 $180,000 $190,000 4.9%0.2%
Industrial Engineers $84,000 $90,000 $137,000 $151,000 24.4%0.9%
Mechanical Engineers $92,600 $99,000 $150,000 $167,000 19.3%0.7%
Engineers, All Other $99,600 $106,000 $162,000 $179,000 5.5%0.2%
Mechanical Drafters $64,700 $72,000 $113,000 $127,000 3.6%0.1%
Electrical Engineering Technologists and Technicians $76,700 $86,000 $134,000 $151,000 5.8%0.2%
Industrial Engineering Technologists and Technicians $74,200 $83,000 $129,000 $146,000 5.1%0.2%
Mechanical Engineering Technologists and Technicians $60,200 $67,000 $105,000 $119,000 2.5%0.1%
Calibration and Engineering Technicians, Except Drafters $81,600 $87,000 $133,000 $147,000 3.2%0.1%
Other Architecture and Engineering Occupations $89,400 $95,000 $145,000 $161,000 13.8%0.5%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $89,400 $96,000 $145,000 $159,000 100.0%3.7%
Sales and Related Occupations
First-Line Supervisors of Non-Retail Sales Workers $72,200 $81,000 $126,000 $142,000 4.6%0.5%
Cashiers $32,800 $41,000 $76,000 $100,000 3.3%0.3%
Counter and Rental Clerks $41,600 $49,000 $85,000 $104,000 4.0%0.4%
Parts Salespersons $41,700 $49,000 $85,000 $105,000 7.1%0.7%
Retail Salespersons $35,500 $45,000 $82,000 $108,000 6.5%0.7%
Sales Reps of Services $66,900 $75,000 $117,000 $132,000 3.0%0.3%
Sales Reps, Wholesale & Manufacturing, Technical $104,400 $111,000 $159,000 $168,000 8.1%0.8%
Sales Reps, Wholesale and Manufacturing, Other $74,800 $84,000 $130,000 $147,000 57.3%6.0%
Other Sales and Related Occupations $68,800 $77,000 $120,000 $135,000 6.0%0.6%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $68,800 $77,000 $121,000 $138,000 100.0%10.5%
Office and Administrative Support Occupations
Supervisors of Office and Administrative Support Workers $63,300 $71,000 $110,000 $125,000 6.9%0.8%
Bookkeeping, Accounting, and Auditing Clerks $47,800 $56,000 $98,000 $120,000 12.2%1.5%
Customer Service Representatives $42,000 $49,000 $86,000 $105,000 16.3%2.0%
Order Clerks $40,900 $48,000 $84,000 $103,000 2.8%0.3%
Receptionists and Information Clerks $33,900 $43,000 $79,000 $103,000 2.0%0.2%
Production, Planning, and Expediting Clerks $52,100 $59,000 $100,000 $117,000 5.8%0.7%
Shipping, Receiving, and Inventory Clerks $37,900 $48,000 $88,000 $115,000 16.5%2.0%
Secretaries and Admin Assistants, Except Legal, Medical $44,800 $53,000 $92,000 $112,000 8.5%1.0%
Office Clerks, General $40,000 $47,000 $82,000 $100,000 19.7%2.4%
Other Office and Administrative Support Occupations $43,900 $52,000 $90,000 $110,000 9.3%1.1%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $43,900 $52,000 $90,000 $111,000 100.0%12.1%
Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Occupations
First-Line Supervisors of Mechanics, Installers, and Repairers $84,900 $91,000 $138,000 $153,000 8.2%0.9%
Computer, Automated Teller, and Office Machine Repairers $43,800 $51,000 $90,000 $110,000 2.5%0.3%
Automotive Body and Related Repairers $46,500 $55,000 $95,000 $117,000 9.3%1.1%
Automotive Service Technicians and Mechanics $51,200 $58,000 $99,000 $115,000 22.5%2.6%
Bus and Truck Mechanics and Diesel Engine Specialists $53,000 $60,000 $102,000 $119,000 7.6%0.9%
Mobile Heavy Equipment Mechanics, Except Engines $66,800 $75,000 $117,000 $132,000 3.6%0.4%
Heating, Air Conditioning, and Refrigeration Mechanics $53,400 $61,000 $103,000 $119,000 2.0%0.2%
Industrial Machinery Mechanics $66,500 $74,000 $116,000 $131,000 13.5%1.5%
Maintenance and Repair Workers, General $48,800 $57,000 $100,000 $123,000 9.2%1.1%
Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Workers, All Other $44,200 $52,000 $90,000 $111,000 3.2%0.4%
Other Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Occupations $56,700 $65,000 $109,000 $127,000 18.5%2.1%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $56,700 $64,000 $107,000 $124,000 100.0%11.4%
Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, California Employment Development Department
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Rancho Cucamonga Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; trb Page 497
APPENDIX D - TABLE 2
AVERAGE ANNUAL WORKER COMPENSATION AND ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD INCOME, 2021
INDUSTRIAL WORKER OCCUPATIONS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2021 Avg.% of Total % of Total
Worker One Two Three+Occupation Industrial
Occupation 3 Compensation1 Worker Workers Workers Group 2 Workers
Household Income Estimate 4
Page 3 of 3
Production Occupations
First-Line Supervisors of Production and Operating Workers $69,300 $78,000 $121,000 $136,000 7.2%2.2%
Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical Assemblers $37,600 $47,000 $87,000 $114,000 3.7%1.1%
Miscellaneous Assemblers and Fabricators $33,800 $42,000 $78,000 $103,000 15.5%4.7%
Bakers $34,400 $43,000 $80,000 $105,000 2.2%0.7%
Food Batchmakers $36,000 $45,000 $84,000 $110,000 2.3%0.7%
Cutting/Punching/Press Machine Setters, Operators/Tenders $39,000 $49,000 $91,000 $119,000 2.8%0.8%
Machinists $47,100 $55,000 $96,000 $118,000 6.4%2.0%
Welders, Cutters, Solderers, and Brazers $45,100 $53,000 $92,000 $113,000 4.5%1.4%
Cabinetmakers and Bench Carpenters $35,300 $44,000 $82,000 $107,000 2.6%0.8%
Inspectors, Testers, Sorters, Samplers, and Weighers $43,100 $51,000 $88,000 $108,000 5.7%1.7%
Packaging and Filling Machine Operators and Tenders $36,400 $46,000 $85,000 $111,000 4.3%1.3%
Coating/Painting/Spraying Machine Setters, Operators/Tenders $38,100 $48,000 $88,000 $116,000 2.5%0.7%
Computer Numerically Controlled Tool Operators $41,500 $49,000 $85,000 $104,000 2.9%0.9%
Helpers--Production Workers $33,900 $43,000 $79,000 $103,000 2.6%0.8%
Other Production Occupations $41,900 $49,000 $86,000 $105,000 34.7%10.5%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $41,900 $50,000 $88,000 $110,000 100.0%30.4%
Transportation and Material Moving Occupations
Supervisors of Transportation & Material Moving Workers $61,800 $69,000 $108,000 $122,000 5.3%0.8%
Heavy and Tractor-Trailer Truck Drivers $54,700 $62,000 $105,000 $122,000 13.9%2.1%
Light Truck Drivers $47,800 $56,000 $98,000 $120,000 9.8%1.5%
Automotive and Watercraft Service Attendants $35,000 $44,000 $81,000 $106,000 2.4%0.4%
Industrial Truck and Tractor Operators $40,600 $48,000 $83,000 $102,000 7.9%1.2%
Cleaners of Vehicles and Equipment $32,700 $41,000 $76,000 $99,000 10.4%1.6%
Laborers and Freight, Stock, and Material Movers, Hand $36,500 $46,000 $85,000 $111,000 28.2%4.3%
Packers and Packagers, Hand $30,500 $38,000 $71,000 $93,000 6.1%0.9%
Stockers and Order Fillers $35,200 $44,000 $82,000 $107,000 10.5%1.6%
Other Transportation and Material Moving Occupations $41,100 $48,000 $84,000 $103,000 5.7%0.9%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $41,100 $49,000 $88,000 $110,000 100.0%15.2%
95.9%
1
2
3 Including occupations representing 2% or more of the major occupation group.
4
The methodology utilized by the California Employment Development Department (EDD) assumes hourly paid employees are employed full-time. EDD data is adjusted by
KMA to reflect the State minimum wage. Annual compensation is calculated by EDD by multiplying hourly wages by 40 hours per work week by 52 weeks.
Occupation percentages are based on the 2020 National Industry - Specific Occupational Employment Survey compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Wages are
based on Occupational Employment Survey data applicable to San Bernardino County as of 2020 and are adjusted by EDD to the first quarter of 2021.
Household income estimated based average worker compensation and ratios between employee income and household income identified in Appendix G - Table 1.
Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, California Employment Development Department
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Rancho Cucamonga Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; trb Page 498
APPENDIX E - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED WORKER OCCUPATION DISTRIBUTION, 2020
WAREHOUSE WORKERS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Worker Occupation Distribution
Warehouse
Major Occupations (2% or more)
Management Occupations 2.4%
Business and Financial Operations Occupations 2.1%
Office and Administrative Support Occupations 12.4%
Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Occupations 2.6%
Transportation and Material Moving Occupations 74.9%
All Other Worker Occupations - Warehouse 5.7%
TOTAL 100.0%
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Rancho Cucamonga Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; trb
Page 499
APPENDIX E - TABLE 2
AVERAGE ANNUAL WORKER COMPENSATION AND ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD INCOME, 2021
WAREHOUSE WORKER OCCUPATIONS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2021 Avg.% of Total % of Total
Worker One Two Three+Occupation Warehouse
Occupation 3 Compensation1 Worker Workers Workers Group 2 Workers
Page 1 of 2
Management Occupations
General and Operations Managers $120,600 $128,000 $184,000 $195,000 33.3%0.8%
Sales Managers $121,300 $129,000 $185,000 $196,000 3.6%0.1%
Administrative Services and Facilities Managers $105,100 $112,000 $161,000 $170,000 4.4%0.1%
Computer and Information Systems Managers $141,200 $152,000 $204,000 $213,000 2.2%0.1%
Financial Managers $131,300 $141,000 $190,000 $198,000 2.5%0.1%
Transportation, Storage, and Distribution Managers $99,400 $106,000 $162,000 $179,000 39.9%1.0%
Human Resources Managers $121,800 $130,000 $186,000 $197,000 3.1%0.1%
Personal Service, Entertainment and Recreation Managers $119,600 $127,000 $183,000 $193,000 3.5%0.1%
Other Management Occupations $111,500 $119,000 $170,000 $180,000 7.6%0.2%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $111,500 $119,000 $174,000 $187,000 100.0%2.4%
Business and Financial Operations Occupations
Buyers and Purchasing Agents $63,500 $71,000 $111,000 $125,000 10.0%0.2%
Compliance Officers $76,700 $86,000 $134,000 $151,000 2.3%0.0%
Human Resources Specialists $68,700 $77,000 $120,000 $135,000 14.9%0.3%
Logisticians $80,800 $86,000 $131,000 $145,000 13.6%0.3%
Management Analysts $87,700 $94,000 $143,000 $158,000 2.5%0.1%
Training and Development Specialists $70,400 $79,000 $123,000 $139,000 20.0%0.4%
Market Research Analysts and Marketing Specialists $56,600 $65,000 $109,000 $127,000 3.7%0.1%
Project Management and Business Ops Specialists $74,300 $83,000 $130,000 $146,000 20.6%0.4%
Accountants and Auditors $76,200 $85,000 $133,000 $150,000 9.0%0.2%
Other Business and Financial Operations Occupations $72,300 $81,000 $126,000 $142,000 3.5%0.1%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $72,300 $80,000 $125,000 $141,000 100.0%2.1%
Office and Administrative Support Occupations
First-Line Supervisors of Office and Admin Support Workers $63,300 $71,000 $110,000 $125,000 11.8%1.5%
Bookkeeping, Accounting, and Auditing Clerks $47,800 $56,000 $98,000 $120,000 2.0%0.2%
Customer Service Representatives $42,000 $49,000 $86,000 $105,000 13.0%1.6%
Order Clerks $40,900 $48,000 $84,000 $103,000 5.7%0.7%
Production, Planning, and Expediting Clerks $52,100 $59,000 $100,000 $117,000 7.1%0.9%
Shipping, Receiving, and Inventory Clerks $37,900 $48,000 $88,000 $115,000 33.9%4.2%
Weighers, Measurers, Checkers, Samplers, Recordkeeping $38,600 $49,000 $90,000 $117,000 7.3%0.9%
Secretaries & Admin Assistants, Except Legal, Medical, Executive $44,800 $53,000 $92,000 $112,000 3.3%0.4%
Office Clerks, General $40,000 $47,000 $82,000 $100,000 7.3%0.9%
Other Office and Administrative Support Occupations $43,700 $51,000 $89,000 $110,000 8.6%1.1%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $43,700 $52,000 $91,000 $113,000 100.0%12.4%
Household Income Estimate 4
Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, California Employment Development Department
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Rancho Cucamonga Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; trb Page 500
APPENDIX E - TABLE 2
AVERAGE ANNUAL WORKER COMPENSATION AND ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD INCOME, 2021
WAREHOUSE WORKER OCCUPATIONS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2021 Avg.% of Total % of Total
Worker One Two Three+Occupation Warehouse
Occupation 3 Compensation1 Worker Workers Workers Group 2 Workers
Household Income Estimate 4
Page 2 of 2
Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Occupations
First-Line Supervisors of Mechanics, Installers, and Repairers $84,900 $91,000 $138,000 $153,000 9.0%0.2%
Bus and Truck Mechanics and Diesel Engine Specialists $53,000 $60,000 $102,000 $119,000 6.2%0.2%
Industrial Machinery Mechanics $66,500 $74,000 $116,000 $131,000 3.0%0.1%
Maintenance Workers, Machinery $56,900 $65,000 $109,000 $127,000 2.8%0.1%
Maintenance and Repair Workers, General $48,800 $57,000 $100,000 $123,000 63.9%1.6%
Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Workers, All Other $44,200 $52,000 $90,000 $111,000 2.7%0.1%
Other Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Occupations $53,500 $61,000 $103,000 $120,000 12.5%0.3%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $53,500 $61,000 $104,000 $125,000 100.0%2.6%
Transportation and Material Moving Occupations
Supervisors of Transportation and Material Moving Workers $61,800 $69,000 $108,000 $122,000 4.6%3.5%
Heavy and Tractor-Trailer Truck Drivers $54,700 $62,000 $105,000 $122,000 6.6%5.0%
Industrial Truck and Tractor Operators $40,600 $48,000 $83,000 $102,000 20.5%15.3%
Laborers and Freight, Stock, and Material Movers, Hand $36,500 $46,000 $85,000 $111,000 31.1%23.3%
Packers and Packagers, Hand $30,500 $38,000 $71,000 $93,000 7.3%5.5%
Stockers and Order Fillers $35,200 $44,000 $82,000 $107,000 25.5%19.1%
Other Transportation and Material Moving Occupations $39,100 $49,000 $91,000 $119,000 4.4%3.3%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $39,100 $48,000 $85,000 $108,000 100.0%74.9%
94.3%
1
2
3 Including occupations representing 2% or more of the major occupation group.
4
The methodology utilized by the California Employment Development Department (EDD) assumes hourly paid employees are employed full-time. EDD data is adjusted
by KMA to reflect the State minimum wage. Annual compensation is calculated by EDD by multiplying hourly wages by 40 hours per work week by 52 weeks.
Occupation percentages are based on the 2020 National Industry - Specific Occupational Employment Survey compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Wages are
based on Occupational Employment Survey data applicable to San Bernardino County as of 2020 and are adjusted by EDD to the first quarter of 2021.
Household income estimated based average worker compensation and ratios between employee income and household income identified in Appendix G - Table 1.
Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, California Employment Development Department
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Rancho Cucamonga Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; trb Page 501
APPENDIX F - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED WORKER OCCUPATION DISTRIBUTION, 2020
R&D WORKERS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Worker Occupation Distribution
R&D
Major Occupations (2% or more)
Management Occupations 17.4%
Business and Financial Operations Occupations 10.7%
Computer and Mathematical Occupations 12.9%
Architecture and Engineering Occupations 13.9%
Life, Physical, and Social Science Occupations 25.5%
Healthcare Practitioners and Technical Occupations 2.5%
Office and Administrative Support Occupations 7.4%
All Other Worker Occupations - R&D 9.6%
TOTAL 100.0%
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Rancho Cucamonga Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; trb
Page 502
APPENDIX F - TABLE 2
AVERAGE ANNUAL WORKER COMPENSATION AND ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD INCOME, 2021
R&D WORKER OCCUPATIONS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2021 Avg.% of Total % of Total
Worker One Two Three+Occupation R&D
Occupation 3 Compensation1 Worker Workers Workers Group 2 Workers
Page 1 of 3
Management Occupations
Chief Executives $206,700 $219,000 $278,000 $285,000 2.1%0.4%
General and Operations Managers $120,600 $128,000 $184,000 $195,000 15.5%2.7%
Marketing Managers $132,100 $142,000 $191,000 $199,000 4.7%0.8%
Sales Managers $121,300 $129,000 $185,000 $196,000 2.8%0.5%
Administrative Services and Facilities Managers $105,100 $112,000 $161,000 $170,000 3.6%0.6%
Computer and Information Systems Managers $141,200 $152,000 $204,000 $213,000 8.7%1.5%
Financial Managers $131,300 $141,000 $190,000 $198,000 6.2%1.1%
Industrial Production Managers $110,300 $117,000 $168,000 $178,000 3.4%0.6%
Human Resources Managers $121,800 $130,000 $186,000 $197,000 2.3%0.4%
Architectural and Engineering Managers $163,300 $173,000 $219,000 $225,000 9.0%1.6%
Medical and Health Services Managers $131,400 $141,000 $190,000 $198,000 4.6%0.8%
Natural Sciences Managers $153,800 $163,000 $207,000 $212,000 21.7%3.8%
Personal Service Managers; Entertainment & Rec Managers $119,600 $127,000 $183,000 $193,000 10.0%1.7%
Other Management Occupations $136,900 $147,000 $198,000 $207,000 5.4%0.9%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $136,900 $146,000 $196,000 $204,000 100.0%17.4%
Business and Financial Operations Occupations
Buyers and Purchasing Agents $63,500 $71,000 $111,000 $125,000 6.5%0.7%
Compliance Officers $76,700 $86,000 $134,000 $151,000 9.8%1.1%
Human Resources Specialists $68,700 $77,000 $120,000 $135,000 7.3%0.8%
Logisticians $80,800 $86,000 $131,000 $145,000 4.2%0.5%
Management Analysts $87,700 $94,000 $143,000 $158,000 7.1%0.8%
Training and Development Specialists $70,400 $79,000 $123,000 $139,000 4.0%0.4%
Market Research Analysts and Marketing Specialists $56,600 $65,000 $109,000 $127,000 7.6%0.8%
Project Management and Business Ops Specialists $74,300 $83,000 $130,000 $146,000 33.7%3.6%
Accountants and Auditors $76,200 $85,000 $133,000 $150,000 11.1%1.2%
Financial, Investment, Risk Specialists $79,600 $89,000 $139,000 $157,000 3.8%0.4%
Other Business and Financial Operations Occupations $73,500 $82,000 $128,000 $145,000 4.8%0.5%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $73,500 $82,000 $128,000 $144,000 100.0%10.7%
Computer and Mathematical Occupations
Computer Systems Analysts $92,000 $98,000 $150,000 $166,000 11.2%1.4%
Information Security Analysts $125,000 $134,000 $181,000 $189,000 4.6%0.6%
Computer and Information Research Scientists $114,700 $122,000 $175,000 $185,000 6.0%0.8%
Computer User Support Specialists $63,000 $71,000 $110,000 $124,000 4.2%0.5%
Computer Network Architects $117,900 $126,000 $180,000 $190,000 4.5%0.6%
Network and Computer Systems Administrators $91,800 $98,000 $149,000 $165,000 5.9%0.8%
Database Administrators and Architects $103,500 $110,000 $158,000 $167,000 2.8%0.4%
Computer Programmers $92,500 $99,000 $150,000 $167,000 4.1%0.5%
Software Developers & Software Quality Assurance Analysts $104,600 $111,000 $160,000 $169,000 35.5%4.6%
Computer Occupations, All Other $83,000 $89,000 $135,000 $149,000 5.6%0.7%
Operations Research Analysts $92,800 $99,000 $151,000 $167,000 3.2%0.4%
Statisticians $86,600 $92,000 $141,000 $156,000 6.3%0.8%
Data Scientists and Mathematical Science Occupations, All Other $118,500 $126,000 $181,000 $191,000 3.2%0.4%
Other Computer and Mathematical Occupations $99,900 $107,000 $162,000 $180,000 3.0%0.4%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $99,900 $107,000 $156,000 $168,000 100.0%12.9%
Household Income Estimate 4
Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, California Employment Development Department
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Rancho Cucamonga Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; trb Page 503
APPENDIX F - TABLE 2
AVERAGE ANNUAL WORKER COMPENSATION AND ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD INCOME, 2021
R&D WORKER OCCUPATIONS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2021 Avg.% of Total % of Total
Worker One Two Three+Occupation R&D
Occupation 3 Compensation1 Worker Workers Workers Group 2 Workers
Household Income Estimate 4
Page 2 of 3
Architecture and Engineering Occupations
Aerospace Engineers $119,300 $127,000 $182,000 $192,000 4.9%0.7%
Bioengineers and Biomedical Engineers $99,500 $106,000 $162,000 $179,000 3.2%0.4%
Chemical Engineers $87,600 $93,000 $142,000 $158,000 2.7%0.4%
Computer Hardware Engineers $117,600 $125,000 $180,000 $190,000 6.2%0.9%
Electrical Engineers $102,300 $109,000 $156,000 $165,000 8.7%1.2%
Electronics Engineers, Except Computer $117,600 $125,000 $180,000 $190,000 6.4%0.9%
Industrial Engineers $84,000 $90,000 $137,000 $151,000 8.5%1.2%
Mechanical Engineers $92,600 $99,000 $150,000 $167,000 16.3%2.3%
Nuclear Engineers $99,500 $106,000 $162,000 $179,000 2.7%0.4%
Engineers, All Other $99,600 $106,000 $162,000 $179,000 12.4%1.7%
Electrical and Electronic Engineering Technologists and Technicians $76,700 $86,000 $134,000 $151,000 4.3%0.6%
Mechanical Engineering Technologists and Technicians $60,200 $67,000 $105,000 $119,000 2.7%0.4%
Other Architecture and Engineering Occupations $97,900 $104,000 $159,000 $176,000 21.1%2.9%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $97,900 $105,000 $157,000 $171,000 100.0%13.9%
Life, Physical, and Social Science Occupations
Biochemists and Biophysicists $76,200 $85,000 $133,000 $150,000 10.8%2.8%
Microbiologists $76,200 $85,000 $133,000 $150,000 3.7%0.9%
Biological Scientists, All Other $76,200 $85,000 $133,000 $150,000 6.5%1.7%
Medical Scientists, Except Epidemiologists $112,000 $119,000 $171,000 $181,000 28.4%7.2%
Physicists $123,100 $131,000 $188,000 $199,000 3.0%0.8%
Chemists $90,300 $96,000 $147,000 $163,000 6.7%1.7%
Social Science Research Assistants $51,600 $59,000 $99,000 $115,000 3.0%0.8%
Life, Physical, and Social Science Technicians, All Other $57,600 $66,000 $111,000 $129,000 4.6%1.2%
Other Life, Physical, and Social Science Occupations $92,600 $99,000 $150,000 $167,000 33.3%8.5%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $92,600 $100,000 $150,000 $165,000 100.0%25.5%
Healthcare Practitioners and Technical Occupations
Physician Assistants $142,100 $153,000 $206,000 $215,000 2.4%0.1%
Veterinarians $144,400 $155,000 $209,000 $218,000 2.2%0.1%
Registered Nurses $112,100 $119,000 $171,000 $181,000 17.6%0.4%
Nurse Practitioners $149,000 $160,000 $216,000 $225,000 3.4%0.1%
Physicians, All Other; and Ophthalmologists, Except Pediatric $216,300 $230,000 $290,000 $298,000 6.9%0.2%
Clinical Laboratory Technologists and Technicians $60,400 $68,000 $105,000 $119,000 39.2%1.0%
Veterinary Technologists and Technicians $39,600 $50,000 $92,000 $120,000 5.4%0.1%
Medical Dosimetrists, Records Specialists, Health Technologists $52,900 $60,000 $102,000 $118,000 4.6%0.1%
Health Info Technologists, Medical Registrars, Surgical Assistants $59,800 $68,000 $115,000 $134,000 3.9%0.1%
Other Healthcare Practitioners and Technical Occupations $89,900 $96,000 $146,000 $162,000 14.4%0.4%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $89,900 $98,000 $143,000 $157,000 100.0%2.5%
Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, California Employment Development Department
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Rancho Cucamonga Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; trb Page 504
APPENDIX F - TABLE 2
AVERAGE ANNUAL WORKER COMPENSATION AND ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD INCOME, 2021
R&D WORKER OCCUPATIONS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
2021 Avg.% of Total % of Total
Worker One Two Three+Occupation R&D
Occupation 3 Compensation1 Worker Workers Workers Group 2 Workers
Household Income Estimate 4
Page 3 of 3
Office and Administrative Support Occupations
Supervisors of Office and Admin Support Workers $63,300 $71,000 $110,000 $125,000 6.5%0.5%
Bookkeeping, Accounting, and Auditing Clerks $47,800 $56,000 $98,000 $120,000 6.4%0.5%
Customer Service Representatives $42,000 $49,000 $86,000 $105,000 5.8%0.4%
Production, Planning, and Expediting Clerks $52,100 $59,000 $100,000 $117,000 5.2%0.4%
Shipping, Receiving, and Inventory Clerks $37,900 $48,000 $88,000 $115,000 3.0%0.2%
Executive Secretaries and Executive Administrative Assistants $67,800 $76,000 $118,000 $133,000 17.6%1.3%
Secretaries & Admin Assistants, Except Legal, Medical, Executive $44,800 $53,000 $92,000 $112,000 20.5%1.5%
Office Clerks, General $40,000 $47,000 $82,000 $100,000 19.7%1.5%
Other Office and Administrative Support Occupations $50,100 $57,000 $96,000 $112,000 15.3%1.1%
Weighted Mean Annual Wage $50,100 $58,000 $97,000 $115,000 100.0%7.4%
90.4%
1
2
3 Including occupations representing 2% or more of the major occupation group.
4
The methodology utilized by the California Employment Development Department (EDD) assumes hourly paid employees are employed full-time. EDD data is adjusted by KMA
to reflect the State minimum wage. Annual compensation is calculated by EDD by multiplying hourly wages by 40 hours per work week by 52 weeks.
Occupation percentages are based on the 2020 National Industry - Specific Occupational Employment Survey compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Wages are based on
Occupational Employment Survey data applicable to San Bernardino County as of 2020 and are adjusted by EDD to the first quarter of 2021.
Household income estimated based average worker compensation and ratios between employee income and household income identified in Appendix G - Table 1.
Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, California Employment Development Department
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Rancho Cucamonga Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; trb Page 505
APPENDIX G
HOUSEHOLD SIZE RATIOS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Page 506
APPENDIX G - TABLE 1
RATIO OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME TO INDIVIDUAL WORKER INCOME
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Income Range
($thousands)One Two Three or More
25-30 1.30 2.56 3.56
30-40 1.26 2.32 3.04
40-50 1.17 2.04 2.51
50-60 1.14 1.92 2.24
60-80 1.12 1.74 1.97
80-100 1.07 1.63 1.80
100-125 1.06 1.53 1.61
125-150 1.07 1.45 1.51
150-250 1.06 1.34 1.38
250+1.05 1.20 1.24
Source: KMA analysis of 2015 to 2019 American Community Survey Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) data
for San Bernardino County.
Number of Workers in Household
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\la-fs2\Employee\tbretz\My Documents\Rancho Cucamonga\Commercial Nexus Study\Nexus Models\Land Use Files\Rancho Cucamonga
Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; 10/5/2021; dd
Page 507
APPENDIX G - TABLE 2
PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLDS BY SIZE AND NO. OF WORKERS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
No. of Persons No. of Workers Percent of Total
in Household in Household Households
1 1 11.42%
2 1 13.15%
2 11.13%
3 1 8.75%
2 8.83%
3+2.46%
4 1 6.55%
2 7.44%
3+4.85%
5 1 4.31%
2 4.89%
3+3.19%
6 1 4.53%
2 5.15%
3+3.35%
Total 100.00%
Source: 2015-2019 American Community Survey.
Percent of Households by Size and No. of Workers
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, IMPLAN
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
\\la-fs2\Employee\tbretz\My Documents\Rancho Cucamonga\Commercial Nexus Study\Nexus Models\Land Use Files\Rancho Cucamonga
Land Use Files_10 5 21.xlsm; 10/5/2021; dd
Page 508
APPENDIX H
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS
Page 509
APPENDIX H - EXHIBIT 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
RENTAL AFFORDABILITY GAP SCENARIOS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY - AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: RC_Affordability Gap Analyses_8 2 21.xlsx; RC_Nexus Rental_TDC; trb Page 510
APPENDIX H - EXHIBIT 1 - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
RENTAL AFFORDABILITY GAP SCENARIOS
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY - AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I .Land Acquisition Costs 1 130,680 Sf Land $30 /Sf Land $3,920,000
II.Direct Costs
Site Improvement Costs 130,680 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $2,614,000
Surface Parking 2 144 Spaces $5,000 /Space 720,000
Building Costs 99,080 Sf GBA $160 /Sf Res GBA 15,853,000
Contractor Costs 3 20%Other Direct Costs 3,837,000
Total Direct Costs 99,080 Sf GBA $232 /Sf GBA $23,024,000
III.Indirect Costs
Arch, Eng, & Consulting 6.00%Direct Costs $1,381,000
Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 90 Units $20,000 /Unit 1,800,000
Taxes, Ins, Legal & Acctg 3.00%Direct Costs 691,000
Development Management 4.00%Direct Costs 921,000
Soft Cost Contingency Allowance 5.00%Other Indirect Costs 240,000
Total Indirect Costs $5,033,000
IV.Financing Costs
Land Carrying Costs 4 $3,920,000 Financed 5.50%Interest $377,000
Interest During Construction 5 $31,349,000 Financed 4.50%Interest 1,622,000
Financing Fees
Construction Loan $31,349,000 Financed 2.50 Points 784,000
Permanent Loan $20,377,000 Financed 2.50 Points 509,000
Total Financing Costs $3,292,000
V.Total Development Costs 90 Units $391,900 /Unit $35,269,000
1 Estimated based on a survey of recent residential land sales comparables.
2
3 Includes contractors' fees, general requirements, builder's risk insurance and a direct cost contingency allowance.
4 Based on an 18-month construction period and a 3-month absorption period with a 100% average outstanding balance.
5
The parking count is based on the assumption that the project applies for and receives a SB1818 density bonus.
Based on an 18-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance and a 3-month absorption period with a 100% average
outstanding balance.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: RC_Affordability Gap Analyses_8 2 21.xlsx; RC_Nexus Rental_TDC; trb Page 511
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY - AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS
APPENDIX H - EXHIBIT 2A
RENTAL AFFORDABILITY GAP SCENARIOS
RENTS @ 30% TCAC MEDIAN
4% TAX CREDIT SCENARIO
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: RC_Affordability Gap Analyses_8 2 21.xlsx; RC_Nexus_30% AMI; trb Page 512
APPENDIX H - EXHIBIT 2A - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED NET OPERATING INCOME
RENTS @ 30% TCAC MEDIAN
4% TAX CREDIT SCENARIO
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY - AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Rent @ 30% TCAC MEDIAN 1
Manager's Unit (Two-Bedroom)1 Unit 0 /Unit/Month $0
One-Bedroom Units 36 Units $351 /Unit/Month 151,600
Two-Bedroom Units 30 Units $408 /Unit/Month 146,900
Three-Bedroom Units 23 Units $454 /Unit/Month 125,300
Gross Rent Income $423,800
Laundry and Miscellaneous Income 90 Units $10 /Unit/Month 10,800
Gross Residential Income $434,600
(Less) Vacancy and Collection 5%Gross Residential Income (21,700)
Effective Gross Residential Income $412,900
II.Residential Operating Expenses 2 90 Units $5,400 /Unit/Year $486,000
III.Residential Net Operating Income ($73,100)
1
2
NET OPERATING INCOME: RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT
The affordable rents are based on 2021 rents published by TCAC and assume the deduction of the Housing Authority of the County of San Bernardino
utility allowance as of 10/1/2020.
Assumes the project will apply for a property tax exemption accorded to non-profit housing organizations for units rented to households earning less
than 80% of the Area Median Income.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: RC_Affordability Gap Analyses_8 2 21.xlsx; RC_Nexus_30% AMI; trb Page 513
APPENDIX H - EXHIBIT 2A - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED AFFORDABILITY GAP
RENTS @ 30% TCAC MEDIAN
4% TAX CREDIT SCENARIO
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY - AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Available Outside Funding Sources
A. Permanent Loan 1
Net Operating Income ($73,100)NOI (See Table 2)
Income Available for Mortgage 1.20 DCR ($60,917)Debt Service
Interest Rate 4.5%Interest 6.08%Mortgage Constant
Total Permanent Loan ($1,002,000)
B. Tax Credit Equity 2 $13,304,000
Total Outside Funding Sources $12,302,000
II.Affordability Gap Calculation
Total Outside Funding Sources $12,302,000
Less:
Total Development Costs (35,269,000)
Additional Developer Fee 3 (1,579,000)
Total Affordability Gap ($24,546,000)
90 Units ($272,700)/Unit
99,080 Sf GBA ($248)/Sf
1 Assumes a 30-year amortization period.
2
3
Assumes a 4.00% tax credit rate, a 130% difficult to develop premium, and a $0.90 tax credit equity rate.
Equal to the $2,500,000 maximum amount allowed by the tax credit qualified allocation plan minus the $921,000 Developer Fee included in the Total
Development Costs.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: RC_Affordability Gap Analyses_8 2 21.xlsx; RC_Nexus_30% AMI; trb Page 514
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY - AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS
APPENDIX H - EXHIBIT 2B
RENTAL AFFORDABILITY GAP SCENARIOS
RENTS @ 50% TCAC MEDIAN
4% TAX CREDIT SCENARIO
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: RC_Affordability Gap Analyses_8 2 21.xlsx; RC_Nexus_50% AMI; trb Page 515
APPENDIX H - EXHIBIT 2B - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED NET OPERATING INCOME
RENTS @ 50% TCAC MEDIAN
4% TAX CREDIT SCENARIO
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY - AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Rent @ 50% TCAC MEDIAN 1
Manager's Unit (Two-Bedroom)1 Unit $0 /Unit/Month $0
One-Bedroom Units 36 Units $647 /Unit/Month 279,500
Two-Bedroom Units 30 Units $763 /Unit/Month 274,700
Three-Bedroom Units 23 Units $865 /Unit/Month 238,700
Gross Rent Income $792,900
Laundry and Miscellaneous Income 90 Units $10 /Unit/Month 10,800
Gross Residential Income $803,700
(Less) Vacancy and Collection 5%Gross Residential Income (40,200)
Effective Gross Residential Income $763,500
II.Residential Operating Expenses 2 90 Units $5,400 /Unit/Year $486,000
III.Residential Net Operating Income $277,500
1
2
NET OPERATING INCOME: RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT
The affordable rents are based on 2021 rents published by TCAC and assume the deduction of the Housing Authority of the County of San Bernardino
utility allowance as of 10/1/2020.
Assumes the project will apply for a property tax exemption accorded to non-profit housing organizations for units rented to households earning less
than 80% of the Area Median Income.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: RC_Affordability Gap Analyses_8 2 21.xlsx; RC_Nexus_50% AMI; trb Page 516
APPENDIX H - EXHIBIT 2B - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED AFFORDABILITY GAP
RENTS @ 50% TCAC MEDIAN
4% TAX CREDIT SCENARIO
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY - AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Available Outside Funding Sources
A. Tax-Exempt Bond Financing 1
Net Operating Income $277,500 NOI (See Table 2)
Income Available for Mortgage 1.20 DCR $231,250 Debt Service
Interest Rate 4.5%Interest 6.08%Mortgage Constant
Total Tax-Exempt Bond Financing $3,803,000
B. Tax Credit Equity 2 $13,304,000
Total Outside Funding Sources $17,107,000
II.Affordability Gap Calculation
Total Outside Funding Sources $17,107,000
Less:
Total Development Costs (35,269,000)
Additional Developer Fee 3 (1,579,000)
Total Affordability Gap ($19,741,000)
90 Units ($219,300)/Unit
99,080 Sf GBA ($199)/Sf
1 Assumes a 30-year amortization period.
2
3
Assumes a 4.00% tax credit rate, a 130% difficult-to-develop premium, and a $0.90 tax credit equity rate.
Equal to the $2,500,000 maximum amount allowed by the tax credit qualified allocation plan minus the $921,000 Developer Fee included in the Total
Development Costs.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: RC_Affordability Gap Analyses_8 2 21.xlsx; RC_Nexus_50% AMI; trb Page 517
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY - AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS
APPENDIX H - EXHIBIT 2C
RENTAL AFFORDABILITY GAP SCENARIOS
RENTS @ 60% TCAC MEDIAN
4% TAX CREDIT SCENARIO
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: RC_Affordability Gap Analyses_8 2 21.xlsx; RC_Nexus_60% AMI; trb Page 518
APPENDIX H - EXHIBIT 2C - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED NET OPERATING INCOME
RENTS @ 60% TCAC MEDIAN
4% TAX CREDIT SCENARIO
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY - AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Rent @ 60% TCAC MEDIAN 1
Manager's Unit (Two-Bedroom)1 Unit $0 /Unit/Month $0
One-Bedroom Units 36 Units $795 /Unit/Month 343,400
Two-Bedroom Units 30 Units $941 /Unit/Month 338,800
Three-Bedroom Units 23 Units $1,071 /Unit/Month 295,600
Gross Rent Income $977,800
Laundry and Miscellaneous Income 90 Units $10 /Unit/Month 10,800
Gross Residential Income $988,600
(Less) Vacancy and Collection 5%Gross Residential Income (49,400)
Effective Gross Residential Income $939,200
II.Residential Operating Expenses 2 90 Units $5,400 /Unit/Year $486,000
III.Residential Net Operating Income $453,200
1
2
NET OPERATING INCOME: RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT
The affordable rents are based on 2021 rents published by TCAC and assume the deduction of the Housing Authority of the County of San Bernardino
utility allowance as of 10/1/2020.
Assumes the project will apply for a property tax exemption accorded to non-profit housing organizations for units rented to households earning less
than 80% of the Area Median Income.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: RC_Affordability Gap Analyses_8 2 21.xlsx; RC_Nexus_60% AMI; trb Page 519
APPENDIX H - EXHIBIT 2C - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED AFFORDABILITY GAP
RENTS @ 60% TCAC MEDIAN
4% TAX CREDIT SCENARIO
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY - AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Available Outside Funding Sources
A. Tax-Exempt Bond Financing 1
Net Operating Income $453,200 NOI (See Table 2)
Income Available for Mortgage 1.20 DCR $377,667 Debt Service
Interest Rate 4.5%Interest 6.08%Mortgage Constant
Total Tax-Exempt Bond Financing $6,211,000
B. Tax Credit Equity 2 $13,304,000
Total Outside Funding Sources $19,515,000
II.Affordability Gap Calculation
Total Outside Funding Sources $19,515,000
Less:
Total Development Costs (35,269,000)
Additional Developer Fee 3 (1,579,000)
Total Affordability Gap ($17,333,000)
90 Units ($192,600)/Unit
99,080 Sf GBA ($175)/Sf
1 Assumes a 30-year amortization period.
2
3
Assumes a 4.00% tax credit rate, a 130% difficult-to-develop premium, and a $0.90 tax credit equity rate.
Equal to the $2,500,000 maximum amount allowed by the tax credit qualified allocation plan minus the $921,000 Developer Fee included in the Total
Development Costs.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: RC_Affordability Gap Analyses_8 2 21.xlsx; RC_Nexus_60% AMI; trb Page 520
APPENDIX H - EXHIBIT 2D
RENTAL AFFORDABILITY GAP SCENARIOS
RENTS @ 80% TCAC MEDIAN
UNLEVERAGED SCENARIO
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY - AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: RC_Affordability Gap Analyses_8 2 21.xlsx; RC_Nexus_80% AMI; trb Page 521
APPENDIX H - EXHIBIT 2D - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED NET OPERATING INCOME
RENTS @ 80% TCAC MEDIAN
UNLEVERAGED SCENARIO
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY - AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Rent @ 80% TCAC MEDIAN 1
Manager's Unit (Two-Bedroom)1 Unit $0 /Unit/Month $0
One-Bedroom Units 36 Units $1,092 /Unit/Month 471,700
Two-Bedroom Units 30 Units $1,297 /Unit/Month 466,900
Three-Bedroom Units 23 Units $1,482 /Unit/Month 409,000
Gross Rent Income $1,347,600
Laundry and Miscellaneous Income 90 Units $10 /Unit/Month 10,800
Gross Residential Income $1,358,400
(Less) Vacancy and Collection 5%Gross Residential Income (67,900)
Effective Gross Residential Income $1,290,500
II.Residential Operating Expenses 2 90 Units $5,400 /Unit/Year $486,000
III.Residential Net Operating Income $804,500
1
2
NET OPERATING INCOME: RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT
The affordable rents are based on 2021 rents published by TCAC and assume the deduction of the Housing Authority of the County of San Bernardino
utility allowance as of 10/1/2020.
Assumes the project will apply for a property tax exemption accorded to non-profit housing organizations for units rented to households earning less
than 80% of the Area Median Income.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: RC_Affordability Gap Analyses_8 2 21.xlsx; RC_Nexus_80% AMI; trb Page 522
APPENDIX H - EXHIBIT 2D - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED AFFORDABILITY GAP
RENTS @ 80% TCAC MEDIAN
UNLEVERAGED SCENARIO
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY - AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Supportable Private Investment
Net Operating Income $804,500
Threshold Stabilized Return 1 6.50%
Total Supportable Private Investment $12,377,000
II.Affordability Gap Calculation
Total Supportable Private Investment $12,377,000
(Less) Total Development Costs (35,269,000)
Total Affordability Gap ($22,892,000)
90 Units ($254,400)/Unit
99,080 Sf GBA ($231)/Sf
1 Based on a 6.5% threshold return.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: RC_Affordability Gap Analyses_8 2 21.xlsx; RC_Nexus_80% AMI; trb Page 523
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY - AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS
APPENDIX H - EXHIBIT 2E
RENTAL AFFORDABILITY GAP SCENARIOS
RENTS @ 110% TCAC MEDIAN
UNLEVERAGED SCENARIO
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: RC_Affordability Gap Analyses_8 2 21.xlsx; RC_Nexus_110% AMI; trb Page 524
APPENDIX H - EXHIBIT 2E - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED NET OPERATING INCOME
RENTS @ 110% TCAC MEDIAN
UNLEVERAGED SCENARIO
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY - AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Rent @ 110% TCAC MEDIAN 1
Manager's Unit (Two-Bedroom)1 Unit $0 /Unit/Month $0
One-Bedroom Units 36 Units $1,535 /Unit/Month 663,100
Two-Bedroom Units 30 Units $1,829 /Unit/Month 658,400
Three-Bedroom Units 23 Units $2,097 /Unit/Month 578,800
Gross Rent Income $1,900,300
Laundry and Miscellaneous Income 90 Units $10 /Unit/Month 10,800
Gross Residential Income $1,911,100
(Less) Vacancy and Collection 5%Gross Residential Income (95,600)
Effective Gross Residential Income $1,815,500
II.Residential Operating Expenses
General Operating Expenses 90 Units $5,400 /Unit/Year $486,000
Property Taxes 90 Units $2,670 /Unit/Year 240,000
Total Residential Operating Expenses $726,000
III.Residential Net Operating Income $1,089,500
1
2 The residential property tax expense is estimated based on the residential NOI capitalized at a 5.0% rate, and a 1.10% property tax rate.
NET OPERATING INCOME: RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT
The affordable rents are based on 2021 rents published by TCAC and assume the deduction of the Housing Authority of the County of San Bernardino
utility allowance as of 10/1/2020.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: RC_Affordability Gap Analyses_8 2 21.xlsx; RC_Nexus_110% AMI; trb Page 525
APPENDIX H - EXHIBIT 2E - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED AFFORDABILITY GAP
RENTS @ 110% TCAC MEDIAN
UNLEVERAGED SCENARIO
NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS STUDY - AFFORDABILITY GAP ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Supportable Private Investment
Net Operating Income $1,089,500
Threshold Stabilized Return 1 6.50%
Total Supportable Private Investment $16,762,000
II.Affordability Gap Calculation
Total Supportable Private Investment $16,762,000
(Less) Total Development Costs (35,269,000)
Total Affordability Gap ($18,507,000)
90 Units ($205,600)/Unit
99,080 Sf GBA ($187)/Sf
1 Based on a 6.5% threshold return.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
File name: RC_Affordability Gap Analyses_8 2 21.xlsx; RC_Nexus_110% AMI; trb Page 526
FINANCIAL FEASIBLITY ANALYSIS OF
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEES
Prepared for:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Prepared by:
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
October 5, 2021
Page 527
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................1
A. Background .......................................................................................................................... 1
B. Non-Residential Linkage Fee Nexus Analysis ....................................................................... 1
C. Maximum Legally Supportable Non-Residential Linkage Fees ............................................ 2
D. Financially Feasible Non-Residential Linkage Fees .............................................................. 2
II. DETERMINATION OF NON-RESIDENTIAL LAND USE PROTOTYPES .................................................4
III. FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSES ...............................................................................................5
A. Common Assumptions ......................................................................................................... 6
B. Retail / Commercial Pro Forma Analyses (Attachment I) .................................................... 6
C. Office Pro Forma Analyses (Attachment II) ....................................................................... 10
D. Industrial Pro Forma Analyses (Attachment III) ................................................................. 13
E. Warehouse Pro Forma Analyses (Attachment IV) ............................................................. 17
F. Research and Development Pro Forma Analyses (Attachment V) .................................... 20
IV. CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................................................... 24
ATTACHMENTS
Summary Tables A & B: Summary of Financial Feasibility Analysis
Attachment I: Retail/Commercial Pro Forma Analyses
Attachment II: Office Pro Forma Analyses
Attachment III: Industrial Pro Forma Analyses
Attachment IV: Warehouse Pro Forma Analyses
Attachment V: Research and Development Pro Forma Analyses
Page 528
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 1
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
At your request, Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. (KMA) prepared a financial feasibility analysis
of proposed Non-Residential Linkage Fee amounts. This analysis is intended to assist the City of
Rancho Cucamonga (City) in evaluating the policy implications for establishing a Non-
Residential Linkage Fee Program. This analysis is intended to accompany the Non-Residential
Linkage Fee Nexus Study prepared by KMA.
A. Background
A Non-Residential Linkage Fee is an impact fee that is subject to the requirements imposed by
the Mitigation Fee Act. This means that the Non-Residential Linkage Fee must be directly tied
to the increased need for affordable housing that is created by the development of new non-
residential uses in a community. The fundamental concept is that the development of new
non-residential uses will generate new employment, and that a percentage of the new
employees will create an increased demand for affordable housing units.
The purpose of a Non-Residential Linkage Fee is to apportion the financial responsibility for a
part of the increased need for affordable housing to the non-residential uses that create that
additional demand. Non-Residential Linkage Fee revenue can only be used to meet the
community’s future needs for affordable housing. It is therefore necessary to identify the
nexus between new non-residential development and the increased need for affordable
housing.
It is important to note that Non-Residential Linkage Fee programs are more prevalent in
Northern California jurisdictions. Currently, only six Southern California jurisdictions have
enacted Non-Residential Linkage Fee programs. These jurisdictions are the Cities of Culver City,
Glendale, Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Santa Monica, and San Diego.
B. Non-Residential Linkage Fee Nexus Analysis
To adopt and implement a Non-Residential Linkage Fee program, it is necessary to document
the relationships among the following:
1. The construction of new non-residential uses;
2. The number and type of employees that work in the new non-residential uses; and
3. The increased demand for affordable housing.
Page 529
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 2
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
Jobs in non-residential projects cover a range in compensation levels, and the workers’
households range in size. As a result, housing needs are generated at all affordability levels. To
fulfill the Mitigation Fee Act requirements, a nexus analysis must be prepared that quantifies
the need for affordable housing created by each type of non-residential use.
C. Maximum Legally Supportable Non-Residential Linkage Fees
Based on the nexus analysis prepared by KMA, the maximum legally supportable Non-
Residential Linkage Fees for the five land uses are as follows:
Land Use
Fee Per Square Foot of
Gross Building Area
(GBA)
Retail / Commercial $157
Office $162
Industrial $127
Warehouse $37
Research and Development $53
D. Financially Feasible Non-Residential Linkage Fees
As indicated in the previous section, the nexus analysis establishes the maximum legally
supportable Non-Residential Linkage Fee levels. These amounts reflect the full cost associated
with fulfilling the need for affordable housing created by the new non-residential development.
However, this does not take into account the impact the Fee will have on the financial
feasibility of new development. It is important to establish a balance between the public policy
objectives and the economic impact that will be experienced by property owners and
developers.
To that end, KMA prepared the following financial feasibility analysis to assess the impact of
proposed Non-Residential Linkage Fee amounts on each non-residential land use.
The most common approach to establishing fee levels is based on comparing the Non-
Residential Linkage Fee against the development costs associated with each land use. This
approach facilitates an evaluation of whether the amount is likely to affect development
decisions.
Page 530
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 3
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
As such, KMA first prepared a base pro forma analysis of each land use prototype that does not
include a Non-Residential Linkage Fee. Next, KMA estimated a range of potential Non-
Residential Linkage Fees based on a percentage of total development costs ranging from 0.5%
to 3% of total development costs.
Non-Residential Linkage Fee Per SF as a Percentage of Development Costs (Base Scenario)
% Of Development Costs
Retail /
Commercial
Prototype
Office
Prototype
Industrial
Prototype
Warehouse
Prototype
Research and
Development
Prototype
0.5% of Development Costs $2.21 $1.98 $0.70 $0.66 $0.69
1.0% of Development Costs $4.41 $3.96 $1.39 $1.33 $1.38
1.5% of Development Costs $6.62 $5.95 $2.09 $1.99 $2.07
2.0% of Development Costs $8.82 $7.93 $2.78 $2.66 $2.76
2.5% of Development Costs $11.03 $9.91 $3.48 $3.32 $3.45
3.0% of Development Costs $13.23 $11.89 $4.17 $3.99 $4.14
Based on these estimates and discussions with City staff, KMA analyzed the impact on each
development prototype’s financial feasibility for the following Non-Residential Linkage Fee
amounts: $1 per square foot, $2 per square foot, and $3 per square foot.
For reference, to evaluate the financial feasibility of each fee amount, KMA set the threshold
return requirements for each development prototype as follows:
Threshold Return Requirements
Retail /
Commercial
Prototype
Office
Prototype
Industrial
Prototype
Warehouse
Prototype
Research and
Development
Prototype
Feasible Range (Green) ≥ 8.00% ≥ 9.00% ≥ 6.50% ≥ 6.50% ≥ 6.50%
Marginally Feasible Range (Yellow) 7.00% - 7.99% 8.00% - 8.99% 6.00% - 6.49% 6.00% - 6.49% 6.00% - 6.49%
Infeasible Range (Red) ≤ 6.99% ≤ 7.99% ≤ 5.99% ≤ 5.99% ≤ 5.99%
Page 531
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 4
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
The following table summarizes the results of the financial feasibility analysis:
Estimated Returns on Investment By Non-Residential Linkage Fee Amount
Retail /
Commercial
Prototype
Office
Prototype
Industrial
Prototype
Warehouse
Prototype
Research and
Development
Prototype
Base: No Linkage Fee 5.67% 3.40% 7.28% 8.16% 6.81%
Linkage Fee @ $1/SF 5.65% 3.39% 7.22% 8.10% 6.76%
Linkage Fee @ $2/SF 5.64% 3.38% 7.17% 8.03% 6.71%
Linkage Fee @ $3/SF 5.63% 3.37% 7.11% 7.97% 6.65%
II. DETERMINATION OF NON-RESIDENTIAL LAND USE PROTOTYPES
As indicated in the previous section, the nexus analysis establishes the maximum legally
supportable Non-Residential Linkage Fee levels. These amounts reflect the full cost associated
with fulfilling the need for affordable housing created by the new non-residential development.
However, this does not take into account the impact the Non-Residential Linkage Fee will have
on the financial feasibility of new development. It is important to establish a balance between
the public policy objectives and the economic impact that will be experienced by property
owners and developers.
Based on a review of development project information provided by City staff, KMA prepared
pro forma analyses for five non-residential prototypical projects representative of non-
residential product types anticipated to be developed in Rancho Cucamonga in the near-term.
These prototypes are utilized as the basis for which to test the impact of potential linkage fees
on financial feasibility. KMA analyzed the following non-residential land uses:
1. Retail / Commercial Prototype
2. Office Prototype
3. Industrial Prototype
4. Warehouse Prototype
Page 532
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 5
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
5. Research and Development (R&D) Prototype
The scope of development for each prototype is as follows:
Scopes of Development
Retail /
Commercial
Prototype
Office
Prototype
Industrial
Prototype
Warehouse
Prototype
Research and
Development
Prototype
Site Area (SF) 45,000 60,000 250,000 250,000 200,000
Gross Building Area (SF) 12,000 28,750 100,000 100,000 100,000
FAR 0.27 0.48 0.40 0.40 0.50
Number of Parking Spaces 84 115 210 64 300
III. FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSES
KMA prepared pro forma analyses for each of the five development prototypes summarized
above. The KMA pro forma analyses are described in the following sections of this
memorandum. The analyses are presented in Attachments I – V – Appendices A – D. Each pro
forma is organized as follows:
Table 1: Estimated Development Costs
Table 2: Estimated Stabilized Net Operating Income and Return on Investment
For each of the five development prototypes, KMA first prepared a pro forma analysis of a Base
Scenario, which does not include a Non-Residential Linkage Fee (Attachments I – V – Appendix
A). This Base Scenario was utilized to estimate a range of potential Non-Residential Linkage Fee
amounts that could be charged to each land use (based on a percentage of total development
costs).
Upon identification of a range of potential Non-Residential Linkage Fee amounts, KMA worked
with City staff to define specific fee amounts for financial feasibility testing. In the subsequent
pro forma analyses (Attachments I – V – Appendices B – D), KMA analyzed the impact of
imposing these specific Non-Residential Linkage Fee amounts on the financial feasibility of each
development prototype.
Page 533
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 6
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
The following sections describe the assumptions utilized in the KMA pro forma analyses.
A. Common Assumptions
A number of assumptions are applied throughout the analyses of the five development
prototypes. These common assumptions are:
Direct Construction Costs
1. The site acquisition costs are estimated at $20 per square foot of land area based on a
review of land sales comparables researched by KMA.
2. It is assumed that each development prototype will consist of surface parking. The
parking costs are estimated at $2,500 per surface parking space.
3. The contractor costs, inclusive of overhead, profit, general conditions, builder’s risk
insurance and direct cost contingency allowance, are estimated at 20% of the other
indirect costs.
Indirect Construction Costs
1. The taxes, insurance, legal and accounting costs are estimated at 3% of direct costs.
2. The development management fee is set at 4% of direct costs.
3. A soft cost contingency allowance equal to 5% of other indirect costs is provided.
Financing Costs
1. The construction loan interest rate is set at 4.5%.
2. The permanent loan financing fees are set at 2.50 points.
B. Retail / Commercial Pro Forma Analyses (Attachment I)
The following summarizes the pro forma analyses prepared for the Retail/Commercial
Prototype.
Page 534
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 7
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
Estimated Development Costs
The following summarizes the development cost assumptions utilized for the
Retail/Commercial Prototype:
1. The site improvement costs are estimated at $7 per square foot of land area.
2. The building costs are estimated at $150 per square foot of retail/commercial GBA.
3. The tenant improvement costs are estimated at $30 per square foot of
retail/commercial GBA.
4. The architecture, engineering and consulting costs are estimated at 6% of direct costs.
5. Per discussions with City staff, KMA estimated the public permits and fees at $25 per
square foot of retail/commercial GBA.
6. The marketing and leasing costs are estimated at $6.00 per square foot of
retail/commercial GBA.
As such, KMA estimates the Retail/Commercial Prototype’s total development costs for the
Base Scenario as follows:
Retail / Commercial Prototype
Total Development Costs Base Scenario
Total Acquisition Costs $900,000
Total Direct Costs 3,150,000
Total Indirect Costs 821,000
Total Financing Costs 421,000
Total Development Costs $5,292,000
Per SF Retail/Commercial GBA $441
Potential Non-Residential Linkage Fees
To estimate the potential Non-Residential Linkage Fees that could be applied to
retail/commercial land uses, KMA calculated a range of fee amounts based on between 0.5% -
Page 535
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 8
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
3.0% of the Base Scenario’s total development costs. The following table summarizes the range
of potential Non-Residential Linkage Fees:
Retail / Commercial Land Use
% of Total Development Costs
Non-Residential
Linkage Fee Per SF GBA
0.5% of Total Development Costs $2.21 / SF
1.0% of Total Development Costs $4.41 / SF
1.5% of Total Development Costs $6.62 / SF
2.0% of Total Development Costs $8.82 / SF
2.5% of Total Development Costs $11.03 / SF
3.0% of Total Development Costs $13.23 / SF
Estimated Net Operating Income
The Retail/Commercial Prototype’s net operating income (NOI) is estimated based on the
following:
1. The retail/commercial lease rate is set at $27 per square foot per year, which equates to
$2.25 per square foot per month and assumes a NNN lease.
2. The common area maintenance (CAM) reimbursements are estimated at $10 per square
foot per year.
3. A vacancy and collection allowance is set at 5% of the gross retail/commercial income.
4. The CAM expenses are estimated at $10 per square foot per year.
5. The capital reserves are estimated at $0.15 per square foot per year.
The retail/commercial NOI is estimated at $300,000 as follows:
Page 536
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 9
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
Retail / Commercial NOI
Effective Gross Income $422,000
(Less) Operating Expenses (122,000)
Estimated Retail/Commercial NOI $300,000
Estimated Return on Investment of Base Scenario
The return on investment is estimated by dividing the NOI by the total development costs. As
such, the return on investment for the Base Scenario of the Retail/Commercial Prototype is
estimated as follows:
Retail / Commercial Return on Investment (Base Scenario)
Estimated Retail/Commercial NOI $300,000
Estimated Development Costs $5,292,000
Return on Investment – Retail/Commercial Prototype 5.7%
However, KMA estimates that a retail/commercial project would likely require a return on
investment of at least 8% to be financially feasible. The following table summarizes the likely
return on investment ranges to evaluate financial feasibility:
Feasibility Thresholds – Retail / Commercial Projects
Feasible Range 8.0% and Above
Marginally Feasible Range 7.00% - 7.99%
Infeasible Range 6.99% and Below
As such, KMA concludes that retail/commercial development projects are likely infeasible based
on current development costs and lease rates.
Page 537
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 10
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
Impacts on Financial Feasibility of Proposed Non-Residential Linkage Fee
Based on a review of potential Non-Residential Linkage Fee amounts, City staff requested that
KMA analyze the impacts on financial feasibility of Non-Residential Linkage Fees at: $1 per
square foot of GBA; $2 per square foot of GBA; and $3 per square foot of GBA. The following
table summarizes the results of these analyses:
Retail / Commercial Prototype
Non-Residential Linkage Fee Amount
Estimated Return
on Investment
Base Scenario: No Non-Residential Linkage Fee 5.67%
Non-Residential Linkage Fee at $1.00 per SF 5.65%
Non-Residential Linkage Fee at $2.00 per SF 5.64%
Non-Residential Linkage Fee at $3.00 per SF 5.63%
As such, the imposition of Non-Residential Linkage Fees on the Retail/Commercial Prototype
has a minimal impact on financial feasibility. However, it is important to note that
retail/commercial land uses are currently likely to be financially infeasible even without the
imposition of a Non-Residential Linkage Fee.
C. Office Pro Forma Analyses (Attachment II)
The following summarizes the pro forma analyses prepared for the Office Prototype.
Estimated Development Costs
The following summarizes the development cost assumptions utilized for the Office Prototype:
1. The site improvement costs are estimated at $7 per square foot of land area.
2. The building costs are estimated at $150 per square foot of office GBA.
3. The tenant improvement costs are estimated at $50 per square foot of office GBA.
4. The architecture, engineering and consulting costs are estimated at 6% of direct costs.
Page 538
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 11
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
5. Per discussions with City staff, KMA estimated the public permits and fees at $21 per
square foot of office GBA.
6. The marketing and leasing costs are estimated at $6.00 per square foot of office GBA.
As such, KMA estimates the Office Prototype’s total development costs for the Base Scenario as
follows:
Office Prototype
Total Development Costs Base Scenario
Total Acquisition Costs $1,200,000
Total Direct Costs 7,751,000
Total Indirect Costs 1,861,000
Total Financing Costs 584,000
Total Development Costs $11,396,000
Per SF Office GBA $396
Potential Non-Residential Linkage Fees
To estimate the potential Non-Residential Linkage Fees that could be applied to office land
uses, KMA calculated a range of fee amounts based on between 0.5% - 3.0% of the Base
Scenario’s total development costs. The following table summarizes the range of potential
Non-Residential Linkage Fees:
Office Land Use
% of Total Development Costs
Non-Residential
Linkage Fee Per SF GBA
0.5% of Total Development Costs $1.98 / SF
1.0% of Total Development Costs $3.96 / SF
1.5% of Total Development Costs $5.95 / SF
2.0% of Total Development Costs $7.93 / SF
2.5% of Total Development Costs $9.91 / SF
3.0% of Total Development Costs $11.89 / SF
Page 539
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 12
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
Estimated Net Operating Income
The Office Prototype’s NOI is estimated based on the following:
1. The office lease rate is set at $27 per square foot per year, which equates to $2.25 per
square foot per month and assumes a Full Service Gross lease.
2. A vacancy and collection allowance is set at 5% of the gross office income.
3. The operating expenses are estimated at $10 per square foot per year.
4. The capital reserves are estimated at $0.15 per square foot per year.
The office NOI is estimated at $387,000 as follows:
Office NOI
Effective Gross Income $641,000
(Less) Operating Expenses (254,000)
Estimated Office NOI $387,000
Estimated Return on Investment of Base Scenario
The return on investment is estimated by dividing the NOI by the total development costs. As
such, the return on investment for the Base Scenario of the Office Prototype is estimated as
follows:
Office Return on Investment (Base Scenario)
Estimated Office NOI $387,000
Estimated Development Costs $11,396,000
Return on Investment – Office Prototype 3.4%
However, KMA estimates that an office project would likely require a return on investment of
at least 9% to be financially feasible. The following table summarizes the likely return on
investment ranges to evaluate financial feasibility:
Page 540
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 13
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
Feasibility Thresholds – Office Projects
Feasible Range 9.0% and Above
Marginally Feasible Range 8.00% - 8.99%
Infeasible Range 7.99% and Below
As such, KMA concludes that office development projects are likely infeasible based on current
development costs and lease rates.
Impacts on Financial Feasibility of Proposed Non-Residential Linkage Fee
Based on a review of potential Non-Residential Linkage Fee amounts, City staff requested that
KMA analyze the impacts on financial feasibility of Non-Residential Linkage Fees at: $1 per
square foot of GBA; $2 per square foot of GBA; and $3 per square foot of GBA. The following
table summarizes the results of these analyses:
Office Prototype
Non-Residential Linkage Fee Amount
Estimated Return
on Investment
Base Scenario: No Non-Residential Linkage Fee 3.40%
Non-Residential Linkage Fee at $1.00 per SF 3.39%
Non-Residential Linkage Fee at $2.00 per SF 3.38%
Non-Residential Linkage Fee at $3.00 per SF 3.37%
As such, the imposition of Non-Residential Linkage Fees on the Office Prototype has a minimal
impact on financial feasibility. However, it is important to note that office land uses are
currently likely to be financially infeasible even without the imposition of a Non-Residential
Linkage Fee.
D. Industrial Pro Forma Analyses (Attachment III)
The following summarizes the pro forma analyses prepared for the Industrial Prototype.
Page 541
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 14
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
Estimated Development Costs
The following summarizes the development cost assumptions utilized for the Industrial
Prototype:
1. The site improvement costs are estimated at $3 per square foot of land area.
2. The building costs are estimated at $30 per square foot of industrial GBA.
3. The tenant improvement costs are estimated at $5 per square foot of industrial GBA.
4. The architecture, engineering and consulting costs are estimated at 3% of direct costs.
5. Per discussions with City staff, KMA estimated the public permits and fees at $13 per
square foot of industrial GBA.
6. The marketing and leasing costs are estimated at $3.00 per square foot of industrial
GBA.
As such, KMA estimates the Industrial Prototype’s total development costs for the Base
Scenario as follows:
Industrial Prototype
Total Development Costs Base Scenario
Total Acquisition Costs $5,000,000
Total Direct Costs 5,730,000
Total Indirect Costs 2,247,000
Total Financing Costs 926,000
Total Development Costs $13,903,000
Per SF Industrial GBA $139
Potential Non-Residential Linkage Fees
To estimate the potential Non-Residential Linkage Fees that could be applied to industrial land
uses, KMA calculated a range of fee amounts based on between 0.5% - 3.0% of the Base
Page 542
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 15
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
Scenario’s total development costs. The following table summarizes the range of potential
Non-Residential Linkage Fees:
Industrial Land Use
% of Total Development Costs
Non-Residential
Linkage Fee Per SF GBA
0.5% of Total Development Costs $0.70 / SF
1.0% of Total Development Costs $1.39 / SF
1.5% of Total Development Costs $2.09 / SF
2.0% of Total Development Costs $2.78 / SF
2.5% of Total Development Costs $3.48 / SF
3.0% of Total Development Costs $4.17 / SF
Estimated Net Operating Income
The Industrial Prototype’s NOI is estimated based on the following:
1. The industrial lease rate is set at $12 per square foot per year, which equates to $1.00
per square foot per month and assumes a Modified Gross lease.
2. The CAM reimbursements are set at $2.50 per square foot per year.
3. A vacancy and collection allowance is set at 5% of the gross industrial income.
4. The operating expenses are estimated at $3.50 per square foot per year.
5. The capital reserves are estimated at $0.15 per square foot per year.
The industrial NOI is estimated at $1.01 million as follows:
Industrial NOI
Effective Gross Income $1,377,000
(Less) Operating Expenses (365,000)
Estimated Industrial NOI $1,012,000
Page 543
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 16
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
Estimated Return on Investment of Base Scenario
The return on investment is estimated by dividing the NOI by the total development costs. As
such, the return on investment for the Base Scenario of the Industrial Prototype is estimated as
follows:
Industrial Return on Investment (Base Scenario)
Estimated Industrial NOI $1,012,000
Estimated Development Costs $13,903,000
Return on Investment – Industrial Prototype 7.3%
KMA estimates that an industrial project would likely require a return on investment of at least
6.50% to be financially feasible. The following table summarizes the likely return on investment
ranges to evaluate financial feasibility:
Feasibility Thresholds – Industrial Projects
Feasible Range 6.50% and Above
Marginally Feasible Range 6.00% - 6.49%
Infeasible Range 5.99% and Below
As such, KMA concludes that industrial development projects are financially feasible based on
current development costs and lease rates.
Impacts on Financial Feasibility of Proposed Non-Residential Linkage Fee
Based on a review of potential Non-Residential Linkage Fee amounts, City staff requested that
KMA analyze the impacts on financial feasibility of Non-Residential Linkage Fees at: $1 per
square foot of GBA; $2 per square foot of GBA; and $3 per square foot of GBA. The following
table summarizes the results of these analyses:
Page 544
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 17
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
Industrial Prototype
Non-Residential Linkage Fee Amount
Estimated Return
on Investment
Base Scenario: No Non-Residential Linkage Fee 7.28%
Non-Residential Linkage Fee at $1.00 per SF 7.22%
Non-Residential Linkage Fee at $2.00 per SF 7.17%
Non-Residential Linkage Fee at $3.00 per SF 7.11%
As such, the imposition of Non-Residential Linkage Fees on the Industrial Prototype has a
minimal impact on financial feasibility. In addition, KMA concludes that an industrial project
would likely be financially feasible at each of the proposed Non-Residential Linkage Fee
amounts.
E. Warehouse Pro Forma Analyses (Attachment IV)
The following summarizes the pro forma analyses prepared for the Warehouse Prototype.
Estimated Development Costs
The following summarizes the development cost assumptions utilized for the Warehouse
Prototype:
1. The site improvement costs are estimated at $3 per square foot of land area.
2. The building costs are estimated at $30 per square foot of warehouse GBA.
3. The tenant improvement costs are estimated at $5 per square foot of warehouse GBA.
4. The architecture, engineering and consulting costs are estimated at 3% of direct costs.
5. Per discussions with City staff, KMA estimated the public permits and fees at $11 per
square foot of warehouse GBA.
6. The marketing and leasing costs are estimated at $3.00 per square foot of warehouse
GBA.
Page 545
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 18
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
As such, KMA estimates the Warehouse Prototype’s total development costs for the Base
Scenario as follows:
Warehouse Prototype
Total Development Costs Base Scenario
Total Acquisition Costs $5,000,000
Total Direct Costs 5,291,000
Total Indirect Costs 2,069,000
Total Financing Costs 930,000
Total Development Costs $13,290,000
Per SF Warehouse GBA $133
Potential Non-Residential Linkage Fees
To estimate the potential Non-Residential Linkage Fees that could be applied to warehouse
land uses, KMA calculated a range of fee amounts based on between 0.5% - 3.0% of the Base
Scenario’s total development costs. The following table summarizes the range of potential
Non-Residential Linkage Fees:
Warehouse Land Use
% of Total Development Costs
Non-Residential
Linkage Fee Per SF GBA
0.5% of Total Development Costs $0.66 / SF
1.0% of Total Development Costs $1.33 / SF
1.5% of Total Development Costs $1.99 / SF
2.0% of Total Development Costs $2.66 / SF
2.5% of Total Development Costs $3.32 / SF
3.0% of Total Development Costs $3.99 / SF
Estimated Net Operating Income
The Warehouse Prototype’s NOI is estimated based on the following:
Page 546
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 19
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
1. The warehouse lease rate is set at $12 per square foot per year, which equates to $1.00
per square foot per month and assumes a Modified Gross lease.
2. The CAM reimbursements are set at $2.50 per square foot per year.
3. A vacancy and collection allowance is not included.
4. The operating expenses are estimated at $3.50 per square foot per year.
5. The capital reserves are estimated at $0.15 per square foot per year.
The warehouse NOI is estimated at $1.01 million as follows:
Warehouse NOI
Effective Gross Income $1,450,000
(Less) Operating Expenses (365,000)
Estimated Warehouse NOI $1,085,000
Estimated Return on Investment of Base Scenario
The return on investment is estimated by dividing the NOI by the total development costs. As
such, the return on investment for the Base Scenario of the Warehouse Prototype is estimated
as follows:
Warehouse Return on Investment (Base Scenario)
Estimated Warehouse NOI $1,085,000
Estimated Development Costs $13,290,000
Return on Investment – Warehouse Prototype 8.2%
KMA estimates that a warehouse project would likely require a return on investment of at least
6.50% to be financially feasible. The following table summarizes the likely return on investment
ranges to evaluate financial feasibility:
Page 547
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 20
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
Feasibility Thresholds – Warehouse Projects
Feasible Range 6.50% and Above
Marginally Feasible Range 6.00% - 6.49%
Infeasible Range 5.99% and Below
As such, KMA concludes that warehouse development projects are financially feasible based on
current development costs and lease rates.
Impacts on Financial Feasibility of Proposed Non-Residential Linkage Fee
Based on a review of potential Non-Residential Linkage Fee amounts, City staff requested that
KMA analyze the impacts on financial feasibility of Non-Residential Linkage Fees at: $1 per
square foot of GBA; $2 per square foot of GBA; and $3 per square foot of GBA. The following
table summarizes the results of these analyses:
Warehouse Prototype
Non-Residential Linkage Fee Amount
Estimated Return
on Investment
Base Scenario: No Non-Residential Linkage Fee 8.16%
Non-Residential Linkage Fee at $1.00 per SF 8.10%
Non-Residential Linkage Fee at $2.00 per SF 8.03%
Non-Residential Linkage Fee at $3.00 per SF 7.97%
As such, the imposition of Non-Residential Linkage Fees on the Warehouse Prototype has a
minimal impact on financial feasibility. In addition, KMA concludes that a warehouse project
would likely be financially feasible at each of the proposed Non-Residential Linkage Fee
amounts.
F. Research and Development Pro Forma Analyses (Attachment V)
The following summarizes the pro forma analyses prepared for the R&D Prototype.
Page 548
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 21
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
Estimated Development Costs
The following summarizes the development cost assumptions utilized for the R&D Prototype:
1. The site improvement costs are estimated at $3 per square foot of land area.
2. The building costs are estimated at $30 per square foot of R&D GBA.
3. The tenant improvement costs are estimated at $5 per square foot of R&D GBA.
4. The architecture, engineering and consulting costs are estimated at 3% of direct costs.
5. Per discussions with City staff, KMA estimated the public permits and fees at $21 per
square foot of R&D GBA.
6. The marketing and leasing costs are estimated at $3.00 per square foot of R&D GBA.
As such, KMA estimates the R&D Prototype’s total development costs for the Base Scenario as
follows:
R&D Prototype
Total Development Costs Base Scenario
Total Acquisition Costs $4,000,000
Total Direct Costs 5,820,000
Total Indirect Costs 3,085,000
Total Financing Costs 894,000
Total Development Costs $13,799,000
Per SF R&D GBA $138
Potential Non-Residential Linkage Fees
To estimate the potential Non-Residential Linkage Fees that could be applied to R&D land uses,
KMA calculated a range of fee amounts based on between 0.5% - 3.0% of the Base Scenario’s
total development costs. The following table summarizes the range of potential Non-
Residential Linkage Fees:
Page 549
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 22
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
R&D Land Use
% of Total Development Costs
Non-Residential
Linkage Fee Per SF GBA
0.5% of Total Development Costs $0.69 / SF
1.0% of Total Development Costs $1.38 / SF
1.5% of Total Development Costs $2.07 / SF
2.0% of Total Development Costs $2.76 / SF
2.5% of Total Development Costs $3.45 / SF
3.0% of Total Development Costs $4.14 / SF
Estimated Net Operating Income
The R&D Prototype’s NOI is estimated based on the following:
1. The R&D lease rate is set at $12 per square foot per year, which equates to $1.00 per
square foot per month and assumes a Modified Gross lease.
2. The CAM reimbursements are set at $2.50 per square foot per year.
3. A vacancy and collection allowance is set at 10% of gross R&D revenue.
4. The operating expenses are estimated at $3.50 per square foot per year.
5. The capital reserves are estimated at $0.15 per square foot per year.
The R&D NOI is estimated at $940,000 as follows:
R&D NOI
Effective Gross Income $1,305,000
(Less) Operating Expenses (365,000)
Estimated R&D NOI $940,000
Page 550
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 23
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
Estimated Return on Investment of Base Scenario
The return on investment is estimated by dividing the NOI by the total development costs. As
such, the return on investment for the Base Scenario of the R&D Prototype is estimated as
follows:
R&D Return on Investment (Base Scenario)
Estimated R&D NOI $940,000
Estimated Development Costs $13,799,000
Return on Investment – R&D Prototype 6.8%
KMA estimates that a R&D project would likely require a return on investment of at least 6.50%
to be financially feasible. The following table summarizes the likely return on investment
ranges to evaluate financial feasibility:
Feasibility Thresholds – R&D Projects
Feasible Range 6.50% and Above
Marginally Feasible Range 6.00% - 6.49%
Infeasible Range 5.99% and Below
As such, KMA concludes that R&D development projects are financially feasible based on
current development costs and lease rates. However, R&D projects require a specific subset of
tenants/users. Thus, speculative development projects for R&D uses are unlikely.
Impacts on Financial Feasibility of Proposed Non-Residential Linkage Fee
Based on a review of potential Non-Residential Linkage Fee amounts, City staff requested that
KMA analyze the impacts on financial feasibility of Non-Residential Linkage Fees at: $1 per
square foot of GBA; $2 per square foot of GBA; and $3 per square foot of GBA. The following
table summarizes the results of these analyses:
Page 551
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 24
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
R&D Prototype
Non-Residential Linkage Fee Amount
Estimated Return
on Investment
Base Scenario: No Non-Residential Linkage Fee 6.81%
Non-Residential Linkage Fee at $1.00 per SF 6.76%
Non-Residential Linkage Fee at $2.00 per SF 6.71%
Non-Residential Linkage Fee at $3.00 per SF 6.65%
As such, the imposition of Non-Residential Linkage Fees on the R&D Prototype has a minimal
impact on financial feasibility. In addition, KMA concludes that a R&D project would likely be
financially feasible at each of the proposed Non-Residential Linkage Fee amounts. However, it is
important to note that R&D projects require a specific subset of tenants/users. Thus,
speculative development projects for R&D uses are unlikely to occur.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
The following table summarizes the results of the financial feasibility analyses (green shading
denotes scenarios that are financially feasible and red shading denotes scenarios that are not
financially feasible):
Estimated Returns on Investment By Non-Residential Linkage Fee Amount
Retail /
Commercial
Prototype
Office
Prototype
Industrial
Prototype
Warehouse
Prototype
Research and
Development
Prototype
Base: No Linkage Fee 5.67% 3.40% 7.28% 8.16% 6.81%
Linkage Fee @ $1/SF 5.65% 3.39% 7.22% 8.10% 6.76%
Linkage Fee @ $2/SF 5.64% 3.38% 7.17% 8.03% 6.71%
Linkage Fee @ $3/SF 5.63% 3.37% 7.11% 7.97% 6.65%
Page 552
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 25
2109008.RC October 5, 2021
ATTACHMENTS
Page 553
SUMMARY TABLE A
FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Retail / Commercial
Prototype Office Prototype Industrial Prototype Warehouse Prototype
Research and Development
Prototype
I.Scope of Development
Site Area (SF)45,000 60,000 250,000 250,000 200,000
Gross Building Area (SF)12,000 28,750 100,000 1 100,000 1 100,000
FAR 0.27 0.48 0.40 0.40 0.50
Number of Parking Spaces 84 115 210 64 300
II.Total Development Costs - Base Scenario
Site Acquisition Costs $900,000 $1,200,000 $5,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000
Total Direct Costs 3,150,000 7,751,000 5,730,000 5,291,000 5,820,000
Total Indirect Costs 821,000 1,861,000 2,247,000 2,069,000 3,085,000
Total Financing Costs 421,000 584,000 926,000 930,000 894,000
Total Development Costs $5,292,000 $11,396,000 $13,903,000 $13,290,000 $13,799,000
Per SF of GBA $441 $396 $139 $133 $138
III.Estimate Lease Rates
Estimated Annual Lease Rate $27 $27 $12 $12 $12
Type of Lease NNN Full Service Gross Modified Gross Modified Gross Modified Gross
IV.Estimated Net Operating Income $300,000 $387,000 $1,012,000 $1,085,000 $940,000
V.Estimated Return on Cost (Base Scenario)
Estimated Net Operating Income $300,000 $387,000 $1,012,000 $1,085,000 $940,000
Total Development Costs $5,292,000 $11,396,000 $13,903,000 $13,290,000 $13,799,000
Estimated Return on Cost 5.7%3.4%7.3%8.2%6.8%
VI.Non-Residential Linkage Fee Per SF as a Percentage of Development Costs (Base Scenario)
0.5% of Development Costs $2.21 $1.98 $0.70 $0.66 $0.69
1.0% of Development Costs $4.41 $3.96 $1.39 $1.33 $1.38
1.5% of Development Costs $6.62 $5.95 $2.09 $1.99 $2.07
2.0% of Development Costs $8.82 $7.93 $2.78 $2.66 $2.76
2.5% of Development Costs $11.03 $9.91 $3.48 $3.32 $3.45
3.0% of Development Costs $13.23 $11.89 $4.17 $3.99 $4.14
1 Includes 5,000 square feet of office space and 95,000 square feet of industrial/warehouse space.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; SUMMARY_For Printing; trb Page 554
SUMMARY TABLE B
FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Retail / Commercial
Prototype Office Prototype Industrial Prototype Warehouse Prototype
Research and Development
Prototype
I. Threshold Return Requirements
Feasible Range (Green)8.00% and Above 9.00% and Above 6.50% and Above 6.50% and Above 6.50% and Above
Marginally Feasible Range (Yellow)7.00% - 7.99%8.00% - 8.99%6.00% - 6.49%6.00% - 6.49%6.00% - 6.49%
Infeasible Range (Red)6.99% and Below 7.99% and Below 5.99% and Below 5.99% and Below 5.99% and Below
II.Non-Residential Linkage Fees - Financial Feasibility Results
Base Scenario: No Non-Residential Linkage Fee 5.67%3.40%7.28%8.16%6.81%
Non-Residential Linkage Fee @ $1/SF Scenario 5.65%3.39%7.22%8.10%6.76%
Non-Residential Linkage Fee @ $2/SF Scenario 5.64%3.38%7.17%8.03%6.71%
Non-Residential Linkage Fee @ $3/SF Scenario 5.63%3.37%7.11%7.97%6.65%
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; SUMMARY_For Printing; trb Page 555
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
ATTACHMENT I
RETAIL / COMMERCIAL PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; ATT I_TITLE; trb Page 556
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
ATTACHMENT I - APPENDIX A
RETAIL / COMMERCIAL PROTOTYPE
BASE SCENARIO: NO NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Retail_Comm_BASE; trb Page 557
ATTACHMENT I - APPENDIX A - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
RETAIL / COMMERCIAL PROTOTYPE
BASE SCENARIO: NO NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE
12,000 SF RETAIL/COMMERCIAL GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Site Acquisition Costs 45,000 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $900,000
II.Direct Costs 1
Site Improvement Costs 45,000 Sf Land $7 /Sf Land $315,000
Surface Parking Costs 84 Spaces $2,500 /Space 210,000
Building Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $150 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 1,800,000
Tenant Improvement Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $25 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 300,000
Contractor Costs 20.0%Other Direct Costs 525,000
Total Direct Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $263 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA $3,150,000
III.Indirect Costs
Architecture, Engineering & Consulting 6.0%Direct Costs $189,000
Public Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 2 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $25 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 300,000
Non-Residential Linkage Fee 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $0 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 0
Taxes, Insurance, Legal & Accounting 3.0%Direct Costs 95,000
Marketing & Leasing Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $6.00 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 72,000
Development Management 4.0%Direct Costs 126,000
Contingency Allowance 5.0%Other Indirect Costs 39,000
Total Indirect Costs $821,000
IV.Financing Costs
Construction Loan Interest 3 $5,292,000 Financed 4.50%Interest $333,000
Financing Fees
Permanent Loan 70.00%Loan to Value 2.50 Points 88,000
Total Financing Costs $421,000
V.Total Construction Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $366 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA $4,392,000
Total Development Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $441 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA $5,292,000
VI.Non-Residential Linkage Fee Per SF as a Percentage of Development Costs
0.5% of Development Costs $2.21
1.0% of Development Costs $4.41
1.5% of Development Costs $6.62
2.0% of Development Costs $8.82
2.5% of Development Costs $11.03
3.0% of Development Costs $13.23
1
2
3
Based on impact fee estimates provided by City staff. KMA included $5/sf for other public permits and fees. City staff should verify the accuracy of this
estimate.
Direct costs assume prevailing wage requirements will not be imposed on the Project.
Assumes an 18-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance, and a 6-month absorption period with a 100% average outstanding
balance.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Retail_Comm_BASE; trb Page 558
ATTACHMENT I - APPENDIX A - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STABILIZED NET OPERATING INCOME & RETURN ON INVESTMENT
RETAIL / COMMERCIAL PROTOTYPE
BASE SCENARIO: NO NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE
12,000 SF RETAIL/COMMERCIAL GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Retail / Commercial Revenue 1
Lease Revenue 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $27 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA $324,000
CAM Reimbursements 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $10 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 120,000
Gross Retail / Commercial Revenue $444,000
(Less) Vacancy & Collection Allowance 5%Gross Retail / Commercial Revenue (22,000)
Effective Gross Income $422,000
II.Retail / Commercial Operating Expenses
CAM Expenses 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $10 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA $120,000
Reserves 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $0.15 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 2,000
Retail / Commercial Operating Expenses $122,000
III.Residential Net Operating Income $300,000
IV.Estimated Return on Investment
Net Operating Income $300,000
Total Development Costs See ATTACHMENT I - APPENDIX A - TABLE 1 $5,292,000
V.Return on Investment 5.7%
1 Assumes a NNN lease. Equates to $2.25/sf/month.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Retail_Comm_BASE; trb Page 559
ATTACHMENT I - APPENDIX B
RETAIL / COMMERCIAL PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $1/SF SCENARIO
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Retail_Comm_$1; trb Page 560
ATTACHMENT I - APPENDIX B - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
RETAIL / COMMERCIAL PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $1/SF SCENARIO
12,000 SF RETAIL/COMMERCIAL GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Site Acquisition Costs 45,000 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $900,000
II.Direct Costs 1
Site Improvement Costs 45,000 Sf Land $7 /Sf Land $315,000
Surface Parking Costs 84 Spaces $2,500 /Space 210,000
Building Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $150 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 1,800,000
Tenant Improvement Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $25 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 300,000
Contractor Costs 20.0%Other Direct Costs 525,000
Total Direct Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $263 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA $3,150,000
III.Indirect Costs
Architecture, Engineering & Consulting 6.0%Direct Costs $189,000
Public Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 2 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $25 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 300,000
Non-Residential Linkage Fee 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $1 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 12,000
Taxes, Insurance, Legal & Accounting 3.0%Direct Costs 95,000
Marketing & Leasing Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $6.00 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 72,000
Development Management 4.0%Direct Costs 126,000
Contingency Allowance 5.0%Other Indirect Costs 40,000
Total Indirect Costs $834,000
IV.Financing Costs
Construction Loan Interest 3 $5,306,000 Financed 4.50%Interest $334,000
Financing Fees
Permanent Loan 70.00%Loan to Value 2.50 Points 88,000
Total Financing Costs $422,000
V.Total Construction Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $367 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA $4,406,000
Total Development Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $442 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA $5,306,000
1
2
3
Direct costs assume prevailing wage requirements will not be imposed on the Project.
Assumes an 18-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance, and a 6-month absorption period with a 100% average outstanding
balance.
Based on impact fee estimates provided by City staff. KMA included $5/sf for other public permits and fees. City staff should verify the accuracy of this
estimate.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Retail_Comm_$1; trb Page 561
ATTACHMENT I - APPENDIX B - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STABILIZED NET OPERATING INCOME & RETURN ON INVESTMENT
RETAIL / COMMERCIAL PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $1/SF SCENARIO
12,000 SF RETAIL/COMMERCIAL GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Retail / Commercial Revenue 1
Lease Revenue 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $27 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA $324,000
CAM Reimbursements 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $10 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 120,000
Gross Retail / Commercial Revenue $444,000
(Less) Vacancy & Collection Allowance 5%Gross Retail / Commercial Revenue (22,000)
Effective Gross Income $422,000
II.Retail / Commercial Operating Expenses
CAM Expenses 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $10 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA $120,000
Reserves 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $0.15 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 2,000
Retail / Commercial Operating Expenses $122,000
III.Residential Net Operating Income $300,000
IV.Estimated Return on Investment
Net Operating Income $300,000
Total Development Costs See ATTACHMENT I - APPENDIX B - TABLE 1 $5,306,000
V.Return on Investment 5.7%
1 Assumes a NNN lease. Equates to $2.25/sf/month.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Retail_Comm_$1; trb Page 562
ATTACHMENT I - APPENDIX C
RETAIL / COMMERCIAL PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $2/SF SCENARIO
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Retail_Comm_$2; trb Page 563
ATTACHMENT I - APPENDIX C - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
RETAIL / COMMERCIAL PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $2/SF SCENARIO
12,000 SF RETAIL/COMMERCIAL GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Site Acquisition Costs 45,000 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $900,000
II.Direct Costs 1
Site Improvement Costs 45,000 Sf Land $7 /Sf Land $315,000
Surface Parking Costs 84 Spaces $2,500 /Space 210,000
Building Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $150 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 1,800,000
Tenant Improvement Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $25 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 300,000
Contractor Costs 20.0%Other Direct Costs 525,000
Total Direct Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $263 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA $3,150,000
III.Indirect Costs
Architecture, Engineering & Consulting 6.0%Direct Costs $189,000
Public Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 2 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $25 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 300,000
Non-Residential Linkage Fee 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $2 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 24,000
Taxes, Insurance, Legal & Accounting 3.0%Direct Costs 95,000
Marketing & Leasing Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $6.00 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 72,000
Development Management 4.0%Direct Costs 126,000
Contingency Allowance 5.0%Other Indirect Costs 40,000
Total Indirect Costs $846,000
IV.Financing Costs
Construction Loan Interest 3 $5,319,000 Financed 4.50%Interest $335,000
Financing Fees
Permanent Loan 70.00%Loan to Value 2.50 Points 88,000
Total Financing Costs $423,000
V.Total Construction Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $368 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA $4,419,000
Total Development Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $443 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA $5,319,000
1
2
3
Direct costs assume prevailing wage requirements will not be imposed on the Project.
Assumes an 18-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance, and a 6-month absorption period with a 100% average outstanding
balance.
Based on impact fee estimates provided by City staff. KMA included $5/sf for other public permits and fees. City staff should verify the accuracy of this
estimate.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Retail_Comm_$2; trb Page 564
ATTACHMENT I - APPENDIX C - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STABILIZED NET OPERATING INCOME & RETURN ON INVESTMENT
RETAIL / COMMERCIAL PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $2/SF SCENARIO
12,000 SF RETAIL/COMMERCIAL GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Retail / Commercial Revenue 1
Lease Revenue 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $27 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA $324,000
CAM Reimbursements 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $10 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 120,000
Gross Retail / Commercial Revenue $444,000
(Less) Vacancy & Collection Allowance 5%Gross Retail / Commercial Revenue (22,000)
Effective Gross Income $422,000
II.Retail / Commercial Operating Expenses
CAM Expenses 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $10 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA $120,000
Reserves 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $0.15 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 2,000
Retail / Commercial Operating Expenses $122,000
III.Residential Net Operating Income $300,000
IV.Estimated Return on Investment
Net Operating Income $300,000
Total Development Costs See ATTACHMENT I - APPENDIX C - TABLE 1 $5,319,000
V.Return on Investment 5.6%
1 Assumes a NNN lease. Equates to $2.25/sf/month.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Retail_Comm_$2; trb Page 565
ATTACHMENT I - APPENDIX D
RETAIL / COMMERCIAL PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $3/SF SCENARIO
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Retail_Comm_$3; trb Page 566
ATTACHMENT I - APPENDIX D - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
RETAIL / COMMERCIAL PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $3/SF SCENARIO
12,000 SF RETAIL/COMMERCIAL GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Site Acquisition Costs 45,000 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $900,000
II.Direct Costs 1
Site Improvement Costs 45,000 Sf Land $7 /Sf Land $315,000
Surface Parking Costs 84 Spaces $2,500 /Space 210,000
Building Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $150 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 1,800,000
Tenant Improvement Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $25 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 300,000
Contractor Costs 20.0%Other Direct Costs 525,000
Total Direct Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $263 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA $3,150,000
III.Indirect Costs
Architecture, Engineering & Consulting 6.0%Direct Costs $189,000
Public Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 2 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $25 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 300,000
Non-Residential Linkage Fee 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $3 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 36,000
Taxes, Insurance, Legal & Accounting 3.0%Direct Costs 95,000
Marketing & Leasing Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $6.00 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 72,000
Development Management 4.0%Direct Costs 126,000
Contingency Allowance 5.0%Other Indirect Costs 41,000
Total Indirect Costs $859,000
IV.Financing Costs
Construction Loan Interest 3 $5,333,000 Financed 4.50%Interest $336,000
Financing Fees
Permanent Loan 70.00%Loan to Value 2.50 Points 88,000
Total Financing Costs $424,000
V.Total Construction Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $369 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA $4,433,000
Total Development Costs 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $444 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA $5,333,000
1
2
3
Direct costs assume prevailing wage requirements will not be imposed on the Project.
Based on impact fee estimates provided by City staff. KMA included $5/sf for other public permits and fees. City staff should verify the accuracy of this
estimate.
Assumes an 18-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance, and a 6-month absorption period with a 100% average outstanding
balance.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Retail_Comm_$3; trb Page 567
ATTACHMENT I - APPENDIX D - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STABILIZED NET OPERATING INCOME & RETURN ON INVESTMENT
RETAIL / COMMERCIAL PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $3/SF SCENARIO
12,000 SF RETAIL/COMMERCIAL GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Retail / Commercial Revenue 1
Lease Revenue 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $27 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA $324,000
CAM Reimbursements 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $10 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 120,000
Gross Retail / Commercial Revenue $444,000
(Less) Vacancy & Collection Allowance 5%Gross Retail / Commercial Revenue (22,000)
Effective Gross Income $422,000
II.Retail / Commercial Operating Expenses
CAM Expenses 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $10 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA $120,000
Reserves 12,000 Sf Retail/Comm GBA $0.15 /Sf Retail/Comm GBA 2,000
Retail / Commercial Operating Expenses $122,000
III.Residential Net Operating Income $300,000
IV.Estimated Return on Investment
Net Operating Income $300,000
Total Development Costs See ATTACHMENT I - APPENDIX D - TABLE 1 $5,333,000
V.Return on Investment 5.6%
1 Assumes a NNN lease. Equates to $2.25/sf/month.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Retail_Comm_$3; trb Page 568
ATTACHMENT II
OFFICE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; ATT II_TITLE; trb Page 569
ATTACHMENT II - APPENDIX A
OFFICE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
BASE SCENARIO: NO NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Office_BASE; trb Page 570
ATTACHMENT II - APPENDIX A - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
OFFICE PROTOTYPE
BASE SCENARIO: NO NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE
28,750 SF OFFICE GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Site Acquisition Costs 60,000 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $1,200,000
II.Direct Costs 1
Site Improvement Costs 60,000 Sf Land $7 /Sf Land $420,000
Surface Parking Costs 115 Spaces $2,500 /Space 288,000
Building Costs 28,750 Sf Office GBA $150 /Sf Office GBA 4,313,000
Tenant Improvement Costs 28,750 Sf Office GBA $50 /Sf Office GBA 1,438,000
Contractor Costs 20.0%Other Direct Costs 1,292,000
Total Direct Costs 28,750 Sf GBA $270 /Sf GBA $7,751,000
III.Indirect Costs
Architecture, Engineering & Consulting 6.0%Direct Costs $465,000
Public Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 2 28,750 Sf Office GBA $21 /Sf Office GBA 591,000
Non-Residential Linkage Fee 28,750 Sf Office GBA $0 /Sf Office GBA 0
Taxes, Insurance, Legal & Accounting 3.0%Direct Costs 233,000
Marketing & Leasing Costs 28,750 Sf Office GBA $6.00 /Sf Office GBA 173,000
Development Management 4.0%Direct Costs 310,000
Contingency Allowance 5.0%Other Indirect Costs 89,000
Total Indirect Costs $1,861,000
IV.Financing Costs
Construction Loan Interest 3 $11,396,000 Financed 4.50%Interest $487,000
Financing Fees
Permanent Loan 70.00%Loan to Value 2.50 Points 97,000
Total Financing Costs $584,000
V.Total Construction Costs 28,750 Sf Office GBA $355 /Sf Office GBA $10,196,000
Total Development Costs 28,750 Sf Office GBA $396 /Sf Office GBA $11,396,000
VI.Non-Residential Linkage Fee Per SF as a Percentage of Development Costs
0.5% of Development Costs $1.98
1.0% of Development Costs $3.96
1.5% of Development Costs $5.95
2.0% of Development Costs $7.93
2.5% of Development Costs $9.91
3.0% of Development Costs $11.89
1
2
3 Assumes a 14-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance, and a 3-month lease-up period with a 100% average outstanding
balance.
Direct costs assume prevailing wage requirements will not be imposed on the Project.
Based on impact fee estimates provided by City staff. KMA included $5/sf for other public permits and fees. City staff should verify the accuracy of this
estimate.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Office_BASE; trb Page 571
ATTACHMENT II - APPENDIX A - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STABILIZED NET OPERATING INCOME & RETURN ON INVESTMENT
OFFICE PROTOTYPE
BASE SCENARIO: NO NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE
28,750 SF OFFICE GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Office Revenue
Lease Revenue 1 25,000 Sf Office GBA $27 /Sf Office GBA $675,000
(Less) Vacancy & Collection Allowance 5%Lease Revenue (34,000)
Effective Gross Income $641,000
II.Office Operating Expenses
Operating Expenses 25,000 Sf Office GBA $10 /Sf Office GBA $250,000
Reserves 25,000 Sf Office GBA $0.15 /Sf Office GBA 4,000
Office Operating Expenses $254,000
III.Office Net Operating Income $387,000
IV.Estimated Return on Investment
Net Operating Income $387,000
Total Development Costs See ATTACHMENT II - APPENDIX A - TABLE 1 11,396,000
V.Return on Investment 3.4%
1 Assumes a Full Service Gross lease. Equates to $2.25 per square foot per month on a full service gross basis.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Office_BASE; trb Page 572
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
ATTACHMENT II - APPENDIX B
OFFICE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $1/SF SCENARIO
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Office_$1; trb Page 573
ATTACHMENT II - APPENDIX B - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
OFFICE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $1/SF SCENARIO
28,750 SF OFFICE GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Site Acquisition Costs 60,000 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $1,200,000
II.Direct Costs 1
Site Improvement Costs 60,000 Sf Land $7 /Sf Land $420,000
Surface Parking Costs 115 Spaces $2,500 /Space 288,000
Building Costs 28,750 Sf Office GBA $150 /Sf Office GBA 4,313,000
Tenant Improvement Costs 28,750 Sf Office GBA $50 /Sf Office GBA 1,438,000
Contractor Costs 20.0%Other Direct Costs 1,292,000
Total Direct Costs 28,750 Sf GBA $270 /Sf GBA $7,751,000
III.Indirect Costs
Architecture, Engineering & Consulting 6.0%Direct Costs $465,000
Public Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 2 28,750 Sf Office GBA $21 /Sf Office GBA 591,000
Non-Residential Linkage Fee 28,750 Sf Office GBA $1 /Sf Office GBA 29,000
Taxes, Insurance, Legal & Accounting 3.0%Direct Costs 233,000
Marketing & Leasing Costs 28,750 Sf Office GBA $6.00 /Sf Office GBA 173,000
Development Management 4.0%Direct Costs 310,000
Contingency Allowance 5.0%Other Indirect Costs 90,000
Total Indirect Costs $1,891,000
IV.Financing Costs
Construction Loan Interest 3 $11,428,000 Financed 4.50%Interest $489,000
Financing Fees
Permanent Loan 70.00%Loan to Value 2.50 Points 97,000
Total Financing Costs $586,000
V.Total Construction Costs 28,750 Sf Office GBA $356 /Sf Office GBA ##########
Total Development Costs 28,750 Sf Office GBA $397 /Sf Office GBA ##########
1
2
3
Direct costs assume prevailing wage requirements will not be imposed on the Project.
Assumes a 14-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance, and a 3-month lease-up period with a 100% average outstanding
balance.
Based on impact fee estimates provided by City staff. KMA included $5/sf for other public permits and fees. City staff should verify the accuracy of this
estimate.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Office_$1; trb Page 574
ATTACHMENT II - APPENDIX B - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STABILIZED NET OPERATING INCOME & RETURN ON INVESTMENT
OFFICE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $1/SF SCENARIO
28,750 SF OFFICE GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Office Revenue
Lease Revenue 1 25,000 Sf Office GBA $27 /Sf Office GBA $675,000
(Less) Vacancy & Collection Allowance 5%Lease Revenue (34,000)
Effective Gross Income $641,000
II.Office Operating Expenses
Operating Expenses 25,000 Sf Office GBA $10 /Sf Office GBA $250,000
Reserves 25,000 Sf Office GBA $0.15 /Sf Office GBA 4,000
Office Operating Expenses $254,000
III.Office Net Operating Income $387,000
IV.Estimated Return on Investment
Net Operating Income $387,000
Total Development Costs See ATTACHMENT II - APPENDIX B - TABLE 1 11,428,000
V.Return on Investment 3.4%
1 Assumes a Full Service Gross lease. Equates to $2.25 per square foot per month on a full service gross basis.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Office_$1; trb Page 575
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
ATTACHMENT II - APPENDIX C
OFFICE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $2/SF SCENARIO
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Office_$2; trb Page 576
ATTACHMENT II - APPENDIX C - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
OFFICE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $2/SF SCENARIO
28,750 SF OFFICE GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Site Acquisition Costs 60,000 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $1,200,000
II.Direct Costs 1
Site Improvement Costs 60,000 Sf Land $7 /Sf Land $420,000
Surface Parking Costs 115 Spaces $2,500 /Space 288,000
Building Costs 28,750 Sf Office GBA $150 /Sf Office GBA 4,313,000
Tenant Improvement Costs 28,750 Sf Office GBA $50 /Sf Office GBA 1,438,000
Contractor Costs 20.0%Other Direct Costs 1,292,000
Total Direct Costs 28,750 Sf GBA $270 /Sf GBA $7,751,000
III.Indirect Costs
Architecture, Engineering & Consulting 6.0%Direct Costs $465,000
Public Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 2 28,750 Sf Office GBA $21 /Sf Office GBA 591,000
Non-Residential Linkage Fee 28,750 Sf Office GBA $2 /Sf Office GBA 58,000
Taxes, Insurance, Legal & Accounting 3.0%Direct Costs 233,000
Marketing & Leasing Costs 28,750 Sf Office GBA $6.00 /Sf Office GBA 173,000
Development Management 4.0%Direct Costs 310,000
Contingency Allowance 5.0%Other Indirect Costs 92,000
Total Indirect Costs $1,922,000
IV.Financing Costs
Construction Loan Interest 3 $11,460,000 Financed 4.50%Interest $490,000
Financing Fees
Permanent Loan 70.00%Loan to Value 2.50 Points 97,000
Total Financing Costs $587,000
V.Total Construction Costs 28,750 Sf Office GBA $357 /Sf Office GBA $10,260,000
Total Development Costs 28,750 Sf Office GBA $399 /Sf Office GBA $11,460,000
1
2
3 Assumes a 14-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance, and a 3-month lease-up period with a 100% average outstanding
balance.
Based on impact fee estimates provided by City staff. KMA included $5/sf for other public permits and fees. City staff should verify the accuracy of this
estimate.
Direct costs assume prevailing wage requirements will not be imposed on the Project.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Office_$2; trb Page 577
ATTACHMENT II - APPENDIX C - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STABILIZED NET OPERATING INCOME & RETURN ON INVESTMENT
OFFICE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $2/SF SCENARIO
28,750 SF OFFICE GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Office Revenue
Lease Revenue 1 25,000 Sf Office GBA $27 /Sf Office GBA $675,000
(Less) Vacancy & Collection Allowance 5%Lease Revenue (34,000)
Effective Gross Income $641,000
II.Office Operating Expenses
Operating Expenses 25,000 Sf Office GBA $10 /Sf Office GBA $250,000
Reserves 25,000 Sf Office GBA $0.15 /Sf Office GBA 4,000
Office Operating Expenses $254,000
III.Office Net Operating Income $387,000
IV.Estimated Return on Investment
Net Operating Income $387,000
Total Development Costs See ATTACHMENT II - APPENDIX C - TABLE 1 11,460,000
V.Return on Investment 3.4%
1 Assumes a Full Service Gross lease. Equates to $2.25 per square foot per month on a full service gross basis.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Office_$2; trb Page 578
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $3/SF SCENARIO
ATTACHMENT II - APPENDIX D
OFFICE PROTOTYPE
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Office_$3; trb Page 579
ATTACHMENT II - APPENDIX D - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
OFFICE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $3/SF SCENARIO
28,750 SF OFFICE GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Site Acquisition Costs 60,000 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $1,200,000
II.Direct Costs 1
Site Improvement Costs 60,000 Sf Land $7 /Sf Land $420,000
Surface Parking Costs 115 Spaces $2,500 /Space 288,000
Building Costs 28,750 Sf Office GBA $150 /Sf Office GBA 4,313,000
Tenant Improvement Costs 28,750 Sf Office GBA $50 /Sf Office GBA 1,438,000
Contractor Costs 20.0%Other Direct Costs 1,292,000
Total Direct Costs 28,750 Sf GBA $270 /Sf GBA $7,751,000
III.Indirect Costs
Architecture, Engineering & Consulting 6.0%Direct Costs $465,000
Public Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 2 28,750 Sf Office GBA $21 /Sf Office GBA 591,000
Non-Residential Linkage Fee 28,750 Sf Office GBA $3 /Sf Office GBA 86,000
Taxes, Insurance, Legal & Accounting 3.0%Direct Costs 233,000
Marketing & Leasing Costs 28,750 Sf Office GBA $6.00 /Sf Office GBA 173,000
Development Management 4.0%Direct Costs 310,000
Contingency Allowance 5.0%Other Indirect Costs 93,000
Total Indirect Costs $1,951,000
IV.Financing Costs
Construction Loan Interest 3 $11,490,000 Financed 4.50%Interest $491,000
Financing Fees
Permanent Loan 70.00%Loan to Value 2.50 Points 97,000
Total Financing Costs $588,000
V.Total Construction Costs 28,750 Sf Office GBA $358 /Sf Office GBA ##########
Total Development Costs 28,750 Sf Office GBA $400 /Sf Office GBA ##########
1
2
3
Direct costs assume prevailing wage requirements will not be imposed on the Project.
Based on impact fee estimates provided by City staff. KMA included $5/sf for other public permits and fees. City staff should verify the accuracy of this
estimate.
Assumes a 14-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance, and a 3-month lease-up period with a 100% average outstanding
balance.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Office_$3; trb Page 580
ATTACHMENT II - APPENDIX D - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STABILIZED NET OPERATING INCOME & RETURN ON INVESTMENT
OFFICE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $3/SF SCENARIO
28,750 SF OFFICE GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Office Revenue
Lease Revenue 1 25,000 Sf Office GBA $27 /Sf Office GBA $675,000
(Less) Vacancy & Collection Allowance 5%Lease Revenue (34,000)
Effective Gross Income $641,000
II.Office Operating Expenses
Operating Expenses 25,000 Sf Office GBA $10 /Sf Office GBA $250,000
Reserves 25,000 Sf Office GBA $0.15 /Sf Office GBA 4,000
Office Operating Expenses $254,000
III.Office Net Operating Income $387,000
IV.Estimated Return on Investment
Net Operating Income $387,000
Total Development Costs See ATTACHMENT II - APPENDIX D - TABLE 1 11,490,000
V.Return on Investment 3.4%
1 Assumes a Full Service Gross lease. Equates to $2.25 per square foot per month on a full service gross basis.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Office_$3; trb Page 581
ATTACHMENT III
INDUSTRIAL PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; ATT III_TITLE; trb Page 582
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
INDUSTRIAL PROTOTYPE
ATTACHMENT III - APPENDIX A
BASE SCENARIO: NO NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Industrial_BASE; trb Page 583
ATTACHMENT III - APPENDIX A - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
INDUSTRIAL PROTOTYPE
BASE SCENARIO: NO NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE
100,000 SF INDUSTRIAL GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Site Acquisition Costs 250,000 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $5,000,000
II.Direct Costs 1
Site Improvement Costs 250,000 Sf Land $3 /Sf Land $750,000
Surface Parking 210 Spaces $2,500 /Space 525,000
Building Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $30 /Sf Industrial GBA 3,000,000
Tenant Improvement Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $5 /Sf Industrial GBA 500,000
Contractor Costs 20.0%Other Direct Costs 955,000
Total Direct Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $57 /Sf Industrial GBA $5,730,000
III.Indirect Costs
Architecture, Engineering & Consulting 3.0%Direct Costs $172,000
Public Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 2 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $13 /Sf Industrial GBA 1,267,000
Non-Residential Linkage Fee 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $0 /Sf Industrial GBA 0
Taxes, Insurance, Legal & Accounting 3.0%Direct Costs 172,000
Marketing & Leasing Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $3.00 /Sf Industrial GBA 300,000
Development Management 4.0%Direct Costs 229,000
Contingency Allowance 5.0%Other Indirect Costs 107,000
Total Indirect Costs $2,247,000
IV.Financing Costs
Construction Loan Interest 3 $13,903,000 Financed 4.50%Interest $532,000
Financing Fees
Permanent Loan 70.00%Loan to Value 2.50 Points 394,000
Total Financing Costs $926,000
V.Total Construction Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $89 /Sf Industrial GBA $8,903,000
Total Development Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $139 /Sf Industrial GBA $13,903,000
VI.Non-Residential Linkage Fee Per SF as a Percentage of Development Costs
0.5% of Development Costs $0.70
1.0% of Development Costs $1.39
1.5% of Development Costs $2.09
2.0% of Development Costs $2.78
2.5% of Development Costs $3.48
3.0% of Development Costs $4.17
1
2
3
Direct costs assume prevailing wage requirements will not be imposed on the Project.
Assumes a 12-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance, and a 3-month lease-up period with a 100% average outstanding
balance.
Based on impact fee estimates provided by City staff. KMA included $5/sf for other public permits and fees. City staff should verify the accuracy of this
estimate.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Industrial_BASE; trb Page 584
ATTACHMENT III - APPENDIX A - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STABILIZED NET OPERATING INCOME & RETURN ON INVESTMENT
INDUSTRIAL PROTOTYPE
BASE SCENARIO: NO NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE
100,000 SF INDUSTRIAL GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Industrial Revenue
Lease Revenue 1 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $12.00 /Sf Industrial GBA $1,200,000
CAM Reimbursements 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $2.50 /Sf Industrial GBA 250,000
Gross Industrial Revenue $1,450,000
(Less) Vacancy & Collection Allowance 5.0%Gross Industrial Revenue (73,000)
Effective Gross Income $1,377,000
II.Industrial Operating Expenses
Operating Expenses 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $3.50 /Sf Industrial GBA $350,000
Reserves 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $0.15 /Sf Industrial GBA 15,000
Industrial Operating Expenses $365,000
III.Industrial Net Operating Income $1,012,000
IV.Estimated Return on Investment
Net Operating Income $1,012,000
Total Development Costs See ATTACHMENT III - APPENDIX A - TABLE 1 $13,903,000
V.Return on Investment 7.3%
1 Assumes a Modified Gross lease. Equates to a lease rate of $1.00 per square foot per month.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Industrial_BASE; trb Page 585
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
ATTACHMENT III - APPENDIX B
INDUSTRIAL PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $1/SF SCENARIO
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Industrial_$1; trb Page 586
ATTACHMENT III - APPENDIX B - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
INDUSTRIAL PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $1/SF SCENARIO
100,000 SF INDUSTRIAL GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Site Acquisition Costs 250,000 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $5,000,000
II.Direct Costs 1
Site Improvement Costs 250,000 Sf Land $3 /Sf Land $750,000
Surface Parking 210 Spaces $2,500 /Space 525,000
Building Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $30 /Sf Industrial GBA 3,000,000
Tenant Improvement Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $5 /Sf Industrial GBA 500,000
Contractor Costs 20.0%Other Direct Costs 955,000
Total Direct Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $57 /Sf Industrial GBA $5,730,000
III.Indirect Costs
Architecture, Engineering & Consulting 3.0%Direct Costs $172,000
Public Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 2 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $13 /Sf Industrial GBA 1,267,000
Non-Residential Linkage Fee 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $1 /Sf Industrial GBA 100,000
Taxes, Insurance, Legal & Accounting 3.0%Direct Costs 172,000
Marketing & Leasing Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $3.00 /Sf Industrial GBA 300,000
Development Management 4.0%Direct Costs 229,000
Contingency Allowance 5.0%Other Indirect Costs 112,000
Total Indirect Costs $2,352,000
IV.Financing Costs
Construction Loan Interest 3 $14,012,000 Financed 4.50%Interest $536,000
Financing Fees
Permanent Loan 70.00%Loan to Value 2.50 Points 394,000
Total Financing Costs $930,000
V.Total Construction Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $90 /Sf Industrial GBA $9,012,000
Total Development Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $140 /Sf Industrial GBA $14,012,000
1
2
3
Direct costs assume prevailing wage requirements will not be imposed on the Project.
Assumes a 12-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance, and a 3-month lease-up period with a 100% average outstanding
balance.
Based on impact fee estimates provided by City staff. KMA included $5/sf for other public permits and fees. City staff should verify the accuracy of this
estimate.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Industrial_$1; trb Page 587
ATTACHMENT III - APPENDIX B - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STABILIZED NET OPERATING INCOME & RETURN ON INVESTMENT
INDUSTRIAL PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $1/SF SCENARIO
100,000 SF INDUSTRIAL GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Industrial Revenue
Lease Revenue 1 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $12.00 /Sf Industrial GBA $1,200,000
CAM Reimbursements 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $2.50 /Sf Industrial GBA 250,000
Gross Industrial Revenue $1,450,000
(Less) Vacancy & Collection Allowance 5.0%Gross Industrial Revenue (73,000)
Effective Gross Income $1,377,000
II.Industrial Operating Expenses
Operating Expenses 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $3.50 /Sf Industrial GBA $350,000
Reserves 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $0.15 /Sf Industrial GBA 15,000
Industrial Operating Expenses $365,000
III.Industrial Net Operating Income $1,012,000
IV.Estimated Return on Investment
Net Operating Income $1,012,000
Total Development Costs See ATTACHMENT III - APPENDIX B - TABLE 1 $14,012,000
V.Return on Investment 7.2%
1 Assumes a Modified Gross lease. Equates to a lease rate of $1.00 per square foot per month.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Industrial_$1; trb Page 588
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
ATTACHMENT III - APPENDIX C
INDUSTRIAL PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $2/SF SCENARIO
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Industrial_$2; trb Page 589
ATTACHMENT III - APPENDIX C - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
INDUSTRIAL PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $2/SF SCENARIO
100,000 SF INDUSTRIAL GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Site Acquisition Costs 250,000 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $5,000,000
II.Direct Costs 1
Site Improvement Costs 250,000 Sf Land $3 /Sf Land $750,000
Surface Parking 210 Spaces $2,500 /Space 525,000
Building Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $30 /Sf Industrial GBA 3,000,000
Tenant Improvement Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $5 /Sf Industrial GBA 500,000
Contractor Costs 20.0%Other Direct Costs 955,000
Total Direct Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $57 /Sf Industrial GBA $5,730,000
III.Indirect Costs
Architecture, Engineering & Consulting 3.0%Direct Costs $172,000
Public Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 2 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $13 /Sf Industrial GBA 1,267,000
Non-Residential Linkage Fee 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $2 /Sf Industrial GBA 200,000
Taxes, Insurance, Legal & Accounting 3.0%Direct Costs 172,000
Marketing & Leasing Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $3.00 /Sf Industrial GBA 300,000
Development Management 4.0%Direct Costs 229,000
Contingency Allowance 5.0%Other Indirect Costs 117,000
Total Indirect Costs $2,457,000
IV.Financing Costs
Construction Loan Interest 3 $14,121,000 Financed 4.50%Interest $540,000
Financing Fees
Permanent Loan 70.00%Loan to Value 2.50 Points 394,000
Total Financing Costs $934,000
V.Total Construction Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $91 /Sf Industrial GBA $9,121,000
Total Development Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $141 /Sf Industrial GBA $14,121,000
1
2
3
Direct costs assume prevailing wage requirements will not be imposed on the Project.
Assumes a 12-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance, and a 3-month lease-up period with a 100% average outstanding
balance.
Based on impact fee estimates provided by City staff. KMA included $5/sf for other public permits and fees. City staff should verify the accuracy of this
estimate.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Industrial_$2; trb Page 590
ATTACHMENT III - APPENDIX C - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STABILIZED NET OPERATING INCOME & RETURN ON INVESTMENT
INDUSTRIAL PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $2/SF SCENARIO
100,000 SF INDUSTRIAL GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Industrial Revenue
Lease Revenue 1 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $12.00 /Sf Industrial GBA $1,200,000
CAM Reimbursements 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $2.50 /Sf Industrial GBA 250,000
Gross Industrial Revenue $1,450,000
(Less) Vacancy & Collection Allowance 5.0%Gross Industrial Revenue (73,000)
Effective Gross Income $1,377,000
II.Industrial Operating Expenses
Operating Expenses 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $3.50 /Sf Industrial GBA $350,000
Reserves 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $0.15 /Sf Industrial GBA 15,000
Industrial Operating Expenses $365,000
III.Industrial Net Operating Income $1,012,000
IV.Estimated Return on Investment
Net Operating Income $1,012,000
Total Development Costs See ATTACHMENT III - APPENDIX C - TABLE 1 $14,121,000
V.Return on Investment 7.2%
1 Assumes a Modified Gross lease. Equates to a lease rate of $1.00 per square foot per month.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Industrial_$2; trb Page 591
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $3/SF SCENARIO
ATTACHMENT III - APPENDIX D
INDUSTRIAL PROTOTYPE
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Industrial_$3; trb Page 592
ATTACHMENT III - APPENDIX D - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
INDUSTRIAL PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $3/SF SCENARIO
100,000 SF INDUSTRIAL GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Site Acquisition Costs 250,000 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $5,000,000
II.Direct Costs 1
Site Improvement Costs 250,000 Sf Land $3 /Sf Land $750,000
Surface Parking 210 Spaces $2,500 /Space 525,000
Building Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $30 /Sf Industrial GBA 3,000,000
Tenant Improvement Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $5 /Sf Industrial GBA 500,000
Contractor Costs 20.0%Other Direct Costs 955,000
Total Direct Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $57 /Sf Industrial GBA $5,730,000
III.Indirect Costs
Architecture, Engineering & Consulting 3.0%Direct Costs $172,000
Public Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 2 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $13 /Sf Industrial GBA 1,267,000
Non-Residential Linkage Fee 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $3 /Sf Industrial GBA 300,000
Taxes, Insurance, Legal & Accounting 3.0%Direct Costs 172,000
Marketing & Leasing Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $3.00 /Sf Industrial GBA 300,000
Development Management 4.0%Direct Costs 229,000
Contingency Allowance 5.0%Other Indirect Costs 122,000
Total Indirect Costs $2,562,000
IV.Financing Costs
Construction Loan Interest 3 $14,230,000 Financed 4.50%Interest $544,000
Financing Fees
Permanent Loan 70.00%Loan to Value 2.50 Points 394,000
Total Financing Costs $938,000
V.Total Construction Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $92 /Sf Industrial GBA $9,230,000
Total Development Costs 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $142 /Sf Industrial GBA $14,230,000
1
2
3
Direct costs assume prevailing wage requirements will not be imposed on the Project.
Based on impact fee estimates provided by City staff. KMA included $5/sf for other public permits and fees. City staff should verify the accuracy of this
estimate.
Assumes a 12-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance, and a 3-month lease-up period with a 100% average outstanding
balance.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Industrial_$3; trb Page 593
ATTACHMENT III - APPENDIX D - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STABILIZED NET OPERATING INCOME & RETURN ON INVESTMENT
INDUSTRIAL PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $3/SF SCENARIO
100,000 SF INDUSTRIAL GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Industrial Revenue
Lease Revenue 1 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $12.00 /Sf Industrial GBA $1,200,000
CAM Reimbursements 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $2.50 /Sf Industrial GBA 250,000
Gross Industrial Revenue $1,450,000
(Less) Vacancy & Collection Allowance 5.0%Gross Industrial Revenue (73,000)
Effective Gross Income $1,377,000
II.Industrial Operating Expenses
Operating Expenses 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $3.50 /Sf Industrial GBA $350,000
Reserves 100,000 Sf Industrial GBA $0.15 /Sf Industrial GBA 15,000
Industrial Operating Expenses $365,000
III.Industrial Net Operating Income $1,012,000
IV.Estimated Return on Investment
Net Operating Income $1,012,000
Total Development Costs See ATTACHMENT III - APPENDIX D - TABLE 1 $14,230,000
V.Return on Investment 7.1%
1 Assumes a Modified Gross lease. Equates to a lease rate of $1.00 per square foot per month.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Industrial_$3; trb Page 594
ATTACHMENT IV
WAREHOUSE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; ATT IV_TITLE; trb Page 595
ATTACHMENT IV - APPENDIX A
WAREHOUSE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
BASE SCENARIO: NO NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Warehouse_BASE; trb Page 596
ATTACHMENT IV - APPENDIX A - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
WAREHOUSE PROTOTYPE
BASE SCENARIO: NO NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE
100,000 SF WAREHOUSE GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Site Acquisition Costs 250,000 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $5,000,000
II.Direct Costs 1
Site Improvement Costs 250,000 Sf Land $3 /Sf Land $750,000
Surface Parking Costs 64 Spaces $2,500 /Space 159,000
Building Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $30 /Sf Warehouse GBA 3,000,000
Tenant Improvement Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $5 /Sf Warehouse GBA 500,000
Contractor Costs 20.0%Other Direct Costs 882,000
Total Direct Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $100 /Sf Warehouse GBA $5,291,000
III.Indirect Costs
Architecture, Engineering & Consulting 3.0%Direct Costs $159,000
Public Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 2 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $11 /Sf Warehouse GBA 1,140,000
Non-Residential Linkage Fee 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $0 /Sf Warehouse GBA 0
Taxes, Insurance, Legal & Accounting 3.0%Direct Costs 159,000
Marketing & Leasing Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $3.00 /Sf Warehouse GBA 300,000
Development Management 4.0%Direct Costs 212,000
Contingency Allowance 5.0%Other Indirect Costs 99,000
Total Indirect Costs $2,069,000
IV.Financing Costs
Construction Loan Interest 3 $13,290,000 Financed 4.50%Interest $508,000
Financing Fees
Permanent Loan 70.00%Loan to Value 2.50 Points 422,000
Total Financing Costs $930,000
V.Total Construction Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $83 /Sf Warehouse GBA $8,290,000
Total Development Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $133 /Sf Warehouse GBA $13,290,000
VI.Non-Residential Linkage Fee Per SF as a Percentage of Development Costs
0.5% of Development Costs $0.66
1.0% of Development Costs $1.33
1.5% of Development Costs $1.99
2.0% of Development Costs $2.66
2.5% of Development Costs $3.32
3.0% of Development Costs $3.99
1
2
3 Assumes a 12-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance, and a 3-month lease-up period with a 100% average outstanding
balance.
Direct costs assume prevailing wage requirements will not be imposed on the Project.
Based on impact fee estimates provided by City staff. KMA included $5/sf for other public permits and fees. City staff should verify the accuracy of this
estimate.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Warehouse_BASE; trb Page 597
ATTACHMENT IV - APPENDIX A - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STABILIZED NET OPERATING INCOME & RETURN ON INVESTMENT
WAREHOUSE PROTOTYPE
BASE SCENARIO: NO NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE
100,000 SF WAREHOUSE GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Warehouse Revenue
Lease Revenue 1 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $12.00 /Sf Warehouse GBA $1,200,000
CAM Reimbursements 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $2.50 /Sf Warehouse GBA 250,000
Gross Warehouse Revenue $1,450,000
(Less) Vacancy & Collection Allowance 0.0%Gross Warehouse Revenue 0
Effective Gross Income $1,450,000
II.Warehouse Operating Expenses
Operating Expenses 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $3.50 /Sf Warehouse GBA $350,000
Reserves 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $0.15 /Sf Warehouse GBA 15,000
Warehouse Operating Expenses $365,000
III.Warehouse Net Operating Income $1,085,000
IV.Estimated Return on Investment
Net Operating Income $1,085,000
Total Development Costs See ATTACHMENT IV - APPENDIX A - TABLE 1 $13,290,000
V.Return on Investment 8.2%
1 Assumes a Modified Gross lease. Equates to $1.00 per square foot per month.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Warehouse_BASE; trb Page 598
ATTACHMENT IV - APPENDIX B
WAREHOUSE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $1/SF SCENARIO
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Warehouse_$1; trb Page 599
ATTACHMENT IV - APPENDIX B - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
WAREHOUSE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $1/SF SCENARIO
100,000 SF WAREHOUSE GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Site Acquisition Costs 250,000 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $5,000,000
II.Direct Costs 1
Site Improvement Costs 250,000 Sf Land $3 /Sf Land $750,000
Surface Parking Costs 64 Spaces $2,500 /Space 159,000
Building Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $30 /Sf Warehouse GBA 3,000,000
Tenant Improvement Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $5 /Sf Warehouse GBA 500,000
Contractor Costs 20.0%Other Direct Costs 882,000
Total Direct Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $100 /Sf Warehouse GBA $5,291,000
III.Indirect Costs
Architecture, Engineering & Consulting 3.0%Direct Costs $159,000
Public Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 2 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $11 /Sf Warehouse GBA 1,140,000
Non-Residential Linkage Fee 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $1 /Sf Warehouse GBA 100,000
Taxes, Insurance, Legal & Accounting 3.0%Direct Costs 159,000
Marketing & Leasing Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $3.00 /Sf Warehouse GBA 300,000
Development Management 4.0%Direct Costs 212,000
Contingency Allowance 5.0%Other Indirect Costs 104,000
Total Indirect Costs $2,174,000
IV.Financing Costs
Construction Loan Interest 3 $13,400,000 Financed 4.50%Interest $513,000
Financing Fees
Permanent Loan 70.00%Loan to Value 2.50 Points 422,000
Total Financing Costs $935,000
V.Total Construction Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $84 /Sf Warehouse GBA $8,400,000
Total Development Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $134 /Sf Warehouse GBA $13,400,000
1
2
3 Assumes a 12-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance, and a 3-month lease-up period with a 100% average outstanding
balance.
Direct costs assume prevailing wage requirements will not be imposed on the Project.
Based on impact fee estimates provided by City staff. KMA included $5/sf for other public permits and fees. City staff should verify the accuracy of this
estimate.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Warehouse_$1; trb Page 600
ATTACHMENT IV - APPENDIX B - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STABILIZED NET OPERATING INCOME & RETURN ON INVESTMENT
WAREHOUSE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $1/SF SCENARIO
100,000 SF WAREHOUSE GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Warehouse Revenue
Lease Revenue 1 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $12.00 /Sf Warehouse GBA $1,200,000
CAM Reimbursements 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $2.50 /Sf Warehouse GBA 250,000
Gross Warehouse Revenue $1,450,000
(Less) Vacancy & Collection Allowance 0.0%Gross Warehouse Revenue 0
Effective Gross Income $1,450,000
II.Warehouse Operating Expenses
Operating Expenses 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $3.50 /Sf Warehouse GBA $350,000
Reserves 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $0.15 /Sf Warehouse GBA 15,000
Warehouse Operating Expenses $365,000
III.Warehouse Net Operating Income $1,085,000
IV.Estimated Return on Investment
Net Operating Income $1,085,000
Total Development Costs See ATTACHMENT IV - APPENDIX B - TABLE 1 $13,400,000
V.Return on Investment 8.1%
1 Assumes a Modified Gross lease. Equates to $1.00 per square foot per month.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Warehouse_$1; trb Page 601
ATTACHMENT IV - APPENDIX C
WAREHOUSE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $2/SF SCENARIO
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Warehouse_$2; trb Page 602
ATTACHMENT IV - APPENDIX C - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
WAREHOUSE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $2/SF SCENARIO
100,000 SF WAREHOUSE GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Site Acquisition Costs 250,000 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $5,000,000
II.Direct Costs 1
Site Improvement Costs 250,000 Sf Land $3 /Sf Land $750,000
Surface Parking Costs 64 Spaces $2,500 /Space 159,000
Building Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $30 /Sf Warehouse GBA 3,000,000
Tenant Improvement Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $5 /Sf Warehouse GBA 500,000
Contractor Costs 20.0%Other Direct Costs 882,000
Total Direct Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $100 /Sf Warehouse GBA $5,291,000
III.Indirect Costs
Architecture, Engineering & Consulting 3.0%Direct Costs $159,000
Public Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 2 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $11 /Sf Warehouse GBA 1,140,000
Non-Residential Linkage Fee 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $2 /Sf Warehouse GBA 200,000
Taxes, Insurance, Legal & Accounting 3.0%Direct Costs 159,000
Marketing & Leasing Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $3.00 /Sf Warehouse GBA 300,000
Development Management 4.0%Direct Costs 212,000
Contingency Allowance 5.0%Other Indirect Costs 109,000
Total Indirect Costs $2,279,000
IV.Financing Costs
Construction Loan Interest 3 $13,509,000 Financed 4.50%Interest $517,000
Financing Fees
Permanent Loan 70.00%Loan to Value 2.50 Points 422,000
Total Financing Costs $939,000
V.Total Construction Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $85 /Sf Warehouse GBA $8,509,000
Total Development Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $135 /Sf Warehouse GBA $13,509,000
1
2 Assumes a 12-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance, and a 3-month lease-up period with a 100% average outstanding
balance.
Direct costs assume prevailing wage requirements will not be imposed on the Project.
Based on impact fee estimates provided by City staff. KMA included $5/sf for other public permits and fees. City staff should verify the accuracy of this
estimate.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Warehouse_$2; trb Page 603
ATTACHMENT IV - APPENDIX C - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STABILIZED NET OPERATING INCOME & RETURN ON INVESTMENT
WAREHOUSE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $2/SF SCENARIO
100,000 SF WAREHOUSE GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Warehouse Revenue
Lease Revenue 1 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $12.00 /Sf Warehouse GBA $1,200,000
CAM Reimbursements 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $2.50 /Sf Warehouse GBA 250,000
Gross Warehouse Revenue $1,450,000
(Less) Vacancy & Collection Allowance 0.0%Gross Warehouse Revenue 0
Effective Gross Income $1,450,000
II.Warehouse Operating Expenses
Operating Expenses 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $3.50 /Sf Warehouse GBA $350,000
Reserves 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $0.15 /Sf Warehouse GBA 15,000
Warehouse Operating Expenses $365,000
III.Warehouse Net Operating Income $1,085,000
IV.Estimated Return on Investment
Net Operating Income $1,085,000
Total Development Costs See ATTACHMENT IV - APPENDIX C - TABLE 1 $13,509,000
V.Return on Investment 8.0%
1 Assumes a Modified Gross lease. Equates to $1.00 per square foot per month.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Warehouse_$2; trb Page 604
ATTACHMENT IV - APPENDIX D
WAREHOUSE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $3/SF SCENARIO
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Warehouse_$3; trb Page 605
ATTACHMENT IV - APPENDIX D - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
WAREHOUSE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $3/SF SCENARIO
100,000 SF WAREHOUSE GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Site Acquisition Costs 250,000 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $5,000,000
II.Direct Costs 1
Site Improvement Costs 250,000 Sf Land $3 /Sf Land $750,000
Surface Parking Costs 64 Spaces $2,500 /Space 159,000
Building Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $30 /Sf Warehouse GBA 3,000,000
Tenant Improvement Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $5 /Sf Warehouse GBA 500,000
Contractor Costs 20.0%Other Direct Costs 882,000
Total Direct Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $100 /Sf Warehouse GBA $5,291,000
III.Indirect Costs
Architecture, Engineering & Consulting 3.0%Direct Costs $159,000
Public Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 2 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $11 /Sf Warehouse GBA 1,140,000
Non-Residential Linkage Fee 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $3 /Sf Warehouse GBA 300,000
Taxes, Insurance, Legal & Accounting 3.0%Direct Costs 159,000
Marketing & Leasing Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $3.00 /Sf Warehouse GBA 300,000
Development Management 4.0%Direct Costs 212,000
Contingency Allowance 5.0%Other Indirect Costs 114,000
Total Indirect Costs $2,384,000
IV.Financing Costs
Construction Loan Interest 3 $13,618,000 Financed 4.50%Interest $521,000
Financing Fees
Permanent Loan 70.00%Loan to Value 2.50 Points 422,000
Total Financing Costs $943,000
V.Total Construction Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $86 /Sf Warehouse GBA $8,618,000
Total Development Costs 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $136 /Sf Warehouse GBA $13,618,000
1
2
Direct costs assume prevailing wage requirements will not be imposed on the Project.
Based on impact fee estimates provided by City staff. KMA included $5/sf for other public permits and fees. City staff should verify the accuracy of this
estimate.
Assumes a 12-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance, and a 3-month lease-up period with a 100% average outstanding
balance.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Warehouse_$3; trb Page 606
ATTACHMENT IV - APPENDIX D - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STABILIZED NET OPERATING INCOME & RETURN ON INVESTMENT
WAREHOUSE PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $3/SF SCENARIO
100,000 SF WAREHOUSE GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Warehouse Revenue
Lease Revenue 1 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $12.00 /Sf Warehouse GBA $1,200,000
CAM Reimbursements 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $2.50 /Sf Warehouse GBA 250,000
Gross Warehouse Revenue $1,450,000
(Less) Vacancy & Collection Allowance 0.0%Gross Warehouse Revenue 0
Effective Gross Income $1,450,000
II.Warehouse Operating Expenses
Operating Expenses 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $3.50 /Sf Warehouse GBA $350,000
Reserves 100,000 Sf Warehouse GBA $0.15 /Sf Warehouse GBA 15,000
Warehouse Operating Expenses $365,000
III.Warehouse Net Operating Income $1,085,000
IV.Estimated Return on Investment
Net Operating Income $1,085,000
Total Development Costs See ATTACHMENT IV - APPENDIX D - TABLE 1 $13,618,000
V.Return on Investment 8.0%
1 Assumes a Modified Gross lease. Equates to $1.00 per square foot per month.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; Warehouse_$3; trb Page 607
ATTACHMENT V
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; ATT V_TITLE; trb Page 608
ATTACHMENT V - APPENDIX A
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
BASE SCENARIO: NO NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; R & D_BASE; trb Page 609
ATTACHMENT V - APPENDIX A - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROTOTYPE
BASE SCENARIO: NO NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE
100,000 SF R&D GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Site Acquisition Costs 200,000 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $4,000,000
II.Direct Costs 1
Site Improvement Costs 200,000 Sf Land $3 /Sf Land $600,000
Surface Parking 300 Spaces $2,500 /Space 750,000
Building Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $30 /Sf R&D GBA 3,000,000
Tenant Improvement Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $5 /Sf R&D GBA 500,000
Contractor Costs 20.0%Other Direct Costs 970,000
Total Direct Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $58 /Sf R&D GBA $5,820,000
III.Indirect Costs
Architecture, Engineering & Consulting 3.0%Direct Costs $175,000
Public Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 2 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $21 /Sf R&D GBA 2,055,000
Non-Residential Linkage Fee 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $0 /Sf R&D GBA 0
Taxes, Insurance, Legal & Accounting 3.0%Direct Costs 175,000
Marketing & Leasing Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $3.00 /Sf R&D GBA 300,000
Development Management 4.0%Direct Costs 233,000
Contingency Allowance 5.0%Other Indirect Costs 147,000
Total Indirect Costs $3,085,000
IV.Financing Costs
Construction Loan Interest 3 $13,799,000 Financed 4.50%Interest $528,000
Financing Fees
Permanent Loan 70.00%Loan to Value 2.50 Points 366,000
Total Financing Costs $894,000
V.Total Construction Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $98 /Sf R&D GBA $9,799,000
Total Development Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $138 /Sf R&D GBA $13,799,000
VI.Non-Residential Linkage Fee Per SF as a Percentage of Development Costs
0.5% of Development Costs $0.69
1.0% of Development Costs $1.38
1.5% of Development Costs $2.07
2.0% of Development Costs $2.76
2.5% of Development Costs $3.45
3.0% of Development Costs $4.14
1
2
3 Assumes a 12-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance, and a 3-month lease-up period with a 100% average outstanding
balance.
Direct costs assume prevailing wage requirements will not be imposed on the Project.
Based on impact fee estimates provided by City staff. KMA included $5/sf for other public permits and fees. City staff should verify the accuracy of this
estimate.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; R & D_BASE; trb Page 610
ATTACHMENT V - APPENDIX A - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STABILIZED NET OPERATING INCOME & RETURN ON INVESTMENT
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROTOTYPE
BASE SCENARIO: NO NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE
100,000 SF R&D GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Research and Development Revenue
Lease Revenue 1 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $12.00 /Sf R&D GBA $1,200,000
CAM Reimbursements 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $2.50 /Sf R&D GBA 250,000
Gross Research and Development Revenue $1,450,000
(Less) Vacancy & Collection Allowance 10.0%Gross Income (145,000)
Effective Gross Income $1,305,000
II.Research and Development Operating Expenses
Operating Expenses 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $3.50 /Sf R&D GBA $350,000
Reserves 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $0.15 /Sf R&D GBA 15,000
Research and Development Operating Expenses $365,000
III.Research and Development Net Operating Income $940,000
IV.Estimated Return on Investment
Net Operating Income $940,000
Total Development Costs See ATTACHMENT V - APPENDIX A - TABLE 1 $13,799,000
V.Return on Investment 6.8%
1 Assumes a Modified Gross lease. Equates to a lease rate of $1.00 per square foot per month.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; R & D_BASE; trb Page 611
ATTACHMENT V - APPENDIX B
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $1/SF SCENARIO
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; R & D_$1; trb Page 612
ATTACHMENT V - APPENDIX B - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $1/SF SCENARIO
100,000 SF R&D GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Site Acquisition Costs 200,000 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $4,000,000
II.Direct Costs 1
Site Improvement Costs 200,000 Sf Land $3 /Sf Land $600,000
Surface Parking 300 Spaces $2,500 /Space 750,000
Building Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $30 /Sf R&D GBA 3,000,000
Tenant Improvement Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $5 /Sf R&D GBA 500,000
Contractor Costs 20.0%Other Direct Costs 970,000
Total Direct Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $58 /Sf R&D GBA $5,820,000
III.Indirect Costs
Architecture, Engineering & Consulting 3.0%Direct Costs $175,000
Public Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 2 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $21 /Sf R&D GBA 2,055,000
Non-Residential Linkage Fee 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $1 /Sf R&D GBA 100,000
Taxes, Insurance, Legal & Accounting 3.0%Direct Costs 175,000
Marketing & Leasing Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $3.00 /Sf R&D GBA 300,000
Development Management 4.0%Direct Costs 233,000
Contingency Allowance 5.0%Other Indirect Costs 152,000
Total Indirect Costs $3,190,000
IV.Financing Costs
Construction Loan Interest 3 $13,908,000 Financed 4.50%Interest $532,000
Financing Fees
Permanent Loan 70.00%Loan to Value 2.50 Points 366,000
Total Financing Costs $898,000
V.Total Construction Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $99 /Sf R&D GBA $9,908,000
Total Development Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $139 /Sf R&D GBA $13,908,000
1
2
3 Assumes a 12-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance, and a 3-month lease-up period with a 100% average outstanding
balance.
Direct costs assume prevailing wage requirements will not be imposed on the Project.
Based on impact fee estimates provided by City staff. KMA included $5/sf for other public permits and fees. City staff should verify the accuracy of this
estimate.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; R & D_$1; trb Page 613
ATTACHMENT V - APPENDIX B - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STABILIZED NET OPERATING INCOME & RETURN ON INVESTMENT
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $1/SF SCENARIO
100,000 SF R&D GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Research and Development Revenue
Lease Revenue 1 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $12.00 /Sf R&D GBA $1,200,000
CAM Reimbursements 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $2.50 /Sf R&D GBA 250,000
Gross Research and Development Revenue $1,450,000
(Less) Vacancy & Collection Allowance 10.0%Gross Income (145,000)
Effective Gross Income $1,305,000
II.Research and Development Operating Expenses
Operating Expenses 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $3.50 /Sf R&D GBA $350,000
Reserves 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $0.15 /Sf R&D GBA 15,000
Research and Development Operating Expenses $365,000
III.Research and Development Net Operating Income $940,000
IV.Estimated Return on Investment
Net Operating Income $940,000
Total Development Costs See ATTACHMENT V - APPENDIX B - TABLE 1 $13,908,000
V.Return on Investment 6.8%
1 Assumes a Modified Gross lease. Equates to a lease rate of $1.00 per square foot per month.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; R & D_$1; trb Page 614
ATTACHMENT V - APPENDIX C
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $2/SF SCENARIO
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; R & D_$2; trb Page 615
ATTACHMENT V - APPENDIX C - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $2/SF SCENARIO
100,000 SF R&D GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Site Acquisition Costs 200,000 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $4,000,000
II.Direct Costs 1
Site Improvement Costs 200,000 Sf Land $3 /Sf Land $600,000
Surface Parking 300 Spaces $2,500 /Space 750,000
Building Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $30 /Sf R&D GBA 3,000,000
Tenant Improvement Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $5 /Sf R&D GBA 500,000
Contractor Costs 20.0%Other Direct Costs 970,000
Total Direct Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $58 /Sf R&D GBA $5,820,000
III.Indirect Costs
Architecture, Engineering & Consulting 3.0%Direct Costs $175,000
Public Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 2 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $21 /Sf R&D GBA 2,055,000
Non-Residential Linkage Fee 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $2 /Sf R&D GBA 200,000
Taxes, Insurance, Legal & Accounting 3.0%Direct Costs 175,000
Marketing & Leasing Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $3.00 /Sf R&D GBA 300,000
Development Management 4.0%Direct Costs 233,000
Contingency Allowance 5.0%Other Indirect Costs 157,000
Total Indirect Costs $3,295,000
IV.Financing Costs
Construction Loan Interest 3 $14,017,000 Financed 4.50%Interest $536,000
Financing Fees
Permanent Loan 70.00%Loan to Value 2.50 Points 366,000
Total Financing Costs $902,000
V.Total Construction Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $100 /Sf R&D GBA $10,017,000
Total Development Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $140 /Sf R&D GBA $14,017,000
1
2
3 Assumes a 12-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance, and a 3-month lease-up period with a 100% average outstanding
balance.
Direct costs assume prevailing wage requirements will not be imposed on the Project.
Based on impact fee estimates provided by City staff. KMA included $5/sf for other public permits and fees. City staff should verify the accuracy of this
estimate.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; R & D_$2; trb Page 616
ATTACHMENT V - APPENDIX C - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STABILIZED NET OPERATING INCOME & RETURN ON INVESTMENT
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $2/SF SCENARIO
100,000 SF R&D GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Research and Development Revenue
Lease Revenue 1 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $12.00 /Sf R&D GBA $1,200,000
CAM Reimbursements 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $2.50 /Sf R&D GBA 250,000
Gross Research and Development Revenue $1,450,000
(Less) Vacancy & Collection Allowance 10.0%Gross Income (145,000)
Effective Gross Income $1,305,000
II.Research and Development Operating Expenses
Operating Expenses 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $3.50 /Sf R&D GBA $350,000
Reserves 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $0.15 /Sf R&D GBA 15,000
Research and Development Operating Expenses $365,000
III.Research and Development Net Operating Income $940,000
IV.Estimated Return on Investment
Net Operating Income $940,000
Total Development Costs See ATTACHMENT V - APPENDIX C - TABLE 1 $14,017,000
V.Return on Investment 6.7%
1 Assumes a Modified Gross lease. Equates to a lease rate of $1.00 per square foot per month.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; R & D_$2; trb Page 617
ATTACHMENT V - APPENDIX D
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $3/SF SCENARIO
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; R & D_$3; trb Page 618
ATTACHMENT V - APPENDIX D - TABLE 1
ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT COSTS
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $3/SF SCENARIO
100,000 SF R&D GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Site Acquisition Costs 200,000 Sf Land $20 /Sf Land $4,000,000
II.Direct Costs 1
Site Improvement Costs 200,000 Sf Land $3 /Sf Land $600,000
Surface Parking 300 Spaces $2,500 /Space 750,000
Building Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $30 /Sf R&D GBA 3,000,000
Tenant Improvement Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $5 /Sf R&D GBA 500,000
Contractor Costs 20.0%Other Direct Costs 970,000
Total Direct Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $58 /Sf R&D GBA $5,820,000
III.Indirect Costs
Architecture, Engineering & Consulting 3.0%Direct Costs $175,000
Public Permits & Fees/Impact Fees 2 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $21 /Sf R&D GBA 2,055,000
Non-Residential Linkage Fee 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $3 /Sf R&D GBA 300,000
Taxes, Insurance, Legal & Accounting 3.0%Direct Costs 175,000
Marketing & Leasing Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $3.00 /Sf R&D GBA 300,000
Development Management 4.0%Direct Costs 233,000
Contingency Allowance 5.0%Other Indirect Costs 162,000
Total Indirect Costs $3,400,000
IV.Financing Costs
Construction Loan Interest 3 $14,126,000 Financed 4.50%Interest $540,000
Financing Fees
Permanent Loan 70.00%Loan to Value 2.50 Points 366,000
Total Financing Costs $906,000
V.Total Construction Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $101 /Sf R&D GBA $10,126,000
Total Development Costs 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $141 /Sf R&D GBA $14,126,000
1
2
3
Direct costs assume prevailing wage requirements will not be imposed on the Project.
Based on impact fee estimates provided by City staff. KMA included $5/sf for other public permits and fees. City staff should verify the accuracy of this
estimate.
Assumes a 12-month construction period with a 60% average outstanding balance, and a 3-month lease-up period with a 100% average outstanding
balance.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; R & D_$3; trb Page 619
ATTACHMENT V - APPENDIX D - TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STABILIZED NET OPERATING INCOME & RETURN ON INVESTMENT
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROTOTYPE
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE @ $3/SF SCENARIO
100,000 SF R&D GBA
NON-RESIDENTIAL LINKAGE FEE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA
I.Research and Development Revenue
Lease Revenue 1 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $12.00 /Sf R&D GBA $1,200,000
CAM Reimbursements 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $2.50 /Sf R&D GBA 250,000
Gross Research and Development Revenue $1,450,000
(Less) Vacancy & Collection Allowance 10.0%Gross Income (145,000)
Effective Gross Income $1,305,000
II.Research and Development Operating Expenses
Operating Expenses 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $3.50 /Sf R&D GBA $350,000
Reserves 100,000 Sf R&D GBA $0.15 /Sf R&D GBA 15,000
Research and Development Operating Expenses $365,000
III.Research and Development Net Operating Income $940,000
IV.Estimated Return on Investment
Net Operating Income $940,000
Total Development Costs See ATTACHMENT V - APPENDIX D - TABLE 1 $14,126,000
V.Return on Investment 6.7%
1 Assumes a Modified Gross lease. Equates to a lease rate of $1.00 per square foot per month.
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: RC_Feasibility Analysis_10 5 21.xlsx; R & D_$3; trb Page 620
Survey of Affordable Housing Impact Fees
Jurisdiction Yr. Adopted/
Updated Thresholds & Exemptions Comments
San Francisco
Population: 864,000
1981
Updated 2002,
2007
2019
Retail / Entertainment
Hotel
Office (50,000 gsf and above)
Office (<50,000 gsf)
Laboratory
Small Enterprise Workspace
$28.13
$22.57
$69.60
$62.64
$38.37
$23.70
25,000 gsf threshold
Exempt: freestanding pharmacy < 50,000 SF; grocery <
75,000
Office and Laboratory fees reflect fully
phased in January 1, 2021 fee levels. Fee is
adjusted annually based on the
construction cost increases.
County of Santa Clara 2018 Academic Space (Stanford University)$68.50 Fee in effect July 1, 2020.
City of Palo Alto
Population: 67,000
1984
Updated 2002
and 2017.
Office & R&D
Other Commercial
$36.53
$21.26
Churches; universities; recreation; hospitals; private
educational facilities; day care and nursery school;
public facilities; retail, restaurants, services < 1,500 sf
are exempt
Fee is adjusted annually based on CPI.
City of Menlo Park
Population: 34,000
1998 Office & R&D
Other com./industrial
$18.69
$10.14
10,000 gross SF threshold
Churches, private clubs, lodges, fraternal orgs, public
facilities and projects with few or no employees are
exempt.
Fee is adjusted annually based on CPI.
City of Sunnyvale
Population: 152,000
1984
Updated 2003
and 2015.
Industrial, Office, R&D
Retail, Hotel
$16.50
$8.25
Office fee is 50% on the first 25,000 SF of building area.
Exemptions for Child care, education, hospital, non-
profits, public uses.
Fee is adjusted annually based on CPI.
City of Santa Clara
Population: 125,000
2017 Office 20,000 SF +
Office, under 20,000 SF
Industrial 20,000 SF +
Industrial under 20,000 SF
Retail, Hotel, Other 5,000 SF+
Low intensity uses
$20.00
$10.00
$10.00
$5.00
$5.00
$2.00
Assembly, day care, nursery, schools and hospitals and
commercial space in a mixed use project under 20,000
square feet are exempt.
Fee is adjusted annually based on ENR.
City of San Mateo
Population: 104,000
2016 Office
Hotel
Retail
$26.10
$10.44
$5.22
5,000 SF threshold
25% fee reduction for projections paying prevailing
wage. Schools, religious, child care centers, public and
non-profit uses exempt.
Fee is adjusted annually based on ENR.
City of Foster City
Population: 34,000
2016 Office , Medical Office and R&D
Hotel
Retail, Restaurant and Services
$27.50
$12.50
$6.25
5,000 SF threshold
Schools, places of public assembly, recreational
facilities, hospitals, cultural institutions, childcare
facilities, nursing homes, rest homes, residential care
facilities, and skilled
South San Francisco
Population: 67,000
2018 Office , Medical Office and R&D
Hotel
Retail, Restaurant and Services
$15.00
$5.00
$2.50
25% fee reduction for projections paying prevailing
wage. Schools, churches, child care centers, public uses
exempt.
East Palo Alto
Population: 30,000
2016 non-residential $10.72 10,000 SF threshold
Fee Level
(per Sq.Ft. unless otherwise noted)
Attachment 3Page621
Survey of Affordable Housing Impact Fees
Jurisdiction Yr. Adopted/
Updated Thresholds & Exemptions CommentsFee Level
(per Sq.Ft. unless otherwise noted)
San Bruno Population:
43,000
2015 Office and R&D
Hotel
Retail, Restaurant, Services
$13.10
$13.10
$6.55
No minimum threshold Fee is adjusted annually based on ENR.
Redwood City
Population: 84,000
2015 Office (Medical, R&D, Admin)
Hotel
Retail & Restaurant
$20.00
$5.00
$5.00
5,000 SF threshold
25% fee reduction for projections paying prevailing
wage.
Schools, child care centers, public uses exempt.
Fee is adjusted annually based on ENR.
City of Mountain View
Population: 80,000
Updated 2002 /
2012
/2014 /2016
Office/High Tech/Indust.
Hotel/Retail/Entertainment.
$28.25
$3.02
Fee is 50% on building area under thresholds: Office
<10,000 SF
Hotel <25,000 SF
Retail <25,000 SF
Fee is adjusted annually based on CPI.
City of Cupertino
Population: 61,000
1993, 2015 Office/Industrial/R&D
Hotel/Commercial/Retail
$24.60
$12.30
No minimum threshold.Fee is adjusted annually based
on CPI.
City of Los Altos
Population: 31,000
2018 Office (recommended fee level)
All Other Non-Residential (rec. fee)
$25.00
$15.00
500 SF threshold Fee is adjusted annually based
on CPI.
City of Milpitas
Population: 75,000
2019 Office/ Retail
Industrial
$8.00
$4.00
5,000 SF threshold
Assembly, day care, schools, hospitals exempt.
Fee is adjusted annually based on ENR.
County of San Mateo
Population: 763,000
2016 Office/Medical/R&D
Hotel
Retail / Restaurant /Services
$25.00
$10.00
$5.00
3,500 SF threshold;
25% fee reduction for prevailing wage. public,
institutional, childcare, recreational, assisted living
exempt.
Fee is adjusted annually based on ENR.
City of Culver City
Population: 39,800
2021 $5.00 10,000 SF threshold;
exempts housing components of mixed-use projects;
institutional, religious, educational, recreation facilities
exempt.
Yes
City of Los Angeles
Population: 3.9 million
2017 All non residential uses; fee varies depending
on location in the city (designated as low,
meidum, medium-high, and high market areas)
$3.11 -
$5.19
15,000 SF threshold;
exempts hospitals, grocery stores if none within 1/3
mile, public institutional projects
Fee adjusted annually using CPI.
City of Glendale
Population: 203,800
2019 All non residential uses $4.00 1,250 SF threshold;
hotels, auto dealers, institutional uses, reconstructions
due to acts of nature exempt
No
City of West Hollywood
Population: 36,100
2018 All non residential uses $8.68 10,000 SF threshold Yes
San Diego
Population: 3.3 million
1990 All non residential uses; fees vary by type of
construction
$.08 -
$2.12
Non profit hospitals, manufacturing/warehouse,
government uses exempted
Yes
Attachment 3Page622
Survey of Affordable Housing Impact Fees
Jurisdiction Yr. Adopted/
Updated Thresholds & Exemptions CommentsFee Level
(per Sq.Ft. unless otherwise noted)
Santa Monica
Population: 92,900
2015 All non residential uses; fees vary by type of
construction
$3.07 -
$11.21
Institutional projects, commercial portions of
apartment projects developed by non-profit housing
providers if public assistance is provided
Automatically adjusted annually
Attachment 3Page623
Ordinance No. 991 – Page 1 of 6
ORDINANCE NO. 991
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, ADDING CHAPTER 3.76 TO THE RANCHO
CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH AN AFFORDABLE
HOUSING DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
A. RECITALS
1. There is a shortage of affordable housing in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, as evidenced in
the City's Housing Element.
2. New non-residential (e.g. retail/commercial, office, industrial, warehouse, and research and
development) development creates a variety of new jobs with varied degrees of compensation for
workers in such developments.
3. The addition of new workers in these new non-residential developments generates housing
demand for households at extremely low, very low, low, and moderate incomes.
4. Due to housing and market conditions, new market-rate development projects in the City have
provided a disproportionate quantity of housing units that are not affordable to all income groups,
creating an unbalanced housing stock.
5. There is a low vacancy rate for housing affordable to persons of extremely low, very low, low,
and moderate income households.
6. Rancho Cucamonga has one of the least affordable real estate markets in San Bernardino
County.
7. Due to these factors, workers of extremely low, very low, low, and moderate income are
experiencing increasing difficulty in locating and maintaining adequate, safe, and sanitary
affordable housing within or near the City.
8. The failure to provide adequate affordable housing for lower-wage workers can force these
workers to live in less than adequate housing within the City, pay a significantly disproportionate
share of their incomes to live in adequate housing within the City, or commute ever-increasing
distances to their jobs from housing located outside the City.
9. The lack of affordable housing has detrimental impacts on traffic, transit, and related air quality
impacts and the demands placed on the regional transportation infrastructure.
10. Non-residential uses in the City benefit from the availability of housing close to their employees.
11. The City has commissioned the preparation of a Non-Residential Linkage Fee Nexus Study,
prepared by Keyser Marston Associates, Inc., dated October 5, 2021 ("Nexus Study"), to analyze
the relationship between non-residential development, job creation, and the demand for affordable
housing, in compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act (California Government Code Sections 66000
et seq.).
12. According to the Nexus Study (pgs. 10-25), a nexus exists between the addition of new non-
residential development and the jobs/new workers that this development creates, and the workers'
Page 624
Ordinance No. 991 – Page 2 of 6
need for additional housing in proximity to the jobs, a portion of which must be affordable to low-
income workers.
13. More specifically, the Nexus Study documents the linkage between new and expanded non-
residential development, the net number of new employees and employee households generated
by businesses occupying these land use buildings, and the housing demands of these households.
14. As discussed in detail in the Nexus Study, new housing affordable to persons identified in the
Nexus Study is not now being added to the supply in sufficient quantity to meet the needs of the
new employee households associated with new or expanded non-residential development.
15. The Nexus Study quantifies the cost mitigation associated with developing affordable housing
units based on the identified need resulting from employees generated by new non-residential
development.
16. The City Council is imposing the fee established by this Ordinance in order to partially close this
gap by using the fee to help finance additional affordable housing stock.
17. The Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code does not currently establish an adequate mechanism
to account for the impact that non-residential development has on increasing the need for
affordable housing.
18. Requiring non-residential developers to assist in the production of affordable housing is also
consistent with the City's long-standing commitment to achieve and maintain a suitable living
environment, including housing for all economic levels.
20. This municipal commitment conforms with State and Federal policies and is an important goal
of the City's draft Housing Element, which is expected to be adopted in the coming months.
21. Program HE-12 of the City's draft 2021-2029 Housing Element states: “The City has seen a
significant increase in non-residential development in recent years, resulting in job increases in
multiple business sectors and an increased associated need for affordable housing. To mitigate
the impact of newly generated jobs on the local housing market, the City will explore a linkage fee
for non-residential development.”
22. This fee program will benefit the City as a whole since each development which contributes to
affordable housing through the payment of this fee assists in augmenting the City's housing mix,
helps to increase the supply of housing for all economic segments of the community, and addresses
the affordable housing need generated by the development, thereby supporting a balanced
community which is beneficial to the public health, safety, and welfare of the City.
23. The City wishes to impose an affordable housing development impact fee on non-
residential development, and to deposit such fees into a newly-established and stand-alone
fund to partially fund development of affordable housing in the City.
24. All prerequisites necessary to the adoption of this ordinance have occurred, including the
noticing procedures outlined in the Mitigation Fee Act.
B. ORDINANCE
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows:
Section 1. Findings
Page 625
Ordinance No. 991 – Page 3 of 6
A. The provision of safe and stable housing for households at all income levels is
essential for the public welfare of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Housing in the City has become
steadily more expensive and housing costs have gone up faster than incomes. Federal and state
government programs do not provide enough affordable housing to satisfy the needs of very low,
low, or moderate income households. As a result, there is a severe shortage of adequate, affordable-
housing for very low, lower, and moderate income households, as evidenced by the following findings
in the City's draft 2021-2029 Housing Element:
1. The City had a regional housing need between 2013 and 2021 to construct 209
very low income units, 141 low income units and 158 moderate income units. According to the 2020
Housing Element Annual Progress Report, between 2013 and 2020, 18 very low income units, 11
low income units and 171 moderate income units were permitted. Less than 40 percent of the very
low, low and moderate allocated units were permitted during the current housing cycle period.
2. The City has a regional housing need between 2021 and 2029 to construct 3,245
extremely low/very low income units, 1,920 low income units, and 2,031 moderate income units (Draft
Housing Element 2021-2029, Table HE-47, Page 72). According to the draft Housing Element, after
accounting for potential future Accessory Dwelling Units, the City still needs to construct 3,209 extremely
low/very low income units and 1,864 low income units. Therefore, the City's current policies have not
been sufficient to generate enough new housing affordable to Extremely Low Income, Very Low
Income, and Low Income households.
B. The City Council finds that there is a dire need for housing to accommodate the significant
workforce increase caused by non-residential development in recent years. Such job increases in
multiple business sectors is correlated with an increased associated need for affordable housing. To
mitigate the impact of newly generated jobs on the local housing market, the City Council finds that there
is a need for non-residential development to support the resulting workforce’s affordable housing
demand.
Section 2. A new Chapter 3.76 entitled “Affordable Housing Linkage Fee” is hereby added
to Title 3 (“Revenue and Finance”) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read as follows:
Chapter 3.76 AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
3.76.010 Purpose and Intent.
3.76.020 Definitions.
3.76.030 Affordable Housing Development Impact Fee.
3.76.040 Adjustments or Waivers.
3.76.050 Conversion.
3.76.060 Use of Funds.
3.76.010 Purpose and Intent.
A. The purpose of this chapter is to facilitate the development and availability of housing
affordable to a range of households with varying income levels within the city through creation and
imposition of a fee on new non-residential development, which will partially fund the need for affordable
housing created by the workforce of new development.
B. The requirements of this chapter are based on a number of factors including, but not
limited to, the city's long-standing commitment to increasing opportunities for affordable housing; the
immediate need for affordable housing, as reflected in local, state, and federal housing regulations and
policies; the demand for affordable housing created by non-residential development; and the impact that
the lack of affordable housing production has on the health, safety, and welfare of the city's residents
including its impacts on traffic, transit and related air quality impacts, and the demands placed on the
regional transportation infrastructure. Imposing a fee that is reasonably related to the burdens created
Page 626
Ordinance No. 991 – Page 4 of 6
by new non-residential development on the city's need for affordable housing will enable the city to fund
development of affordable housing units that will contribute to addressing these impacts and fulfilling
these goals.
C. It is the intent of the city council that the fee required by this chapter shall be
supplementary to any conditions imposed upon a development project pursuant to other provisions of
this code, the Subdivision Map Act, the California Environmental Quality Act, and other state and local
laws, which may authorize the imposition of project-specific conditions on development.
3.76.020 Definitions.
For the purpose of this chapter, the following words, terms, and phrases shall be defined as set forth
below:
"Affordable housing development impact fee" means the fee paid by a developer of a non-residential
development project to mitigate the impacts that such a project has on the demand for affordable
housing in the city.
"Affordable housing development impact fund" means a fund or account designated by the city to
maintain and account for all monies received pursuant to this chapter.
"Non-residential development project" means the construction or the addition of new non-residential
gross floor area, or the conversion from a use exempt from the affordable housing development impact
fee to a use subject to the affordable housing development impact fee. Non-residential development
includes retail/commercial, office, industrial, warehouse, and research and development uses.
"Community land uses which serve the public" means uses that include, but are not limited to,
hospitals, places of worship, museums, educational facilities (public K-12 schools, community
colleges, and colleges and universities), youth and recreational facilities, retirement or rest homes,
emergency shelters, and other such institutional uses which serve the public, as determined by the
director.
"Developer" means any person, firm, partnership, association, joint venture, corporation, or any entity
or combination of entities, which seeks or applies for city approvals, permits or entitlements for all or
part of a non-residential development project.
"Director” shall mean the engineering services director.
"Gross floor area" shall have the same meaning as set forth in section 17.126.020 ("Floor area, gross").
"Mixed-use development" shall have the same meaning as that set forth in section 17.126.020
(“Development, mixed use”).
3.76.030 Affordable Housing Development Impact Fee.
A. Requirement. An affordable housing development impact fee is hereby imposed on all
non-residential development projects, except those exempt projects identified below. No application for
a building permit for a non-residential development project shall be approved, nor shall any such non-
residential development project be constructed, without first complying with this chapter. The fee imposed
by this chapter shall be paid by each developer no sooner than issuance of a building permit and no later
than issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the structure. No certificate of occupancy shall be issued
for a non-residential development project that has not paid the fee required under this chapter. The
amount of the fee shall be calculated at the time the fee is paid, based upon the rate then in effect.
B. Exemptions. Notwithstanding subsection A above, this chapter shall not apply to the
following:
Page 627
Ordinance No. 991 – Page 5 of 6
1. Any non-residential development project with a gross floor area of 10,000 square
feet or less;
2. Community land uses which serve the public, as defined by this ordinance;
3. Reconstruction of any building that was destroyed by fire, flood, earthquake or
other act of nature, so long as the square footage does not exceed the square footage before the loss;
4. The residential portion of a mixed-use development project;
5. Utility, transportation, public facility, and communication uses;
6. Any non-residential development project developed by a public agency;
7. The non-residential area of any mixed-use project that includes at least 5% of the
total number of residential units reserved for extremely low/very low or low income households. The
applicant shall enter into a regulatory agreement with the city to preserve the units at such income levels
for at least 45 years. The agreement shall be recorded as a deed restriction against the property.
C. Calculation of the fee. The affordable housing development impact fee shall be charged
on new gross floor area, subject to section 3.76.050. The amount of the fee shall be established by
resolution of the city council.
3.76.040 Adjustments or Waivers.
A. The requirements of this chapter may be adjusted or waived by the City Council if the
developer demonstrates that an insufficient nexus exists between the proposed use and the affordable
housing development impact fee. The developer shall submit documentation demonstrating this with a
request for an adjustment or waiver in writing to the director no later than ten days prior to the public
hearing on the development permit application for the project or, if no development permit is required, at
the time of the filing of the request for a building permit. The developer shall provide such additional
information as may be required by the director to process the request for consideration by the City
Council.
B. The requirements of this chapter may be adjusted or waived by the City Council if the
developer demonstrates that applying this chapter would constitute a taking of property without just
compensation in violation of the United States and/or California Constitutions. The developer shall submit
a request for an adjustment or waiver in writing to the director no later than ten days prior to the public
hearing on the development permit application for the project or, if no development permit is required, at
the time of the filing of the request for a building permit than the date it files its initial development
application with the city. The developer shall provide such additional information as may be required by
the director to process the request for consideration by the City Council.
3.76.050 Conversion.
If a development is exempt from the fee at initial construction, but later converts to a non-residential
development project subject to the fee, the converted square footage will be deemed new gross
floor area and the affordable housing development impact fee shall be paid pursuant to section
3.76.030. The amount of the fee shall be calculated at the time the fee is paid, based upon the rate then
in effect.
3.76.060 Use of Funds.
All funds derived from this chapter shall be placed in a separate and distinct affordable housing
development impact fund and used solely to increase the supply of housing affordable to extremely
Page 628
Ordinance No. 991 – Page 6 of 6
low, very low, low and moderate income households, the demand for which is created by the
development of new non-residential development in the city.
Section 3. This ordinance and the affordable housing development impact fee shall apply
to all non-residential development projects except those that have received all required discretionary
entitlements prior to the effective date of this ordinance.
Section 4. The City Council declares that, should any section, subsection, subdivision,
sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance for any reason is held to be invalid or
unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect
the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would
have adopted this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase,
or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions,
sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the
same to be published in the manner prescribed by law.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this _____ day of ______________ 2021.
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY:
L. Dennis Michael, Mayor
I, Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the __ day of ___________
2021, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ATTEST:
City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Page 629
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-131
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, TO ESTABLISH THE
AMOUNT OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPACT FEE FOR
NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS WITHIN THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN
SUPPORT THEREOF
WHEREAS, the State of California has found that local governments have a responsibility
to use the powers vested in them to facilitate the development of housing and to make adequate
provision for the housing needs of all economic segments of the community (Government Code
Section 65580(d)); and
WHEREAS, There is a shortage of affordable housing in the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
as evidenced in the City's Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, New non-residential development creates a variety of new jobs with varied
degrees of compensation for workers in such developments.
WHEREAS, The addition of new workers in these new non-residential developments
generates housing demand for households at extremely low, very low, low, and moderate
incomes.
WHEREAS, The failure to provide adequate affordable housing for lower-wage workers
can force these workers to live in less than adequate housing within the City, pay a significantly
disproportionate share of their incomes to live in adequate housing within the City, or commute
ever-increasing distances to their jobs from housing located outside the City.
WHEREAS, The City has commissioned the preparation of a Non-Residential Linkage Fee
Nexus Study, prepared by Keyser Marston Associates, Inc., dated October 5, 2021 ("Nexus
Study"), to analyze the relationship between non-residential development, job creation, and the
demand for affordable housing, in compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act (California Government
Code Sections 66000 et seq.).
WHEREAS, According to the Nexus Study (pgs. 10-25), a nexus exists between the
addition of new non-residential development and the jobs/new workers that this development
creates, and the workers' need for additional housing in proximity to the jobs, a portion of which
must be affordable to low-income workers.
WHEREAS, More specifically, the Nexus Study documents the linkage between new and
expanded non-residential development, the net number of new employees and employee
households generated by businesses occupying these land use buildings, and the housing
demands of these households.
WHEREAS, As discussed in detail in the Nexus Study, new housing affordable to persons
identified in the Nexus Study is not now being added to the supply in sufficient quantity to meet
the needs of the new employee households associated with new or expanded non-residential
development.
Page 630
WHEREAS, The Nexus Study quantifies the cost mitigation associated with developing
affordable housing units based on the identified need resulting from employees generated by new
non-residential development.
WHEREAS, To ensure that development projects remain economically feasible, the
recommended affordable housing development impact fee is lower than the maximum amount
needed to fully mitigate the burdens created by new development on the need for affordable
housing, as determined in the Nexus Study.
WHEREAS, At least ten days prior to the adoption date of this Resolution, data was made
available to the public indicating the amount of cost, or estimated cost, required to provide the
affordable housing for which the fee is being levied and the revenue sources anticipated to provide
the affordable housing, in accordance with Government Code Section 66019.
WHEREAS, At least fourteen days prior to the adoption date of this Resolution, notice was
provided to any persons or organizations who had requested notice, in accordance with
Government Code Section 66019.
WHEREAS, Notice of the hearing on the proposed fees was published twice in a
newspaper of general circulation in the manner set forth in Government Code Section 6062a, in
accordance with Government Code Sections 66004 and 66018.
WHEREAS, On December 15, 2021, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
held a public hearing and conducted first reading of Ordinance No. 991 establishing the authority
for imposing and charging am affordable housing development impact fee. The ordinance states
that the City Council shall set the amount of the affordable housing development impact fee by
resolution. The City Council is expected to conduct second reading of the ordinance on January
5, 2022.
WHEREAS, On December 15, 2021, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
conducted a duly noticed public hearing concerning the amount of the affordable housing
development impact fee adopted herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
1. The facts set forth in the Recitals, above, are true and correct.
2. Findings:
a. The findings of the Nexus Study have been considered and are hereby
incorporated into this resolution by reference.
b. The purpose of the affordable housing development impact fee is to
finance the development of new affordable housing needed to mitigate
the demand for such housing generated by new non-residential
development.
c. The fees collected pursuant to this Resolution shall be used to finance
only affordable housing as described in Ordinance No. 991.
d. The affordable housing development impact fee and the related
facilities to be financed with the fee are consistent with the City’s
Page 631
General Plan.
e. There is a reasonable relationship between the need for affordable
housing, and the mitigation of impacts associated with new non-
residential development.
f. There is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee
established by Ordinance No. 991at the rates set forth below, and the
type of non-residential development for which the affordable housing
development impact fee will be charged.
3. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby adopts the affordable
housing development impact fees as described below:
Non-Residential Affordable Housing Development Impact Fee
Development Type
Proposed Fee
per Sq. Ft.
Retail/Commercial $1.00
Office $1.00
Industrial $6.00
Warehouse $6.00
Research and Development $6.00
Each fee set forth above shall be adjusted annually, commencing on July 1, 2022, and
each year thereafter, without further action of the City Council, according to the
percentage change in the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index for the
Los Angeles Area, for the 12-month period ending on December 31st of the
immediately preceding year. If the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index
for the Los Angeles Area is discontinued, the replacement index in use and accepted
as the industry and business standard for Southern California, as determined by City
Council, shall be utilized.
4. Effective Date: This Resolution shall take effect upon adoption, provided that the
fees as herein established shall not be imposed by the City until 60 days from the date
of the second reading of Ordinance No. 991, establishing the authority for imposing
and charging the affordable housing development impact fee.
5. Judicial Challenge: Any judicial action proceeding to appeal, review, set aside,
void, or annul this resolution shall be brought within 120 days of its adoption.
6. Certification: The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of 2021
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINED:
Page 632
__________________________________
L. Dennis Michael, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________________
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
I, JANICE C. REYNOLDS, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved and
adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a Regular Meeting
of said City Council held on the __ day of _________ 2021.
Executed this ___ day of_______, 2021 at Rancho Cucamonga, California
_________________________________
Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk
Page 633
DATE:December 15, 2021
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Elisa C. Cox, Deputy City Manager
Erika Lewis-Huntley, Management Analyst III
SUBJECT:Consideration to Approve the Re-appointments of Three Public Members
to the Public Art Committee. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the re-appointments of Jaymie Leslie, John
Machado, and Leslie Matamoros to the Public Art Committee.
BACKGROUND:
At its regular meeting on June 21, 2017, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 912, amending
the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code regarding creative placemaking through public art.
Pertinent to implementation of the ordinance was the formation of the Public Art Committee, which
is composed of five (5) members appointed by the City Council as follows: (i) one member of the
Planning Commission; (ii) one member of the Rancho Cucamonga Community and Arts
Foundation; and (iii) three members of the public appointed based on relevant work experience,
trade, industry, or expertise. Committee members serve a term of two (2) years in a volunteer
capacity. Duties include advising the City Council regarding the selection, purchase, placement,
and maintenance of art installed by the City or on City property and expenditures from the City of
Rancho Cucamonga Public Art Trust Fund.
ANALYSIS:
The terms of the three public members appointed to the Public Art Committee will be expiring at
the end of the month. The recruitment period for the three vacancies ran from October 4 – October
28, 2021. The Committee received six applications from members of the public (one applicant
withdrew their application due to scheduling conflicts). The Community Services Subcommittee
interviewed five applicants (served by Council Member Scott and Council Member Spagnolo) on
November 18, 2021.
The Community Services Subcommittee recommends that Jaymie Leslie, John Machado, and
Leslie Matamoros be re-appointed to the Public Art Committee based on their knowledge, work
experience, and expertise in multiple arts disciplines. All candidates are either Rancho
Cucamonga residents and/or represent local arts entities serving our community. In addition to
the three public members recommended for re-appointment, Planning Commissioner Bryan Dopp
and Community and Arts Foundation Member Paula Pachon also serve on the Committee.
Page 634
Page 2
1
0
6
1
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:
Establishing and maintaining a skilled and effective Public Art Committee contributes to achieving
the City Council’s core value of providing and nurturing a high quality of life for all.
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
Page 635
Consideration of
Affordable Housing
Linkage Fee
December 15, 2021
Affordable Housing Need is Growing
•Housing costs rapidly accelerating in Southern
California –up 18.33% this CY to date
•38% of all RC households spending more than
30%
–17% are spending more than 50%
•Without redevelopment and its 20% set aside
for affordable housing, there are no local
revenues dedicated to help meet this need and
continue to expand inventory
RHNA Requirements
Affordability Gap
Proposed Linkage Fee for Affordable
Housing
•Ad-Hoc Committee discussed adoption of an
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and a non-
residential affordable housing linkage fee
•Fee is a type of Development Impact Fee,
similar to those charged for parks, streets
and other infrastructure
•Need for housing is “linked” to non-
residential development
•Fee study was included as a program in the
draft Housing Element
Non-Residential Affordable Housing
Linkage Fee
•A Non-Residential Affordable Housing Linkage Fee (Non-Residential Linkage
Fee) is an impact fee that is imposed on new non-residential development to
mitigate the need for affordable housing created by the new development.
•Per the Mitigation Fee Act, impact fees imposed on new development MUST
be supported by a nexus study.
December 15, 2021 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC.6
Non-Residential Linkage Fee Basics
Impact Fee -Charge imposed by a local
government on a new development project
that is used to reduce the impacts created
by the new development.
December 15, 2021 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC.7
New Non-Residential Development
Fees Paid
Affordable Housing
Trust Fund
New Affordable Housing
What is an Affordable Housing Nexus
Study?
•An affordable housing nexus study is used to quantify the need for affordable
housing generated by new development (i.e. new office buildings or industrial
projects).
•The nexus study produces a maximum legally supportable impact fee that can
be charged to new development.
•Impact fees are usually assessed on a per square foot of building area basis.
December 15, 2021 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC.8
Non-Residential Affordable Housing Nexus
December 15, 2021 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC.9
New Non-
Residential
Development
New jobs and
new workers
Some of these
jobs are low
paying
Need for
affordable
housing
Non-Residential Nexus Study Research
•The Non-Residential Nexus Study is based on current real estate dynamics.
KMA also refers to this as the KMA Jobs-Housing Nexus Model.
•The non-residential land uses that were analyzed in Rancho Cucamonga are:
•Retail/Commercial
•Office
•Industrial
•Warehouse
•Research and Development
December 15, 2021 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC.10
Non-Residential Nexus Study Steps
•Step 1: Define the land uses to be evaluated.
•Step 2: Determine employment density (typical number of employees per square foot of each land use).
•Step 3: Determine average number of workers per household (US Census).
•Step 4: Determine occupational breakdown of workers in each land use (BLS)
•Step 5: Determine compensation levels for workers in each occupation (CA EDD).
•Step 6: Create distribution to place each worker household into an income category (US Census).
December 15, 2021 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC.11
Non-Residential Nexus Study Steps
•Step 7: Convert number of households per income level to households per square foot of building area.
•Step 8: Calculate affordability gap (i.e. subsidy required to develop affordable housing at the defined income categories in Rancho Cucamonga).
•Step 9: Multiply the number of households in each income category per square foot of the non-residential development times the affordability gap for that income category.
Conclusion: The net cost/subsidy to produce affordable units for new worker households.
December 15, 2021 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC.12
Maximum Legally Supportable
Non-Residential Linkage Fees
The result of the nexus study are the maximum legally supportable linkage (impact) fees:
December 15, 2021 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC.13
Retail /
Commercial Office Industrial Warehouse Research and
Development
Maximum Non-Residential
Affordable Housing
Linkage Fees Per Square
Foot
$157 $162 $127 $37 $53
Financial Feasibility Analysis
•KMA prepared pro forma analyses for the following prototypical development projects:
•A retail/commercial project
•An office project
•An industrial project
•A warehouse project
•A research and development project
•KMA utilized two feasibility testing methodologies based on parameters that have been used in the creation of many Non-Residential Affordable Housing Linkage Fee Programs in California.
•The goal is to avoid placing an onerous burden on non-residential developers.
December 15, 2021 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC.14
Non-Residential Linkage Fee as a % of
Total Development Costs
December 15, 2021 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC.15
Retail /
Commercial Office Industrial Warehouse Research and
Development
1% of Development Costs $4.41 $3.96 $1.39 $1.33 $1.38
2% of Development Costs $8.82 $7.93 $2.78 $2.66 $2.76
3% of Development Costs $13.23 $11.89 $4.17 $3.99 $4.14
4% of Development Costs $17.64 $15.86 $5.56 $5.32 $5.52
5% of Development Costs $22.05 $19.82 $6.95 $6.65 $6.90
Financial Return Results
December 15, 2021 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC.16
Retail /
Commercial Office Industrial Warehouse Research and
Development
Threshold Feasible
Return 8.00%9.00%6.50%6.50%6.50%
No Non-Residential Fee 5.67%3.40%7.28%8.16%6.81%
Fee @ $1.00/SF 5.65%3.39%7.22%8.10%6.76%
Fee @ $2.00/SF 5.64%3.38%7.17%8.03%6.71%
Fee @ $3.00/SF 5.63%3.37%7.11%7.97%6.70%
Fee @ $6.10/SF 5.58%3.34%6.95%7.77%6.50%
Maximum Recommended
Non-Residential Linkage Fees
December 15, 2021 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC.17
Retail /
Commercial Office Industrial Warehouse Research and
Development
Maximum Non-Residential
Affordable Housing
Linkage Fees Per Square
Foot
$157 $162 $127 $37 $53
Recommended Non-
Residential Linkage Fee Per
Square Foot
$1.00 $1.00 $6.00 $6.00 $6.00
Comparisons to Other Agencies
•Affordable Housing linkage fees are not new –in place in
dozens of California cities for many years
•Fees vary widely across agencies (see Attachment 3 to staff
report)
•Proposed fees ($1 –6 per SF) are generally at the low end
as compared to fees found in other cities
Recommendations
•Conduct the public hearing
•Adopt the Ordinance and Resolution
•Direct staff to research residential inclusionary housing
ordinances that include an in-lieu fee option, determine fee
viability and present findings and recommendations to City
Council before September 2022.
Recommended Next Steps
•Given the need, all developers
(including residential) should
participate in the solutions
•Consideration of an inclusionary
housing ordinance would accomplish
this goal
•Ordinance would require set-aside of a
certain number of units in every
development as affordable, or pay a fee
in lieu
Questions?