Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997/04/02 - Agenda Packet CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA REGULAR MEETINGS 1st and 3rd Wednesdays - 7:00 p.m. April 2, 1997 Civic Center Council Chambers 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 City Councilmembers William J. Alexander, Mayor Diane Williams, Mayor Pro Tern Paul Biane, Councilmember James V. Curatalo, Councilmember Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember Jack Lain, City Manager James L. Markman, City Attorney Debra J. Adams, City Clerk City Office: 477-2700 City Council Agenda April 2, 1997 I All items submitted for the City Council Agenda must be in writing. The deadline for submitting these items is 6:00 p.m. on the Tuesday of the week prior to the meeting. The City Clerk's Office receives all such items. A. CALL TO ORDER 1. Roll Call: Alexander Biane , Curatalo , Gutierr;z , and Williams__ B. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS 1. Presentation of Proclamation proclaiming the Month of Apdl as Motorcycle Awareness Month. 2. Presentation of Proclamation recognizing the week of March 30 thru Apdl 5, 1997 as Architecture Week in Rancho Cucamonga. 3. Presentation of Proclamation declaring the Month of Apdl as Fair Housing Month. C. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC This is the time and place for the general public to address the City Council. State law prohibits the City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The City Council may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual. D. CONSENT CALENDAR The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time without discussion. Any item may be removed by a Councilmember or member of the audience for discussion. 1. Approval of Warrants, Register Nos. 3/12/97 and 3/19/97; and 1 Payroll ending 3/6/97 for the total amount of $1,31 1,984.43. 2. Approval to receive and file current Investment Schedule as of 10 February 28, 1997. 3. Approval of request form Marks Cablevision to waive City fees for 15 the Rancho Rally (Mini Grand Prix Race) to be held on June 8, 1997 4. Approval of Public Convenience or Necessity 96-04 - Texaco, a 18 request for the issuance of an Alcohol Beverage Control License (Off-site Sale of Beer and Wine) for a mini-market within Texaco Gas Station, located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Elm Avenue - APN: 1077-421-42. City Council Agenda April 2, 1997 2 RESOLUTION NO. 97-036 25 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY AND A REQUEST FOR THE ISSUANCE OF AN ALCOHOL BEVERAGE CONTROL LICENSE WITHIN A MINI-MARKET OF A SERVICE STATION, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND ELM AVENUE - APN: 1077-421-42 5. Approval of Public Convenience or Necessity 96-05 - Texaco, a 18 request for the issuance of an Alcohol Beverage Control License (Off-site Sale of Beer and Wine) for a mini-market within Texaco Gas Staljon, located at the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Milliken Avenue - APN: 1077-672-37. RESOLUTION NO. 97-037 27 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY AND A REQUEST FOR THE ISSUANCE OF AN ALCOHOL BEVERAGE CONTROL LICENSE WITHIN A MINI-MARKET OF A SERVICE STATION, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BASE LINE ROAD AND MILLIKEN AVENUE - APN: 1077-672-37 6. Approval of Public Convenience or Necessity 97-01 - Zayer, a 29 request for the issuance of an Alcohol Beverage Control License (Off-Sale General) for a liquor store, located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN: 229-011-41. RESOLUTION NO. 97-038 34 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY AND A REQUEST FOR THE ISSUANCE OF AN ALCOHOL BEVERAGE CONTROL LICENSE FOR A LIQUOR STORE LOCATED AT 11897 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND ROCHESTER AVENUE - APN: 229-101-41 7. Approval of City Co-sponsorship with Active Ride Shop of a Skate 36 Park Concert on June 7, 1997. City Council Agenda April 2, 1997 3 8. Approval to participate in SANBAG's Joint Electrical Restructuring 38 Committee in the amount of $1,000, to be paid out of Account Number 01-4245-8022. 9. Approval to authorize the submittal of an application to the California 39 Integrated Waste Management Board for a 1996/97 Tire Recycling Grant. RESOLUTION NO. 97-039 41 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION TO THE CALIFORNIA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR A 1996/97 TIRE RECYCLING GRANT 10. Approval to accept Improvements, Release the Faithful 42 Performance Bond, accept a Maintenance Bond and file a Notice of Completion for Tract 14208, located on the north side of Base Line Road, west of Alta Cuesta Drive. Release: Faithful Performance Bond $ 130,000.00 Bond #3SM88347700 Faithful Performance Bond 76,500.00 Bond #3SM80699300 Accept: Maintenance Guarantee Bond 20,400.00 RESOLUTION NO. 97-040 43 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT 14208, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BASE LINE ROAD, WEST OF ALTA CUESTA DRIVE, AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK E. CONSENT ORDINANCES The following Ordinances have had public hearings at the time of first reading. Second readings are expected to be routine and non- controversial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time without discussion. The City Clerk will read the title. Any item can be removed for discussion. 1. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 12.16 TO TITLE 12 PROVIDING FOR THE REGULATION OF NEWSPAPER RACKS WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY City Council Agenda April 2, 1997 4 ORDINANCE NO. 571 (second reading) 44 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 12.16 TO TITLE 12 THEREOF AND PROVIDING FOR THE REGULATION OF NEWSPAPER RACKS WITHIN THE CITY F. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. The Chair will open the meeting to receive public testimony. 1. CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND 56 VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 96-02 - CITATION HOMES - A request to amend the Victoda Community Plan Development Distdct designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 18 acres of land at the northeast comer of Milliken Avenue and Victoda Park Lane - APN: 227-011- 17. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for consideration. ORDINANCE NO. 572 (first reading) 146 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 96-02, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (8- 14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO LOW- MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR APPROXIMATELY 18 ACRES OF LAND AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MILLIKEN AVENUE AND VICTORIA PARK LANE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-011-17 2. CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND 56 VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 96-03 - CITATION HOMES - A request to amend the Victoda Community Plan Development Distdct designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 12.4 acres of land south of Highland Avenue, east of Woodruff Place - APN: 227-011-26. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for consideration. City Council Agenda April 2, 1997 5 ORDINANCE NO. 573 (first reading) 148 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 96-03, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (8- 14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO LOW- MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR APPROXIMATELY 12.4 ACRES OF LAND SOUTH OF HIGHLAND AVENUE, EAST OF WOODRUFF PLACE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227- 011-26 G. PUBLIC HEARINGS The following items have no legal publication or posting requirements. The Chair will open the meeting to receive public testimony. 1. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL OF SIGN PERMIT FOR 150 UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM NO. 119 - OILMAX - An appeal of the Planning Commission decision regarding signs for Oil Max, an approved project within the Foothill marketplace Shopping Center, located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, east of Interstate 15 - APN: 229-031-37 RESOLUTION NO. 97-041 164 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A PROPOSED SIGN PERMIT FOR UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM NO. 119, REGARDING SIGNS FOR OIL MAX, AN APPROVED PROJECT WITHIN THE FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE SHOPPING CENTER, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, EAST OF INTERSTATE 15, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 229-031-37 H. CITY MANAGER'$ STAFF REPORTS The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Chair may open the meeting for public input. 1. CONSIDERATION TO SUPPORT THE CHAMBER'S OPPOSITION 166 TO AB15 City Council Agenda April 2, 1997 6 2. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION CALLING FOR 168 ASSESSMENT PROTEST PROCESS RESOLUTION NO. 97-041 191 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN PARK AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT PD- 85R FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972; APPROVING AN ENGINEERING REPORT IN RELATION THERETO; APPROVING BALLOT MATERIALS RELATED TO THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PORTION OF SAID ASSESSMENT; AND OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING AND CANVASSING OBJECTIONS THERETO I. COUNCIL BUSINESS The following items have been requested by the City Council for discussion. They are not public hearing items, although the Chair may open the meeting for public input. 1. CONSIDERATION OF SLOGAN FOR RANCHO CUCAMONGA (Oral Report) J. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING This is the time for City Council to identify the items they wish to discuss at the next meeting. These items will not be discussed at this meeting, only identified for the next meeting. K. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC This is the time and place for the general public to address the City Council. State law prohibits the City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The City Council may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual. City Council Agenda April 2, 1997 7 L. ADJOURNMENT MEETING TO ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS: (A) PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON ROCHESTER, BETWEEN FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND ARROW ROUTE; VALLEY BASEBALL AND JERRY FULWOOD, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER, NEGOTIATING PARTIES; REGARDING TERMS OF PAYMENT; AND (B) LABOR NEGOTIATIONS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6 TO GNE LARRY TEMPLE, ADMINISTRATNE SERVICES DIRECTOR, DIRECTION IN REGARDS TO THE MEET AND CONFER PROCESS. I, Debra J. Adams, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on March 27, 1997, seventy-two (72) hours pdor to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. I I N I ~ I ! i I ~ I ~ N ~! I a I R I I I II I · ~ I ~ I ~11 I ~11 N II I II I I II I O0 ~ 0 0 0 ~0~00~0~00000~00~~00~00000~0~0~ ~1 O0 Cd 0 0 0 ~11~1 ~11~1 ~ I II I ~11 I I I Zll I A A A A ~ I ~ A A A A II]l II I II I U III I I I1 I 11 · I I · I I · tl I 0 II I Z ~ ~ Z ~ Z II I V V V~ V V~ U ~g ~ Ii I V V V~V VJ ~ ~ ~ ~ II I V V V~V V~ ~J ~ UZ~ II I [ ~ Z Z Z mN ZZ Z Z Z~J JZZ3 ~ I1~1 ~ ~ ~ ZZU U ~JZ~UJJ~JZ~Z UUJUZ~ZJUQu~J J IIUI Z ~ - ~ Z Z~O~O ~O O~ZZ O ~O~ N (~ZO~ II I II I II I OU Z II I ZO O II I II I Z ~ ~ II I N ~ J II I ~ ~ ~ (0 0 It I J Z > U (( ~Z ~U U II I ~ GU ~ 0 Q . m U ) u~z o~moz~ zz]mU ~oo -m -Z II I I~ ~ Z ~ ZO~U> OOU~OQ~'~~ J U~ .OZ~:OZZ~ II I II I I1~1 II I I I I I I I I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I I I I ~1 I I I ~l~l ..... 01~1 I I ~1 I ~1 I ~1 I I I ZI I I I I I · N I I · Z I I ~ ~ V r~ UZ~ I I ~ ZZZ Z~ Z ZZ Z ZZ Z Z Z ZZ ZZ J IUI OZ ~ Z~(OOZ~ NO D ~(OO ~OD ~ZO Z ~ I I I I I I I ~ u u Z I I Z U Z I I N Z ( I I ~ Z ~ I I ~ ~ Z I w ~ ) U O I I ~JJU) ~lZ ( Z. ( ( ~ UUi Z ~.U ~ Z I I Z~-- ~ I-( ~ ~ ~ ZN ZM O~Z (~,-~Z ~ ~ Z I ~ O~WQN~ ~ZUZ~( O~OJ ~ ~W Z:~ ~ ~ Z I I ~ ~((~Z~uO0~ OIQQ~OZ O ~u~O--O JUN ~ Z- J O ,' I I)11 I II I I I I R I II I I I I I U I I I I I I I R I ~ I O0~O~O~O0~O~O~O~O000~O~ ~0~00000~0~ ~000 I~l ~O~n~O~O~~O~O~O000~O~ fi~O~OOOOO~fi~ ~000 ORal I I I ~ I A A Z~ I A A A ~l I ~ A A 1]1 I I ~ I ~l I II S S S S 1S I$ S I$ I Z I I ~ V V V ~ ~ I Z ~ V V V J ~ul ~0~00 ZZOZ~mZZZZZZZOZ~ZOO~O~Z~ ONO OO000Z(ZZZ I ~ I n I Z u n i ~ g I ~ 0 II I 0 ~ H ~ ZZU II I 0 UZ Z [ ~ U I ~ ~ ~- u O UZ>~O Im I J U ~ u ~u Z ~ ~ ~ --~ Z Z It I OZ ~ -~m 0 X~ -> Z Z.~ Z ~[Z ~ ~(J ~ Z u(I D(u~OOOOOO> mZZZZZOO(WZ(((O~ ~((((uuuuu~--OO H I ~ I If)l tl I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~OOfiOOOOOOV~fi~~O~O0~O00~O~O~O ~O~O~O~OOO~ 01~1 I I I I I I Ill HZ ~Z~EZ~~Z~ZZZJ~Z~W~Z~ZEZ~ I I R I N U I ~ Z Z I X ~ I I U ~ I I Z 0 I I U ~ u Z I I Z ~ I I N ~ J Z I It I II I~11 ~ I~11 I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ I ~1 I I I ! I I I I I ~ I ~1 I OI I ~n I ~1 I ~ I a I O00000~O00-~O~OOh I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ I I U ~ I I ~ I I , I I I I ~ I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I m Z I I U II I ZN~ Q( J ~ U I ~OO Z ~Z ~ O II I ~ ~> Z~ ZZ ~ ~ Z II I ~ ~U ~U~ ~O~ II I n I U~I 00~~0~~~~~ II Z I ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ I1~1 /l>l II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~1 I I I ~1 I ~1 I ~1 I I I I~l ~l~l ~mcm 0131 I I · . I I ~1 I ~1 I {I I QI I I I Zl I ]1 I I~1 I I I I I I I I I I IUI I l I I I I I I I I I I m m I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .. I I l I I I I I I I I I I II ~l II I II I I I I I · I ~1 l I II I~R ~1~1 01~1 I I ~l I I I l I I ZI I I I I I I I I I I I lull I l I I I l I I I u n II u ~f II II II ) II II I I I I I I I I I, I I~- I I I I I l I I I l I I I ~1 I ~1 I I I I 0--000 ~O0~O0~~O~O~O0~nO~O00~O~O--~O00~O0~ 0 I~ 0~00 ~O00fOO~OO~O~OO~fO~O~Of~O~--~O~O~O0~ ~1~1 ~1~1 - 01~1 I I · I I ~1 I ~1 I ~1 I ~1 I I I A Zl I ~ I~11 I I V ~N ~ ~1 I I ~ ~ ~ J ~ Z Z~ I I D ~ Z Z a uuZ ~ 0~ I~n (ZZZ ~ ~UZZ(( UZDZJ ~ ZJ ZZ~W 00~ ~u J Z~Z I I I I I : i U a z I I Z . J I I -Z u \ I I WN Z m ~Z u~ I n 0 ~: U~ ~ ~JZO ~ ~0 3(ZZ~:Z D3( 0 ~ li ~~ 3 >~ ~Dm · :J~O0(~ J3 ~Z~ZZZZ~ ~Z~JNmDJ~ I li ~ ~Zu ~0~ ~i ~muUu-m(mQD--ZZZZZO~Og~O (J ~ I II I tl H i I l ;I (IN il II I I I l N I ~ ~O00000~~O0~OW~O0~O00~O~ ~ ~O0~O~W~hOOOM~O~Oh~OWN~OM M$~$ 05~$ $ $ ..$ N $ $ $ ZI I ~l I ~ A d~g I l I I uS·IS I l ~ N I U 0 ~ I I , · S I · ~ ~ S S ~WM X~X ~M EE l X X tl II It . H I! ~ Z n I; ) ~ X II ~R ZZ~>(UW II II ~( II II (~ H II fi~ll II)lf It II 03/25/1997 CITY OF RAINCHO CUCAMONGA PM - 1 PORTFOLIO MASTER SU)O4ARY CITY FEBRUARY 28, 1997 CA.ql{ AVERAGE ---YIELD TO MATURITY--- PERCENT OF AVERAGE DAYS TO 360 165 INVESTMENg'S BOOK VALUE PORTFOLIO TERM MATURITY EQUIVALENT EQUIVALENT Certificates of Deposit - Bank ...............$ 9,825,532.50 14.81 528 121 5.995 6.078 Local Agency Investment Funds ................$ 18,103,458.96 27.29 1 1 5.507 5.583 Federal Aqency Issues - Coupon ...............$ 37,404,375.00 56.39 1,686 1,316 6.457 6.546 Treasury Securities - Coupon .................$ 272,845.00 0.41 1,180 183 6.057 6.141 Mortgage Backed Securities ...................$ 723,997.01 1.09 8,318 4,507 7.800 7.908 TOTAL INVES~ and AVERAGES ............. $ 66,330,208.47 lO0.OOl 1,125 810 6.1421 6.2271 CASH Passbook/Checking Accounts ...................$ 1,584,777.61 1.973 2.000 (not included in yield calculations) Accrued Interest at Purchase .................$ 7,233.90 TOTAL CASH and PURCHASE INTEREST .............$ 1,592,011.51 TOTAL CA.ql{ and I~S ................. $ 67,922,219.98 MONTH ENDING FISCAL TOTAL EARNINGS FEI]RiJARY 28. YEAR ~0 DATE Current Year $ 335,976.34 $ 2,697,523.71 AVERAGE DAILY BALANCE $ 67,664,827.16 $ 63,785,036.13 EFFECTI~ RATE OF RETURN 6.47t 6.35t I certify that this repor~ accurately reflects all City pooled investments and JT is in comformity wit~ the investment policy adopted Angust 7, 1996. A copy of the investment policy is available in the Administrative Services Department. ~,/l,~/~ The Investment Program berein shown provides sufficient cash flow liquidity to P meet the next six months estimated expenditures. Source of Valuation - DATE Interactive Data Corporation automatic pricinq service. /© 03/25/1997 CITY OF RAK1]O CUCA)~MGA PM - 2 INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO DETAILS * INVESTMEltS CITY FEBRUARY 28, 1997 CASH INVESTMENT AVERAGE PURt'I{.4.SE STATED ---YTM--- I'LATURITY DAYS NUMBER ISSUER BALANCE DATE BCK)K VALUE FACE VALUE MARKET VALUE RATE 360 365 DATE TO MAT CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT - BANK 00937 QILL INDEP BANI( 04/06/95 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 6.950 6.950 7.047 04/09/97 39 00966 GREAT WESTERN BANK 03/04/96 500,000.00 500,000.00 500,O(X).O0 4.700 4.700 4.765 03/04/97 3 00977 GREAT WESTE1U{ BANK 09/17/96 1,810,532.50 1,810,532.50 1,810,532.50 5.300 5.300 5.374 03/18/97 17 0(~945 S~LNWA 05/02/95 2,000,000.00 2,0(K),O00.O0 2,000,000.00 6.410 6.410 6.499 05/02/97 62 00975 SANWA 05/22/96 1,500,000.00 1,500,000.00 1,500,000.00 6.000 6.000 6.083 05/26/98 451 00976 SANWA 08/06/96 1,515,000.00 1,515,000.00 1,515,000.00 5.650 5.650 5.728 08/06/97 158 00980 SANIdA 11/26/96 500,000.00 500,000.00 500,000.00 5.350 5.350 5.424 05/27/97 87 SUBTOTALS and AVEPAGES 10,236,246.79 9,825,532.50 9,825,532.50 9,825,532.50 5.995 6.078 121 LC~AL AGDICY INVESTMErt FUNDS 00005 LOCAL AGE)ICY INVST FUND 16,910,141.12 16,910,141.12 16,910,141.12 5.583 5.507 5.583 1 00804 LOCAL AGENCY INVST FUND 1,193,317.84 1,193,317.84 1,193,317.84 5.583 5.507 5.583 EALS atKI AVERAGES 18,103,458.96 18,103,458.96 18,103,458.96 18,103,458.96 5.507 5.583 1 FEDERAL AGENCY ISSUES - COUPON 00964 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BA{ 01/16/96 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 1,964,375.00 6.030 6.030 6.114 01/16/01 1, 00969 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 03/05/96 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 1,970,000.00 6.165 6.165 6.251 03/05/01 1,4~j 00973 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 05/20/96 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 1,005,0130.00 6.500 6.500 6.590 05/20/99 810 00978 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 10/03/96 1,500,000.00 1,500,000.00 1,506,562.50 6.610 6.610 6.702 10/06/99 949 00983 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 12/23/96 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 994,687.50 6.700 6.700 6.793 12/24/01 1,759 00922 FEDERAL HONE LOAN BANK 12/19/94 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 1,016,562.50 8.030 8.030 8.142 12/19/97 293 00940 FEDERAL KNE LOAN BANK 04/06/95 942,968.75 1,000,000.00 985,312.50 5.240 7.030 7.127 11/30/98 639 00962 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 12/18/95 4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 3,941,250.00 6.195 6.195 6.281 12/18/00 1,388 00971 FEDERAL HONE LOAN BANK 03/19/96 995,312.50 1,000,000.00 993,750.00 5.880 6.053 6.137 03/19/99 748 00974 FEDERAL HOle LOAN BANK 05/21/96 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 1,006,562.50 7.025 7.025 7.123 05/21/01 1,542 00982 FEDERAL HONE LOAN BANI 12/30/96 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 990,937.50 6.195 6.195 6.281 06/30/00 1,217 00938 FEDERAL IK31{E LOAN MORTG. CO 04/06/95 1,002,031.25 1,000,000.00 1,005,000.00 7.420 7.226 7.326 09/23/99 936 00957 FEDERAL KI[E LOAN NORTG. CO 11/20/95 2,500,000.00 2,500,000.00 2,473,437.50 6.290 6.290 6.377 11/17/00 1,357 00967 FEDERAL HONE LOAN NOR~. CO 03/0~/9~ 1,998,750.00 2,000,000.00 1,960,000.00 5.990 6.005 6.088 03/06/01 1,466 00968 FEDERAL HONE LOAN le!PM. CO 02/22/96 1,985,312.50 2,000,000.00 1,942,5430.00 5.695 5.867 5.948 02/16/01 1,448 00972 FEDERAL KI[E LOAN NOM~. CO 05/15/96 3,000,000.00 3,000,000.00 3,006,562.50 7.275 7.275 7.376 05/15/01 1,536 00947 FEDERAL NATL lelN3 AS..ql 05/08/95 1,500,000.00 1,500,000.00 1,522,500.00 7.270 7.270 7.37105/08/00 1,164 00959 FEDERAL NATL !flIGASS!I 11/29/95 4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 3,958,750.00 6.230 6.230 6.317 11/28/00 1,368 00960 FEDERAL NAIq, NTG ASSN 11/24/95 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 997,500.00 5.970 5.970 6.053 11/25/98 634 00981 FEDERAL NATL NTG ASS]I 11/29/96 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 1,964,375.00 6.230 6.230 6.317 11/29/01 1,734 00984 FEDERAL NATL ~ ASS]i 12/12/96 1,980,000.00 2,000,000.00 1,974,133.89 6.160 6.378 6.467 12/14/01 1,749 SUBTOTALS a])d AVERAGES 37,404,375.00 37,404,375.00 37,179,758.89 37,500,000.00 6.457 6.546 1,316 :25/1997 CITY OF RANCH0 ClftMO~A PM - 3 INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO DETAILS - INVESTMENTS CITY FEBRUARY 28, 1997 CASI~ IF~ESTME]~T AVERAGE P[~Z3]ASE STATED ---Pl~--- MATURITY DAYS NUMBER ISS]JER BALANCE DATE BOOK VALUE FACE VALUE MARKET VAL[IE RATE 360 365 DATE TO MAT TERRY SEC~ITIES - CO{3PO!I 00903 TR~Y !IOTE 06/08/94 272,845.00 277,000.00 277,000.00 5.625 6.057 6.141 08/31/97 183 AVERAGES 272,845.00 MO]~T~GE BACK~ SECURITIES 00071 FEDERAL ~OME LOAN MORTG. CO 02/23/87 42,497.36 43,629.79 35,062.i6 8.000 8.336 8.452 01/01/02 1,767 00203 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN 09/21/87 93,033.47 100,712.82 101,574.03 8.500 9.557 9.689 09/01/10 4,932 00002 GOVERNMENT NATIONAL MORTG A 06/23/86 74,610.72 75,650.92 62,803.93 8.500 8.621 8.740 05/15/01 1,536 00069 GOVERNMENT NATIONAL MORTG A 05/23/86 23,181.02 22,726.49 2,980.52 9.000 8.534 8.652 03/15/01 1,475 00004 SMALL BUSINESS ADMIN 07/25/86 490,674.44 445,434.95 485,846.74 8.750 7.261 7.361 07/25/11 5,259 SUBTOTALS and AVERAGES 726,159.52 723,997.01 688,267.38 688,154.97 7.800 7.908 4,507 TOTAL INVESTMENTS and AVG. $ 66,330,208.47 66,074,017.73 66,743,085.27 66,394,146.43 6.142% 6.227% 810 03/25/1997 CITY OF IO31C~O CUCAMONGA PM - l INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO DETAILS - ~ CITY FEBRUARY 28, 1997 CASH ;, INVESTMENT AVERAGE PURa{ASE STATED ---YTM--- MATURITY DAYS ~ER ISSUER BALANCE DATE BOOK VALUE FACE VALUE MAIU~ET VALUE RATE 360 365 DATE ~0 MAT ~NG/SAVINGS ACCOUNTS 00180 BANK OF AMERICA 1,584,777.61 2.000 1.973 2.000 0<)979 BANK OF AMERICA 0.00 2.000 1.973 2.0(30 00985 BANK OF AMERICA O. O0 2.000 1.973 2.000 S~ALS arid AVERAGES 921,741.90 1,584,777.61 1.973 2.000 A~:rued Interest at Pur~ase 7,233.9<) TtYrAL ~ $ 1,592,011.51 TOTAl, .CAS!{ and INVESTMENTS $ 67,664,827.16 67,922,219.98 03/'~25/1997 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PM - 5 PORTFOLIO M~STER INVESTMENT ACTIVITY BY TYPE CITY F~RUARY 1, 1997 - FEBRUARY 28, 1997 CASH STATED TRANSACTION PURCHASES SAIJ..5/MATURITIES TYPE INVESTMENT # ISSUER RATE DATE OR DEPOSITS OR WITHDRAWALS BALANCE CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT - BA.MK BEGII(MING BAI,,a. NCE: 10,325,532.50 00933 SAIrWA 6.920 02/24/1997 5(K),O00.O0 9,825,532.50 AGENCY INVESTMENT FUNDS (Montllly Summary) BEGIliNI~ BALANCE: 17,103,458.96 O0(X)5 LOr. AL AGENCY INVST FUNI) 5.583 1,500,000.00 500,000.00 00804 LOCAL AGENCY INVST FUND 5.583 SU]~TOTA. LS and ENI)INO B~{J.,AN(~E 1,500,000.00 500,000.00 18,103,458.96 ~ING/SAVINGS AC<X)U1FrS (Monthly Summary) BEGINNII+G BALANCE: 1,140,77'7.61 00180 ~ OF ANIZRICA 2.000 2,630,000.00 2,186,0(10.00 00'979 BAIiK OF AMERIC. A 2.000 00985 BANK OF AMEP, ICA 2.000 SIJB'I'ii~r~ and ENI)IIeG BALANCE 2,630,000.00 2,186,000.00 1,584,777.61 ~ AGEIk"Y ISSUES ' <XiMIBDN BEGIN1MIIN3 BALANCE: 37,404,375.00 37,404,375.00 TRF. ASURY SECUI{ITIES - <XiNIPON B~INNI~ BAI..~I~"E: 272,845.00 272,845.00 MORTGAGE BACKEl) SECURITI~ BEGI~I~ BAI.A/{CE: 728,188.23 00071 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG. CORP. 8.000 02/18/97 1,154.29 00203 FE])ERAI, NATL MTG ASSN 8.500 02/~/97 541.46 (X)(X)2 GO~ ~TIONAL MOR'Y~G ASS){ 8.500 02/24/97 1,092.45 0(K)69 GOVEIUdME)~T MATION~ MORI'G ~N 9.000 02/03/97 49.78 <K)(X)4 SMALL ~SINEf:,S AIN4I. M 8.750 02/03/97 1,353.24 SU]YlNDTA/..S and ENI)II~ BALJd{(2E 0.00 4,191.22 723,997.01 TOq'ALS BEGI~ING BAI, AN(2E:$ 66,975,17'7.30 4,130,000.00 3,190,191.22 67,914,986.08 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 2, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Suzanne Ota, Community Services Manager SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF REQUEST FROM MARKS CABLEVISION TO WAIVE CITY FEES FOR THE RANCHO RALLY (MINI GRAND PRIX RACE) HELD ON JUNE 8, 199'7 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve waiving of facility rental fees for the Rancho Rally (Mini Grand Prix Race) to be held on June 8, 1997. This is a fundraising event to benefit the YMCA. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: The City has received a request from Ron Stark, representing Marks CableVision, for the City to waive facility rental fees for use of the Epicenter Expanded Parking Lot on June 8, 1997, for their Rancho Rally fundraiser. The Rancho Rally is a community fundraiser for the YMCA. Last year a similar event was held with San Antonio Hospital near the Hilton Hotel in Ontario. This event will also be sponsored by KOLA Radio. USA/M-Car promotes these types of events as fundraisers in cities throughout the country. The YMCA is an important community non-profit organization which provides much needed youth programs for the residents of Rancho Cucamonga. FISCAL IMPACT: Ron Stark has indicated that Marks CableVision will provide to the City a $3,000 credit for advertising and promoting City programs on their major cable networks in exchange for the City's waiving the facility rental fee. spect ~ , ,/ Services Manager SO/kls Attachment MARKS CABLEVISION ~- 9098874668 March 25, 1997 Suzanne Ota Community Services Manager City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear Suzanne: Thank you for your assistance and guidance for our use of the Epicenter parking lot for the Rancho Rally to benefit the Rancho Cucamonga Family YMCA. As we discussed we would like to use the parking area without a cash outlay so more dolla~'s can go to the YMCA. I realize that the parking lot has a real value and that the City would normally charge around $3,000. I have an option that may prove to be a benefit for the YMCA the City and for us. I would like to suggest a trade arrangement. We would give you (the City) $3,000 in cable advertising. You could use this advertising to promote your city events like the Skatepark fund-raiser you mentioned to me, or your Art in the Park, or Concert in the Park series. etc. Your advertisements will be shown on our major cable networks like CNN, ESPN, USA, Lifetime. Discovery, Nickelodeon and others. As each event approached I would help you create an advertising.schedule that would meet that specific evenrs needs. Your $3,000 would act as a credit on ou~' books to use at your discretion. This way the City still receives value for the Epicenter parking lot, you receive additional promotion for your events, the YMCA gets to keep more of the money that is raised and we get to support city events... everyone wins! 4240 N. Ha/Imark Pkwy. · San Bernardino, CA 92407 · (9~0) 880-0231 ,, Fax: 880-0230 As discussed we would like to use the Epicenters back parking area on Sunday, June 8. We would need to go in sometime the previous evening for about 2 hours of setup. I understand that your Saturday event will be ending early that evening and we will be happy to wait until that event is completely wrapped up and moved out before we begin set-up. We are working with radio station KCAL/KOLA to promote this event. Between the two of us we will be running close to $100,000 in promotional advertising. The radio gives us the reach we need to cover all of the Inland Empire and the Cable gives us the frequency and the local impact. These sanctioned races are becoming very popular. As I mentioned, the City of San Bernardino is having theirs May 3 and 4. M-Car races are also held in Riverside, Temecula, Redlands, Victorville, Hemet, Palm Desed and other cites throughout Southern California and the Nation. Our goal is to raise between $5,000 and $10,000 for the YMCA, to bdng a unique event to our city and to have some fun!-:' Ron Stark Director of Advertising CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 2, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY 96- 04 - TEXACO - Consideration of a request to make a determination of Public Convenience or Necessity (PCN) for the issuance of an Alcohol Beverage Control License (off-site sale of beer and wine) for a mini-market within Texaco Gas Station, located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Elm Avenue - APN: 1077-421-42. PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY 96- 05 - TEXACO - Consideration of a request to make a determination of Public Convenience or Necessity (PCN) for the issuance of an Alcohol Beverage Control License (off-site sale of beer and wine) for a mini-market within Texaco Gas Station, located at the southwest corner of Baseline Road and Milliken Avenue - APN: 1077-672-37. RECOMMENDATION Approve the determination of "Public Convenience or Necessity" for the two sites through the adoption of the attached Resolutions and forward copies to the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. ANALYSIS A. Background: The applicant, Texaco, submitted two Conditional Use Permits for building two new gas stations that included mini-markets. Since Texaco intends to sell beer and wine for off-site consumption within the mini-markets, they requested the City make a determination of Public Convenience or Necessity (PCN) for the two future facilities. Conditional Use Permit 96-21 applies to the facility at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Elm Avenue and is approved. Staff expects to receive the construction plans for plan check soon. Conditional Use Permit 96-27 applies to the facility at the southwest corner of Baseline Road and Milliken Avenue, which is in process and will be scheduled for Planning Commission review and approval soon. Both sites are within the same Census Tract. Attached are copies of the requests from Texaco. B. Requirements from Department of AlCohol Beverage COntrQh The Department of Alcohol Beverage Control regulates the distribution of liquor licenses by setting limits on the different types of licenses in each Census Tract. The limits are calculated from the ratio of liquor licenses to the population of the Census Tract. When a Census Tract's limit has CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT PCN 96-04 & PCN 96-05 - TEXACO April 2, 1997 Page 2 been reached, additional liquor licenses can be issued only if the City determines that the license would serve the public's convenience or necessity as required by Section 23958 of the Business and Professional Code. The legislation purposefully left the term "public convenience and necessity" undefined so that the local legislative body (City Council) has the greatest latitude, based on local conditions and determinations. The two proposed gas stations are located in census tract 20.06 and the number of Off-Sale Beer and Wine (Type 20) licenses is limited to six. According to Alcohol Beverage Control staff, this Census Tract is not impacted by over concentration but there is a moratorium on new Type 20 licenses in San Bernardino County. Alcohol Beverage Control can issue a new Type 20 license if the applicant obtains a determination of public convenience or necessity from the City. C. Facts to Support a Public Convenience or NeceSsity Determination: The following are facts. that support the requested "Public Convenience or Necessity." 1. A mini-market, including the sale of beer and wine is a common and accepted business practice. 2. Both sites, the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Elm Avenue and the southwest corner of Milliken Avenue and Baseline Road, are along major thoroughfares, which are suited for this type of gas station and mini-market facility. 3. Neither sites are close to sensitive users such as day care facilities, schools, or churches. 4. Rancho Cucamonga residents would be afforded more shopping opportunities for personal and convenience items and services. CONCLUSION Based on the above analysis, staff finds the off-sale of beer and wine in conjunction with a gas station and mini-market at the two sites will not have a negative impact to the surrounding uses. Staff recommends approval of the attached Resolutions. City Planner BB:NF/mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Letters from Texaco Exhibit "B" - Census Tract and Location Map Exhibit "C" - Site Plans for Texaco Stations Resolutions Approving PCN 96-04 and PCN 96-05 Ms. Nancy Fong Ci~° of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: Ring of Fire Texaco Refining and Marketing Inc. Conditional Use Permits Numbers 9(::~.9_- ! Dear 5. fs. Fong Texaco Refining and Marketing Inc. has submined a Conditional Use Permit Application with the City. of Rancho Cucamonga for constructing a new facili~' at the comer of Foothill & Elm within the planned communit2:' of Tetra Vista. As recently discussed with the City.' and incorporated in the application and submittal package, the t'acilitv will include the la,.,,-ful sale of beer and wine to the public as part off the convenience store operation. Texaco respectfull.,,' requests that the Cirv of Rancho Cucamonga make a determination of necessit;,.' ancL/or convenience in order tbr a findino_. to be made and to altow a permit to be of/~red bv the Alcoholic Beverage and Control. Texaco respects the privilege of offering and abilitv to sell Beer and Wine at our facilitv and will adhere to the strict standards. laws of the State and policies of the City concerning the sale of these products. \"er2:.' truly .,,'ours, D. C. Markins .x.[anager Special Projects co: James O'Malley - Tail & ,Associates Ms. Nancy Fang Cirv of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga. CA 91729 Subject: Ring of Fire Texaco Refining and Marketing Inc. Conditional Use Permits Numbers 9(:~'~' .2-1 Dear Ms. Fong Texaco Refining and Marketing Inc. has submitted a Conditional Use Permit Application with the Ci~' of Rancho Cucamonga for constructing a new facility at the comer of Foothill & Elm v.'itkin the planned communir}' ofTezra Vista. As recently discussed with the City and incorporated in the application and submittal package, the facility ,.','ill include the tav, T'ul sale of beer and ,.vine to the public as part of the convenience store operation. Texaco respectfully requests that the CiD' of Rancho Cucamonga make a determination ofnecessirv and/or convenience in order for a finding to be made and to allow a permit to be offered by the Alcoholic Beverage and Control. Texaco respects the privilege of offering and ability to sell Beer and Wine at our t~acilitv and will adhere to the strict standards, laws of the State and policies of the Ci~.' concerning the sale of these products. \"er',' truly .,.'ours. D. C. Markins .x, Ianager Special Projects cc: James O'Mallev - Tait & ,Associates hJa ?: RO,-'.-~>ers Dec ::;O t dac , A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY AND A REQUEST FOR THE ISSUANCE OF AN ALCOHOL BEVERAGE CONTROL LICENSE WITHIN A MINI-MARKET OF A SERVICE STATION, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND ELM AVENUE - APN: 1077-421-42. A. Recitals. 1. Texaco has filed an application for an off-site sale of beer and wine license from the Department of Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC). 2. Section 23958 of the Business and Professional Code requires the City of Rancho Cucamonga to make a determination that the issuance of the said license will service the public convenience or necessity. 3. On the 2nd day of April 1997, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga reviewed said application prior to the adoption of this Resolution. 4. 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 as follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced meeting on April 2, 1997, including wdtten and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. On December 11, 1996, the Planning Commission issued Conditional Use Permit No. 96-21 for a Texaco service station with a mini-market to be located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Elm Avenue. b. The selling of beer and wine for off-site consumption is a common and accepted business practice in conjunction with a mini-market and service station. c. The location is along a major artedal street, which is suited for this type of service station and mini-market facility. d. The site is not close to sensitive users such as day care facilities, schools or churches. e. Rancho Cucamonga residents would be afforded more shopping opportunities for personal and convenience items and services. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. TEXACO - PCN 96-04 April 2, 1997 Page 2 3. Based upon the findings set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Council concludes that the off-site sale of beer and wine in conjunction with a mini-market and service station will not have a negative impact to the surrounding uses. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this Council hereby determines that the issuance of an off-site sale of beer and wine license for Texaco will serve the public convenience or necessity. 5. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY AND A REQUEST FOR THE ISSUANCE OF AN ALCOHOL BEVERAGE CONTROL LICENSE WITHIN A MINI-MARKET OF A SERVICE STATION, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BASELINE ROAD AND MILLIKEN AVENUE - APN: 1077-672-37. A. Recitals. 1. Texaco has filed an application for an off-site sale of beer and wine license from the Department of Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC). 2. Section 23958 of the Business and Professional Code requires the City of Rancho Cucamonga to make a determination that the issuance of the said license will service the public convenience or necessity. 3. On the 2nd day of April 1997, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga reviewed said application prior to the adoption of this Resolution. 4. 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 as follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Council dudng the above-referenced meeting on April 2, 1997, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The applicant has processed Conditional Use Permit No. 96-27 for a Texaco service station with a mini-market to be located at the southwest corner of Baseline Road and Milliken Avenue. b. The selling of beer and wine for off-site consumption is a common and accepted business practice in conjunction with a mini-market and service station. c. The location is along two major arterial streets, which is suited for this type of service station and mini-market facility. d. The site is not close to sensitive users such as day care facilities, schools or churches. e. Rancho Cucamonga residents would be afforded more shopping opportunities for personal and convenience items and services. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. TEXACO - PCN 96-05 April 2, 1997 Page 2 3. Based upon the findings set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Council concludes that the off-site sale of beer and wine in conjunction with a mini-market and service station will not have a negative impact to the surrounding uses. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this Council hereby determines that the issuance of an off-site sale of beer and wine license for Texaco will serve the public convenience or necessity. 5. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. CITY OF RANCHO CUCA,MONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 2, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY 97- 01 - ZAYER - Consideration of a request to make a determination of Public Convenience or Necessity (PCN) for the issuance of an Alcohol Beverage Control License (Off-Sale General) for a liquor store, located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN: 229-011-41. RECOMMENDATION Approve the determination of "Public Convenience or Necessity" through the adoption of the attached Resolution and forward a copy to the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. ANALYSIS. A. BackgroUnd: The applicant, George and Evelyn Zayer, will be operating a liquor store within Building 7 in Masi Plaza and as shown in Exhibit "B." Building 7 is under construction with a projected completion date of Apirl 15, 1997. The applicant will proceed to do interior improvements after the shell building is complete. B. Requirements from Department of AlCohol Beverage ContrOl: The Department of Alcohol Beverage Control regulates the distribution of liquor licenses by setting limits on the different types of licenses in each Census Tract. The limits are calculated from the ratio of liquor licenses to the population of the Census Tract. According to Alcohol Beverage Control staff, there is a total of 23 active Off-Sale General (Type 21) licenses within Census Tract 21.00 where the liquor store is located, thus exceeding the Alcohol Beverage Control's given limit of 16. VVhen a Census Tract's limit has been reached, additional liquor licenses can be issued only if the City determines that the license would serve the public's convenience or necessity as required by Section 23958 of the Business and Professional Code. The legislation purposefully left the term "public convenience and necessity" undefined so that the local legislative body (City Council) has the greatest latitude, based on local conditions and determinations. ,,. j CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT PCN 97-01 - ZAYER April 2, 1997 Page 2 ,. C. Facts to Support a Public Convenience or Necessity Determination: The following are facts that support the requested "Public Convenience or Necessity." 1. On September 22, 1993, Conditional Use Permit 93-26 was issued for a liquor store to be located at the subject site, 11897 Foothill Boulevard. 2. The site is along two major arterial streets, which is suited for this type of business. 3. The site is not close to sensitive users such as day care facilities, schools or churches. 4. The site is adjacent to the City's Adult Sports Complex, however, staff did not foresee a conflict because of its proximity. 5. Rancho Cucamonga residents would be afforded more shopping opportunities for personal and convenience items. 6. The bulk of the land area in Census Tract 21.00 where the liquor store is located is zoned Industrial, which accounts for the low-limit for Off-Sale General licenses. The majority of the population is located west of Haven Avenue or north of Foothill Boulevard. 7. The site is located at the eastern edge of one of the largest Census Tracts within the community; however, the majority of existing Off-Sale General licenses are located in the western portion of the Tract. CONCLUSION Based on the above analysis, staff finds the issuance of an Oif-Sale General liquor license would not have a negative impact to the surrounding uses. Staff recommends approval of the attached Resolution. Respectf submitted, City Planner BB:NF/mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Applicant's Alcohol Beverage Control Application Exhibit "B" - Site Plan for Masi Plaza Exhibit "C" - Census Tract and Location Map Resolution of Approval c4 ~:; o ~..; ,4 DROPPING P--XRTNER, YES NO ' / ---~'_--,__._,_-__ ~ .... IqPPL!I2FIT!0N FOB RL[2aHBL BEUERRGE LIEENSE(S} TO: D¢.oartment or' Alcoholic Beverage Control File Number .............. 328590 Receipt Number ......... I 12624 1 G~o.graphical Code ........3615 Copies ;',,,lailed Date ... 2/24/97 issa¢cl Date. Sec. 2/-.044 1 yr frm dr. of Complet:i~ DISTRiCT SERvING LOCATION: RIVERSIDE; ,~ ~" Name o( Business: ~IEGA. LIQUOR DELl e ~ / k ~' O Location of Business: Number and Street 11897 FOOTHILL BLVD A City, .State Zip Code RANCHO CUCAMONGA CA 91730 County SAN BERNA. RDINO L"'q'-k O/~ ~9 Is premise inside city limits? YES ,~..~ Mailing Addre.ss: D/aOOz' chO C Cifdiffemnt from 10400 ARRO%V HIGH%VAY RTE 4 ~ O/~/$~c?~Or(,Oa premise addre,ss) O RANCHO CUCAMONGA CA 91730 If premise licensed: Type of license Transferor'shames/license: SeMITHE FOOD & DRUG CENTERS INC 311704 LLzense ."/~e Tr~ns=_ztL~.-..-',.:~ Fee .".-~e Yas:er Du~ ~a,,-.e Fee w::hdrawai :- ReappLy See Receip~ ~i1248~'3 !. 2L OFF-SALE GE?iEP~L PERSC:~ '.O PERSG~; T.~-'--'4S :;~ YES 0 FEB 24,199.7 S .~0: 2.21 OFF-SALE GE.~XE?,'-.L .'-2~.'N'jAL FEE .~:A YES 0 FEB 24,19.97 S .'30 : 3. 2! OFF-SALE GENE?_~.L PREMISE TO PR-'--v. iSE T.~A N'A YES 0 FE3 24,1997 S .GO : TOTAL S i 33. O .3 Have you ever b~en Have you ever vioLaned any ~rovisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control convicted of a felony? NO AcL or regulations of the Department pertaining [o the Ace? NO AtDplican~ agrees (a) r. ha~ =ny manager employed in on-sale licensed promise will have all the qualifications of a [icens~e. and (b) h~ will no~ violam or cause or permit ~o be violated an,.' o[' the provisions of the Alcoholic Bevernge Comrol AcL STATE OF CAj_12FOR2,~'IA County of RIVERS!DE Da~e FEB 24,1997 Under ;xnaRy of l:x'~Jury. :',ch person whos~e s~nalur: ,:;~:ats b~low. c:."u~¢s and .~ys: (I) He is :in a.DplicanL or One ot' the applican,,. or an :~¢cuuv: of~c-.r of ,-ppiicanc corpomUon. named in the for,-go,ng 3pplica:ion. duly authorized to make uhiS :pphcauon on l~s b~h.llf; (2) thai he ~a$ r~ad Lhe t'or~,!Join~ and knows :omenu ;.hrmof and tna~ ,-ach of the -~bov~ st~¢men~ ;h~min made ~,'= u-,'~; (3) L~.ac no ~son ocher than the applican~ or applicanr~ ha,~ any direct or indi.~c: in~,'.'-,~: ,n :he a;~plic~nt or applicants busint, ss ~o b~ conduc:~d und:r -'-he lic',ns~(s) for which :,".~s al~plication is made: (4) Lha: the u"4nsf:r application or ;~rooos~d z'~nsf:r is noc made to satisfy ~c paym~nl o( a loan or co fulfill an a~r~,:-,.-1. enl em::'-d into mo~ :nan mn=,w. (90) days pr,:c,-~:Lin~ the day on which me cranst'¢r a~plic:Uon is ~H=d L,he D=~az't, mcn: or co Sain or =s~.Iblish a p~f,,-r~,nc~ :o or for any cz~,Ct[or or L, ans:','ror or :o d~.'.'~ud or injure any creator of L-mlsf,-Tor: (5) ~,h.l~ ~¢ crlns:',-: ::~lic:non may ~ wimch-awn by eith,,-T the applicant or ;he licensee with no r-,~ulUn~ liabilky r,o ~,he Applican~ Name(s) Applicam Sig-narum(s) ZAYER EVELYN ELIAS Z'4rc~-/~ ~ Attached: 209 & 231 & 227 "' U CY ,,9/ rC/~ "F :..BC 211 Z5,9'5) .~ I 97- 038 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANGHO GUGAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY AND A REQUEST FOR THE ISSUANCE OF AN ALCOHOL BEVERAGE CONTROL LICENSE FOR A LIQUOR STORE LOCATED AT 11897 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND ROCHESTER AVENUE - APN: 229-101-41. A. Recitals. 1. George and Evelyn Zayer has filed an application for an off-site sale of beer and wine license from the Department of Alcohol Beverage Control. 2. Section 23958 of the Business and Professional Code requires the City of Rancho Cucamonga to make a determination that the issuance of the said license will service the public convenience or necessity. 3. On the 2rid day of April 1997, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga reviewed said application prior to the adoption of this Resolution. 4. 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 as follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced meeting on April 2, 1997, including wdtten and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. On September 22, 1993, the Planning Commission issued Conditional Use Permit No. 93-26 for a liquor store to be located at 11897 Foothill Boulevard. b. The location is along two major arterial streets, which is suited for this type of business. c. The site is adjacent to the City's Adult Sports Complex, however, staff did not foresee a conflict because of its proximity. d. The site is not close to sensitive users such as day care facilities, schools or churches. e. Rancho Cucamonga residents would be afforded more shopping opportunities for personal and convenience items and services. f. The bulk of the land area in Census Tract 21.00 where the liquor store is located is zoned Industrial which accounts for the low-limit for off-site General licenses. The majority of the population is located west of Haven Avenue and north of Foothill Boulevard. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. PCN 97-01 - ZAYER April 2, 1997 Page 2 3. Based upon the findings set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Council concludes that the off-site sale of liquor, wine and beer will not have a negative impact to the surrounding uses. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this Council hereby determines that the issuance of an Off-Sale General license for a liquor store serve public convenience or necessity. 5. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. -- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 2.1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP. City Manager FROM: Suzanne Ota, Community Services Manager SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF CITY CO-SPONSORSHIP WITH ACTIVE RIDE SHOP OF A SKATE PARK DEMONSTRATION AND CONCERT EVENT ON JUNE 7, 1997 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City co-sponsor a 2nd fundraiser for Project Skate Park with Active ~de Shop on Saturday, June 7, 1997, at the Epicenter Expanded Parking Lot. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: The Park and Recreation Commission recommends that the City co- sponsor the 2nd Project Skate Park fundraiser--a skate park demonstration and concert with Active Ride Shop. The purpose of the concert is to assist with fundraising for a skate park at Spruce Park for the community. Active Ride Shop has agreed to a collaborative fundraising effort and will provide the band and entertainment for the concert. Active will also provide all of the concert and skateboard technical equipment for the event, comprehensive public liability insurance which will be paid For by revenues from the event, and will seek major sponsom;for the concert. As a co-sponsor, the City will waive rental fees for the expanded parking lot and will provide a small stage for the band, equipment and maintenance cleanup for the event. Security will be coordinated through the Rancho Cucamonga Sheriff's Department and private security. The ~undraising concert will be marketed to Rancho Cucamonga youth. It is estimated that approximately 2,000 youth will attend the event, and there will be $5 ticket entry fee. FISCAL IMPACT: The City will provide in-kind contributions of rental fees, equipment and labor for setup and take down and cleanup for the event. It is estimated that approximately $6,000 can be raised for Project Skate Park with 2,000 youth attending the concert. The special event will also provide an excellent opportunity. for the City's community youth to participate in a concert and skateboarding event. Respectfully submitted, Attachment I RANCHO CUCAMONGA SKATE PARK FUNDRAISING CONCERT SATURDAY. JUNE 7, 1997 Purpose The City of Rancho Cucamonga is in the process of developing a skate park for the community. Active Ride Shop has agreed to a collaborative fundraising effort for Project Skate Park. A skate park demonstration and concert is proposed for Saturday, June 7, 1997, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. at the Epicenter Expanded Parking Lot. It is estimated that approximately 2,000 youth will attend the event. There will be a $5 ticket entry fee for the fundraiser. Active Ride Shop will provide: · Three popular bands appealing to young skateboarders. · Sound and technical equipment. · Demonstration skateboard ramps and equipment. · Comprehensive public liability insurance for $1 million which will be paid for by revenues from the event. · Active will seek major sponsors for the concert. City will provide: · Waiver of Rental Fees for use of the Expanded Parking Lot. A stage for the bands. · Tables and pop-up tents for food concession sales. · Maintenance and cleanup of parking lot. · Street barricades to be placed in front of stage. · Security will be coordinated with Rancho Cucamonga Reserves and private security. · Waiver of banner application fees if street banners are requested for the event. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 2, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Diane O'Neal, Management Analyst II SUBJECT: Approval to Participate in SANBAG's Joint Electrical Restructuring Committee in the amount of $1,000 to be Paid Out of Account Number 01 4245 8022 RECOMMENDATION Approve participation in SANBAG's Joint Electrical Restructuring Committee in the amount of $1,000 to be paid out of Account Number 01 4245 8022. Background Last year the Governor signed Assembly Bill 1890 which provided for restructuring of California' s electric industry. The goal of AB 1890 is to bring the benefits of increased competition and lower electric rates to all Californians. Ultimately, all electric consumers in California will be able to choose their own provider of electric generation in the same manner that today' s consumers are free to choose their long-distance telephone carrier. The SANBAG Board addressed this issue of electrical restructuring at its March 5, 1997 Board meeting. Specifically, the Board approved the formation of a Electrical Restructuring Committee to explore the joint purchase of electrical power for municipal facilities within San Bernardino County. The SANBAG member jurisdictions will each contribute $1,000 to develop a basic analysis of a joint power pool. /'-R,,espec Submitted 0 'Neat ~ Management Analyst II CITY OF RANC}IO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 2, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lain, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer B Y: Karen McGuire-Emery, Associate Park Planner SUBJECT: APPLICATION TO THE CALIFORNIA INTEGRATi~D WASTE MANAGEI~IENT BOAI~J) FOR A 1996/97 TII/Ji; RJ~CYCLING GIL~N'F ILECOMMENDATION Approval by the City Council to submit an application to the California Integrated Waste Management Board for a 1996/97 Tire Recycling Grant for the purpose of purchasing and installing resilient surfacing underneath and around play equipment. BACKGROUND The Public Resources Code Section 42860 et.seq. authorizes the California Integrated Waste Management Boards Tire Recycling Program to expend funds for grants from the California Tire Recycling Management Fund. Grants funded by the Tire Recycling Program are intended to divert tires from disposal in Califomia landfills by promoting recycling and market development activities. The Tire Recycling Grant Program is funded by a $0.25/tire fee that is assessed on tire sales at tire dealers. Eligible grm~t applicm~ts include California cities, cormties and their sub-divisions, as well as school districts, which cm~ demonstrate the implementation of a recycling program prior to January 1997, for at least tkree of the following materials: paper, plastic, glass, old corrugated cardboard, aluminum, ferrous metals, newspaper, tires, used oil, and green waste. The City of Rancho Cucmnonga has an established recycling program that has operated for a number of years. In 1996, the City submitted it's first mmual Diversion Report for 1995. At that time, it was reported that the City had achieved the 25% diversion rate goal, as established through Assembly Bill 939, through it's curbside recycling program, which includes the collection of paper, glass, plastics and aluminum/tin. CITY COUNCIL STAFF IUEPORT April 2. 1997 Page 2 Grant funds are available for installation and material costs of rubberized mat surfacing (manufactured from California waste tire rubber) placed underneath and around playground equipment. Pour-in-place projects using a thin layer of synthetic rubber over a tire rubber base are also acceptable. The City is proposing funds in the 1997/98 fiscal year budget for the installation of "resilient surfacing" along with equipment modifications in existing play areas. These modifications will provide access to the play equipment in response to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Money received from this grant would offset some of the purchasing and installation costs to provide surfacing in three park play areas; Bear Gulch, Windrows and Coyote Canyon Parks. Eligible applicants may request up to $25,000 under this competitive grant program. In addition, all applicants are required to provide minimum matching funds equaling 50% of the total project cost, and may include funds provided for the cost of ground preparation, materials, and installation. However, playground equipment and in-kind services are not eligible expenses for fulfilhnent of the matching fund requirement. If successful in receiving the grant award, the City will be notified by June 1997. Respectful ly submitted, Will~''fir City Engineer WJO:ke A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION 'FO THE CALIFORNIA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR A 96/97 TIRE RECYCLING GRANT WItEREAS, the people of the State of California have enacted Asse~nbly Bill 1843 (W. Brown, Chapter 974, Statutes of 1989) that provides grants to local govermnents, businesses and non-profit organizations for the purpose of diverting tires from land fill disposal by tbstering new business enterprises and encouraging cooperative local government programs; and WHEREAS, the California Integrated Waste Mm~agement Board has been delegated the responsibility for the administration of the program within the state, setting up necessary procedures governing application by local agencies, businesses and non-profit organizations under the progrmn; and WHEREAS, said procedures established by the California Integrated Waste Management Board require the applicant to certify by resolution approval of the application before submission of said application to the state; and WHEREAS, the applicm~t will enter into an agreement with the State of California for development of the project; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of I(ancho Cucamonga authorizes the submittal of an application to the California Integrated Waste Management Board for a 96/97 Tire Recycling Grant. The City Engineer of the City of Rancho Cucamonga is hereby authorized and empowered to execute in the name of the City of Rancho Cucamonga all necessary applications, contracts, agreements, amendments and payment requests hereto for the purposes of securing grm~t funds and to imple~nent and carry out the purposes specified in the grant application. The foregoing resolution was passed by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga this 2nd day of April. 1997. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 2.1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lain, AICP. City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil. City Engineer BY: Linda R. Beek, Jr. Engineer ~,.~.4 SUBJECT: ACCEPTANCE OF IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASE THE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND, ACCEPT A MAINTENANCE BOND AND FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR TRACT 14208, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BASE LINE ROAD, WEST OF ALTA CUESTA DRIVE RECOMMENDATION: The required street improvements for Tract 14208 have been completed in an acceptable manner and it is recommended that City Council accept said improvements, authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and authorize the City Clerk to release the Faithful Performance Bonds and accept the Maintenance Bond. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Tract 14208, located on the north side of Base Line Road, west of Alta Cuesta Drive. Developer: Ralph G. Rittenhouse 400 North Santa Anita Avenue Arcadia, C A 91006 Release: Faithful Performance Bond No. 35M88347700 in the amount of $130,000.00 Faithful Performance Bond No. 35M80699300 in the amount of $ 76,500.00 Accept: Maintenance Guarantee Bond No. 3SM883747700-A in the amount of $20,400.00 Resp 'sl ly submitted~.,~;57 Willim O'Neil City Efigineer WJO:LRB:Is Attachment A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT 14208, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BASE LINE ROAD, WEST OF ALTA CUESTA DRIVE, AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of improvements for Tract 14208, located on the north side of Base Line Road, west of Alia Cuesta Drive, have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and, WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed. certi/~ying the work complete. NOW. THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby resolves, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County ORDINANCE NO. 571 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 12.16 TO TITLE 12 THEREOF AND PROVIDING FOR THE REGULATION OF NEWSPAPER RACKS WITHIN THE CITY. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new Chapter 12.16 to Title 12 thereof to read, in words and figures, as follows: "Chapter 12.16 REGULATION OF NEWSPAPER RACKS Sections: 12.16.010- Intent and purpose. 12.16.020 - Definitions. 12.16.030 - Permit required. 12.16.040 - Prohibited installations. 12.16.050 - Placement and maintenance standards. 12.16.060 - Maintenance standards 12.16.070 - Display of certain matter prohibited. 12.16.080 - Display of harmful matter. 12.16.090 - Violation - notice to owner. 12.16.100 - Impounding of newsracks - when authorized. 12.16.110 - Impounding of newsracks - request for hearing. 12.16.120 - Return of impounded newsracks - conditions. 12.16.130 - Sale or disposal after impoundment. 12.16.140- Impoundment- hearing procedures. 12.16.150 - Appeals. 12.16.160 - Restoration following newsrack removal. 12.16.010 Intent and PurDose. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby finds that newsracks, stands, containers, and similar newspaper and vending devices have proliferated and increased in areas of the City of Rancho Cucamonga to the extent that, in some instances, they constitute a threat to the public health, safety, and welfare by impeding pedestrian traffic and interfering with ingress and egress to and from buildings, vehicles, and public modes of transportation. The purpose of this Chapter is to promote the public health, safety, and welfare through the regulation of placement, appearance, number, and size and servicing of newsracks on public rights-of-way so as to: Ordinance 571 Page 2 A. Provide for pedestrian and driving safety and convenience; B. Insure no unreasonable interference with the flow of pedestrian or vehicular traffic including ingress into, or egress from, any residence or place of business, or from the street to the sidewalk, by persons exiting or entering parked or standing vehicles; C. Provide reasonable access for the use and maintenance of sidewalks, poles, posts, traffic signs or signals, hydrants, mailboxes, and access to locations used for public transportation services; D. Reduce visual blight on the public rights-of-way and protect the aesthetics of store window displays, public landscaping, and other improvements; E. Maintain and protect the value of surrounding properties; F. Reduce exposure to the City to personal injury or property damage claims and litigation; G. Protect the right to distribute information as protected by the state and federal constitutions through the use of newsracks; H. Avoid interference with the emergency activities of public safety agencies. It is not the intent of this Chapter to in any way discriminate against, regulate, or interfere with the publication, circulation, distribution, or dissemination of any newspapers or other written materials. 12.16.020 - D~finitiOns. For purposes of this Chapter, the following words and phrases shall be construed to have the meanings herein set forth, unless it is apparent from the context that a different meaning is intended: "Director" means the Director of Community Development of the City of Rancho Cucamonga or his or her designee. "Explicit sexual acts" means depictions of sexual intercourse, oral copulation, anal intercourse, oral-anal copulation, bestiality, sadism, masochism, or excretory functions in conjunction with sexual activity, masturbation, or lewd exhibition of genitals, whether any of the above conduct is depicted or described as being performed alone or between members of the same or opposite sex or between humans and animals, or other acts of sexual arousal involving any physical contact with a persoWs genitals, pubic region, pubic hair, perineum, anus, or anal region. "Newsrack" means any self-service or coin-operated box, container, storage unit, or other dispenser installed, used, or maintained for the display, sale, or distribution of any publication. Ordinance 571 Page 3 "Owner" means any person or company whose name appears as an owner on a newsrack as required by Section 12.16.050.H of this Chapter, for which a permit is sought or obtained. "Parkway" means that area between the sidewalks and the curb of any street, and where there is no sidewalk, that area between the edge of the roadway and the property line adjacent thereto. Parkways shall also include any area within a roadway which is not open to vehicular travel. "Public right-of-way" means any place of any nature which is dedicated to use by the public for pedestrian and vehicular travel, and includes, but is not limited to, a street, sidewalk, curb, gutter, public easement, crossing, intersection, parkway, highway, alley, lane, mall, court, way, avenue, boulevard, road, roadway, viaduct, bridge, thoroughfare, park, square, and any other similar public way. "Roadway" means that portion of a street improved, designed, or ordinarily used for vehicular travel. "Sidewalk" means any surface provided for the use of pedestrians. "Street" means all that area dedicated to public use for public street purposes and shall include, but not be limited to, roadways, parkways, alleys, and sidewalks. 12.16.030 - Permit Reauired. (a) A newsrack permit issued in accordance with this Chapter shall be required prior to the installation, placement, or maintenance of any newsrack which, in whole or in part, rests upon, in, or over any public right-of-way. Each permit shall be valid for one year unless sooner terminated as provided herein, and may be renewed annually. Each permit shall designate the number and location or locations of newsracks for which the permit has been issued. (b) Application. A written application for a newsrack permit shall be filed with the Director and shall contain the following: 1. The name, address, and telephone number of the applicant and owner of the newsrack(s); 2. The name, address, and telephone number of a representative or other responsible person whom the City may notify or contact at any time concerning the applicant's newsrack(s); 3. The number of newsracks at the street address of each proposed location as shown on a scaled drawing; Ordinance 571 Page 4 4. A diagram of the location or locations proposed for the installation of the newsrack(s); 5. Name(s) of newspaper(s) or other written material to be contained in each newsrack; 6. Type or brand of newsrack, including a photograph or scaled drawing of the newsrack and mount; and 7. A written statement, satisfactory to the City Attorney, whereby the owner agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, and employees, from any loss or liability or damage, including expenses and costs, for bodily or personal injury, and for property damage sustained by any person, as a result of the installation, use, or maintenance of a newsrack or newsracks within the City. C. Each application shall be accompanied by a non-refundable fee in an amount set by resolution of the City Council, which shall not exceed the actual cost of investigating the facts contained in the application and processing of the application. D. Issuance and Denial. Upon a finding that the applicant is in compliance with the provisions of this Chapter, the Director shall issue a newsrack permit applicable to the location or locations approved by the Traffic Engineer. If a permit is denied, the applicant shall be notified in writing of the specific cause of such denial by the Director and of the right to appeal in accordance with Section 12.16.140 of this Chapter. E. A newsrack permit shall not be required pdor to the installation, placement, or maintenance of a newsrack which does not rest, in whole or in part, in or upon a public right-of-way. Such newsrack may not, however, be placed within any required setback area, or where otherwise prohibited by the Development Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. For purposes of application of the Development Code to newsracks, a newsrack shall be deemed to be a 'structure.' 12.16.040 Prohibited installations. A. No person shall install, use, or maintain, or cause to be installed, used, or maintained, any newsrack which projects onto, into, or over any part of the roadway of any public street, or which rests, wholly or in part, upon, along, or over any portion of the roadway of any public street. B. No person shall install, use, or maintain, or cause to be installed, used, or maintained, any newsrack which, in whole or in part, rests upon, in, or over any public sidewalk or parkway, when such installation, use, or maintenance: Ordinance 571 Page 5 1. Would likely endanger the safety of persons or property; or 2. Is on a site or location used for public utility purposes, public transportation purposes, or other governmental purpose; 3. Would likely and unreasonably interfere with or impede the flow of pedestrian or vehicular traffic, including access to any legally parked or stopped vehicle; or 4. Would likely and unreasonably interfere with or impede ingress into or egress from any residence or place of business, or the use of poles, posts, traffic signs or signals, hydrants, mailboxes, or other objects permitted at or near the location; or 5. Would interfere with the cleaning of any sidewalk by the use of mechanical sidewalk cleaning machinery. 12.16.0,50 Placement standardS. Any newsrack which, in whole or in part, rests upon, in, or over any public sidewalk or parkway shall comply with the following standards: A. Each newsrack shall be installed in an upright and secure position. B. Each newsrack shall be of a type that is completely enclosed with a self- closing door that is either self-latching or otherwise requires manual or mechanical release at each use. C. No newsrack shall exceed 40 inches in height, 30 inches in width, or 24 inches in thickness. D. Newsracks shall only be placed near a curb or adjacent to the wall of a building. Newsracks placed near the curb shall be placed no less than 18 inches nor more than 24 inches from the edge of the curb and shall not open toward the roadway. Newsracks placed adjacent to the wall of a building shall be placed parallel to the wall and not less than 6 inches nor more than 18 inches from the wall. No newsrack shall be placed or maintained on a sidewalk or parkway opposite a newsstand or another newsrack. E. No newsrack shall be chained, bolted, or otherwise attached to: 1. Any property without the express written permission of the owner of such property; provided however, that the Director may require newsracks to be secured to the sidewalk by means of an approved device; or 2. Any fixture located in the public right-of-way, except to other newsracks, including but not limited to, any tree, streetlight post, traffic signal, or sign. /..( (:~ Ordinance 571 Page 6 F. Attachment to Other Newsracks. Newsracks, when placed side-by-side, may be chained or otherwise attached to one another, provided that no group of newsracks shall extend for a distance of more than 10 feet along a curb, and a space of not less than 6 feet shall separate each group of newsracks. G. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 12.16.040, no newsrack shall be placed, installed, used, or maintained: 1. Within 10 feet of any marked 'mid-block' crosswalk; 2. Within 30 feet of any street or alley curb return; 3. Within 8 feet of any fire hydrant, fire call box, curb bordering any fire access lane, police call box, or other emergency facility; 4. Within 10 feet of any driveway; 5. Within 5 feet ahead of or 25 feet to the mar of any sign marking a designated bus stop; 6. Within 6 feet of any bus bench or bus shelter; 7. At any location whereby the clear space for the passageway of pedestrians is reduced to less than 4 feet; or 8. Within 3 feet of any area improved with lawn, flowers, shrubs, or trees or within 3 feet of any display window of any building abutting the sidewalk or parkway or in such manner as to impede or interfere with the reasonable use of such window for display purposes. H. Color. Newsracks shall be of unobtrusive neutral colors of grey, brown, or black in order to blend in with the streetscape. I. Materials. Newsracks shall be constructed of metal, except for the display window. J. No newsrack shall be used for advertising signs or publicity purposes other than that dealing with the display, sale, or purchase of the newspaper or printed material sold therefrom. K. Each newsrack shall be constructed and located in compliance with this Chapter and in such manner as to comply with all state and federal regulations concerning access by disabled persons. L. Each newsrack shall have affixed thereto, in a place where such information may be easily seen, the correct name, address, and telephone number of the owner thereof. Upon acceptance of a newsrack permit, each permittee shall be deemed to have consented to receive any notices given Ordinance 571 Page 7 pursuant to this Chapter, by mail, at the address affixed to such permitted newsrack(s). M. No newsrack permit shall be transferred except upon ten calendar days prior notification to City and continued compliance with the provisions of this Chapter. 12.16.060 Maintenance standards. Each newsrack shall be maintained in a clean and neat condition and in good repair at all times in accordance with the following provisions: A. Each newsrack shall prominently display the correct name, address, and telephone number of the owner thereof. B. Each newsrack shall be maintained in a condition that is free of accumulations of outdated printed materials, trash, rubbish, or debris. C. Each newsrack shall be regularly serviced so that: 1. It is kept reasonably free of chipped, faded, peeling, and cracked paint in the visible, painted areas thereof; 2. It is kept reasonably free of rust and corrosion in the visible, unpainted metal areas thereof; 3. The clear glass or plastic parts thereof, if any, through which the printed material being dispensed, are not broken and are kept reasonably free of tears, peeling, fading, dirt, or grime. 4. The structural parts of the newsrack are not broken or unduly misshapen. 12.16.070 DiSplay of Certain matter prohibited. Publications offered either for sale or at no charge from newsracks placed or maintained on or projecting into or over a public right-of-way shall not be displayed or exhibited in a manner which exposes to public view from any public right-of-way any of the following: A. Any statements or words describing explicit sexual acts, sexual organs, or excrement where such statements or words have as their purpose or effect sexual arousal, gratification, or affront; B. Any picture or illustration of genitals, pubic hair, perinea, anuses, or anal regions of any person where such picture or illustration has as its purpose or effect sexual arousal, gratification, or affront; C. Any picture or illustration depicting explicit sexual acts where such picture or illustration has as its purpose or effect sexual arousal, gratification, or affront. Ordinance 571 Page 8 12.16.080 Display of harmful matter. (a) Definitions. For purposes of this section, the terms harmful matter, matter, person, knowingly, exhibit, and minor shall have the meanings specified in Section 313 of the Penal Code of the State of California, or any successor provisions thereto. For the purposes of this section, the term blinder rack shall mean opaque material placed in front of, or inside, the newsrack and which prevents exposure to public view. (b) Prohibition. No person shall knowingly exhibit, display, or cause to be exhibited or displayed, harmful matter in any newsrack located, in whole or in part, in or on a public right-of-way or other public place from which minors are not excluded, unless blinder racks have been installed so that the lower two-thirds of the matter is not exposed to public view. 12.16.090 Violation - nOtiCe tO owner. Whenever any newsrack is found to be in violation of this Chapter, the Director shall cause a tag to be attached to such newsrack specifying the date and nature of the violation. Within three calendar days thereafter, a written notice of such violation shall be sent by first-class mail by the Director to the owner whose name appears on the newsrack as required in Section 12.16.050.H, specifying the nature of the violation and that the newsrack shall be impounded if corrections are not made. The owner shall, within ten calendar days from the date on which the notice of violation was mailed, either cause the violation to be correctedEor request a hearing pursuant to Section 12.16.130. 12.16.100 Impounding of newSraCk~ - when authorized. A. If an owner fails to timely correct the violation(s) specified in the written notice, and fails to request a hearing within the time provided herein, the Director may impound such newsrack or newsracks; B. In the event a newsrack does not have the owners name, address, and telephone number affixed thereto as required by this Chapter, then such newsrack may be impounded if, within ten calendar days of the date the violation tag was affixed, the owner has not requested a hearing as provided 'in Section 12.16.140, in which case the newsrack shall be deemed to be abandoned; C. Where the installation, use, or maintenance of a newsrack creates an immediate threat to the public health, safety, or welfare, it may be impounded, provided written notice is thereafter provided to the owner by first-class mail pursuant to Section 12.16.110 of this Chapter. D. When such newsrack has been abandoned, it may be impounded. For purposes of this section, a newsrack shall be deemed abandoned when it has remained empty for 30 consecutive days or longer or no new publication has been placed in the newsrack for 45 days or longer. Upon abandonment, a newsrack may be impounded without prior notice, provided post-impoundment notice is given to the owner, if the owner can Ordinance 571 Page 9 be identified, pursuant to Section 12.16.110. 12.16.110 Impounding of newsrackS - notice to owner. Whenever any newsrack is impounded, the Director shall provide written notice by first-class mail to the owner within three calendar days of such impoundment and of the rights of the owner to recover such impounded newsrack(s). 12.16.120 Return of impounded newsracks - conditions. A. Any newsrack, together with it contents, which has been impounded shall be returned to the owner: 1. If a hearing is not timely requested, upon receipt of an impound fee within 30 days of impoundment, the amount of which has been set by resolution of the City Council; or 2. Upon a determination, after hearing by the Director, that the newsrack should not have been impounded and should be returned to the owner; or 3. Upon a decision by the City Council on appeal that the newsrack should not have been impounded. B. In the event a hearing has not. been requested within the time permitted, an impound fee, the amount of which has been set by resolution of the City Council, shall be imposed upon the owner. 12.16.130 Sale or disposal after impoundment. The Director may sell or otherwise dispose of any newsrack, together with its contents, and retain the proceeds, on behalf of the City, from any such or other disposition and any moneys contained in the newsrack at the time of its impoundment, provided that either: A. Thirty days have elapsed since impoundment occurred, no hearing has been requested within the time permitted, and the owner has failed to pay all impound fees assessed; or B. A hearing and an appeal, if filed, have resulted in a final determination that the newsrack was properly impounded and fees assessed have not been received within 30 days from the date of said final determination. 12.16.140 Impoundment - hearing procedures. A. Any newsrack owner may file a written request with the Director for a hearing within the time specified in Section 12.16.090, for the purpose of demonstrating that a newsrack should not be impounded, was improperly impounded, or that a violation as specified in the notice of violation has not in fact occurred. Ordinance 571 Page 10 B. Notice of Hearing. Within five calendar days from the date on which the request for hearing is received, the Director shall set a hearing date and shall notify the owner by first-class mail of the date, time, and place of such hearing. The hearing shall occur within ten calendar days of the date of mailing the notice. C. Conduct of Hearing. At the time set for the hearing or at the date to which the hearing is continued, the Director shall receive all evidence relevant to the occurrence or non-occurrence of the specified violation(s), the compliance or non-compliance with any or the provisions of this Chapter, and any other relevant information. The hearing need not be conducted according to technical rules relating to evidence and witnesses. D. Decision after Hearing. Within ten calendar days after the conclusion of the hearing, the Director shall find and determine, from the facts adduced at the hearing, whether the newsrack is in violation of this Chapter. The decision of the Director shall be in writing and shall contain findings of fact, a determination of the issues presented and the amount of the impound fee, if any, to be imposed. Thereafter, the Director may order the owner to remove such newsrack, if determined to be in violation of this Chapter, within ten calendar days of the mailing date of the decision. If a notice of appeal is not timely filed during said ten-day period, the Director may thereafter order the newsrack to be impounded without further notice to the owner. E. Notice of Decision. The Director shall send to the owner, by first-class mail, a copy of the decision and order. 12.16.150 ApDeals. A. Any newsrack owner may, within ten calendar days of the mailing date of the copy of the Director's decision and order, appeal such decision to the City Council by filing a notice of appeal. If no hearing was timely requested and a newsrack was impounded, then the owner may appeal such impoundmerit provided a written request for appeal is received by the Director within ten calendar days of such impoundment. B. An appeal shall set forth in writing specifically wherein the appellant believes there was error or abuse of discretion on the part of the Director. The Director shall, within ten calendar days, transmit the appeal, together with a copy of his or her file, decision and order, to the clerk of the City Council, who shall set the matter for hearing. C. The City Council shall, upon receipt of the material specified in the preceding paragraph from the Director, and after a hearing: 1. Approve the decision and order of the Director; 2. Reverse or modify the decision and order, and refer the matter back to the Director; or Ordinance 571 Page 11 3. Where no hearing before the Director was timely requested, sustain the impoundment or impose fees or order the newsrack returned with or without fees being imposed. 12.16.160 Restoration following newsrack removal. In the event an owner removes any newsrack, or has a newsrack removed by the Director following hearing and/or appeal, if any, it shall be such owner's responsibility to restore the site of the newsrack to an undamaged condition. Undamaged condition shall mean a condition which is smooth, free of holes, fasteners, and physical devices of any nature, such that another newsrack may be located on that specific site without further restoration. In the event such newsrack permittee fails to restore the site as required herein, the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall be authorized, at its discretion, to restore the site following the expiration of five calendar days prior written notice to the owner stating his or her obligation to perform restoration. The cost of such restoration performed by the City shall be recoverable from the permittee as a debt in a contract action." SECTION 2: Time for compliance. Every owner of a newsrack for which a permit would be required pursuant to this Chapter shall, within 120 days of the effective date of this Ordinance, apply for and obtain a permit for such newsrack or newsracks. Following the expiration of said period, the Director shall be authorized to proceed to enforce the provisions of this Chapter. SECTION 3: Penalties for Violation of Ordinance. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm, partnership, or corporation to violate any provision or to fail to comply with any of the requirements of this Ordinance or the Chapter hereby adopted. Any person, firm, partnership, or corporation violating any provision of this Ordinance or the Chapter hereby adopted or failing to comply with any of their requirements shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine not exceeding One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) or by imprisonment not exceeding six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Each such person, firm, partnership, or corporation shall be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or any portion thereof during which any violation of any of the provisions of this Ordinance or the Chapter hereby adopted is committed, continued, or permitted by such person, firm, partnership, or corporation, and shall be deemed punishable therefor as provided in this Ordinance. SECTION 4: Civil Remedies Availablq, The violation of any of the provisions of this Ordinance or the Chapter hereby adopted shall constitute a nuisance and may be abated by the City through civil process by means of restraining order, preliminary or permanent injunction, or in any other manner provided by law for the abatement of such nuisances. Ordinance 571 Page 12 SECTION 5: Severability. The City Council hereby declares that should any provision, section, paragraph, sentence, or word of this Ordinance or the Chapter hereby adopted by rendered or declared invalid by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences, and words of this Ordinance or the Chapter hereby adopted shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 6: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published as required by law. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of April, 1997. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: William J. Alexander, Mayor ATTEST: Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the 19th day of March, 1997, and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the 2nd day of April, 1997. Executed this 3rd day of April, 1997, at Rancho Cucamonga, California. Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk CITY OF R.A. NCHO CUC,'-MMONGA ' STAFF REPORT DATE: April 2, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Steve Hayes, AICP, Associate Planner SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 96-02 - CITATION HOMES - A request to amend the Victoria Community Plan Development District designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 18 acres of land at the northeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Victoria Park Lane - APN: 227-011-17. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for consideration. CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 96-03 - CITATION HOMES - A request to amend the Victoria Community Plan Development District designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 12.4 acres of land south of Highland Avenue, east of Woodruff Place - APN: 227-011-26. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for consideration. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve Victoria Community Plan Amendment 96-02 and 96-03 through adoption of the attached Ordinances and issue Negative Declarations for both actions. ABSTRACT The purpose of the public hearing is to consider a proposal by Citation Homes, the owner/applicant for the above referenced applications, to modify the Development District designation from Medium Residential to Low-Medium Residential for two properties recently purchased within the Victoria Planned Community. The applicant desires to build single family detached residences on the two properties on lots of a similar size to those within the immediate neighborhood. The adjacent developed properties with single family homes are all currently zoned Low-Medium Residential, consistent with the applicant's request. These amendments to the Development District designations are required in order for the applicant to subdivide these properties into individual lots of a similar size to those adjacent developed parcels. In conjunction with the proposed amendments, the applicant submitted Tentative Tract Maps for both properties. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT VCPA 96-02 AND VCPA 96-03 - CITATION HOMES April 2, '1997 Page 2 BACKGROUND The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed amendments and approved related Tentative Tract Map Nos. 15796 and 15797 at their meeting on February 26, 1997. At that meeting, no additional testimony from the public occurred. Staff has received several inquiries regarding the proposed applications and a majority, if not all, of the residents in the immediate area that have contacted the City were in favor of the proposed amendments once learning that the property would now be designated for the development of single family detached residences and that the new property owner was subdividing the land for that purpose. CONCLUSION Staff feels that proposed modifications to the Development District designations is consistent and compatible with surrounding development in the immediate area and in conformance with the basic goals and objectives within the Victoria Community Plan and General Plan. Respectfully submitted, City Planner BB:SH:taa Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Planning Commission Staff Report for Victoria Community Plan Amendment 96-02 and Tentative Tract 15796 dated February 26, 1997 Exhibit "B" - Planning Commission Staff Report for Victoria Community Plan Amendment 96-03 and Tentative Tract 15797 dated February 26, 1997 Exhibit °'C" - Planning Commission Minutes dated February 26, 1997 Ordinance approving Victoria Community Plan Amendment 96-02 Ordinance approving Victoria Community Plan Amendment 96-03 57 CITY OF R,&NCHO CUC,&MONGA -- STAFF REPORT DATE: February 26, 1997 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Steve Hayes, AICP, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 96-02 - CITATION HOMES - A request to amend the Victoria Community Plan Development District designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 18 acres of land at the northeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Victoria Park Lane -APN: 227-011-17. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15796 - CITATION HOMES - A proposed residential subdivision of 94 single family lots on 18 acres of land in the Medium Residential district (8-14 dwelling units per acre), proposed to be Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre), located at the northeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Victoria Park Lane - APN: 227-011-17. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Project Density: 5.2 dwelling units per acre. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Commercial Shopping Center; Village Commercial South - Single Family Residences; Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) East - Single Family Residences and Neighborhood Park; Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) West - Single Family Residences; Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) C. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Low-Medium Residential North - Medium Residential and Neighborhood Commercial South Low-Medium Residential East Low-Medium Residential West Low-Medium Residential and proposed Elementary School D. Site Characteristics: The site is vacant and slopes generally from north to south at roughly 4 percent. A trail exists along the east property line to link the subdivision to the east and k,,,. south with the school and park to the east and north. The site is covered in native scrub .-,f PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT VCPA 96-02 & TT 15796 - CITATION HOMES February 26, 1997 Page 2 .:, vegetation; no trees or any other significant landscaping exists on the property. Curb and gutter exist along the project frontages. BACKGROUND: On March 11, 1992, a 189-unit condominium project was approved for the site. Since that time, the property has been sold and the current property owner is pursuing the proposed single family residential project on the property because of current market conditions. ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant is proposing to subdivide the 18-acre site into 94 single family residential lots. The lots are of a size and dimension consistent with the existing Low-Medium Residential Development Standards within the Victoria Community Plan. Lots range in size from 5,000 to 11,304 square feet and average 6,210 square feet. In addition to the 94 residential lots, a lettered lot is proposed along the southeast side of the subdivision to provide access to the existing trail extension east of the site. B. Victoria Community Plan Amendment: In conjunction with the proposed Tentative Tract Map, the applicant has also submitted an application to amend the development district designation for the property associated with the proposed subdivision. The 18-acre parcel is currently zoned Medium Re.~idential and the developer is proposing to change the designation on this property to Low-Medium Residential for the purpose of develooing a conventional single family residential subdivision with center plot detached homes. The applicant is proposing this amendment for reasons outlined in the attached justification letter (See Exhibit "E"). Within the Medium Residential Development District of the Victoria Community Plan, a wide variety of housing stock is allowed including, but not limited to, condominiums, townhouses, triplexes, fourplexes, and other types of single family housing, both attached and detached. However, the density of a project in the Medium Residential District shall be between 8 to 14 dwelling units per acre. The applicant is proposing a single family residential subdivision at a density of 5.2 dwelling units. The proposed density and lot sizes both conform with the Low-Medium Residential development standards within the Victoria Community Plan, hence the amendment request by the applicant. Within the surrounding neighborhood, the predominant type of development is detached single family residences. To the north is a neighborhood commercial shopping center. The property in question was originally designated Medium Residential for the purpose of providing a buffer between the detached single family development to the south and the Village Commercial designation to the north. With small-lot single family detached housing being one of the accepted housing types in this "buffed' area, the amendment proposal would not necessarily change the type of housing allowed in this area, only the density and lot size. Staff feels that redesignating the parcel to Low-Medium Residential would also fit in with the surrounding neighborhood where a single family detached deve;,..,pment of a similar density is predominant. C. Design Review Committee: On February 4, 1997, the Committee (Bethel, Macias, Coleman) reviewed the project and recommended approval of the subdivision with conditions that have been incorporated into the attached Resolution of Approval. Comments from this meeting are provided for your convenience (See Exhibit "D"). P~NNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT VCPA 96-02 & TT 15796 - CITATION HOMES February 26, ! 997 Page 3 D. Technical Review Committee: On February 5, 1997, the Technical Review Committee reviewed the project and determined that, together with the recommended special and standard Conditions of Approval, the project is consistent with all applicable standards and ordinances. The Grading Committee reviewed the project and recommended approval subject to conditions at their meeting on February 4, 1997. E. Environmental Assessment: Staff has completed Part II of the Initial Studies for both the Tentative Tract Map and Victoria Community Plan Amendment (See Exhibit "G"). Staff determined that the proposed Tentative Tract Map could have a significant adverse impact on the environment relative to noise unless proper mitigations are incorporated into the design of the project. A preliminary acoustical analysis was prepared by a registered engineer that recommended construction of an 8- to 10-foot high sound barrier along Milliken Avenue and a 6- to 8-foot screen wall along Kenyon Way to mitigate noise to acceptable levels, as defined in the City's General Plan. Staff has incorporated a Condition of Approval into the attached Resolution of Approval for the Tentative Tract Map requiring this sound wall as mitigation to the potential noise issue. If the Commission concurs with staffs recommendations, then issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Tentative Tract Map and a Negative Declaration for the proposed Victoria Community Plan Amendment would be in order. CORRESPONDENCE: These items have been advertised as public hearings in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property has been posted, and notices were sent to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Victoria Community Plan Amendment 96-02 and approve Tentative Tract 15796 through adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with Conditions and issue a mitigated Negative Declaration for the tract. City Planner BB:SH:jfs Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Utilization Map Exhibit "B" - Tentative Tract Map Exhibit "C ' - Conceptual Grading Plan Exhibit "D" - Design Review Committee Action Comments dated February 4, 1997 Exhibit "E" - Letter from Applicant regarding proposed Victoria Community Plan Amendment Exhibit °'F" - Surrounding Land Uses Map Exhibit "G" - Initial Study. Part II Resolution of Approval for Victoria Community Plan Amendment 96-02 Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract Map 15796 .; ~] 5\-T~---- PLANNINe £ ': '-:',S ~ V "~OPOSED VILLAGE '~ ' ' ' -~-8 DU/AC. IAL ' \' ,S-~4 SU, AC. TFRACT--t3A~'0L- I LOTS' ,CT' ~ 30~ 7 ---, ~ _-_: ~K SITE tL-- "r53-L ARK -;ITF__, :7/~ =- ;:*. ,.. ;~ - '.X: ' ' - . ,._ : :: !::'i::' ,-:-.. "i<.. _-_:--_! ! [. _ '~::-' :X~--_ .........-_ _"~'~'-':;~Zf;-'=.'-''-'- ~ ii 'i{' .... : i ~ '---: '-' -'. "" __ . ', ,. :. ' .:-'-- t/-"' ~.: ' ~ i'- ..: 'F, ;, " .:'- ",, .' }: t' 2_ ;.':, ~,! :--"~' ?:' ". "': "'_.(~. ~!"" . . ,~ i".7 ~: ' ''.;,it:',' ,-.:'.':,/- ' ,-~iH".4-. ', ~ '~. Z - ~ ~ .-, ~ ,,/' ' T. .... :. _.~,~ ~ .~ -~_ ' ~_ :'~ ; ':- ':' "/'~' ' ;:'~:;,"' i, i:;,,-/'. *. .,-' z .i ~!!' ~- ~-' ~ !"; :' '.. '-';i 'T-:i ~i ':-..'~-:~::I ' 0 ",1 (J : ': 2- ~ :xT:' · :,~. i~"\ - :. ~ . ' :.t--t=:~;l::;-'""-~:~ ':,; i:t~' ' ..- ~-:~ $ ; "': ~! ' -_' - ' :, ~' :': 'l,~"""":*"'~'= ""'"'~'~.~'-.~--"ezs::, :' -~ '~: ' · :' : ~ :~ ;,,7 ~:- _ _.,. , ~ : t': ' '::,{ ~ .~'~ ': .: " '-' ]J'] -'-'.. :. " :~ " : ' " - ":z : ':'., '-:'t:- ~: ~ I · ,3":': N/': {...~:' ',::: ,..,. ,.. ..,.'-.,;:.:-.,.,.:.__..-:t,;. t.:,t';~,' -: -,: >) ~ ;.' ' / -, ~. - -.. , ::, . - ~ . ',- ..,.,: ~: ' %'-' ' '. .S ~.-' " ~'."4 _ ' ~.:. ~ ..'. i:,: ~ , ..., . .: ' ~. '~ .,,,.,_ · .;. : ~ !! ~ LU": ' '{ !'"'""' ~ ~ ....... R...~_*.~.~ ....... , - - --~ :;]; .i,_= I.". -"., "',._; 2-3,s, -~"'} o E~'L,TRO~trELN'T.-X.L ASSESb~X'I]E.',q'T .-L'x'D TEXT.-XT[VtE TP,.ACT [.5796- CITATION H:O,.N/E,$- A proposed residential subdivision of 94 Iots on IS acres o~'[and in ch, e .x,'[edium .'R. esidential District (S- d,,`.'eilin~ units per acre) located at the nor"theast corner of'.'k,l:illiken Avenue and Victoria Park Lane - A.P:",': 227-0 i 1- ]. 7. P,,etaced F'ile: Victoria Community t:'!an Az'nendment De.~i~n ParameterS: This site is bounded b.v a neighborhood commercial shopping center to the north, a neighborhood park aton8 the portion of the east side, and residential development in ,,a.[1 other directions. A trail exists along the east side of the project area. Victoria Park Lane, which exists a[on__--. the southern border of the site, has b-":n developed and includes an exoanded ~,..'id~h rio, hi-of-way for a finear park. .No significant vegetation or natural features exist on the proneFry..--k oOr'tiOn of the noah ten:tel area of the site has some uncompacted fill that is proposed co be spread out over :he propert?' ,.,.'hen developed. 7he gener~Ily slopes from noah co south at approximateI?'4 percent. Staff Comments: The follov,'in~ comments are intended to pr.o,.'ide an outline for Committee discussion. .xfaj9r ISsue.':,: The following broad desi~ issues ,.d[l be :h~ focus of Committee discussion regardin=~, :his project: t. in order to reduce the number of awkward adjacent side/rear :yard relationships, Street "G" should be ~umed around to face the same direction as cu[-de-sac streets "C" and "E." As a result, Street "F"' should terrain-ate as a nonher[,,' fa. cinU; cul-de-sac. 2. The cul-de-sac a.: the southern ~erminus o~' Street "E" should be pulled back nonher[,,' :o provide a more pleasin~ connection to the Victoria Park Lane trail s':'stem, consistent in design with exis;;."~ simiiar sit,.za:ions in Victori~ (see at:ached 3. Lor. s 56 throu2h 65 should be reorien'-''~ ' east/we ,.,.,~ !nan s~ direction to minimize :he number awk'ward side,,'rear yard relationships in :his Secondan,' [5~ues: Once all of the major issues have been addresse~, and ~ime oermi::in~, :he Commi.::ee ,.v!tl discuss the following secondar'}' design The I-~ndscapin=a ,.viabin the proposed :rail :ann~c',ion be:,.veen Lots 75 and 77 shou[c: include significant tandscapin=c, to mitigate the narrowness of;he 2. A ~:~ area should be provided adjacent :o :he :rososed bus bay area ,:o allow far benches ~.o be orovided a~ the bus s~op. Po[{sv IssueS: 'The 5l[o;,.'ing items are ~ matter af' ?Ianning Commission policy and shou!J be incorporated into the project design ,,viihour t. .'a.e:aidn~ v,'a!Zs should be limited :o a maxim::.'.., height. of-4'. fee: and be composed of a decaratE,.'e material or finish. 2 Walls along the oer-:mecer of:he project should Lse consistent in design with the est.ablish. ed theme · ' ' " · a~ ~- L~n-.-, wal!s v,,'tznln \ ~c:oria r .... ~ ~ ,"',, 3. .-k 5-fooz sesar~:ion be:wean ::'-.e ba~-'.-: of sic_Zev.',_[".< and any ',,,'~[[s should be provided in all corner TT L_;7.c'6 - CZT:,',TZO.N' S~;'~ff Recommendr~tion: Sta~recommends Ehat the Design Review Commit;co recommend approval of the proposed subdivision mad with the revisions recommended by sEaff incorporated into the design of the project. Attachment Design Review Committee ActiOn: ~[embers Present: Bill Bethel, Rich Nlacias, Dan Coleman S:aff/P!armer: Steve Hayes The Desi~ Review Comm. i~ee recommended approva! ofthe project subject to the following condi:ions: The cuPde-sac at the southern te,ffr',inus of Street "F" should be pulled northerly to provide a more pleasing landscaped connection r.o the Victoria Park Lane trail system. a The combination rerainin~,'block walls throughout the project, up to l O feet in height, should be studied and lowered where possible aanicularly along Vic;oria Park Lane. Specific solu.:ions ~o this issue should be forwarded to the Planning Di,.I sion for choir review and approval. Suggestions included terracing the walls or using open view fencing. 3 The exhibiE ~re~ared bv the a.anlicant co tearesent how the .aocencial nea~r~ve impacts associated ,.rich the sima.:ions where a downslope loc sides on.;o up co three upslope rear yards was 5und co be acceptable bv the Committee. The applicant should work with ~.he Plannin~ Division scarf co setec.; the aDoro,ariate sacties and number of trees ;o mici~,~;~ ~he concerns ~ssocia:ed ,.~'i~h ;his issue. A.i! Seconda,w and Policy design isles referenced above were recommended by :he Commi:.'.ee to be placed as recommended Conditions o~'Ap?ro'~'al for ,'.he project. ' · MATC ;~ TRACT 13~8 .,.,_,-.~ // 'Z C,: "" / U E--.- ,"j 2 C a "\ ~~ (---e (-e"' ' t '\, C TIOIN .._ IIOMES January 9, 1997 Planning Commission CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 R E' i~ E' I V ~' D Re: Victoria Specific Plan Amendment JAil 2 17°97 Tentative Map 15796 "' CiTY OF JC-.AMON Dear Members of the Commission: We have requested an Amendment to the Victoria Specific Plan, specifically Planning Area #5, to enable the Specific Plan to be consistent with the land use proposed by our Tentative Map #15796. The existing land use and zoning for the Plan on PA5 is medium density residential (M), 8-14dua. This designation provides for detached or attached residential uses not to exceed 14 dwelling units per acre. We are requesting a change in the Plan to 10'w medium density to permit SFD homes on 5,000 square foot lots. There is no significant market for housing at the medium density level. Single family detached housing on this site, as we propose, will be a very compatible land use for the surrounding uses. We feel that it would be an unreasonable burden for us to continue holding the land until such time as a higher density development becomes more marketable when an SFD development is imminently marketable and yet compatible with surrounding uses. We hope you will give our proposal favorable consideration. Sincerely, TAVA DEVELOPMEF CO. dba C)TATION HOM F. G. Lint ro '~lelopment FGL:mkw 2-2,,:, 19600 Fairchild Road, Suite 270, Irvine, CA 92715-2510 (714) 250-6600, FAX (714) 250-6656 DE'v'ELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT MAP TRACT IIIIAND TRACT ~ ~ :~',~'_~,.".' ,~, , """ $'3;,I,MUNFFf F'AC',Lff T' '~ ' VICTORIA P.C. ,"" ..... fi;-..~... ~=$7 B~ .. ~;=m=~ ,V'~F 12253 ......... / ':':~ ,r TRACT ~ ":'~::~X ''':''~' , '~. ~ ~,.,, , ,,,, ;,.,' ,. ~ '-, FROM "M" TO "~" " ~"" :B~.aO L= .-' // ~ ~'4O'n'[ ~ a:'a~']~'v ~ N/"/,,' ~. //~CTORIA P.C. ~ACT ~ FROM"M' TO "LM" Vi '~'~e' ~CTORIA P.C. L~7 ,, ,. ,,, ~ : ',, , ~CTORIA P.C. 2 -2.C. -ct"'l , ~ E",C-~6C2 ,','PD ju,y '7 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAM ONGA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1) Project File #/Name: Victoria Community Plan Amendment 96-02 2) Related Files: Tentative Tract 15796 3) Applicant: Citation Homes Address: 19600 Fairchild Road, Suite 270, Irvine, CA 92715 Telephone #: (714) 250-6600 4) Project Description: Proposed chanqe from Medium to Low-Medium Residential 5) Project Accepted as Complete (date): January 27.1997 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation is required for '11 "Yes" and "Maybe" answers on attached sheets, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects ~entified. Yes Maybe No I. EARTH - Will the proposal result/n: a) Unstable earth conditions or changes in the geologic structure? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Disruptions, displacement, compaction, or over covering of the soil? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Change in the topography or ground surface relief features? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) The destruction, covering, or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ( ) ( X ) e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? ( ) ( ) ( X ) f ) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sand, or changes in siltation, deposition, or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet, or lake? ( ) ( ) ( X ) g) Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards, such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? ( ) ( ) ( X ) II. AIR - Will the proposal result in: a) Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) The creation of objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Alteration of air movement moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? ( ) ( ) ( X ) :. III. WATER - Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Changes in the absorption rate, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Alterations to the course of flow of flood waters? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any body? ( ) ( ) ( X ) e) Discharge into surface waters, or in alteration of surface water quality, including, but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity? ( ) ( ) ( X ) f) Alteration of the direction or rate of ground waters? ( ) ( ) ( X ) g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? ( ) ( ) ( X ) h) Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? ( ) ( ) ( X ) i) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal pools? ( ) ( ) ( X ) IV. PLANT LIFE - Will the proposal result in: a) Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Reduction in the number of any unique, rare, or endangered species of ( ) ( ) ( X ) plants? c) Introduction of new species of plants into an area or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? ( ) ( ) ( X ) V. ANIMAL LIFE - Will the proposal result in: a) Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of animals (birds, land animals, including reptiles, fish, and shellfish benthic organisms or insects)? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Reduction of the number of any unique, rare, or endangered species of animals? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Introduction of any new species of animals into the area or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? ( ) ( ) ( X ) 2 VI. NOISE - W/II the proposal result in: a) Increase in existing noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( X ) VII. LIGHT AND GLARE - Will the proposal.' a) Produce new light and glare? ( ) ( ) ( X ) VIII. LAND USE - Will the proposal result in: a) Substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? ( ) ( X ) ( ) IX. NATURAL RESOURCES - Will the proposal result in.' a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? ( ) ( ) ( X ) X. ' RISK OF UPSET - Will the proposal involve: a) A risk of explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pest/c/des, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XI. POPULATION - Will the proposal.' a) Alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? ( ) ( X ) ( ) Xll. HOUSING - Will the proposal: a) Affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? ( ) ( ) ( X ) Xli l. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION - Will the proposal result in: a) Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Effects on existing parking facilities or demand for new parking? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Alterations to the present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? ( ) ( ) ( X ) e) Alterations to waterborne, rail, or air traffic? ( ) ( ) ( X ) f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, b/cyclists, or pedestrians? ( ) ( ) ( X ) 3 XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES - Will the proposal have an effect upon. or result in a need for, news:or altered government services in any of the following areas.' a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Schools? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Parks and other recreational facilities? ( ) ( ) ( X ) e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) ( X ) f) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XV. ENERGY - Will the proposal result in: a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy or require the development of new sources of energy? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XVl. UTILITIES and SERVICE SYSTEMS - HIT//the proposal result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Communications systems? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Water? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) ( ) ( X ) e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ( ) ( X ) f') Solid waste disposal? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XVII. HUMAN HEALTH - Will the proposal result in: a) Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Exposure of people to potential health hazards? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XVlll. AESTHETICS - Will the proposal result in: a) The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XlX. RECREATION - Will the proposal result in: a) Impact upon the quality of existing recreational opportunities? ( ) ( ) ( X ) 4 '7ol Restrict the religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XX. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Will the proposal.' a) Result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archeological site? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic or cultural values? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE - a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or ( ) ( ) (X) prehistory? b) Short term: Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definite period of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect on the total of those impacts on the environment is ( ) ( ) ( X ) significant.) d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XXII. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Narrative description of environmental impacts) - XXlll. DISCUSSION OF LAND USE IMPACTS (Examine whether the project would be consistent with existing zoning, plans, and other applicable land use controls) - XXIV. EARLIER ANALYSES - Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): ~X General Plan EIR 5 SENT 3Y: R ;J~N-GA ~,0~t DE"V; 2-13-97 9:~¢ul; ,~09 477 2847 -> 71425066,_,r--6; ="7/c~ ;' '/~ Master Envi,m~taJ Assessment fc~ ~e 1989 Llpdale of the General Plan lnduslrial Area Specific Ran EIR 'X Vi~ Ranned Commun~ Tetra Vista Planned C<.~m~ EIR __ ~ Be~-~rd SpeOf.= Plan _ Etiwanda ~ S~df~= Ran a) I fmcl that the proposed project c'ou/d mt ~ a ~jn~r~am effec~ on ~ environment. A NEC-,-~TIV1E DECLARATION will be pret:~m~ .......................................................................... b) i ~ 'Z~at a!fi~:j~ the ~ pmjec~ could have a si:j,,f~nt etfect on have bcc-~, ~ t~ tJ~e ~ A NECC, TIVE DECLARATION will I~e p~ ......................................................................... c) ! ~ mat the prgpes~ pmiecl may hae a skJ~~ effec~ on the e.,~ironmerrf. AN ENV1RONM~AL IMPACT REPORT is ~ ............................................................... Prepares S~~/ XX'VL APPLICANf CERTIRCATtON ('To be completed by appticanI) - I cerl3fy that I am me appticar~ for the projecl described ia ttis ~ Study. ] aclm~ ~ t have read ~ Ir,~l Study and d~e propcsed mlgaion ~ F~, ! ~ re.~se~ ~e ~ plans er pmpcs=ts and/or h=9.~ .agree. tp the fx.o~ mill ' measles w .~ tl~ ~ ~r mitigate me efrecl~ to a poim where G/L ]Ok~a BSgBOS~%~L=CII SH~OH NOI,L~LID-'HO~=I 90:0~ L8-8% ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Initial'Study- Part II Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Project Description: VCPA 96-02 - Citation Homes Proposed chan~e in zonin~ designation from Medium (8-14 dwellin~ units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre') for 12.4 acres of land located at the northeast comer of Milliken Avenue and Victoria Park Lane. VIII. Land Use: a) This application for a Victoria Community Plan is proposed to change the designation of the property from Medium residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre). The purpose of the amendment is to allow for conventional single family residences to be built on the propere2,.'. The type of lots and fume residences proposed are already permitted within this area and are consistent with the Victoria Community Plan. Therefore, no significant land use impacts associated with this subdivision or the related Specific Plan Amendment are anticipated. XI. Population: a) The proposed amendment could have a potential impact on the density in that it is proposing to lower the density range for the site. However, with the single family subdivision proposed being consistent with a potential type of housing already allowed with the existing density range, no adverse environmental impacts are expected. EARLIER ANALYSES The application is part of the Victoria Community Plan for which an EIR ,,,,'as prepared and certified by the City. This document is available at the Planning Division, City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive. The Master Environmental Assessment for the General Plan was also referenced in evaluating the potential impacts of the application. This document is available for review at the Planning Division, City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive. Specific studies evaluating potenital impacts created by this project (i.e. Noise Study ) are also available for review at the Planning Division, City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive. 7_5' H ETT15796 WPD ~july 17, 1996b CITY OF RANCHO CUCAM ONGA NVIRONM ENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1 ) Project File #/Name: Tentative Tract 15796 2) Related Files: Victoria Community Plan Amendment 96-02 3) Applicant: Citation Homes Address: 19600 Fairchild Road, Suite 270, Irvine, CA 92715 Telephone #: (714) 250-6600 4) Project Description: 94 lot sin~ile family residential subdivision 5) Project Accepted as Complete (date): January 27, 1997 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation is required for ill "Yes" and "Maybe" answers on attached sheets, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects .dentified. Yes Maybe N_9o I. EARTH - Will the proposal result/n.' a) Unstable earth conditions or changes in the geologic structure? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Disruptions, displacement, compaction, or over covering of the soil? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Change in the topography or ground surface relief features? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) The destruction, covering, or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ( ) ( X ) e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? ( ) ( ) ( X ) f) Changes in deposition or'erosion of beach sand, or changes in siltation, deposition, or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet, or lake? ( ) ( ) ( X ) g) Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards, such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? ( ) ( X ) ( ) II. AIR - Will the proposal result in: a) Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) The creation of objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Alteration of air movement moisture, or temperature, or any change n climate. either locally or regionally? ( ) ( ) ( X ) .~. III. WATER - Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, ~n either marine or fresh waters? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Changes in the absorption rate, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Alterations to the course of flow of flood waters? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any body? ( ) ( ) ( X ) e) Discharge into surface waters, or in alteration of surface water quality, including, but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity? ( ) ( ) ( X ) f) Alteration of the direction or rate of ground waters? ( ) ( ) ( X ) g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? ( ) ( ) ( X ) h) Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? ( ) ( ) ( X ) i) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal pools? ( ) ( ) ( X ) IV. PLANT LIFE - Will the proposal result in: a) Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Reduction in the number of any unique, rare, or endangered species of ( ) ( ) ( X ) plants? c) Introduction of new species of plants into an area or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? ( ) ( ) ( X ) V. ANIMAL LIFE - Will the proposal result in: a) Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of animals (birds, land animals, including reptiles, fish, and shellfish benthic organisms or insects)? ( ) [ ) ( X ) b) Reduction of the number of any unique, rare, or endangered species of animals? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Introduction of any new species of animals into the area or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? ( ) ( ) ( X ) 2 VI. NOISE - W"II the proposal result in: a) Increase in existing noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ( X ) ( ) VII. LIGHT AND GLARE - Will the proposal.' a) Produce new light and glare? ( ) ( ) ( X ) VIII. LAND USE - Will the proposal result in: a) Substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? ( ) ( X ) ( ) IX. NATURAL RESOURCES - Will the proposal result in.' a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? ( ) ( ) ( X ) X. RISK OF UPSET - Will the proposal involve: a) A risk of explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XI. POPULATION - Will the proposal: a) Alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? ( ) ( X ) ( ) XII. HOUSING - Will the proposal: a) Affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XIII. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION - Will the proposal result in: a) Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Effects on existing parking facilities or demand for new parking? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Alterations to the present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? ( ) ( ) ( X ) e) Alterations to waterborne, rail, or air traffic? ( ) ( ) ( X ) f') Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians? ( ) ( ) ( X ) 3 XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES - Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for, new~'pr altered government services in any of the following areas.' a) Fire protection.'? ( ) ( ) ~ X ) b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Schools? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Parks and other recreational facilities? ( ) ( ) ( X ) e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) ( X ) O Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XV. ENERGY - Will the proposal result in: a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy or require the development of new sources of energy? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XVI. UTILITIES and SERVICE SYSTEMS - t4411 the proposal result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Communications systems? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Water? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) ( ) ( X ) e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ( ) ( X ) f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XVII. HUMAN HEALTH - Will the proposal result in: a) Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Exposure of people to potential health hazards? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XVIII. AESTHETICS - Will the proposal result in: a) The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XIX. RECREATION - Will the proposal result in: a) Impact upon the quality of existing recreational opportunities? ( ) ( ) ( X ) 4 b) Restrict the religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XX. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Will the proposal.' a) Result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archeological site? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic or cultural values? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XXl. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE - a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or ( ) ( ) (X) prehistory? b) Short term: Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definite period of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect on the total of those impacts on the environment is ( ) ( ) ( X ) significant.) d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XXll. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Narrative description of environmental impacts) - XXlll. DISCUSSION OF LAND USE IMPACTS (Examine whether the project would be consistent with existing zoning, plans, and other applicable land use controls) - XXlV. EARLIER ANALYSES - Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): __KGeneral Plan EIR 5 SEN, BY: ~ CdC.U~NGA 2,C4/Dr'V; 2-13-97 9:1 gAJal; g09 477 2847 '~ Master EnvicommentaJ Asses~ for the 1989 Update of the ~t Ran Industrial Area Specific Plan ~ Vicbsria Planned Community Tetra Vista Plarmed Communil) EIR __ ~1 Boulevard Specif.: Ran ~ E1jwanda ~ Specific Ran a) I Fred t~at the proposed project cou/~ nc~ have a sigrdrK:am effec~ on ~ environment. A NEC-.-.-~'RVE DEC~TION will ~e ;prepered ..........................................................................( b ) [ ~ that a~l*~jh the proposed prejec~ could have a have ~ a:tded to the projecI. A NEGA~ DECLARAtiON will I~e I~repat, d .........................................................................( c) ~ ~nd U-gat the proposgd project: may have a signirlcan~ effec~ on the environment AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is recluire~ ............................................................... Pr~.~rer' s S~,nature/ XXVL APPLICANT CF,,RTTRCATION (-to be coml:leted by applicant) - I cer~y that I am the applicat~ for the project described in this ~ S'!3,~y. ] actm~ ttat| have read ~ tP~-,d S,hjdy and d~ profx~sed mjgalio~ measa~s, Further, l have revised me project plans or pmposais and/or hereby agree to the proposed m~ ' rneasur~ to avoid the effeds or mftigae me effects to a point where dearly no sim:jn~ envimnm ~ would cx:ca'. . Sk]~e: Date: '2./ ~ - ..- , S/~'~ :_~ct SS9905~;Z.:OI S:~HOH NOIZ,~'£I~:i~O~=I 90:0~ Z-S-C ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Initia!:':Study Part II Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Project Description: TT 15796 - Citation Homes Subdivision of 18 acres of land into 94 single family lots located at the northeast comer of Milliken Avenue and Victoria Park Lane I. Earth: g) The majority of California is susceptible to earthquakes. The project is within the special study zone established by the City for the inferred location of the Red Hill fault. Geologic studies were done in conjunction with the consideration of the Victoria Community Plan during the Environmental Review process and no evidence of faulting was found within the special study area within Victoria. VI. Noise: b) The noise levels for a portion of this project closest to Milliken Avenue could be potentiall~, severe. A noise study has been prepared to access the impacts associated with constructing this development in close proximity to Milliken Avenue. The preliminary study recommended that a 8-10 foot high screen wall be constructed along Milliken and that certain construction elements (i.e. dual- glazed windows) be provided to mitigate noise to safe levels. With these mitigations in place, people should not be exposed to severe noise levels. VIII. Land Use: a) In conjunction with this application, an amendment to the Victoria Community Plan is proposed to change the designation of the property from Medium residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dv,'elling units per acre). The purpose of the amendment is to allow for conventional single family residences to be built on the property. The type of lots and future residences proposed are already permitted within this area and are consistent with the Victoria Community Plan. Therefore, no significant land use impacts associated with this subdivision or the related Specific Plan Amendment are anticipated. XI. Population: a) The project, with its related Victoria Community Plap. Amendment, could have a potential impact on the density in that the related amendment is proposing to lower the density range for the site. However, with the single family subdivision proposed being consistent with a potential type of housing already allowed with the existing density range, no adverse environmental impacts are expected. t~ XXI. Mandatory' Findines of Significance: c) The project is pan of the larger Victoria Community Plan area tbr which an "'Environmental Impact was prepared and certified. The application most likely will contribute to the cumulative impacts within the Planned Community and the Citv. Therefore, the application ,,viII be required to comply with the mitigation measures outlined in the Victoria Community Plan EIR to mitigate any potential cumalitive impacts to a level of insignificance. EARLIER ANALYSES The application is part of the Victoria Community Plan for which an EIR was prepared and certified by the City. This document is available at the Planning Division, City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive. The Master Environmental Assessment for the General Plan was also referenced in evaluating the potential impacts of the application. This document is available for review at the Planning Division, City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive. Specific studies evaluating potenital impacts created by this project (i.e. Noise Study ) are also available for review at the Planning Division, City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive. RESOLUTION NO. 97-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 96-03, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR APPROXIMATELY 12.4 ACRES OF LAND SOUTH OF HIGHLAND AVENUE AND EAST OF WOODRUFF PLACE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 227-011-26. A. Recitals. 1. Citation Homes has filed an application for Victoria Community Plan Amendment No. 96--03 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereina~er in this Resolution, the subject Victoria Community Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On February 26, 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public heanng on February 26, 1997, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 12.4 acres of land, basically a reverse "L" shaped configuration, located south of Highland Avenue and east of Woodruff Place and which is presently undeveloped. Said property is currently designated as Medium Residential; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Low-Medium Residential within the Caryn Planned Community and the property is developed with single family residences. Immediately to the north is the fight-of-way for the future Foothill Freeway, which is presently vacant. The property to the west is designated Village Commercial and developed with a neighborhood commercial shopping center. The property to the east is designated Low-Medium Residential and is developed with a single family residential subdivision. The property to the south is designated Low-Medium Residential and is developed with a neighborhood park and an elementary school. c. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and d. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element; and ,::~(..¢ .DL:.NNiNG COMMISSIOf .ESOLUTiON NO. ~7-12 \"PA 96-03 CtT,-:,TiON HOMES February 26, 1997 Page 2 ', ', e. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; and b. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties; and c. That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Negative DecJaration has been prepared in compliance with the Califomia Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That, based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the Califomia Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby recommends approval of Victoria Community Plan Amendment No. 96-03. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 1997. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLAN,"'4!NG COMMISStOt'..F_SOLUTiON VCPA 96-03 - CITATION HOMES FeDruan/26, 1997 Page 3 -!. A TT E S T: '.~ t).~ vi"'i"r Z 'r ' r ~ecr ary I. Brad Bullet, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced. passed. and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 26th day of February 1997. by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, BETHEL, HACIAS, 1,1CNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE RESOLUTION NO. 97-:.,3 ,, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15797, A PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF 61 LOTS ON 12.4 ACRES OF LAND IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) PROPOSED TO BE LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED SOUTH OF HIGHLAND AVENUE AND EAST OF WOODRUFF PLACE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 227-011-26. A. Recitals. 1. Citation Homes has filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 15797, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafier in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 26th day of February 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission dunng the above- referenced public hearing on February 26, 1997, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located south of Highland Avenue and east of Woodruff Place with a Highland Avenue frontage of approximately 400 feet and maximum lot depth of approximately 890 feet and which is presently improved with curb and gutter along all vacant street frontages and trail and sidewalk along Highland Avenue; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is the fight-of-way for the future Foothill Freeway and single family residential, the property to the south consists of a neighborhood park and an elementary school, the property to the east is single family residential and, the property to the west is a neighborhood commercial shopping center; and c. The application contemplates the subdivision of 12.4 acres of land into 61 single family residential lots that have an average lot size of 6,150 square feet; and d. The site is within the Victoria Community Plan and, in conjunction with this application, a Victoria Community Plan Amendment is proposed to change the Development District Designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre); and 87 -"_=,NN1,NG CSMMISSiOI' -'SOLUTION NO. TT 15797-CiTATiON HOMES February 2-3.1997 Page 2 e. The proposed subdivision design is in compliance with the development standards for the Low-Medium Residential Development District included within the Victoria Community Plan. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and b. The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and c. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and e. The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and f. The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That, based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated heroin by this reference. " :~ HGM, zS FeSruar,/26, 1997 Page 3 Planning Division 1) Approval of this tentative tract map is contingent upon approval of Victoria Community Plan Amendment 96-03. 2) Retaining walls throughout the project shall not exceed 4 feet in height above finished grade and be composed of a decorative block or exterior finish. The final design and heights of all retaining/block walls throughout the project shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of any building permits for the walls. If any combination retaining/block walls exceed 6 feet in height, but are less than 8 feet in height (with the exception of the sound attenuation wall required along Milliken Avenue), then a Minor Exception shall be submitted for consideration by the City Planner prior to the issuance of any building permits for said walls. 3) The slope landscaping and retaining walls along the side of downslope lots that side onto two or more upslope rear yards shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of building permits for said retaining walls. 4) The final design of the required trail connection shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and City Engineer prior to recordation of the Final Map. The final design shall include areas sufficient for trees within the trail connection, to the satisfaction of the City Planner and City Engineer. 5) The final map and grading plan shall be redesigned with each lot meeting the minimum 50-foot width, as measured at the front setback line, to the satisfaction of the City Planner, prior to recordation of the final map. 6) An exhibit shall be provided on the final grading plan that clearly depicts the typical side yard slope situation, to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 7) A minimum of 5 feet shall be provided between the back of sidewalk and any walls in all corner side yards within the subdivision to allow sufficient area for future tree growth at the time houses are contemplated on the property, to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Environmental Mitiqation Measures 1) An 8-foot screen wall shall be constructed along Highland Avenue, consistent with the recommendations contained within the preliminary noise study. Also, certain construction elements (i.e. dual glazed windows) shall be provided at such time houses are contemplated 'within the subdivision. These elements shall be provided as also recommended in the preliminary noise study, and a final noise study, which shall be required for review and approval of the City Planner prior to the issuance of building permits. .DL:.N." j,".;,..S r""",~.~.%IISSION -:SOLUTION NO 97 '3 TT 15797- CITAT',ON HOMES FebruaQ' 2-3, 1997 Page 4 Engineerinq Division 1) The conceptual grading plan shows grading and drainage on the future church site property. Permission to do so will be required from the church site property owners, pdor to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. 2) Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) plans shall incorporate cost efficient, low maintenance designs, including the use of bardscape compatible with or transitioning to existing LMD areas, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The maximum slope within publicly maintained landscape areas shall be 3:1. Where slopes occur, a 1-foot fiat area behind the sidewalk shall be provided, and at the top of slopes, where the slope height is 6 feet or greater, a 2-foot wide fiat shelf shall run along the base of the walls. Planting areas for shrubs should have a minimum width of 3 feet, clear of wall footings. Trees will require wider planting areas, as determined by the City Engineer. 3) This project is connected to or will disrupt an existing City-maintained landscape and irrigation area located along Woodruff Place, Kenyon Way, and possibly Highland Avenue and the existing trail. Prior to new construction, a joint inspection and documentation of the existing area's condition shall occur with both the new contractor and the City inspeclor. The existing irrigation system shall be relocated as needed and any damaged landscaping replaced to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. At this point, the new construction contractor shall be responsible for maintenance of both the new and existing areas. The developer shall assume maintenance responsibility for the altered landscape area for a minimum of 90 days after reconstruction. A follow-up inspection of both areas is required prior to the City's acceptance of the new area. 4) Street names shall be applied for through the Planning Division and shall be accepted and added to the final map prior to approval and recordation thereof. 5) The trail connection shall encompass a width of 20 feet minimum to 35 feet maximum with maximum landscape slopes of 3:1 and a 1-foot minimum width drainage swale located on both sides of the sidewalk to handle drainage and nuisance flows. If retaining walls are required, the height shall be no greater than 30 inches. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 1997. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DUz, NNING CCMM:SSICN .ESOLUT',ON NO 97-13 : 15797 ~',T.:'.Ti,~N HOMES Februan/ 26.1997 Page 5 BY: I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 26th day of February 1997, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, BETHEL, MACIAS, MC,NIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CON DITIONS PROJECT#: Tentative Tract 15797 SUBJECT: 61-1ot residential single family subdivision APPLICANT: Citation Homes LOCATION: S/o Hillbland Avenue. E/o Woodruff Place ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: \. Time Limits completion Date 1, Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, if building permits are not __/__/__ issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the date of approval. 2. Approval of Tentative Tract No. 15797 is granted subject to the approval of Victoria Community_ __/__/__ Plan Amendment 96-03. 3. Prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first, __/__/__ the applicant shall consent to, or participate in, the establishment of a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District for the construction and maintenance of necessary school facilities. However, if any school district has previously established such a Community Facilities District, the applicant shall, in the alternative, consent to the annexation of the project site into the territory of such existing District prior to the recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first. Further, if the affected school district has not formed a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District within twelve months from the date of approval of the project and prior to the recordation of the final map or issuance of building permits for said project, this condition shall be deemed null and void. This condition shall be waived if the City receives notice that the applicant and all affected school districts have entered into an agreement to privately accommodate any and all school impacts as a result of this project. 4. Prior to recordation of the final map or prior to the issuance of building permits when no map is __/__/__ involved, written certification from the affected water district that adequate sewer and water facilities are or will be available to serve the proposed project shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. sc -~ 1 iaroject No. TT 15797 Completion Date B. Site Deve!.opment 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include / / site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Victoria Community Plan. 2. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be / / submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 3. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for / / consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 4. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, __/ / all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 5. Street names shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval in accordance with the / / adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map. 6. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property ~1__1__ owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approved prior to the issuance of building permits. 7. Six foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. If a double wall / / condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all contiguous property owners at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/fences along the project's perimeter. 8. Any wood fences shall be constructed with a 2-inch galvanized pipe, at each post, extending at / / least 4 feet, 6 inches above grade and imbedded in an 18-inch deep concrete footing. C. Landscaping 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping __/__/__ in this case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. 2. All private slopes of 5 feet or less in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 / / slope, shall be, at minirr,um, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent i,'rigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 3. All pdvate slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater __/__/__ slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1 -gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered Project .No. Completion Date clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a perrYanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 4, For single family residential development, all slope planting and irrigations shall be continuously __/__/__ maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in satisfactory condition. 5. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included __/__/__ in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. 6.Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 7. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the __/__/__ design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. D. Environmental 1. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Fourth Street Rock __/__/__ Crusher project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. 2. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the City Adopted Special Studies Zone for the Red Hill Fault, in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. 3. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Foothill Freeway project __/__/__ in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. 4. A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuss the level of interior noise attenuation to below 45 CNEL, the building materials and construction techniques provided, and if appropriate, verify the adequacy of the mitigation measures. The building plans will be checked for conformance with the mitigation measures contained in the final report. 5. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of I__1 implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the City Planner in the amount of $ to be determined, pdor to the issuance of building permits, guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. In those instances requiring long term monitoring (i.e.) beyond final certificate of occupancy), the applicant shall provide a written monitoring and reporting program to the City Planner prior to issuance of building permits. Said program shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. SC - ~'3/96 3 PrOject NO. Completion Date APPLICANTS 8HALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-27'10, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: E. Site Development 1. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tract/parcel map recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. F. Grading 1, Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to / / perform such work. 3.A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. 4. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance of building permits. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: G. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, __/__/__ community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees, traffic signal encroachment and maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Private easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. 2. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. __1__1__ 3. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for __/__/__ approved openings: Kenyon Way and Wo0druff Place. 4. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quitclaimed or delineated on the __/__/__ final map. 5. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall __/__/__ be dedicated to the City. H. Street Improvements 1. All public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped __/__/__ areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. S C - · 3/c--.j6 4, Projet', Nc "r , 57c,jT Completion Date 2. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: / / Curb & A.C. Side- Drive Street Street Comm Median Bike Other Street Name Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail Kenyon Way / e Wood ruff Place / e Highland Avenue / e Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per STD. 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item. (e) Landscape (planting and irrigation) also see Special Conditions - LMD plans. 3. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights __/__/__ on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a __/__/__ construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and __/__/__ interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction / / project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: ( 1 ) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. (2) Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City __/__/__ Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with __/ / adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be / / installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots. PrOjeCt NO 'FT'. 5797 Completion Date h. :.. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. / / 4. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in / / accordance with the City's street tree program. 5. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with / / adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. 6. A permit shall be obtained from Caltrans for any work within the following right-of-way: Highland Avenue. I. Public Maintenance Areas 1. A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Public Works Standards shall / / be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval pnor to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. The following landscaped parkways, medians, paseos, easements, trails or other areas shall be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance District: Kenyon Way, Wood ruff Place, Highland Avenue, and the trail as shown on the tentative tract map. Also, refer to the Special Conditions - LMD plans. 2. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting / / Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 3. All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the developer until accepted by the City. J. Utilities 1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable 'FV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the __/ / Cucamonga County Water District (CCVVD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bemardino. A letter of compliance from the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. K. General Requirements and Approvals 1. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all __/__/__ new street lights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: L. General Fire Protection Conditions 1. Mello Roos Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this project. /__/__ SC - ~0/96 6 ~ 7 Completion Date 2. Fire flow requirement shall be 1,500 gallons per minute. __/__/__ a. A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department __/__/ personnel prior to water plan approval. 3. Fire hydrants are required. All required public or on-site fire hydrants shah be installed, flushed __/__/ and operahie prior to aleliven/of any combustible building materials on site (i.e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department personnel. 4. Existing fire hydrant locations shall be provided prior to water plan approval. Required hydrants, __/__/~ if any, will be determined by the Fire District. Fire District standards require a 6" riser with a and a 2-1/2" outlet. Substandard hydrants shall be upgraded to meet this standard. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specifications on approved brands and model numbers. 5. Prior to the issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted ~/~/~ to the Fire District that an approved temporan/water supply for fire protection is available, pending completion of required fire protection system. e. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to final~/~ inspection. 7. All trees and shrubs planted in any median shall be kept trimmed a minimum of 14'6" from ground __/__ up so as not to impede fire apparatus. 8. Plan check fees in the amount of $D have been paid. An additional $125.00 shall be paid: X Prior to water plan approval. __/__ __ Note: Separate plan check fees for fire protection systems (sprinklers, hood systems, alarms, etc.) and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon submittal of plans. g. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1994 UBC, UFC, __/__ UPC, UMC, NEC, and RCFD Standards 22 and 15. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: M. Security Hardware 1. A secondan/locking device shall be installed on all sliding glass doors. __/___ 2. One-inch single cylinder dead bolts shall be installed on all entrance doors. If windows are within __/__ __ 40 inches of any locking device, tempered glass or a double cylinder dead bolt shall be used. 3. All garage or rolling doors shall have slide bolts or some type of secondan/locking devices. __/__ __ N.Windows 1. All sliding glass windows shall have secondan/locking devices and should not be able to be lifted __/__ __ from frame or track in ~-ny manner. "]. Building Numbering 1, Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for nighttime visibility. SC - 'S,c~5 7 CITY OF RANCHO CUCA_MONGA -- STAFF REPORT DATE: February 26, 1997 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Steve Hayes, AICP, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 96-03 - CITATION HOMES - A request to amend the Victoria Community Plan Development District designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 12.4 acres of land south of Highland Avenue, east of Woodruff Place - APN: 227-011-26. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15797 - CITATION HOMES - A proposed residential subdivision of 61 single family lots on 12.4 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), proposed to be Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre), located south of Highland Avenue and east of Woodruff Place - APN: 227-011-26. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Project Density: 4.9 dwelling units per acre B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Future Foothill Freeway right-of-way and single family residences; Caryn Planned Community South - Neighborhood Park and Elementary School East Single Family Residences; Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) West Commercial Shopping Center; Village Commercial C. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Low-Medium Residential North - Low Residential South - Low-Medium Residential East Low-Medium Residential West Neighborhood Commercial D. Site Characteristics: The site is vacant and slopes generally from north to south at roughly 5 percent. A trail exists along the east propery line to link the subdivision to the east with the school and park to the south. The site is covered in native scrub vegetation; no trees or any other significant landscaping exists on the property. Curb and gutter exist along the project frontages. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT VCPA 96-03 & TT 15797 - CITATION HOMES February 26, 1997 Page 2 BACKGROUND: On March 11, 1992, a 155-unit condominium project was approved for the site. Since that time, the property has been sold and the current property owner is pursuing the proposed single family residential project on the property because of current market conditions. ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant is proposing to subdivide the 12.4-acre site into 61 single family residential lots. The lots are of a size and dimension consistent with the existing Low-Medium Residential Development Standards within the Victoria Community Plan. Lots range in size from 5,000 to 11,800 square feet and average 6,150 square feet. In addition to the 61 residential lots, a lettered lot is proposed along the east side of the subdivision to provide an extension of the existing trail east of the site for additional landscape area. B. Victoria Community Plan Amendment: In conjunction with the proposed Tentative Tract Map, the applicant has also submitted an application to amend the Development District designation for the property associated with the proposed subdivision. The 12.4-acre parcel is currently zoned Medium Residential and the developer is proposing to change the designation on this property to Low-Medium Residential for the purpose of developing a conventional single family residential subdivision with center plot detached homes. The applicant is proposing this amendment for reasons outlined in the attached justification letter ( See Exhibit "E"). Within the Medium Residential Development District of the Victoria Community Plan, a wide variety of housing stock is allowed, including, but not limited to, condominiums, townhouses, triplexes, fourplexes, and other types of single family housing, both attached and detached. However, the density of a project in the Medium Residential District shall be between 8 to 14 dwelling units per acre. The applicant is proposing a single family residential subdivision at a density of 4.9 dwelling units. The proposed density and lot sizes both conform with the Low-Medium Residential development standards within the Victoria Community Plan, hence the amendment request by the applicant. Within the surrounding neighborhood, the predominant type of development is detached single family residences. To the west is a neighborhood commercial shopping center. The property in question was originally designated Medium Residential for the purpose of providing a buffer between the detached single family development to the east and the Village Commercial designation to the west. With small-lot single family detached housing being one of the accepted housing types in this "buffer" area, the amendment proposal would not necessarily change the type of housing allowed in this area, only the density and lot size. Staff feels that redesignating the parcel to Low-Medium Residential would fit in with the surrounding neighborhood where a single family detached development of a similar density is predominant. C. Design Review Committee: On February 4, 1997, the Committee (Bethel, Macias, Coleman) reviewed the projec'. and recommended approval of the subdivision with conditions that have been incorporated into the attached Resolution of Approval. Comments from this meeting are provided for your convenience (See Exhibit "D"). PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ',./CPA 96-03 &: 15797 - CITATION HOMES February 26, 1997 Page 3 D. Technical Review Committee: On February 5, 1997, the Technical Review Committee reviewed the project and determined that, together with the recommended special and standard Conditions of Approval, the project is consistent with all applicable standards and ordinances. The Grading Committee reviewed the project and recommended approval subject to conditions at their meeting on February 4, 1997. E. Environmental Assessment: Staff has completed Part II of the Initial Studies for both the Tentative Tract Map and Victoria Community Plan Amendment (See Exhibit "G'°). Staff determined that the proposed Tentative Tract Map could have a significant adverse impact on the environment relative to noise unless proper mitigations are incorporated into the design of the project. A preliminary acoustical analysis was prepared by a registered engineer that recommended that an 8-foot high sound barrier be constructed along Highland Avenue to mitigate noise to acceptable levels, as defined in the City's General Plan. Staff has incorporated a Condition of Approval into the attached Resolution of Approval for the Tentative Tract Map requiring this sound wall as mitigation to the potential noise issue. If the Commission concurs with staffs recommendations, then issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Tentative Tract Map and a Negative Declaration for the proposed Victoria Community Plan Amendment would be in order. CORRESPONDENCE: These items have been advertised as public hearings in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property has been posted, and notices were sent to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Victoria Community Plan Amendment 96-03 and approve Tentative Tract 15797 through adoption of the attached Resolutio,~s of Approval with Conditions and issue a mitigated Negative Declaration for the tract. · r sep e e City Planner BB:SH/jfs Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Utilization Map Exhibit "B" - Tentative Tract Map Exhibit "C" - Conceptual Grading Plan Exhibit "D" - Design Review Committee Action Comments dated February 4, 1997 Exhibit "E" - Letter from Applicant regarding proposed Victoria Community Plan Amendment Exhibit "F" - Surrounding Land Uses Map Exhibit '°G" - Initial Studies, Part II Resolution of Approval for Victoria Community Plan Amendment 96-03 Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract Map 15797 " -'-'CL'..,TV . ~ ..... -'-8 DU,'AC. CSicME-C:-,_ ' :.~--_ E -j S-: -' ..... ' LOT"', , ~ - ,CT: -- -_ -~. L SiTE EL=ME .--~,, ~i;;LACT 13722 ~"COTS --- i '. "----__~ -----ml.' , iF"" ' F""'-------j i , · . ~ : j___~T~OTS'L---SL ~,~:---- . ; "7 ' iT'-, :7 , . . ~ --.., , - -:j 6j:o s ','-- ~ ~ - ....... ~ T D,~ · =-',u=~;~u ii ........................... " %,~ ~ ... .' ,; ~H ~! : :-2: D,., 'C. ' :- "~~'-' 7-:'~ ~""'-'--""-",,C,, E.N'~,i'TR.O..x,."X~EXTAL AS.,SESSXrEXT .-L\'D TE.YTAT[~"E TR. ACT i579',.'-C[T.-kT[O.Y .HO~'ES-, .-k areDosed residenti~ subdivision of' 61 single famEiv lots on 1'~ 4 acres of land in the .x..fedium Residential district (S-14 dwdlin~ units per acre) located south of Highland Avenue and east of Wood,'-urf.--V,'enue .--kP:N': 227-0t 1-25. R. elated l:'ile: Victoria Community ]Plan A-rnendment 96-03. Design Parameters: The site o/the proposed subdi~,'ision is bounded to the noah by the ~uture Foothill Freeway to the south bL'a park, to the east by single familv residential deve!osmenc and to the west church site and a neiShborhood commercial shopping center. A ~rail linkin~ the subdivision to the east with :he or" and the south exists east o: :he s~ce. The site slopes from noah '.o south .. a ,,, school co . ' _ approximately5 percent. Staff Comments' The foiio;',.'in~ corn. meats ~re in:ended :o ~rovide ~n outline for Corns;tree discussion. :kfa.iOr I~.~ue$: The follo~.vin~ broad desi.~n issues ~.,,-ill be :he foe:us off Committee discussion re~ardin~ this I. The subdivision should be redesi~ned to eliminate the ~ont-on loc situation on Street "A" combined ~.,.'ith the direct access off Street "A" to Woodme Avenue. Scarf recommends this revision because Woodn. zrf.--kvenue is now expected to have heavier ~.han originally anticipated traffic volumes since i: ~.dlI be a direct link to an on-rams to the fdture freew~v ins:earl. staff recommends :he Iavou: shown in the attached e.×hibic ,.,.'here both points of vehicular access come from Ken~,'on Way. $ec0ndar~:.' Issues: Once all of the major issues have been ad~resse~, and time permi.:cin~, the '.vii! ciiscuss the follo~,,,'in~ setone_laP; desif=n issues: i. The sidewalk for the trail connet:ion should be designed co line us with the sidewai'.< on either noah or south side of Street "A." Polic!.' ,r~ue~: The tbllowin~ items are a matter of Plannin~ Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project desi.~n without discussion: AJ! re:~i,"tin~ wails and block walls in area on :he Dellmeter of:he site shouI'~ be ~esi~,~ed ce..nsis:~n: with the theme wail desi.,zn a!readv es:ablished '..vi:hin ~,'ic:oria Par.'-: Lane. ? A minimum S-foot separa:ion beckycon the bat'.< ofside'.valk and any '~lls ouid ided n -. , ~.,._,, sh be zrov rear and corner side yard situations throughout :he project. 5taft Recommendation: S:~f. recommends :hat the Design Review Committee recom~'''~'~ :hat ;h~ ~'~slican.: revise :he iavout of :he subdivision :rich and once redesi~ned to the satisfaction of starT, then the project may be scheduled 5r the P!annin~ Commission for review and action. '~ o~ ,~,,.,,~ Design Re~.'ie,,,,' Committee .--Xctio~ .kfembers Present: Bill Be.'.he!, Kith .kfac:as. D.~.n TT L5:'97,- C]:TAT~ON' HOXEES FeL'7-:zT,' :; ' o, The Design Review CommiF. ee recom. mended a.mprov3i of the project subject to the following conditions: !. The tr~l connection between Lots 36 and 37 should be natrowed to reduce the amount of'publiciy maintained are-~. Consequently, the lots north znd south of the connection should be ,.videned to better accommodate potential housing products. 2. Open fencing should be utilized on the uppermost portion of the combination retaining/block wal! along the southern edge of Lots 22 through 32 to mitigate the height of the proposed ,,,,'all as seen from Kenyon Way. 3. The Second=a:v and Poiicv Design issues mentio,~,ed in these comments ,.,,'ere also recommended to be incorporated as Conditions of Approval for the projec.:. log :C TIOI",I C.. IIOMES J~nu~ry g, 1 g97 Planning Commission CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Re: Victoria Specific Plan Amendment Tentative Map 15797 Dear Members of the Commission: We have requested an Amendment to the Victoria Specific Plan, specifically Planning Area #2, to enable the Specific Plan to be consistent with the land use proposed by our Tentative Map #15797. The existing land use and zoning for the Plan on PA2 is medium density residential (M), 8o14dua. This designation provides for detached or attached residential uses not to exceed 14 dwelling units per acre. We are requesting a change in the Plan to low medium density to permit SFD homes on 5,000 square foot lots. There is no significant market for housing at the medium density level. Single family detached housing on this site, as we propose, will be a very compatible land use for the surrounding uses. We feel that it would be an unreasonable burden for us to continue holding the land until such time as a higher density development becomes more marketable when an SFD development is imminently marketable and yet compatible with surrounding uses. We hope you will give our proposal favorable consideration. Sincerely. TAVA DEVELOPMENT CO. dba CITAT N HOI~S n, Jr. ~evelopment FGL:mkw / /-T " E z-2c,~-q ""] ]gG00 Fairchild ~aad, Suite 270, Irvine, CA 9271 8-2~]0 (714) 2~0-GG00, FAX (7'14) 2~0-6G~G DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT MAP TRACT ill AN D TRACT iIIIII . , ] N -.-, ' COi'4NtUNIT'f FACILITY '~"" "' (FLrTURE CHURCH] .~ , ., LOT12 TRA~T I'I:). lI%flt , .;.i VICTORIA P.C. .....,,L. .......r~' '/ , -.. r=57.89 ., PARCEL MAP 12263 "'/' ",' '::':" / ~ 7 z ' ,,// \\ ..... -""./ TRACT ~ ':;,'~ -,! t,b '~-. / ~ ', ~L'::,,',,~/' ~,. ,,.::,---,~:, , '\,,~/>" ~" "' FROM "M' TO "L!~ 12800 L= ., ',.,, ,,"' N 89'40'11'E: N 81'05'g4'v VAr,,,,AII"T / 46'oo'o7'E: L-14.,. 1 3440 t,,  i'4~. '9~ L:22.I ~';' ':: ~, P. TRACT ~ FROU'U' TO K, ENTON PARK / ~ V1CTORIA P.O.  ~'~ \ ~ TF~,,ACT 13442 · .-( ~,. \ ~,.~ \ N e 4' 20'00 ' ~r .,- ......,,,,,_,y" ! \_ ,,,~----_,, TR, ACT 134~3 VICTORIA P.C. H EUC9603 WPD iJu,y 17 Ig561 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAM ONGA iNVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1) Project File #/Name: Victoria Community Plan Amendment 96-03 2) Related Files: Tentative Tract 15797 3) Applicant: Citation Homes Address: 19600 Fairchild Road, Suite 270, Irvine, CA 92715 Telephone #: (714) 250-6600 4) Project Description: Proposed change from Medium to Low-Medium Residential 5) Project Accepted as Complete (date): January 27, 1997 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation is required for ~11 "Yes" and "Maybe" answers on attached sheets, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects .dentilled. Yes Maybe N__~o I. EARTH - Wi/I the proposal result/n: a) Unstable earth conditions or changes in the geologic structure? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Disruptions, displacement, compaction, or over covering of the soil? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Change in the topography or ground surface relief features? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) The destruction, covering, or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ( ) ( X ) e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? ( ) ( ) ( X ) f) Changes in deposition or' erosion of beach sand, or changes in siltation, deposition, or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet, or lake? ( ) ( ) ( X ) g) Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards, such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? ( ) ( ) ( X ) II. AIR - Will the proposal result in: a) Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) The creation of objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) [ X ) " , 2,,-:Z~ ~"1 / lid:) c) Alteration of air movement moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? ( ) ( ) ( X ) ,,. II!. WATER - Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Changes in the absorption rate, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Alterations to the course of flow of flood waters? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any body? ( ) ( ) ( X ) e) Discharge into surface waters, or in alteration of surface water quality, including, but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity? ( ) ( ) ( X ) O Alteration of the direction or rate of ground waters? ( ) ( ) ( X ) g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? ( ) ( ) ( X ) h) Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? ( ) ( ) ( X ) i) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal pools? ( ) ( ) ( X ) IV. PLANT LIFE - Will the proposal result in: a) Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Reduction in the number of any unique, rare, or endangered species of ( ) ( ) ( X ) plants? c) Introduction of new species of plants into an area or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? ( ) ( ) ( X ) V. ANIMAL LIFE - Will the proposal result in: a) Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of animals (birds, land animals, including reptiles, fish, and shellfish benthie organisms or insects)? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Reduction of the number of any unique, rare, or endangered species of animals? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Introduction of any new species of animals into the area or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? ( ) ( ) ( X ) 2 VI. NOISE ~ Will the proposal result a) Increase in existing noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( X ) VII. LIGHT AND GLARE - Will the proposal.' a) Produce new light and glare? ( ) ( ) ( X ) VIII. LAND USE - Will the proposal result in.' a) Substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? ( ) ( X ) ( ) IX. NATURAL RESOURCES - Will the proposal result in.' a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? ( ) ( ) ( X ) X. RISK OF UPSET - Will the proposal involve: a) A risk of explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pest/c/des, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XI. POPULATION o Will the proposal: a) Alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? ( ) ( X ) ( ) XII. HOUSING - Will the proposal: a) Affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XIII. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION - Will the proposal result in: a) Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Effects on existing parking facilities or demand for new parking? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Alterations to the present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? ( ) ( ) ( X ) e) Alterations to waterborne, rail, or air traffic? ( ) ( ) ( X ) f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, b/cyclists, or pedestrians? ( ) ( ) ( X ) 3 XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES - Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for. ne~':or altered government services in any of the following areas.' a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Schools? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Parks and other recreational facilities? ( ) ( ) ( X ) e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) ( X ) f) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XV. ENERGY - Will the proposal result in: a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy or require the development of new sources of energy? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XVI. UTILITIES and SERVICE SYSTEMS - Will the proposal result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Communications systems? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Water? ( ) ( ) (X) d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) ( ) ( X ) e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ( ) ( X ) f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XVII. HUMAN HEALTH - Will the proposal result in: a) Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? ( ) ( ) (X) b) Exposure of people to potential health hazards? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XVlll. AESTHETICS - Will the proposal result in: a) The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XlX. RECREATION - Will the proposal result in: a) Impact upon the quality of existing recreational opportunities? ( ) ( ) ( X ) 4 b) Restrict the religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XX. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Will the proposal.' a) Result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archeological site? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic or cultural values? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE - a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or ( ) ( ) (X) prehistory? b) Short term: Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definite period of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect on the total of those impacts on the environment is ( ) ( ) ( X ) significant.) d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XXII. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Narrative description of environmental impacts) - XXIII. DISCUSSION OF LAND USE IMPACTS (Examine whether the project would be consistent with existing zoning, plans, and other applicable land use controls) - XXIV. EARLIER ANALYSES - Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): X'" General Plan EIR 5 SENT BY: .;;l z_-J~NGA ~ DE'V; 2-13-B7 ~:1~¢~1; ,.~09 477 2847 ~-- 7142586~,58; ='7/~ __ i~u~ ~a $~ ~ EIR ~ ~~ ~a~ Co~u~ EIR ~ E~da ~ S~c Ran EiR ~h~ a) I ~ ~ t~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ a ~~ ~ on ~ ~m~- A NE~~ DEC~~ON ~ ~ pra~ .......................................................................... ~ ) h~e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A NE~~ O~~ON il ~ ~ ......................................................................... ( X ~ ~~m~~3 / ~ . X:X'Vt. APPLICANT CERTIRCATION ('To be completed by applicant) - I cef~y that I am the appiic~r~ for the pe'oje~ <leecribed in ~ Initial Study. iacY, nowteOge ~ 1 have read ~ tr,~-at Study and d~e ptopcsecl mitigaZi~ ~ Furffie. I have revised me project t:ians or proposals and/or iceby agree to the proposed miti ' measles to avoid ~ effec~ mitigae the effects to a point where G/Z, ~Dt~={ eS~SeS~L:OZ S~NOH NOIJLVLID:NO~ E30:Or- ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Initiai'%tudy- Part II ~' Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Project Description: VCPA 96-03 - Citation Homes Proposed chan~e in zoning designation from Me. dium (8-14 dwelling units t3er acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for 12.4 acres of land located south of Highland Avenue, east of Woodruff Avenue VIII. Land Use: a) This application for a Victoria Community Plan is proposed to change the designation of the property from Medium residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre). The purpose of the amendment is to allow for conventional single family residences to be built on the property. The type of lots and future residences proposed are already permitted within this area and are consistent with the Victoria Community, Plan. Therefore, no significant land use impacts associated with this subdivision or the related Specific Plan Amendment are anticipated. XI. Population: a) The proposed amendment could have a potential impact on the density in that it is proposing to lower the density range for the site. However. with the single family subdivision proposed being consistent with a potential type of housing already allowed with the existing density range, no adverse environmental impacts are expected. EARLIER ANALYSES The application is part of the Victoria Commtmity Plan for which an EIR was prepared and certified by the City. This document is available at the Planning Division, City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive. The Master Environmental Assessment for the General Plan was also ret~renced in evaluating the potential impacts of the application. This document is available for review at the Planning Division, City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive. Specific studies evaluating potenital impacts created by this project (i.e. Noise Study ) are also available for review at the Planning Division, City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive. -~ F__"'7' 5797 ,'~'PD .: j',,iy CITY OF RANCHO CUCAM ONGA :NVIRON ENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL ,STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1 ) Project File #/Name: Tentative Tract 15797 2) Related Files: Victoria Community Plan Amendment 96-03 3) Applicant: Citation Homes Address: 19600 Fairchild Road, Suite 270, Irvine, CA 92715 Telephone #: (714) 250-6600 4) Project Description: 61 lot single family residential subdivision 5) Project Accepted as Complete (date): January 27, 1997 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation is required for I"Yes" and "Maybe" answers on attached sheets, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects enti~ed. Yes Maybe N__o I. EARTH - Will the proposal result/n: a) Unstable earth conditions or changes in the geologic structure? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Disruptions, displacement, compaction, or over covering of the soil? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Change in the topography or ground surface relief features? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) The destruction, covering, or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ( ) ( X ) e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? ( ) ( ) ( X ) f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sand, or changes in siltation, deposition, or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet, or lake? ( ) ( ) ( X ) g) Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards, such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? ( ) ( X ) ( ) II. AIR - Will the proposal result in: a) Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) The creation of objection le odors? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Alteration of air movement moisture, or temperature. or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? ( ) ( ) ( X ) III. WATER - Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Changes in the absorption rate, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Alterations to the course of flow of flood waters? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any body? ( ) ( ) ( X ) e) Discharge into surface waters, or in alteration of surface water quality, including, but not limited to, temperature. dissolved oxygen, or turbidity? ( ) ( ) ( X ) f) Alteration of the direction or rate of ground waters? ( ) ( ) ( X ) g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? ( ) ( ) ( X ) h) Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? ( ) ( ) ( X ) i) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal pools? ( ) ( ) ( X ) IV. PLANT LIFE - Will the proposal result in: a) Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Reduction in the number of any unique, rare, or endangered species of ( ) ( ) ( X ) plants? c) Introduction of new species of plants into an area or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? ( ) ( ) ( X ) V. ANIMAL LIFE - Will the proposal result in: a) Change in the diversity of species. or number of any species of animals (birds, land animals, including reptiles. fish, and shellfish benthic organisms or insects)? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Reduction of the number of any unique, rare, or endangered species of animals? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Introduction of any new species of animals into the area or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? ( ) ( ) ( X ) 2 VI. NOISE - W/fl the proposal result in: a) Increase in existing noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ( X ) ( ) VII. LIGHT AND GLARE - Will the proposal: a) Produce new light and glare? ( ) ( ) ( X ) VIII. LAND USE - Will the proposal result in: a) Substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? ( ) ( X ) ( ) IX. NATURAL RESOURCES - Will the proposal result in: a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? ( ) ( ) ( X ) X. RISK OF UPSET - Will the proposal involve: a) A risk of explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XI. POPULATION - Will the proposal: a) Alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? ( ) ( X ) ( ) Xll. HOUSING - Will the proposal: a) Affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XIII. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION - Will the proposal result in: a) Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Effects on existing parking facilities or demand for new parking? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Alterations to the present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? ( ) ( ) ( X ) e) Alterations to waterborne, rail, or air traffic? ( ) ( ) ( X ) f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians? ( ) ( ) ( X ) 3 XIV. PUBLIC, SERVICES - Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for, ne~:or altered government services in any of the following areas.' a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Schools? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Parks and other recreational facilities? ( ) ( ) ( X ) e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) ( X ) f) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XV. ENERGY - Will the proposal result in: a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy or require the development of new sources of energy? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XVI. UTILITIES and SERVICE SYSTEMS - Will the proposal result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Communications systems? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Water? ( ) ( ) ( X ) d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) ( ) ( X ) e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ( ) ( X ) f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XVII. HUMAN HEALTH - Will the proposal result in.' a) Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Exposure of people to potential health hazards? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XVlll. AESTHETICS - Will the proposal result in: a) The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XIX. RECREATION - Will the proposal result in: a) Impact upon the quality of existing recreational opportunities? ( ) ( ) ( X ) 4 Restrict the religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XX. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Will the proposal.' a) Result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archeological site? ( ) ( ) ( X ) b) Result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic or cultural values? ( ) ( ) ( X ) XXi. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE - a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or ( ) ( ) (X) prehistory? b) Short term: Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definite period of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) ( ) ( ) ( X ) c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect on the total of those impacts on the environment is ( ) ( ) ( X ) significant.) d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ( ) ( ) (X) XXII. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Narrative description of environmental impacts) - XXIII. DISCUSSION OF LAND USE IMPACTS (Examine whether the project would be consistent with existing zoning, plans, and other applicable land use controls) - XXlV. EARLIER ANALYSES - Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): _X_ General Plan EIR 5 SENT BY: ~ CJCAI~NGA C0~4 DE'V; 2-13o97 9:~9/~1; 909 477 2847 -> 7142506656' 'j Master Enviro~t~ Asse~nt for the 1989 LIIxlaleoftheGereralRan ,_ Industrial Area Specific Plan ~X Victoria Planned Community EIR -_ T~rra Vista Planned CornmunilT EIR Ethvanda North Specific Ran Other:. a) l rind that the proposed project cou~ not have a signfficam effec~ on me environmen{, A NEGATIVE DECLARA~N wil be prepared .......................................................................... b ) [ firx:l that a~hough the ixoposed pmjed could have a sigrili:ant elfect on the ewimnmenfL have been added to the prOjed. A NEGATIVE DECLAP~TION wll be prepared ......................................................................... ! fred that the prolx}sed project my have a signi~3nl: effect on the env,ronment AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required ............................................................... Pre.~are~s Signature/' P~n~ Name and 'rdte / XXVl, APPLICANT CF.,RTRqCATION (To be completed by applicant) - I certi(y that I am tlqe ~pplicsnt for the project described in ~ Initial Study. ] at.~rtowtcdge that i have read this Initial Study and 1:he ~ m~ measures. Ftntler, ! have revised the 13rojecl plans or proposals and/or hereby agree., !o the pr.olpsed m" ' rnemsur~ to .avoid the effeds or mitigate 1:he effects to a point where PrintNamearldTll:le: ~' ~ C--~. Lt~,-~, >,~ '~'J~. . 6//- ~S~d 95990S~t~ :OI S=rHOH NOiJ, V£i3=HO~[=I 90:0~ ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Initia!Study- Part II ~i Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Project Description: TT 15797 - Citation Homes Subdivision of 12.4 acres of land into 61 single family lots located south of Highland Avenue and east of Woodruff Avenue I. Earth: g) The majority of Califomia is susceptible to earthquakes. The project is within the special study zone established by the City for the inferred location of the Red Hill fault. Geologic studies were done in conjunction with the consideration of the Victoria Community Plan during the Environmental Review process and no evidence of faulting was found within the special study area within Victoria. VI. Noise: b) The noise levels for a portion of this project closest to Highland Avenue and the future Route 30 Freeway could be potentially severe. A noise study has been prepared to access the impacts associated with constructing this development in close proximity to Highland Avenue and the future Route 30 Freeway. The preliminary study recommended that a 8-10 foot high screen wall be constructed along Highland and that certain construction elements (i.e. dual-glazed windows) be provided to mitigate noise to safe levels. With these mitigations in place, people should not be exposed to severe noise levels. VIII. Land Use: a) In conjunction with this application, an amendment to the Victoria Conununity Plan is proposed to change the designation of the property, from Medium residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre). The purpose of the amendment is to allow for conventional single family residences to be built on the property. The D,,'pe of lots and future residences proposed are already permitted within this area and are consistent with the Victoria Community Plan. Therefore, no significant land use impacts associated with this subdivision or the related Specific Plan Amendment are anticipated. XI. Population: a) The project, with its related Victoria Community Plan Amendment, could have a potential impact on the density in that the related amendment is proposing to lower the density, range for the site. However, with the single family subdivision proposed being consistent with a potential type of housing already allowed with the existing density range. no adverse environmental impacts are expected. XXI. .Mandatory Findings of Significance: c) The project is part of the larger Victoria Community Plan area for which an Environmental Impact was prepared and certified. The application most likely will contribute to the cumulative impacts within the Planned Community and the City. Therefore, the application will be required to comply with the mitigation measures outlined in the Victoria Community Plan EIR to mitigate any potential cumulative impacts to a level of insignificance. EARLIER ANALYSES The application is part of the Victoria Community Plan for which an EIR was prepared and certified by the City. This document is available at the Planning Division, City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive. The Master Environmental Assessment for the General Plan was also referenced in evaluating the potential impacts of the application. This document is available for review at the Planning Division, City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive. Specific studies evaluating potential impacts created by this project (i.e. Noise Study ) are also available for review at the Planning Division, City Hall, 10500 Civic Center Drive. RESOLUTION NO. 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 96-02, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR APPROXIMATELY 18 ACRES OF LAND AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MILLIKEN AVENUE AND VICTORIA PARK LANE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 227-011-17. A. Recitals. 1. Citation Homes has filed an application for Victoria Community Plan Amendment No. 96-02 as described in the title of this Resolution. Heroinafter in this Resolution, the subject Victoria Community Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On February 26, 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on February 26, 1997, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 18 acres of land, basically a rectangular configuration, located at the northeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Victoria Park Lane and is presently undeveloped. Said property is currently designated as Medium Residential; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Village Commercial and is developed with a neighborhood commercial shopping center. The property to the west is designated Low-Medium Residential and developed with single family residences. The property to the east is designated Low-Medium Residential and is developed with a neighborhood park and a single family residential subdivision. The property to the south is designated Low-Medium Residential and is developed with single family residences. c. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and d. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element; and ~* ' "" ":G """~'M'SSI'~'' ' _,-.,,' ....,'~ ,~',~, VCP,:. g6-02 -3;T.-:,TZON HOMES FeDruar'/26. Page 2 e. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above. this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; and b. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties; and c. That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration. together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended. and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and th.e Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and. further. this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That, based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project. no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further. based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 af the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1.2.3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby recommends approval of Victoria Community Plan Amendment No. g6-02. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 1997. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLz,.NNiNG COM,MISSIO.,X :SOLUTION NO. VCPA 96-02 -.C;TA. TION HOMES Februar/26. ! 997 Page 3 BY: ATTEST: ~ ~ ~~,,¢l~ary I, Brad Bullet, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 26th day of February 1997, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, BETHEL, HAG]:AS, NCN]:EL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE RESOLUTION NO. 97-11 ,,~ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15796, A PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF 94 LOTS ON 18 ACRES OF LAND IN THE MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) PROPOSED TO BE LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MILLIKEN AVENUE AND VICTORIA PARK LANE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF APN: 227-011-17. A. Recitals. 1. Citation Homes has filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 15796, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereina~er in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 26th day of February 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on February 26, 1997, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located on at the northeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Victoria Park Lane with a Milliken Avenue frontage of approximately 1,200 feet and average lot depth of approximately 610 feet and is presently improved with curb and gutter along both vacant street frontages and trail and parkway landscape improvements along Victoria Park Lane; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is a neighborhood shopping center, the property to the south consists of single family residences, the property to the east is single family residential and a neighborhood park, and the property to the west is single family residential; and c. The application contemplates the subdivision of 18 acres of land into 94 single family residential lots that have an average lot size of 6,210 square feet; and d. The site is within the Victoria Community Plan and, in conjunction with this application, a Victoria Community Plan Amendment is proposed to change the Development District Designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre); and -"' -' NNING CG,%I,%I[SS;ON ~=SOLUT;nN ,"40 -37-I ~ TT 15Tg6 CITAT;ON '~'MES Februan/26, 1997 Page 2 e. The proposed subdivision design is in compliance with the development standards for the Low-Medium Residential Development District included within the Victoria Community Plan. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and b. The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and c. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and e. The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and f. The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That, based' upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. D! . N"'NG " ' _~, :~ C. 2 ~'S'-?- CN R=SOLUT;GN ,";0. ~7-!I .'77 157~6- C~7,.:',T;.C.N HC, MES Februa,'-y 25, i Page 3 PIanninc~ Division 1) Approval of this tentative tract map is contingent upon approval of Victoria Community Plan Amendment 96-02. 2) Retaining walls throughout the project shall not exceed 4 feet in height above finished grade and be composed of a decorative block or exterior finish. The final design and heights of all retaining/block walls throughout the project shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of any building permits for the walls. If any combination retaining/block walls exceed 6 feet in height, but are less than 8 feet in height (with the exception of the sound attenuation wall required along Milliken Avenue), then a Minor Exception shall be submitted for consideration by the City Planner prior to the issuance of any building permits for said walls. 3) The slope landscaping and retaining walls along the side of downslope lots that side onto two or more upslope rear yards (See Exhibit "A") shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of building permits for said retaining walls. 4) A flat area shall be provided adjacent to the proposed bus bay area sufficient for benches to be provided at the bus stop, to the satisfaction of the City Planner and City Engineer. 5) The final map and grading plan shall be redesigned with each lot meeting the minimum 50-foot width, as measured at the front setback line, to the satisfaction of the City Planner, prior to recordation of the final map. 6) An exhibit shall be provided on the final grading plan that clearly depicts the typical side yard slope situation, to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 7) The final map and grading plan shall be redesigned to show the wall location along Milliken Avenue at a minimum of 18 feet and at a minimum average of 20 feet back from face of curb, to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 8) A minimum of 5 feet shall be provided between the back of sidewalk and any walls in all corner side yards throughout the subdivision to allow sufficient room for future tree growth at the time houses are contemplated on the property, to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Environmental Mitiqation Measures 1) An 8- to 1 O-foot screen wall along Milliken Avenue and a 6- to 8-foot screen wall along Kenyon Way shall be constructed consistent with the recommendations contained within the preliminary noise study. Also, certain construction elements (i.e. dual glazed windows) shall be provided at such time houses are contemplated within the subdivision. These elements shall be provided as also recommended in the ~'~,;";""""' .CC; 1;.,',SSiOt',~ RES~LUT~'N NO 97-11 TT 15796 ~ "'" ~, ,~,QN HCMES -I FeSruan/25, 1997 sage ~ prelimina~ noise study, and a final noise study, which shall be required for review and approval of the City Planner prior to the issuance of building permits. Engineerinq Division 1 ) Install a combined bus bay and right turn lane for Street H on Milliken Avenue per Standard Drawing 119. 2) Inte~or Ioal streets shall have 5~foot ~ghts-of-way. Provide additional sidewalk easements on all local streets. 3) Design facilities at the intersection of Streets D and F to minimize the opportunity for flows to bypass the catch basin. 4) The under sidewalk drain at the south end of Street F shall be installed at an angle to Victoria Park Lane, doubling as the easterly diagonal sidewalk. 5) Install ~o pedest~an connections to the sidewalk noah of Victoria Park Lane at the south ends of Streets B and F. Angle the trail intersection along the southeast corner of Lot 73 to provide sidewalks in both directions, similar to existing trail connections along the east tract bounda~. Wrap the perimeter wall along the sides of Lots 73 and 74 ending at the front yard setback for those lots. The perimeter wall for Lots 62 and 63 shall also end at the front yard setback and the trail sidewalks can run along the respective property lines. 6) Complete the landscaping on the west side of the existing trail along the east tract bounda~, between the existing sidewalk and the tract perimeter wall. 7) The new trail connection between Lots 73 and 74 shall be graded to convey ove~ows in the event of a blockage in the sump catch basin. Drainage swales within trail connections shall have a minimum grade of 1 percent. The sidewalk shall not be used for drainage purposes. 8) Revise the following public improvement plans to reflect the project: a) Drawing 1158: show any revisions to existing Landscape Maintenance District improvements on Victoria Park Lane. b) Drawing 1186: show store drain lateral and new trail connection. c) Drawing 1194: show additional Landscape Maintenance District improvements be~een the east tract bounda~ wall and the existing trail sidewalk. d) Drawing 1240: show bus bay/right turn lane on Milliken Avenue and additional Landscape Maintenance District improvements. _<~, :: ,. e/ Dra~in,~ 1~2: s~cw oil ~e~ siCewa!k connections ~o Victoria Park Lane. Drawing 140B: show ~enyon Way/Street A intersection and additional Landscape ~aintenance District improvements. 9/ This project is connected to or will disrupt several existing City- maintained landscape and irrigation areas. Prior ~o new constr~ction, a joint inspection and documentmion of the e×isting areas' condition shall occur with both the new contractor and the City inspector. e×isting irrigation system shall be relocated as needed and any damaged Iandsc~pir~g replaced ~o ~he satisfaction of the City Engineer. At this point, the new const~ction contractor shall be responsible for maintenance of both the new and existing areas. The developer shall assume maintenance responsibility for the altered landscape area for a minimum of 90 days after reconstruction. A follow-up inspection of both areas is required prior to the City's acceptance of the new area. 10) Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) plans shall incorporate cost efficient, low maintenance designs, compatible with or transitioning to existing LMD areas, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The maximum slope within publicly-maintained landscape areas shall be 3: 1. Where slopes occur, a l-foot fiat area behind the sidewalk shall be provided. Slopes higher than 5 feet shall have a 2-foot wide fiat shelf at the top, along the base of the wall. Slope widths should be minimized through the use of 30-inch maximum height, free-standing retaining walls and up to 4 feet of retaining beneath perimeter walls. Low maintenance wall treatments should be used. Planting areas for shrubs should have a minimum width of 3 feet, clear of wall footings. Trees will require wider planting areas, as determined by the City Engineer. 1 I) Street names shall be applied for through the Planning Division and shall be accepted and added to the final mad prior to approval and recordation thereof. The Secretary to this Commission shall certif'y to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 1997. PLA. ' ' OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA E. u"'avid Barker, 'hairman .:,T'TEST' '~ ' ~ - 2'L-:,NNiNG CCM.%,IISSiCN RESOLUTION NO. 97-11 TT 15796 - C:TAT',ON HGMES FeDruan/26, 1997 Page 6 t, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 26th day of February 1997, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, BETHEL, MACIAS, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE !: ,~ ~ :-2 ~ ~ / ;;69 x " . , !' 70 ,' 71 , ,' ,~ / i' ,; ./ ," . . ;' j ,' /' , , ,' ,, , /,' ~"T ,53' : " 95" ." ." / 9 2' '  55'.,' 55 , / , / ,.' /z / / / ~ / , / / ,' " , , ~,, ' ,' / ,, , % k ~.5' WALL ' 9Z' ~ ~ ~ " ' ' .- , , / ', ': 66 " =~ " ,, C ~- ; ~eo~. , 7 ,' , / / P" i , ,' , ~ ,, ; ,' / / ; , .' , : , ., , ; / / ,' / ,' , ~ 3~ ~ ,., ,' / / / ' ~T~R : , · , ' ' / ~" WALL .. , ' / / ~ / ' , " " '/ " k' I f l t ' ,,' ,. , , / f , ,. ~, ~ ~ ,, , , .. ,, ,,, , ' ,_oc~ ,~uu' 59 ,' 60 ,3: ~ u~ ," ,' -' ,- . ', .... ,,.,;. .... . .>; . ~' :" ~' .:....:.:: ::::' , :~:.';" ~:..'.~,.~:e.:.::',~:~:..:..~ ...~'.~,, VENUE ':';"':',=;::"":'::"" . , ~ .' ,. ,':../ _.:,.~' ~ /7 ,.,~.~.. ., . .,'.. ~, :.... .,,..,. ?.,:. ~ ,.: .~ · ,:;., ~,.. ~; ;: :~" ' '::: :' ' :'" ~'~ U' ' :'~;':1" .,':~ ' ':' / .......... 7 E x. +-2: ':~ __ __ . %':"'" COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CON DITIONS PROJECT#: Tentative Tract 15796 SUBJECT: 94-1ot residential sin~]le family subdivision APPLICANT: Citation Homes LOCATION: NEC Milliken Avenue & Victoria Park Lane ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: ',,. Time Limits completion Date 1. Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, if building permits are not / I issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the date of approval. 2. Approval of Tentative Tract No. 15796 is granted subject to the approval of Victoria Community __ / Plan Amendment 96-02. 3. Prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first, __ __/__ the applicant shall consent to, or participate in, the establishment of a Metlo-Roos Community Facilities District for the construction and maintenance of necessary school facilities. However, if any school district has previously established such a Community Facilities District, the applicant shall, in the alternative, consent to the annexation of the project site into the territory of such existing District prior to the recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first. Further, if the affected school district has not formed a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District within twelve months from the date of approval of the project and prior to the recordation of the final map or issuance of building permits for said project, this condition shall be deemed null and void. This condition shall be waived if the City receives notice that the applicant and all affected school districts have entered into an agreement to privately accommodate any and all school impacts as a result of this project. 4. Prior to recordation of the final map or prior to the issuance of building permits when no map is __/__ involved, written certification from the affected water district that adequate sewer and water facilities are or will be available to serve the proposed project shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. sc-,c,,s6 1 (__.~ P'o!ect No. 7 15796 .Completion Date B. Site Deve!opment 1 The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include / / site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Victoria Community Plan. 2. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be I / submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 3. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for / / consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc. ) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 4 Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, / / all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 5 Street names shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval in accordance with the / / adopted Street Naming policy prior to approval of the final map. 6. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property __1__1__ owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approved prior to the issuance of building permits. 7. Six foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. If a double wall / / condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all contiguous property owners at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/fences along the project's perimeter. 8. Any wood fences shall be constructed with a 2-inch galvanized pipe, at each post, extending at / / least 4 feet, 6 inches above grade and imbedded in an 18-inch deep concrete footing. C. Landscaping 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping __1__1__ in this case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. 2. All private slopes of 5 feet or less in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 I__1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 3. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater __1__1__ slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-cJallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1 -cJallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered ~o~ec: No Completion Date clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a pern~anent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 4. For single family residential development, all slope planting and irrigations shall be continuously __/__/__ maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each ;ndividual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in satisfactory condition. 5. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included __/__/__ in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. 6. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meandering __/__/__ sidewalks (with horizontal change), and intensified landscaping, is required along Milliken Avenue. 7. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the __1__1__ perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 8. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the __1__1__ design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. D. Environmental 1. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Fourth Street Rock Crusher project in a star~dard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. 2. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the City Adopted Special __1__1__ Studies Zone for the Red Hill Fault, in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. 3. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Foothill Freeway project __1__/__ in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. 4. A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the __1__1__ issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuss the level of interior noise attenuation to below 45 CNEL, the building materials and construction techniques provided, and if appropriate, verify the adequacy of the mitigation measures. The building plans will be checked for conformance with the mitigation measures contained in the final report. 5. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the City Planner in the amount of $ to be determined, prior to the issuance of building permits, guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants znd/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. In those instances requiring long term monitoring (i.e.) beyond final certificate of occupancy), the applicant shall provide a written monitoring and reporting program to the City Planner prior to sc- .c/~ 3 I....~ 7 ;arOleCt N,3 "'T ~ Completion Date issu,ance of building permits. Said program shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to ki~ow whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. APPLICANTS SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 47'7-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: E. Site Development 1. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tract/parcel map recordation and __/ / prior to issuance of building permits. F. Grading 1. Grading of the subject' property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City __1__1__ Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to / / perform such work. 3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the / / time of application for grading plan check. 4. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance of building permits. __/__/__ APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477'-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: G. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, __/__/__ community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees, traffic signal encroachment and maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Private easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. 2. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. __/___ 3. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for __/___ approved openings: Milliken Avenue, Victoria Park Lane, and Kenyon Way. 4. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quitclaimed or delineated on the /. final map. 5. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall / / be dedicated to the City. 6. Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along the Milliken Avenue right turn lane, to __/__/__ provide a minimum of 7 feet measured from the face of curb. H. Street Improvements 1. All public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped __/__/__ areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map snail be constructed to City Standards. SC - ~ ~/-e-,6 4 ~ ~ Completion Date Interior street improvements shall include. but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, driv~ approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. 2. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights . / / on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a __/__/ construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and __/__/__ interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction / / project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: ( 1 ) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. (2) Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City __/__/__ Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with __/__/__ adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be __/__/ installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. __/__ 3. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in __/__ accordance with the City's street tree program. 4. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with __/__ adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required. sc -~0/96 5 I ""~ q Completion Date I. Public Maintenance Areas 1. A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Public Works Standards shall __/ be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. The following landscaped parkways, medians, paseos, easements, trails or other areas shall be annexed into the Victoria Landscape Maintenance District: Milliken Avenue, Victoria Park Lane, Kenyon Way, expansion of existing trail along east tract boundary, and cul-de-sac paseo connections to Victoria Park Lane from Streets B and F. 2. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting __/__ Districts shall be filed ~,ith the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 3. All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the __/__ developer until accepted by the City. 4. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective / / Beautification Master Plan: Milliken Avenue. J. Drainage and Flood Control 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. 2. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe measured __/__/__ from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk. 3. Public storm drain easements shall be graded to convey overflows in the event of a blockage in __/__/__ a sump catch basin on the public street. K. Utilities 1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, __/__/__ electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. __/__/__ 3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the __/__/__ Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. L. General Requirements and Approvals 1. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all __/__/__ new street lights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. sc -~o,'s6 6 ] Completion Date PPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (ggg) 477-2730, OR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: M. General Fire Protection Conditions 1. Mello Roos Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this proiect. / / 2. Fire flow requirement shall be 1,500 gallons per minute. / / a. A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department / / personnel prior to water plan approval. 3. Fire hydrants are required. All required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed / / and operahie prior to delivery of any combustible building materials on site (i.e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department personnel. 4. Existing fire hydrant locations shall be provided prior to water plan approval. Required hydrants, / / if any, will be determined by the Fire District. Fire District standards require a 6" riser with a 4" and a 2-1/2" outlet. Substandard hydrants shall be upgraded to meet this standard. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specifications on approved brands and model numbers. 5. Prior to the issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted / / to the Fire District that an approved temporary water supply for fire protection is available, pending completion of required fire protection system. 6. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to final __/ / inspection. 7. All trees and shrubs planted in any median shall be kept trimmed a minimum of 14 feet, 6 inches / / from ground up so as not to impede fire apparatus. 8. Gated/restricted entry(s) require installation of a Knox rapid entry key system. Contact the Fire / / Safety Division for specific details and ordering information. 9. Plan check fees in the amount of $0 have been paid. An additional $150.00 shall be paid: X Prior to water plan approval. / / Note: Separate plan check fees for fire protection systems (sprinklers, hood systems. alarms, etc.) and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon submittal of plans. 10. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1994 U BC, U FC, / / UPC, UMC, NEC. and RCFD Standards 22 and 15. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: N. Security Hardware 1. A secondary locking device shall be installed on all sliding glass doors. __/__/__ 2. One-inch single cylinder dead bolts shall be installed on all entrance doors. tf windows are within / / 40 inches of any locking device, tempered glass or a double cylinder dead bolt shall be used. sc-.c,~5 7 / (..// Project No "'T ' Completion Date 3 All g,arage or rolling doors shall have slide bolts or some type of secondary locking devices. __/ / O.Windows 1. All sliding glass windows shall have secondary locking devices and should not be able to be lifted / / from frame or track in any manner. P. Building Numbering 1. Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for nighttime __/__/__ visibility. SC - ~3196 8 / q~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA · '- PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ,.--' Regular Meeting ,, February 26, 1997 , Chairman Barker called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council Chamber at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman Barker then led in the pledge of allegiance. ,' ROLL CALL / COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David'l~'arker, William Bethel, Rich Macias, Larry McNiel, Peter ToiLtoy // / ABSENT~,," None / /, STAFF PRESENT: Bracl/Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Ralph Hanson, De!duty City Attorney; Steve Hayes, Associate Planner; Dan James, Senior ..... vii Engineer; Gall Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary ANNOUNCF~NTS Brad Bu r, City Planner, observed that he would be distributing information on Heritage and Red Hill P s to the Commission regarding PD-85. APPROVAL O____ZF M_.!NUTE~S ved by Tolstoy, seconded by Maci. as, carried 4-0-0-1 (McNiel abstain), to approve the minutes of January 22, 1997. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 96-02 - CITATION HOMES - A request to amend the Victoria Community Plan Development District designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 18 acres of land at the northeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Victoria Park Lane - APN: 227-011-17. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Related file: Tentative Tract 15796. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15796 - CITATION HOMES - A proposed residential subdivision of 94 lots on 18 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), proposed to be Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre), located at the northeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Victoria Park Lane - APN: 227-011-17. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Related file: Victoria Community Plan Amendment 96-02. 143 C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 96-03 - CITATION HOMES - A request to amend the Victoria Community Plan Development District designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4;:-8 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 12.4 acres of land south of Highland Avenue, east of Woodruff Place - APN: 227-011-26. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Related file: Tentative Tract 15797. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15797 - CITATION HOMES - A proposed residential subdivision of 61 single family lots on 12.4 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), proposed to be Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre), located south of Highland Avenue and east of Woodruff Place - APN: 227-011-26. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Related file: Victoria Community Plan Amendment 96-03. Steve Hayes, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if there will be two separate fences, a soundwall for the freeway and another wall along the property boundary. Mr. Hayes confirmed there will be sound attenuation walls along Kenyon Way. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, stated that the current design plans for the freeway do not include a soundwall in that location. Commissioner Tolstoy felt there may be duplication. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that if the project is built prior to awarding of the construction contract for the freeway, Caltrans may include a wall. He said the City is making the developer responsible for the wall along the property line. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Jerry Linton, Citation Homes, 19600 Fairchild Road, #270, Irvine, expressed appreciation for staffs efforts in helping the project to move forward. He stated the project will not be able to mitigate the sound of the freeway. He observed that soundwalls are designed at a 20-foot height to mitigate the traffic noise from Highland Avenue, not the future freeway. Mr. Hayes commented that the Citys General Plan recognizes the noise levels cannot be completely mitigated. He pointed out that when the preliminary noise study was completed, the noise consultant had been under the impression that the freeway will be above ground. He observed there will be a final noise study at plan check status and there is a chance that the walls will not be as high as originally anticipated because the freeway will be lower. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the City should require a disclosure that the freeway will be built. Mr. Buller stated that a disclosure can be required, but it is hard for staff to police the issue. Mr. Linton stated they had just finished another development in the City at which they had disclosed the future existence of the freeway for their own protection. He said they would include notice of the future freeway at this location. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Barker closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes -2- February 26, 1997/ Commissioner McNiel stated the application is a straightforward zone change to reduce the density for marketing purposes. He felt the proposed development fits well in the neighborhood and supported the application. ..,, Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the resolutions recommending approval of Victoria Community Plan Amendment 96-02, approving Tentative Tract 15796, recommending approval of Victoda Community Plan Amendment 96-03, and approving Tentative Tract 15797 and issue negative declarations for Tentative Tract 15796 and 15797. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: BARKER, BETHEL, MACIAS, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE - carried ~ ENVIRONMEN SSESSMENT AND A request to construct a 2,900 square foot drive-thru facility and a 5,548 square foot restaurant on 3.7 acres of land in the Community Commercial designation of the Foothill Boulevard ecific Plan, located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - A · 207-211-12 and 13. Related file: Pre-Application Review 95-04. Steve Hayes, sociate Planner, presented the staff report and distributed copies of a revised roof plan and equipm t specifications for roof-mounted equipment which had been provided by the applicant earlier in t week. He indicated staff had determined the proposed parapet height and well depth should be su lent to screen the roof equipment from view. He reported the applicant ding plans the previous week and staff had determined that, with the Mr. Hayes replied that the issues had to do ~ the nature of the queuing of flows and the directing of overflows into the spillway. He noted that te%rary measures will be taken with Phase One and the issues would be permanently addressed with PRase Two. He commented that Engineering staff felt the issues could be resolved pending approval o"'f.the Flood Control District. \ Commissioner McNiel remarked that temporary measur'~i are included with Phase One with permanent solutions waiting until Phase Two. He asked the~oundness of the temporary system, noting that Phase Two may not occur for possibly 6 to 12 years.""~.~, \ Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, replied that with Phase One, there v~it[ be water flowing over raw land. He noted that staff felt the overflow concerns were addressed b9 the latest grading plans which had been recently submitted. \\ Commissioner McNiel asked if staff felt it is a safe system. · Mr. James responded affirmatively. rke out. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if everything had been worked out or if it was still to be wo Mr. James replied that confirmation of acceptance had not yet been received from the Flood District. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if concrete drainage swales will be used. Planning Commission Minutes -3- February 26, 1997/4~E" ORDINANCE NO. 5 ?~:P/' .,, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 96-02, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO LOW- MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR APPROXIMATELY 18 ACRES OF LAND AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MILLIKEN AVENUE AND VICTORIA PARK LANE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-011-17. A. Recitals. 1. Citation Homes has filed an application for Victoria Community Plan Amendment No. 96-02, as described in the title of this Ordinance. Hereinafter in this Ordinance, the subject Victoria Community Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On February 26, 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. On April 2, 1997, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to the Planning Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on February 26, 1997, and to the City Council during the above referenced hearing on April 2, 1997, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 18 acres of property located at the northeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Victoria Park Lane; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Village Commercial and is developed with a neighborhood commercial shopping center. The property to the west is designated Low-Medium Residential and developed with single family residences. The property to the east is designated Low-Medium Residential and is developed with a neighborhood park and a single family residential subdivision. The property to the south is designated Low-Medium Residential and is developed with single family residences. c. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. VCPA 96-02 - CITATION HOMES April 2, 1997 Page 2 .,, d. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element; and e. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the subject property is suitable for the modifications permitted by the proposed amendment in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; and b. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties; and c. That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the City Council; and, further, this Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the City Council finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the City Council during the public headng, the City Council hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-1-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Council hereby approves Victoria Community Plan Amendment No. 96-02. 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. /U7 ORDINANCE NO. _J~ 73 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 96-03, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (6-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO LOW- MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4-6 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR APPROXIMATELY 12.4 ACRES OF LAND SOUTH OF HIGHLAND AVENUE, EAST OF WOODRUFF PLACE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-011-26. A. Recitals 1. Citation Homes has filed an application for Victoria Community Plan Amendment No. 96-03, as described in the title of this Ordinance. Hereinafter in this Ordinance, the subject Victoria Community Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On February 26, 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. On April 2, 1997, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to the Planning Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on February 26, 1997, and to the City Council during the above referenced hearing on April 2, 1997, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 12.4 acres of property located south of Highland Avenue, east of Woodruff Place; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Low-Medium Residential within the Caryn Planned Community and the property is developed with single family residences. Immediately to the north is the right-of-way for the future Foothill Freeway, which is presently vacant. The property to the west is designated Village Commercial and developed with a neighborhood commercial shopping center. The property to the east is designated Low-Medium Residential and is developed with a single family residential subdivision. The property to the south is designated Low-Medium Residential and is developed with a neighborhood park and an elementary school. c. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. VCPA 96-03 - CITATION HOMES April 2, 1997 Page 2 :- d. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element; and e. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the subject property is suitable for the modifications permitted by the proposed amendment in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; and b. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties; and c. That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the City Council; and, further, this Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the City Council finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the City Council during the public headng, the City Council hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c'1-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Council hereby approves Victoria Community Plan Amendment No. 96-03. 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -- STAFF REPORT DATE: April 2, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Steve Hayes, AICP, Associate Planner SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL OF SIGN PERMIT FOR UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM NO. 119 - OIL MAX - An appeal of the Planning Commission's decision regarding signs for Oil Max, an approved project within the Foothill Marketplace Shopping Center, located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, east of Interstate 15 - APN: 229-031-37. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's decision by adopting the attached Resolution of Denial. ABSTRACT The purpose of this public hearing is to consider the specific request of the appellant, which is to install three signs on a building currently under construction in the Foothill Marketplace Shopping Center. All three wall signs are proposed to have the "Oil Max" name, but the word "Oil" is proposed to be in yellow letters, consistent with the company's registered trademark. These signs are not consistent with the current Uniform Sign Program for the Foothill Marketplace shopping center because yellow is not an approved color for pad tenants within the shopping center; red and white are currently the only allowable colors. Secondly, two of the three wall signs are proposed to have "10 Minute Oil Change" following the main company name. The appellant claims that this is part of their company's registered name and therefore, should be allowed. It should be noted that if the "10 Minute Oil Change" signs were allowed as originally proposed, then the two signs containing this message would have also exceeded the maximum size limitation of 50 square feet per sign. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CUP 95-33 - OIL MAX April 2, 1997 Page 2. BACKGROUND On February 26, 1997, the Planning Commission considered this application and upheld the City Planner's decision for denial. At the meeting, the Commissioners were given a copy of a letter from the appellanrs attorney stating that the appellant would agree to eliminate the yellow color from the sign and reduce each sign to fit within the size requirements of the Uniform Sign Program in trade for allowing the "10 Minute Oil Change" message to be placed on two of the three wall signs as originally requested. However, since there is no ancillary service being provided, no separate secondary entrance for an ancillary use, and the business does not exhibit the elements where secondary signage has been permitted in previous situations in the City (i.e. large retailer such as Price Club, WaI-Mart or Target with a separate garden center, tire installation facility, etc.) the Commission denied the appellant's request for secondary signage (i.e. "10 Minute Oil Change") for this specific business. For your convenience, Staff has attached the staff report and minutes from the February 26, 1997 Planning Commission meeting. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:SH/mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Letter from Appellant Exhibit "B" - Planning Commission Staff Report Dated February 26, 1997 Exhibit "C" - Planning Commission Minutes Dated February 26, 1997 Resolution of Denial ' RECEIVED DUPLICATE REC[IPT DUPLICATE RECEIPT · ~/1R 0 5 1997 ~e9-477-~?~ 'ty of Rancho Cuc DEP~TI, IE)IT I:W* Fl:!lli~ P/ann/nO Divisi REB/RCPT : el-49~4 C:e,3.--e4-1997 C~HIER If): S 16:47:t~ il:e3.-eS-~-~7 1813 pullfliNG FEES ttL~,tl p/C ~ OIL.miX Ze RImE t~ttl-39~t-788~-el~..ill~ TOTti, 1)tie $1~,t~ RECEIVE]) FROIq: #~ AI)~RS NUNTIiqGTON BEACH ~j~ , CHECK TOTAL TEiq~EREI) .ICATE REEIPT I)~PLICATE RECEIPT CITY OF R~NCHO CUCAMONGA -- STAFF REPORT DATE: February 26, 1997 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Steve Hayes, AICP, Associate Planner SUBJECT: APPEAL OF SIGN PERMIT FOR UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM NO. 119 - OIL MAX - An appeal of the City Planner's decision regarding signs for Oil Max, an approved project within the Foothill Marketplace Shopping Center, located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, east of Interstate 15 - APN: 229-031-37. ABSTRACT: Oil Max, an approved automobile service facility within the Foothill Marketplace Shopping Center, is currently under construction immediately south of the existing In-N-Out Burger restaurant. The applicant is seeking approval of wall signs on the southwest and northeast elevations of the building that are not in compliance with the approved Uniform Sign Program for the Foothill Marketplace Shopping Center. The proposed signs exceed the maximum size for wall signs for pad tenants (50 square feet) and the word "Oil" in the wall signs is proposed to be yellow in color. The sign program currently allows only red or white as colors for wall signs for pad tenants. In addition, the applicant is requesting that a secondary sign reading "10 Minute Oil Change" be allowed to be incorporated into the wall signs on the southwest and northeast elevations. The signs on these elevations exceed the 50 square foot maximum because of the request for the secondary information to be incorporated into the wall signs on these elevations. The applicant contends that both the sign color and secondary information are needed because it is part of their registered trade name. Please refer to the applicant's letter (Exhibit "A") for further details. ANALYSIS: A. Sign Color: The applicant is requesting to have the word "Oil" in yellow letters and the word "Max" (as well as the proposed secondary sign, which will be analyzed later in this report) in red letters, consistent with their corporate color scheme used throughout Southern California. Red is an approved color for pad tenants within the shopping center. However, yellow is not an allowable wall sign color for pad tenants at this time; only red and white are allowed at this time. The applicant has asked staff to consider their total "Oil Max" sign as a logo, because the approved sign program allows for flexibility in color for corporate Iogos. However, it has been the policy of the Planning Commission and. upheld by staff that typically a logo constitutes only a very small portion of the overall sign area. Some businesses (example: In-N-Out Burger) have Iogos that comprise a very small portion of the overall sign area, typically less that 10 percent. Therefore, staff determined that the entire sign could not constitute a logo and recommended that the whole sign either be red or white (or a combination thereof) consistent with the approved Uniform Sign Program. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SIGN PROGRAM #119 - OIL MAX Felaruary 26.1997 Page 2 ,, When the Planning Commission first reviewed the sign criteria for this shopping center, it was specifically noted that continuity in the signage for pad tenants, especially those along Foothill Boulevard, would be essential. Since the developer felt it necessary to allow nationally registered companies to use their own letter and logo style the element to ensure this continuity would be through the letter color. It should be noted that the pad in question is not directly on Foothill Boulevard, where the Planning Commission's concern for continuity was essential. However, given that Oil Max will be immediately adjacent to In-N-Out Burger and highly visible from the Foothill Boulevard off ramp from northbound Interstate 15, staff feels that it will appear as a continuation of the project frontage from areas of public view. Currently, all four of the other pad tenants along Foothill Boulevard have red letters and the pad under construction, Hollywood Video, will have a combination of the two allowable colors. One more retail pad and a service station pad are the only other pad projects that are yet to be developed. By allowing Oil Max the yellow color within their sign, essentially a third color of sign is being introduced for pad tenants. In reviewing other sign programs for similar size shopping centers within the City, such as Terra Vista Town Center and Town Center Square, it is typical that only one or, at most, two primary colors (excluding Iogos) be allowed for pad tenants. To alter from the precedent at this stage of development of the shopping center would be inconsistent with the goals and policies of the Planning Commission. Therefore, staff feels that, in order to ensure consistency in signage for the street (and off ramp) scene, the applicant's request to allow yellow letters for a portion of their wall sign should be denied and the City Planner's decision for denial should be upheld by the Planning Commission. B. Secondary Wall Siqn: The Sign Ordinance states that "sign copy shall include minimal information only. The use of subordinate information such as telephone numbers, lists of products, pictures of products, etc. are discouraged. The name of the use or business shall be the dominant message on the sign." In staffs opinion, the "10 Minute Oil Change" secondary wall sign is advertising of a product or service; therefore, the applicant's request was denied. The applicant contends that this is part of their registered trade name and, therefore, should be allowed. The limitation of content for signs is intended to provide consistency and visually attractive and uncluttered signage throughout the community. Examples of other relatively new businesses of similar magnitude which have complied include much larger tenants such as WaI-Mart and Home Depot and businesses such as the new Mobil and Arco service stations along Foothill Boulevard. Typically, the Planning Commission has only allowed secondary business identification signage for significantly larger tenants (Price Club, Target) that have a pronounced secondary entrance where specific speciality goods (Garden Centers, Tire Service) or services are offered. In these instances, the Commission noted that these were in fact separate businesses operating under the same roof but having their own entrances. The business under consideration does not offer any type of secondary products or services similar to situations noted above. Approval of the applicant's requested secondary sign copy would, in staffs opinion, be inconsistent with the Sign Ordinance and with situations where certain criteria warranted secondary signage. Further, staff finds no unique circumstances with this situation that would warrant the applicant's request for secondary signage. Staff believes that the three wall signs reading "Oil Max," the business' high visibility from the freeway off ramp, and oth~:_~.(_./ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SIGN PROGRAM ~¢119 - OIL MAX February 26.1997 Page 3 identification tools allowed under the Sign Program (i.e. existing Freeway pylon sign and the existing Foothill Boulevard monument signs) provide ample business identification. It should be noted that by upholding the City Planner's decision on this issue. the issue of overall sign area will disappear with the elimination of this portion of the sign copy. Staff believes that approval of the appeal would set a precedent and lead to similar requests by other businesses. The Planning Commission has consistently interpreted the Sign Ordinance to prohibit the use of advertising slogans in sign copy. On February 12, 1997, the Planning Commission denied a similar appeal by Orchard Supply Hardware to have a secondary sign which reads "Complete Hardware and Garden." In their decision, the Commission noted that most retail chains have a slogan for advertising as shown in the attached examples (see Exhibit "D"). As shown in these examples, the advertising slogan often overpowers *.~.e business name and becomes the dominant message. "Ralphs" is the business name which should be identified by a sign, not "Ralphs, First in Savings." RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission uphold, by minute action, the City Planner's decision regarding proposed signage for Oil Max and deny the appeal. Respectfull submitted, City Planner BB:SH/mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Appeal Request Letter Exhibit "B" - Sign Elevations Exhibit "C" - Site Plan Exhibit "D" - Examples of Secondary Advertising ..... _,... ~ECENT P.E".,..'TEL;j ANn COMENTS ON THE ~2=8~ 3. ,.Zz Q 'r H i L L 5: L '.,' C', ',3 l L P1A X: I ,:> ;;11 i"'~, '3 1 L iS H A b.t G E B U Z L D I P4 G P R O J E C T, HO:,SSZVE!;~ r-i"'f' CLZEFjT ,~F"-4D !sJQQD? :SEGP'.J :%,. LIGHTING ( AGENT ) ;EEL THAT AN ~:='DEAL !3F' "f'L3UP. D~'i"r:SZ,'3hl T~3 THE P' ~' Z;",'TEREST TO ALLG',U US T'O USE !'jUR P. EGISTEP. ED TRADE NAME , AND D,B,A, OUR F'jE;,4 BUT ' r., ~ NG THANI.:::S TO TH; STAF-': 'S.: ' ..... ~ .... ' ......"' L]UP. ..... ~!~_'.,'~_ H FO;~ -r , ,'-t: == Y i ANn tf # z -2e mmmmmm '~ ---- - ,m m .>_ .: 2-2e:, ..~-.1 DIRECTOR'S REPORTS F. APPEAL OF SIGN PERMIT FOR UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM NO. 119 - OIL MAX - An appeal of'the City Planner's decision regarding signs for Oil Max, an approved project within the Foothill Marketplace Shopping Center, located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, east of Interstate 15 - APN: 229-031-37. Steve Hayes, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and indicated that a letter had been received from the attorney representing Oil Max. Commissioner Bethel observed that the letter from the attorney indicated that only the "10 Minute Oil Change" verbiage was being requested, not the third color or the larger size. Brad Bullet, City Planner, stated the letter was sent to the Community Development Director and offered to compromise by complying with the provisions regarding color and size but asking that they be allowed to use "1 O-Minute Oil Change." He said the applicant agreed to have the letter forwarded to the Planning Commission for its consideration. Commissioner Bethel did not feel this application was a good comparison to the appeal from Orchard Hardware because staff had recommended that Orchard be allowed to have a second sign reading "Hardware and Garden Center'' and staff recommended no second sign for Oil Max. Commissioner McNiel noted that the building has three proposed wall signs. He observed that it is a small building and asked if three signs would comply with the sign program for the center. Mr. Hayes responded that it does. Chairman Barker invited public comment. Buck Woods, Owner, Woods Sign & Lighting, 9152 Madeline Drive, Huntington Beach, stated they had never intended to exceed the sign size. He said they were willing to forego the yellow sign color and the only remaining issue was the registered trade name of Oil Max 1 O-Minute Oil Change. Commissioner Bethel said he had disagreed with the Commission's finding not to allow the "Complete Hardware and Garden" sign, but in this instance he felt the additional verbiage is a description of the type of business and violates the sign ordinance. He did not support the appeal. Commissioner Tolstoy supported upholding the City Planner's decision. Commissioner McNiel commented that one can register anything as a registered trademark. He did not support the appeal and noted the business could also be registered as "Oil Max 1 O-Minute Oil Change, Tire Rotations, Smog Certification, Bumper Hitches, and Chrome Polishing." He did not feel they are entitled to a sign which includes all of the registered name. Commissioner Macias stated that the building is much smaller than Orchard Supply and he felt the requested verbiage is inappropriate because it is too large for a building of its size. Chairman Barker concurred with staff because he considered the additional verbiage as advertising. It was the unanimous consensus of the Commission that the appeal be denied. 'l', Y/ Planning Commission Minutes -10- February 26, 1997 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A PROPOSED SIGN PERMIT FOR UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM NO. 119, REGARDING SIGNS FOR OIL MAX, AN APPROVED PROJECT WITHIN THE FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE SHOPPING CENTER, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, EAST OF INTERSTATE 15, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 229-031-37. A. Recitals. 1. Oil Max 10 Minute Oil Change has filed an application for the approval of a Sign Permit within the Foothill Marketplace Shopping Center (Uniform Sign Program No. 119) as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Sign Permit request is referred to as the "application." 2. On January 7, 1997, City staff informed the applicant that the application would be denied by staff as presented, based on its inconsistencies with the approved Uniform Sign Program for the Foothill Marketplace Shopping Center and policies within the City Sign Ordinance. The application was officially denied by staff on January 13, 1997. 3. The decision represented by staff was timely appealed to the Planning Commission on January 15, 1997. 4. On February 26, 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga considered the item and upheld the decision of the .City Planner and denying the application by minute action. 5. The decision represented by said Planning Commission Resolution was timely appealed to this Council on March 3, 1997. 6. On April 2, 1997, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga considered the application. 7. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as-follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part "A," of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced April 2, 1997 meeting, including written staff reports and the minutes of the above-referenced Planning Commission meeting, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The application applies to property located south of Foothill Boulevard, east of Interstate 15, on property zoned Regional Related Commercial, and is currently under construction for an automotive service facility. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. CUP 95-33 - OIL MAX April 2, 1997 Page 2 (b) The property to the north of the subject site is a quick service restaurant with a drive-thru facility, the property to the south of that site consists of a parking lot for a major anchor tenant within the shopping center, the properties to the east and west are vacant. (c) The application contemplates the installation of three wall signs on the building currently under construction, two of which include the "10 Minute Oil Change" message following the "Oil Max" name. (d) All of the proposed signs under the application indicate the word "Oil" in yellow letters. (e) The applicable Uniform Sign Program for the application does not currently allow yellow letters for pad tenants within the shopping center; only red and white are permitted and other colors are restricted to a companies' corporate logo area. (f) The Sign Ordinance states, "Sign copy shall include minimal information only. The use of subordinate information such as telephone numbers, lists of products, pictures of products, etc., is discouraged. The name of the use or business shall be the dominant message on the sign." (g) Secondary signage, such as "Garden Center," has been allowed in the City for major tenants with a separate secondary entrance to the separate line of products or services involved. The application, with its "10 Minute Oil Change" request, does not exhibit the characteristics of businesses where secondary signage has been allowed in other situations. (h) The application as proposed includes two signs that exceed the maximum area requirement allowed under the applicable Uniform Sign Program for the project. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above- referenced public meeting, and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: (a) The design of the sign is not consistent with the intent and purpose of the Sign Ordinance; (b) The proposed application is not in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Sign Ordinance or the applicable Uniform Sign Program for the Foothill Marketplace Shopping Center. 4. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby denies the application. 5. This Council hereby provides notice to Oil Max 10 Minute Oil Change that the time within which judicial review of the decision represented by this Resolution must be sought is governed by the provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. 6. The City Clerk of the City of Rancho CUcamonga is hereby directed to: (a) certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and (b) forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, return-receipt requested, to Oil Max 10 Minute Oil Change at the address identified in City records. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 2, 1997 FROM: , SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION TO SUPPORT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE'S OPPOSITION TO AB 15 The Chamber of Commerce supports changing the overtime hours to a 40 hour work week. AB 15, authored by Knox, proposes to keep an 8 hour work day. Please see the attached fax from the Chamber of Commerce. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. DO/dja Attachment CEO's Corner (picture) William L. Holley Chief Executive Of~c~ California Overtime Law Reform Needed Califomia's oYedin~c laws are long overdue for refonn.'[he fac~s of ~,e matter ate very, straight forward. Fact i: California is one of only t..~ree states that require .~vertime to b~ paid based on an 8-hour work day, ra~er than a 40- hou~ workweek. Fact 2: This puts our State at a competitive disadvantage to forty-seven other states in terms of initiating alternative work schedules g~red to a business' production nee~ts and er::,.:loyee preferences. One example of the preceding: In a production sorting, s: ty a small print shop where job setup is required prior to beginning work and press cleanup is r~quirect before the end of the 't<gk '.lay, ~tis means ten periods of time are required during a five day workweek fbr setup and cleanup. T?~is could amounl r.o, say, 'L5 hours per week. Even if the shop owner a,qd the employees agreed thax it would be more efficient and des k,"able to fur2 on a workvv~k sche, dule based on four 10-hour days rather than five g-hour days, which would reduce weekly setups and cleanups by 2~4, and which would allow 78 more production hours per press per ye. ar, Cali fornia's current ~vertime la,,~'s make it too costly and cumbersome to do so. Another example: It prevents an employee from taking off tw<~ hours one day for fam, ily business, such as a parent-teacher conference, and making up that two hours by working tw.> hours extra the next day. Why? Under Califomia's current overtime laws, that two hours of makeup time must be paid at time-and-one-half because it exceeds an 8-hour day. Last yt:ar the Republican lead State Assembly passed a bill, authored by Fred Aguire, which would have put Califomia in step with the vast majority, of the nation, that is, basing overtime in Califomia on the 40-hour workweek rather than the 8- hour day. The Democraticall}' lead Senate killed. the bill. This year the Industrial Welfare Commission, with Governor Wilson's sn'ong support, is proposing to do by regulation what the Assembly attempted to do through legislation last yea:. However, this year the Assembly leadership is in the hanrds of the Democrats. The issue is breaking along party, lines. L~gis!afion has been introducexl, AB15-Knox, that will ur,do what tlae 1. W.C. is proposing to do and keep California on the 8-hour overtime standard. We can assume thax ABI5 will lik.-ly pass the Assembly and then pass the Senate. It will rest with Governor Wilson to either sign or veto the bill. If he vetoes the bill, t.he Legislature will not have the votes necessary to orerode ~e veto and the I.~,V.C. proposed action, if adoptt, d as prt~posec[, will go into effect. Our task, each and every one of us, as members of the business community is to let Governor Wilson know ,VOk~ if AB15 reaches his desk, thai we request and strongly urge his v,:..t o of t~his legislation as detrimental to the business climate in California. Write to Governor Pete Wilson, First Floor - ~;r, ate Capittfl, Sacramento, CA 95814. Or telephone the Governor a~ 916/445-2841. Or 'fax the Governor at 916/4454633. Or wr~te, phone ant! fax... it is that important. One more thing you can do is alert you friends and business associates across ~he State of this situation and get them to write, phone and fax, ~s welt. Don't put it off, do it today. Time could be very sh.>rt! T~,e Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce Board o:' Directors by unanimous action on March 12th su'ongly endorsed the I.W.C. proposed changes. We will do what we can... Flease do w}'at you can. We will keep you updated. ,,'s Bill /-" CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT ~,. DATE: April 2, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, ACP. City Manager FROM: Rick Gomez, Community Development Director SUBJECT: PD-85R- ASSESSMENT PROTEST PROCESS RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution setting the following: 1. Declaring its intention to levy and collect assessments with PD-85R for the fiscal year 1997/98 pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972. 2. Approving an Engineering Report in relation to PD-85R. 3. Approving ballot materials relating to the operation and maintenance portion of PD-85R. 4. Setting a time and place for a hearing and canvassing objections. BACKGROUND: PD-85R, includes Red Hill and Heritage Parks. PD-85 was formed July 1, 1985 by City Council action for the purpose of fi~nding construction and maintenance and operation costs of Red Hill Park' s 44 acres and Heritage Park' s 40 acres. PD-85 is self-supporting in that all of the ~mds collected are used to retire the bonds used to construct the parks and for all annual operational and maintenance expenses at these parks. The total annual cost of PD-85R is approximately $1.68 million dollars. This consists of two (2) elements; 1) approximately $680,000 for debt'services and; 2) approximately $1 million for operations and maintenance. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT PD-85R ASSESSMENT PROTEST PROCESS April 2.1997 Page #2 These assessment have been stable since 1993. Proposition 218 now requires the existing property owners to ratify the existing rates for maintenance through an election prior to July 1, 1997. The vote to ratify the existing maintenance portion of $31.00 of the total assessment amount of $52.00 per year per single family residence, will be before property owners on June 26, 1997. The approximate 25,000 property owners will be receiving a ballot in the mail with a detailed explanation of the ballot, the voting process, the dollar amounts involved, and the date to return the ballot. The majority of those ballots returned by property owners will determine if the annual operational funds can still be collected through the District to maintain these parks. The ballots will then be tabulated at the June 26, 1997 public hearing conducted by the City Council. In December 1996, the City Council conducted a workshop regarding Proposition 218 and its impacts to PD-85, Council directed staff to take the necessary steps to accomplish a property owner election before July, 1997. In reviewing the various altematives within this short time frame, it was decided that the property owner election be timed as late as possible prior to this date in order to have more time to prepare for this important election. The following schedule was adopted: City Council adopts resolution to take the following actions: Wednesday, April 2, 1997 · Declaring its intention levy and collect assessments with PD-85R for the fiscal year 1997/98 pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972. · Approving an Engineering Report in relation to PD-85R. · Approving ballot materials relating to the operation and maintenance portion of PD-85R. · Setting a time and place for a heating and canvassing objections. Last day for City Clerk to submit ballot materials to Elections Thursday, April 17, 1997 Consultants for printing and mailing preparation. Election Consultant delivers ballots to Post Office for Mailing Thursday, May 8, 1997 Last day for City Clerk to submit 10-day Public Heating Notice Wednesday, June 11, 1997 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT PD-8~R ASSESSMENT PROTEST PROCESS April 2.1997 Page ~3 City Council conducts 1972 Act Public Hearing Thursday, June 26, 1997 City Council conducts Public Hearing to Canvas Votes. Thursday, June 26, 1997 City Council adopts Resolution certifying the final vote. Thursday, June 26, 1997 City Council adopts Resolution authorizing the assessment, Thursday, June 26, 1997 if approved. Since the City Council direction to facilitate a property owners election, City staff has been and continues to meet with interested community/sports groups and users and civic leaders to explain the factual implications of Proposition 218 and its acute impact on PD85-R and the upcoming election process. A grass-roots committee, organized by activist Bob Dutton, intends to campaign for PD-85R and conduct a door-to-door campaign. The Chamber of Commerce has also supported the retention of PD-85. Attached for your review and approval are the following documents: 1. Engineers Report This report for the 1997/1998 fiscal year is prepared in compliance with the requirements of the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972, of the Streets and Highways Code Act. 2. Ballot Materials An informational pamphlet and Sample Ballot has been prepared to assist property owners understand the history of PD-85R, the characteristics of each park, the cost associated with PD-85R and the election process and date for future public hearings. The sample ballot describes the two (2) decisions the property owners has; either to vote for their continued support to pay their assessment; or to oppose the continued support to pay their assessment. The sample language does not contain a CPI escalator, to make it as simple as possible. Proposition 218 has also stipulated that each property owner vote is weighed by the amount of their assessment. Each ballot will be included in an envelope with an information pamphlet and pre-addressed and pre-paid first class envelope to encourage remm ballots as soon as possible. To ensure privacy of each vote, once the return envelop is received and recorded, the ballot will be removed and stored separately until counted. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT PD-g5'R ASSESSMENT PROTEST PROCESS April 2. 1997 Page #4 CONCLUSION; It is recommended that the City Council consider all the related material and adopt the attached Resolution implementing the assessment protest process. Res] lectfully submitted, Ricl Cor a'ntmity Development Director RG/js Attachments: Pamphlet Sample Ballot Sample Engineers Report Resolution Boundary Map Redhill and Heritage Communi j Pro-ks INFORMATION, NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND BALLOT ON PROPOSED CONTINUATION OF PARK MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DISTRICT PD-85-R, CONCERNING RED HILL AND HERITAGE PARKS This notice concerns the proposed continuation of PD- Cucamonga, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho 85-R (Park District-85), an annual assessment for the Cucamonga, CA 91730. In order for your ballot to be continued operation and maintenance services and included in this process, it must be delivered to the City recreational activities at Red Hill Community Park and Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga prior to the Heritage Community Park. The City of Rancho conclusion of the public testimony at the public Cucamonga is presenting you the decision whether to hearing. The hearing will begin at 7:00 p.m. on June continue the existing assessment within Park District- 26, 1997 in the City of Rancho Cucamonga Council 85 to continue providing these services. This proposal Chambers, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho does not ask you to approve an increase on any tax, fee, Cucamonga, California. or assessment. The City has a legal obligation to provide you this information, notice and ballot. PD 85-R, an area which includes your parcel, was formed on July 1, 1985. Upon formation of the District, assessments were established and levied to provide funds to develop and maintain the Red Hill Community Park and Heritage Community Park. Bonds were sold to provide development funds and the parks were then developed. The community invested $4,070,800.00 dollars in the development of Red Hill Community Park which was opened to the public on July 4, 1987. Approximately $3,263,975.00 dollars was invested to develop Heritage Community Park which opened on July 4, 1987. Prior to the formation of the assessments, the City Council received public input from the community at a noticed hearing, as well as engineering input, and concluded that the two large Red Hill Community Park community parks provided special benefits to and served the needs of the property within the area of the District through recreational opportunities and the A Public Hearing will be held on June 26, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. in the City of Raneho enhancement of property. values. The .parks' value to the area is referred to in the City's General Plan. Cueamonga Council Chambers, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Raneho Enclosed is a ballot by which you will be able to Cueamonga, California. Record owners of support or oppose the continuation of the assessment of parcels within District PD-85-R and all other your parcel for the continued operation and interested persons are encouraged to attend the maintenance of Red Hill and Heritage Community hearing and provide their input to City Council Parks. You may support or oppose the continuation of regarding the proposed continuation of the the assessment by checking the appropriate space to the maintenance and operation assessment for Red left of the sentence beginning with "Yes..." or "No..." Hill Community Park and Heritage Community on the ballot, signing the ballot and delivering the ballot to the City Clerk in person or by mail to the Park. -. following address: City Clerk, City of Rancho RED HILL COMMUNITY PARK Red Hill Community Park is located at the intersection of Vineyard Avenue and Baseline Road and contains 44 acres, which includes two baseball fields, two o softball fields, two soccer fields, an amphitheater, a lake, tot lots, walking paths, a physical fitness course, picnic areas, horseshoe pits, restroom facilities, and snackbars. In 1996, several recreational activities and social events were held. Some of these special events included: · A children's Easter egg hunt which involved 1,800-2,000 participants; · Art in the Park, a day of cultural arts, crafts, dancing, and music involving approximately 600 persons; · Concerts in the Park, offering a variety of music for 10,900 persons; · Picnic use, in which 428 picnic reservation applications were made, generating picnic use by 33,365 persons; and · Forty-four applications were processed for the Children at Red Hill Community Parlc use of the amphitheater and was utilized by 10,548 persons. Additionally, Red Hill Community Park is a facility for many sport organizations. The following statistics demonstrate the use of Red Hill Community Park by youth sport groups: S p ring/S u m rn · r S · a s';o.n P In y · rs T e a m s Ace Youth ~5ottball (521 53 R ancho Cucarnonga Softball 144 12 R ancho Cucamonga Spirits 83 7 Citrus Little Lea g ue 278 22 !A Ita Lo rn a Little Lea g ue 74 6 D e e r C a nyo n Little Lea g ue 75 6 A .Y .S .0 . 200 20 C .Y .S .A. 465 15 T o ta I I ,Iil31~ 141 F a II/W in re' r Si: · a s o n P lay · rs T · a m 8 A .Y .~5 .U . 2(50 C .Y .S .a . 450 30 R ancho Cucarnonga Softball 600 40 R ancho Cucamonga Spirits 324 27 Citrus Little Lea g ue 146 10 Alta Loma Little League 64 6 iD e e r C a nyo n Little Lea g ue 40 3 ~I o ta I 1,884 136 HERITAGE COMMUNITY PARK Heritage Community Park is located on Hillside Road betwe~ Carnelian Street and Hellman Avenue and contair~ 40 acres which include three baseball fields, t~o overlay soccer fields, equestrian facilities, walking paths, a physical fitness course, tot lots, basketball courts, restroom facilities, picnic areas and snackbars. During 1996, 12,692 person utilized the park's picnic facilities and 149 sport organizations, such as Little League and Pop Warner Football held sporting events involving a total of 2,264 players. Two hundred twenty-tbur picnic applications were processed, serving 1:2,692 persons. Additionally, sport groups regularly use Heritage Community Park for organized activities. Heritage Community Park's equestrian center. The tbllowing table demonstrates the use of Heritage Park by organized sport groups: Spring/Summer Season Players Teams Alta Loma Little League z~4/ 3/ D e e r C a nyo n Little Lea g ue 75 6 T o ta I 5ZZ 43 F a II/W in te r S e a s o n P lay e rs T e a m s A .Y .5 .U . ~b(J bU R .C.Pop WarnerFootball 427 10 Aztec T o urna m e nt 450 30 Alta Loma Little League 130 9 R a ncho C uca m o ng a P o ny 59 5 R ancho Cucamonga Indians 26 2 T o ta I 1,742 I O~ Heritage Community Park's equestrian center has served more than 4,195 persons. The following table outlines events and the number of attendees at the park during 1996: C lab S ho ws Attend e nce A Ira L o rn a H icl in g L; lu b zl. 4U(J Rising Stars of Equestrian Therapy 11 1,925 R a nc ho R e b e Is 4H 3 350 R anchoR ebels 4H (H orsera anship) 9 900 C itize ns P a tro I (T raining ) 2 1 O0 T o ta I Z9 3,675 N on-R esidentShows/Clubs Shows Attendence ~j a I-N e t 5 tate D ~s a b le cl R ~cl e rs 5 Do w 1 1 P into B re e d e rs & E xhib ito rs 3 600 Pacific CoastMiniHorse Shows 2 225 Inland Valley D ressage (Foxtrotter) 2 200 Pony W heelers of So.Ca. 1 225 I 0 ta I ~ /-,~)~ COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH RED HILL Rancho Cucamonga, California. Record owners of COMMUNITY PARK AND HERITAGE parcels within District PD-85-R and all other interested COMMUNITY PARK persons are encouraged to attend the hearing and :. provide their input to the City Council. The approval of the proposed continuation of the maintenance assessment will provide funds to continue BALLOT INFORMATION operating and maintaining the parks for the uses described earlier. The proposed total annual amount of Enclosed is a ballot by which you will be able to funds proposed to be charged to the District for the support or oppose the continuation of the assessment of continuation of services in both parks is One Million your parcel for the continued operation and Six Thousand Three Hundred Seventy dollars maintenance of Red Hill and Heritage Community ($1,006,370.00). The annual amount you will be Parks. If a majority of the amount of assessments charged is stated on the enclosed ballot. Developed shown on the ballots returned to the City Clerk are single family homes are charged Thirty-One dollars opposed to the continuation of the annual assessment, ($31.00). Developed multi-family parcels are charged the assessment will not be imposed. Ifa majority of the Thirty-One dollars ($31.00) per residential unit amount of assessments shown on the ballots returned to contained on each parcel, and other parcels are charged the City Clerk support the continuation of the annual based upon the size of the parcel. All assessments are assessment, the City Council will be authorized to levy based upon the special benefits the parks provide to the the assessments. As a result, the City will continue to property. These special benefits include recreational use the previously established source of funding to opportunities, enhancement of the physical provide recreational opportunities and services as environment, and support of property values. described earlier. Expense items included in the City budget for the You may support or oppose the continuation of the operation and maintenance of Red Hill and Heritage assessment by checking the appropriate space to the let~ Community Parks are as follows: utility expenses, of the sentence beginning with "Yes..." or "No..." on equipment, maintenance, emergency and regular the ballot, signing the ballot and delivering the ballot to vehicle rental, insurance costs, personnel costs, the City Clerk in person or by mail to the following including water costs and contract service costs for the address: City Clerk, City of Raneho Cucamonga, maintenance of facilities. Specific detailed information 10500 Civic Center Drive, Raneho Cueamonga, CA regarding the assessment formula and the maintenance 91730. and operation budget is contained in the Annual Engineer's Report, Fiscal Year 1997-98, City of In order for your ballot to be included in this process, Rancho Cucamonga Improvement District No. PD-85- it must be delivered to the City Clerk of the City of R prepared by NBS Government Finance Group. A Rancho Cucamonga prior to the conclusion of public copy of this report can be obtained at the Office of the testimony at the public hearing. The hearing will City Clerk, City of Rancho Cucamonga, 10500 Civic begin at 7:00 p.m. on March 26, 1997 in the City of Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, Califomia, between Rancho Cucamonga Council Chambers, 10500 Civic the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. The Thursday. Again, the amountproposed to be assessed City Council encourages your participation in this on your parcel for annual maintenance and operation of process. both community parks is not an increase, but is rather '~. a continuation of annual assessments previously levied for the purpose of maintaining and operating Red Hill and Heritage Community Parks. Should the majority of the annual assessments shown on the ballots returned to the City Clerk support the continued Should you have any questions, please assessment, the annual amount may be levied each contact Rick Gomez, Community year, but it cannot be increased without another Development Director at 477-2700, extension ballot process. 2298. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Please take notice that a public hearing on the proposed continuation of the maintenance and operation assessment for Red Hill Community Park and Heritage Community Park will occur at 7:00 p.m. on June 26, 1997, in the City of Rancho Cucamonga Council Chambers, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, OFFICIAL BALLOT for 2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PD-85-R (MAINTENANCE OF RED HILL 3 PARKAND HERITAGE PARK) ~ ~ REMEMBER: Your ballot will not be counted if it is not;5 Use a pencil, pen or other pointed object to push out hole in vo~ng square TO THE RIGHT of the 'YES' or 7 'NO'. After voting, place ballot in ID-Retum envelope and mail. 8 I Make sure circled cross $ is I 9 ~ completely remov~ 10 11 12 I suppo~ the continuation of an annual assessment of $ , forthecontinued 13 operation and maintenance of Red Hill CommuniW Pa~and Hed- 14 tage CommuniW Park. 15 I oppose the continuation 16 of an annual assessment 17 of $ , for the continued o and maintenance of Red Hill Communi~ 18 Park and Heritage Community Park. 19 20 21 22 23 24 (CASC ~ 2) ~ 25 26 The:.instructions for voting the ballot was not available at the time' the agenda packets were assembled. The information will be distributed to you prior to the Council meeting. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. PD-85 ANNUAL ENGINEER'S REPORT FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 April 2, 1997 Prepared by William J. O'Neil, City Engineer CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. PD-85 10500 civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Phone - (909) 477-2700 Fax - (909) 477-2849 CITY COUNCIL William J. Alexander, Mayor Diane Williams, Mayor Pro Tem Paul Biane, Councilmember James V. Curatalo, Councilmember Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember CITY STAFF Jack Lam, City Manager Rick Gomez, Community Development Director William J. O'Neil, City Engineer Ingrid Blair, G.I.S./Special Districts Supervisor CONSULTANT Pat Perinich, NBS Govemment Finance Group TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 ENGINEER'S LETTER 2 PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS BOUNDARIES OF IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. PD-85 .............................................. 2 - 1 HISTORY OF IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. PD-85 .................................................... 2 - 1 DESCRIPTION OF FACILITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. PD-85 .................... 2 - 2 BENEFIT PROVIDED BY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. PD-85 ................................... 2 - 2 3 ESTIMATE OF COSTS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. PD-85 BUDGET ..........................................................3 - 1 4 ASSESSMENTS METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT .................................................................................. 4 - 1 ASSESSMENT CATEGORY A ....................................................................................... 4 - 1 ASSESSMENT CATEGORY B ....................................................................................... 4 - 1 ASSESSMENT CATEGORY C ....................................................................................... 4 - 1 ASSIGNED EQUIVALENT UNITS ................................................................................. 4 - 2 TOTAL EQUIVALENT UNITS ....................................................................................... 4 - 2 ASSESSMENT PER EQUIVALENT UNIT ....................................................................... 4 - 2 ASSESSMENT RATE BY LAND USE CLASS ................................................................. 4 - 3 TOTAL ASSESSMENT BY LAND USE CLASS ............................................................... 4 - 3 5 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM 1 ENGINEER 'S LETTER WHEREAS, on January 15, 1997, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (the "City"), State of California, under the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (the "Act"), Initiated Proceedings for the Annual Levy of Assessments and Ordered the Preparation of an Engineer's Report for a Parks and Recreation Improvement District ("Improvement District No. PD-85"); WHEREAS, the City Council directed the City Engineer to prepare and file a report presenting plans and specifications describing the general nature, location and extent of the improvements to be maintained, an estimate of cost of the maintenance, operations and servicing of the improvements for Improvement District No. PD-85 for the referenced fiscal year, a diagram for Improvement District No. PDo85 showing the area and properties proposed to be assessed, and an assessment of the estimated costs of the maintenance, operations and servicing the improvements, assessing the net amount upon all assessable lots and/or parcels within Improvement District No. PD-85 in proportion to the special benefit received; NOW THEREFORE, the following assessment is made to cover the portion of the estimated cost of maintenance, operation and servicing of said improvements to be paid by the assessable real property within Improvement District No.-PD-85 in proportion to the special benefit received: SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENT (1) (2) (3) As As As Prelimmanly Confirmed Modified Approved and After Recorded Recordation Improvement District No. PD-85 Costs $2,042,893.00 Funds Available from Working Capital Fund (359,523.00) Balance to Assessment $1,683,370.00 Improvement District No. PD-85 Equivalent Units 32,372.5 Assessment Per Equivalent Unit $52.00 I, the undersigned, respectfully submit the enclosed Engineer's Report and, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, the Engineer's Report, the Assessments, and the Assessment Diagram herein have been computed in accordance with the order of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. William J. O'Neil, City Engineer /g/ 2 IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. PD-85 Boundaries of Improvement District No. PD-85 The boundaries of the improvement district encompass those properties and parcels where assessments are made to pay for the financing of capital facilities and annual maintenance costs. A general description of the boundaries of the district is as follows: · The extreme northerly City boundary. · The westerly City boundary. · The southerly City boundary. · The easterly City boundary from Fourth Street and Etiwanda Avenue to Hickory Avenue and Arrow Highway, thence, westerly on Arrow Highway to Etiwanda Avenue, thence northerly to Foothill Boulevard. thence westerly to Interstate 15, thence southwesterly along the west right-of-way of Interstate 15 to the Day Creek Channel, thence northerly to Foothill Boulevard, thence westerly to Haven Avenue, thence northerly to the Southern Pacific Transportation Company's railroad right-of-way, thence easterly + 2, 100 feet, thence northeasterly _+ 4,200 feet to a point on Highland Avenue + 3,500 feet easterly of Haven Avenue, thence easterly to the southeast comer of Section 25, T1N, R7W, San Bemardino Base Meridian, thence northerly along the easterly City boundary to the northerly City boundary. History of Improvement District No. PD-85. The significant events in the history of Improvement District No. PD-85 are as follows: · May 17, 1985 - Public Hearing for the formation of Improvement District No. PD-85. · July 1, 1985 - Final approval of the Engineer's Report with annual assessment rate set at $34.65. · January 4, 1986 - Ground breaking. · June 4, 1986 - Annual assessment rate decreased to $33.50. · June 3, 1987 - Annual assessment rate remained at $33.50. · March 18, 1988 - Notice of Completion filed. · June 4, 1988 - Annual assessment rate remained at $33.50. · July 4, 1988 - Grand Opening Ceremony at both parks. · May 17, 1989 - Annual assessment rate remained at $33.50. · June 20, 1990 - Annual assessment rate increased to $35.00. · June 6, 1991 - Public Hearing held for public comment on annual assessment rate increase to $52.00 to mitigate the General Fund subsidy and to bring the level of service back to former level of maintenance service. · June 17, 1992 - Annual assessment rate remained at $52.00. · June 16, 1993 - Annual assessment rate remained at $52.00. · May 2, 1994 - Refunding bonds issued to decrease annual debt service on bonds to $679,552.03. · June 1, 1994 - Annual assessment rate remained at $52.00. · May 3, 1995 - Annual assessment rate remained at $52.00. · May 15, 1996 - Annual assessment rate remained at $52.00. Description of Facilities for Improvement District No. PD-85 The facilities within Parks and Recreation Improvement District No. PD-85 of the City of Rancho Cucamonga which have been constructed and are operated, serviced. maintained and improved from the assessments are generally described as follows: · The construction of 40 acres of Heritage Community Park including, but not limited to, grading, planting, irrigation. onsite roads, sidewalks, parking lots, lighting, restrooms, equestrian facilities, playground equipment, picnic facilities, athletic facilities, and walking, jogging, and equestrian trails. · The construction of 44 acres of Red Hill Community Park including, but not limited to, grading, planting, irrigation, onsite roads, sidewalks, parking lots, lighting, waterscapes, restrooms, senior citizen facilities, playground equipment, picnic facilities, major lighted athletic facilities, jogging trail, underground storm drains system, and adjacent public street improvements. · The maintenance of Heritage Community Park including, but not limited to, lawn mowing and fertilizing, tree and shrub trimming, irrigation system maintenance, road, sidewalk and parking lot maintenance, maintenance and operation of lighting system, restroom cleaning, refuse pickup, and maintenance of equestrian facilities. playground equipment, picnic facilities and athletic facilities. · The maintenance of Red Hill Community Park including, but not limited to, lawn mowing and fertilizing, tree and shrub trimming, irrigation system maintenance, road, sidewalk and parking lot maintenance, maintenance and operation of lighting system, restroom cleaning, refuse pickup, and maintenance of senior citizen facilities, playground equipment, picnic facilities, athletic facilities, and water features. Benefit Provided by Improvement District No. PD-85 The method used for apportioning the assessment is based upon the relative special benefit derived by the properties in Improvement District No. PD-85 over and above general benefit conferred on the real property or to the public at large. Assessed parcels within Improvement District No. PD-85 receive special benefit from the maintenance and operation of the facilities. Particular and distract benefit includes enhanced recreation opportunities and expanded access to recreation facilities; graffiti removal; protection and preservation of landscaping, views and other facilities and resource values; and reduced cost of local government in law enforcement, public health care, and fire prevention. Maintenance and operation of expanded and improved facilities provides a healthy alternative for youth and adult activities while protecting the capital investments that have been made within the City of Rancho Cucamonga Parks and Recreation Improvement District No. PD-85. Improvement District No. PD-85 spreads the costs of maintenance and operation of the facilities to the assessed parcels based on the proportionate special benefit received. Section 4 of this Report provides the Method of Apportionment of the Assessment for Improvement District No. PD-85. 3 ,.' E S TIMA TE 0 F C 0 S TS The cost of servicing, maintaining, repainng and replacing the improvements as described in the Section I of this Report are summarized as follows. Improvement District No. PD-85 Budget PERSONNEL Regular Salaries $271,840.00 Part Time Salaries 7,600.00 Fringe Benefits 100.580.0Q Subtotal Personnel $380,020.00 OPERATIONS Maintenance and Operations $80,000.00 Maintenance and Operations - Facilities 20,000.00 Vehicle Maintenance 24,000.00 Equipment Maintenance 6,000.00 Emergency and Regular Vehicle Rental 2,000.00 General Liability 13,070.00 General Overhead 135,480.00 Contract Services 24,500.00 Contract Services - Facilities 15,000.00 Telephone Utilities 3,000.00 Water Utilities 100,000.00 Electric Utilities 96.000.00 Subtotal Operations 519,050.00 ASSESSMENT ADMINISTRATION Assessment Administration $124,270.00 Delinquent Assessments 101,003.00 Debt Service 677.000.00 Subtotal Assessment Administration 902,273.00 CAPITAL OUTLAY Building Improvement $5,000.00 Equipment 77,250.00 Vehicles - . 6.300.00 Subtotal Capital Outlay $88,550.00 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Tot Lot Rehabilitation (A.D.A. Compliance) $153.000.00 Subtotal Capital Improvement Projects $153.000.00 SUBTOTAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. PD-85 COST $2,042,893.00 FUNDS AVAILABLE FROM WORKING CAPITAL FUND (359.523.00) TOTAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. PD-85 COST $1.683.370.00 4" ASSESSMENTS The proposed assessment and the amount of the assessment for the Fiscal Year 1997/98 apportioned to each parcel as shown on the latest equalized roll at the County Assessor's office are listed and submitted as a Appendix A of the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Engineer's Report for Improvement District No. PD-85, Fiscal Year 1997/98. The description of each lot or parcel is part of the records of the County Assessor of the County of San Bernardino and such records are, by reference, made part of this Report. As land use changes occur, the assessment will be apportioned based on the use code assigned by the County Assessor of the County of San Bemardino. Method of Apportionment The method used for apportioning the assessment is based upon the relative special benefit derived by the assessed properties within Improvement District No. PDo85 over and above general benefit conferred on the real property or to the public at large, as described in Section 2 of this Report. Each parcel within a given Assessment Category and Land Use Class is deemed to benefit equally with all other parcels in such Assessment Category and Land Use Class and therefore, would bear its proportionate share of the costs. Assessment Categories are and Assessment Rate Calculations are as follows: Assessment Category A Assessment Category A is defined as all parcels containing existing residential dwelling umts and meeting the following conditions: LAND USE CLASS DESCRIPTION A - 1 Single Family Residential Use Parcels A - 2 Multi Family Residential Use Parcels Assessment Category B Assessment Category B is defined as all parcels not defined in Assessment Category A or Assessment Category C and meeting the following conditions: LAND USE CLASS DESCRIPTION B - 1 Less than 1.5 acres. B - 2 1.51 to 3.5 acres. B - 3 3.51 to 7.0 acres. B - 4 7.01 to 14.0 acres. B - 5 14.01 to 25.0 acres. B - 6 Greater than 25.0. Assessment Category C Assessment Category C is defined as all Non-Assessed Parcels including, but not limited to, the following: 1. All properties currently tax exempt. 2. All public owned property. 3. Railroad mainline rights-of-way. 4. Major utility transmission rights-of-way. 5. Mineral rights. 6. Parcels so small they currently cannot be built upon. Assigned Equivalent Units The following table provides the assigned Equivalent Units (E.U.) for various Land Use Classes which are assessed within Assessment Category A and Assessment Category B of Improvement District No. PD-85: LAND USE CLASS EQUIVALENT UNITS A - 1 1.0 E.U. Per Dwelling Unit A - 2 1.0 E.U. Per Dwelling Unit B - 1 0.5 E.U. Per Parcel B - 2 1.5 E.U. Per Parcel B - 3 3.5 E.U. Per Parcel B - 4 7.0 E.U. Per Parcel B - 5 14.0 E.U. Per Parcel B - 6 25.0 E.U. Per Parcel C 0.0 E.U. Per Parcel Total Equivalent Units Total Equivalent Units for Improvement District No. PD-85 is as follows: LAND USE CLASS NU1VIBER OF PARCELS ~ A- 1 22,703' 22,703 A - 2 * 266 5,819 B- 1 1,078 539 B - 2 420 630 B - 3 203 710.5 B -4 119 833 B - 5 42 588 B - 6 22 550 C 765 0 TOTALS: 25,618 32,372.5 · There are 266 Multi-Family Residential Parcels within Improvement District No. PD-85 containing 5,819 dwelling units. Assessment Per Equivalent Unit The assessment for each parcel or lot within Improvement District No. PD-85 is calculated by dividing the proposed assessment for Improvement District No. PD-85 by the total E.U. within Improvement District No. PD-85 to determine the amount to be assessed per E.U. The assessment per E.U. within Improvement District No. PD-85 is as follows: IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. PD-85 EQUIVALENT UNITS 32,372.5 TOTAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. PD-85 ASSESSMENT $1,683,370.00 IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. PD-85 ASSESSMENT PER EQUIVALENT UNIT $52.00 Assessment Rate by Land Use Class The following table shows the proposed assessment rates to be levied by Land Use Class for Improvement District No. PD-85 for Fiscal Year 1997/98: LAND USE CLASS ANNUAL RATE MONTHLY RATE A- 1 $52.00 $4.33 A - 2 $52.00 $4.33 B- 1 $26.00 $2.17 B - 2 $78.00 $6.50 B - 3 $182.00 $15.17 B - 4 $364.00 $30.33 B - 5 $728.00 $60.67 B - 6 $1,300.00 $108.33 C $0.00 $0.00 Total Assessment by Land Use Class The following table shows the proposed assessment total to be levied by Land Use Class for Improvement District No. PD-85 for Fiscal Year 1997/98: LAND USE CLASS NUMBER OF PARCELS I_O_T. AL[AL TOTAL ASSESSMENT A- 1 22,703 22,703 $1,180,556.00 A - 2 266 5,819 302,588.00 B- 1 1,078 539 28,028.00 B - 2 420 630 32,760.00 B - 3 203 710.5 36,946.00 B - 4 119 833 43,316.00 B - 5 42 588 30,576.00 B - 6 22 550 28,600.00 C 765 0 0.00 TOTALS: 25,618 32,3 72.5 $1,683,3 70.00 * There are 266 Multi-Family Residential Parcels withAn Improvement District No. PD-85 containing 5,819 dwelling umts. 5 'i ASSESSMENT DIA GRAM An Assessment Diagram for Improvement District PD-85 has been submitted to the City Clerk in the format required under the provision of the Act. Enclosed is a facsimile of said submittal. The lines and dimensions shown on maps of the County Assessor of the County of San Bernardino for the current year are incorporated by reference herein and made part of this Report. · "~,, .... -m ' 7" :': I e~V mm~mJ RESOLUTION NO. 97- . A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN PARK AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT PD-85R FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972; APPROVING AN ENGINEERING REPORT IN RELATION THERETO; APPROVING BALLOT MATERIALS RELATED TO THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PORTION OF SAID ASSESSMENT; AND OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING AND CANVASSING OBJECTIONS THERETO. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, and pursuant to the provisions of California Constitution Article XIII D, Section 4, does resolve as follows: SECTION 1. DescriptiOn of Work. The public interest and convenience require and it is the intention of this City Council to levy and collect assessments within Park and Recreation District PD-85R for the fiscal year 1997/98 for the maintenance and operation and debt service payment of Red Hill Community Park and Heritage Community Park thereon dedicated for common park purposes by deed or recorded subdivision tract map within the boundaries of said District. Said maintenance and operation includes the cost and supervision of landscape and other maintenance (including repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement providing for illumination of the subject area) in connection with said District. The assessment is not proposed to increase from fiscal year 1996/97. SECTION 2. LoCation of Work. The foregoing described work is to be located within the parks, roadway rights-of-way and easements enumerated in the report of the City Engineer on file in the City Clerk's Office, entitled City of Rancho Cucamonga Improvement District No. PD-85R, Annual Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 1997/98 ( Engineer's Report hereinafter). The City Engineer is designated as the engineer for the purposes of Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code in relation to PD-85R. SECTION 3. Description of AsseSsment District. The contemplated work, in the opinion of said City Council is of more than local or ordinary public benefit, and the City Council hereby proposes to make the expense of the work chargeable upon the District, which District is described as follows: Resolution No. 97-* * * Page 2 All that certain territory in the City of Rancho Cucamonga included within the exterior boundary lines shown upon that certain Map of Park and Improvement District (PD-85R), indicating by said boundary lines the extent of the territory included within the assessment district and which maps are on file in the Office of the City Clerk of said City. Reference is hereby made to said maps for further, full and more particular description of said assessment district, and the said maps so on file shall govern all details as to the extent of said assessment district. SECTION 4. Report of Engineer. This City Council hereby approves the Engineer's Report, which report indicates the amount of the proposed assessments, the district boundaries, and the method of assessment. The Engineer's Report is on file in the Office of the City Clerk of said City. Reference to said report is hereby made for all particulars for the amount and extent of the assessments and for the extent of the work. SECTION. 5. Assessment ProteSt ProCesS. This Council recognizes that the assessment protest process specified in California Constitution, Article XIII D, Section 4 applies to that portion of the proposed assessment to continue operation and maintenance of the subject parks. In that regard, attached hereto and marked Exhibit 1 are a ballot and related materials required to be provided to record owners of property within the subject District by California Constitution, Article XIII D, Section 4. Said ballot and materials hereby are approved as to form and content and the City Clerk and City staff are instructed to process said ballot and materials in accordance with the above-referenced provisions of the California Constitution. SECTION 6. Time and PlaCe of Hearing. Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing is hereby scheduled in the Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Council Chambers, 10500 Civic Center Drive, City of Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 on Thursday, June 16, 1997, at 7:00 p.m. Any and all persons may appear and show cause why said maintenance for the existing Improvements should not be done or carried out or why assessments should not be levied and collected for fiscal year 1997/98. Protests must be in accordance with the materials attached hereto and approved pursuant to Section 5 of this Resolution. SECTION 7. LandsCapinq and Liqhtinq Act of 1972. All the work herein proposed shall be done and carried through in pursuance of an act of the legislature of the State of California designated as the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. SECTION 8. Mailed Notice. Notice of the above-referenced hearing and proposed maintenance and operation portion of the assessment shall be mailed in the form approved in Section 4 above in accordance with the provisions of California Constitution, Article XIII D, Section 4. Resolution No. 97- * * * Page 3 SECTION 9. Publication of Resolution of Intention.' Published notice shall be made pursuant to Section 6061 of the Government Code. The Mayor shall sign this Resolution and the City Clerk shall attest to the same, and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published ten days before the date set for the hearing, at least once in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of April, 1997. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: William J. Alexander, Mayor ATTEST: Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 2nd day of April, 1997. Executed this 3rd day April, 1997, at Rancho Cucamonga, California. Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH RED HILL parcels within District PD-85-R and all other interested COMMUNITY PARK AND HERITAGE persons are encouraged to attend the hearing and COMMUNITY PARK provide their input to the City Council. The approval of the proposed continuation of the BALLOT INFORMATION maintenance assessment will provide funds to continue operating and maintaining the parks for the uses Enclosed is a ballot by which you will be able to described earlier. The proposed total annual mount of support or oppose the continuation of the assessment of funds proposed to be charged to the District for the your parcel for the continued operation and continuation of services in both parks is One Million maintenance of Red Hill and Heritage Community Six Thousand Three Hundred Seventy dollars Parks. If a majority of the mount of assessments ($1,006,370.00). The annual amount you will be shown on the ballots returned to the City Clerk are charged is stated on the enclosed ballot. Developed opposed to the continuation of the annual assessment, single family homes are charged Thirty-One dollars the assessment will not be imposed. Ifa majority of the ($31.00). Developed multi-family parcels are charged amount of assessments shown on the ballots returned to Thirty-One dollars ($31.00) per residential unit the City Clerk support the continuation of the annual contained on each parcel, and other parcels are charged assessment, the City Council will be authorized to levy based upon the size of the parcel. All assessments are the assessments. As a result, the City will continue to based upon the special benefits the parks provide to the use the previously established source of funding to property. These special benefits include recreational provide recreational opportunities and services as opportunities, enhancement of the physical described earlier. environment, and support of property values. TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS OF Expense items included in the City budget for the MAINTENANCE DISTRICT PD-85-R: operation and maintenance of Red Hill and Heritage Community Parks are as follows: utility expenses, The City ofhRancho Cucamonga will conduct a public equipment, maintenance, emergency and regular hearing and vote on the proposed continuation of park vehicle rental, insurance costs, personnel costs, maintenance assessment in the City of Rancho including water costs and contract service costs for the Cucamonga District PD-85-R, concerning Red Hill and maintenance of facilities. Specific detailed information Heritage Community Parks on Thursday, June 26, regarding the assessment formula and the maintenance 1997. and operation budget is contained in the Annual Engineer's Report, Fiscal Year 1997-98, City of The City Council has directed that this election be Rancho Cucamonga Improvement District No. PD-85- conducted by ALL-MAIL balloting. Voting by mail R prepared by NBS Government Finance Group. A has proven to generate a higher rate of participation and copy of this report can be obtained at the Office of the to save money. There will be no polling places. City Clerk, City of Rancho Cucamonga, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, between Please note that your ballot must be RECEIVED by the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through the City Clerk prior to the completion of the public Thursday. Again, the amount proposed to be assessed hearing on Thursday, June 26, 1997. A POSTMARK on your parcel for annual maintenance and operation of DATE IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. You must sign and both community parks is not an increase, but is rather use the enclosed Identification Envelope for mailing a continuation of annual assessments previously levied your ballot by First Class Mail (postage has been paid for the purpose of maintaining and operating Red Hill for you) or your ballot may be delivered BY YOU, and Heritage Community Parks. Should the majority THE VOTER, in the Identification Envelope to the of the annual assessments shown on the ballots City Clerk. Use the enclosed Business Reply returned to the City Clerk support the continued Identification Envelope to return you ballot. assessment, the annual amount may be levied each year, but it cannot be increased without another VOTING INSTRUCTIONS ballot process. Use a pencil, pen or other pointed object to push out NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING the circled cross O in the voting square TO THE RIGHT of the "YES" OR "NO." After voting, place Please take notice that a public hearing on the proposed ballot in ID-Remm Envelope, sign and mail. continuation of the maintenance and operation Community Park will occur at 7:00 p.m. on June 26, If you have any questions, please contact Rick 1997, in the City of Rancho Cucamonga Council Gomez, Community Development Director at Chambers, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, 477-2700, ext. 2298. Rancho Cucamonga, California. Record owners of OFFICIAL BALLOT for CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PD-S~R (MAINTENANCE OF RED HILL 3 PARK AND HERffAGE PARK) JUNE 26, 1997 4 REMEMBER: Your ballot will no! be counted if it is not 5 raceived by ~he City Cl~rk prior to the completion of the public hearing on June 26, 1997, 6 -VOlqNG INBTRUCTIONI- Use a pencil, pen or Other pointed object to push <:ut 7 hole in voting squire TO THE RIGHT of the 'YES' or 'NO'. After voting, place ballot in ID-Return envelope, ~8 ~ign and mill, I Mike sure cl;~le(I r, ror, i' Iil ! 9 c~mpietely rem~e~Ned 10 11 Yes, I support the continuation of nusl assessment of $ , for the con- 12 linued operation and maintenance of Red 13 Hill Community Park and Heri- tage Community Park. t ' 14 No, I oppose the continuation of 15 an annual assessment of 16 $ , forthe continued operation and maintenance of Red Hill Community Park 17 and Heritage Community Park. 21 23 24 (CAeCum) 25 26 CITY OF KANCHO CUC,~,IONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: April 2, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager SUBJECT: Y COUNCIL AGENDA An error was made on Item H.2. regarding CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION CALLING FOR ASSESSMENT PROTEST PROCESS. The Resolution number was incorrect and should read Resolution No. 97-042, not 97-04 1 as printed on the agenda. Sorry for any inconvenience this might have caused you. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 2, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Diane O'Neal, Management Analyst II SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 97-~ ~ RECOGNIZING AND ENDORSING THE "CALIFORNIA 1ST" CONGRESSIONAL LEADERSHIP SUMMIT ORGANIZED BY THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS (SCAG) RECOMMENDATION The City Council adopt Resolution No. 97 -~*~ e~ndorsing SCAG' s "California lst" Leadership Summit. BaCkground SCAG will be sponsoring its "California lst" State Legislative Leadership Summit on April 11, 1997 in Los Angeles. The purpose of the Summit is to bring together Southern California' s State Senators and Assembly members to discuss issues affecting our region and to stress the importance of unity and bipartisanship. The City Council did participate in last year's "California l st" Summit by passing Resolution 96-114 August 7, 1996 endorsing the same purposes of regional unity and bipartisanship. ,./"N,. Respectfull Sub ' , Management Analyst II Attachment: Resolution No. 97-*** RESOLUTION NO. 97-* *C~i ~ ~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOGNIZING AND ENDORSING THE LEGISLATIVE LEADERSHIP SUMMIT, "CALIFORNIA FIRST", ORGANIZED BY THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS (SCAG), TO FOSTER UNITY IN THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA DELEGATION ON ISSUES AFFECTING THE REGION WHEREAS, the Southem Califomia Association of Govemments (SCAG) is a Joint Powers Agency (JPA) established pursuant to Section 6502 et seq. of the California Government Code; and WHEREAS, SCAG is the designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the counties of Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura; and WHEREAS, SCAG's mission is to provide leadership, vision and progress which promote economic growth, personal well-being, and livable communities for Southern California; and WHEREAS, SCAG has invited every State Legislator from the SCAG region to attend a Legislative Leadership Summit, "California First", which will be held at the University of Southern California (USC) on April 11, 1997 to foster unity in the Southern California delegation on issues affecting the region; and THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that, we the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga recognize the significance of this event and endorse the "California First" Legislative Leadership Summit, which deserves the' participation, involvement, and support of all officials who have been elected to serve the citizens of Southern California; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that, we, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, encourage all of the Southern California State delegation members to attend this important event. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 16th day of April, 1997. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: William J. Alexander, Mayor CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: April 2, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Rick Gomez, Community Development Director SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION CALLING FOR ASSESSMENT PROTEST PROCESS Attached you will find a revised page 175 and page 176. Please replace these with the existing pages 175 and 176 in your agenda packets. ,,, j testimony portion of the public hearing on Thursday', _~ June 26. 1997. A POSTMARK DATE IS NOT " ACCEPTABLE. You must sign and use the enclosed Identification Envelope for mailing your ballot by First Class Mail (postage has been paid for you) or your ballot may be delivered BY YOU, THE VOTER, in the Identification Envelope to the City Clerk. Use the enclosed Business Reply Identification Envelope to ~ City of VOTING INSTRUCTIONS the circled cross e in the voting squ~e TO THE RIGHT of the "YES" OR "NO." After vot~g, place INFORMATION PAMPHLET If ~ou have any questions, please contact ~ck Gomez, Communi~ Development Director at 4??-2?00, ext. 2298. MAINTENANCE DISTRICT PD-85-R Redhill and Heritage Communi~ Parks PUBLIC HEARING THURSDAY, JUNE 26, 1997 Compilm:l and Prlplred Debra J, Adams, City Clerk and Rick Gomez, Community Development Director City of Rencho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Dr, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 909/477-2700 VOTE AND RETURN THE ENCLOSED OFFICIAL BALLOT BY MAIL OR iN PERSON TO THE CITY CLERK BY June 26, 1997 included in this process, it must be delivered to the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga prior to the conclusion of the public testimony at the public hearing. The hearing will begin at 7:00 p.m. on June 26, 1997 in the City of Rancho Cucamonga Council Chambers, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Heritage Community Park's equestrian center. COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH RED HILL COMMUNITY PARK AND HERITAGE COMMUNITY PARK The approval of the proposed continuation of the maintenance assessment will provide funds to continue operating and maintaining the parks for the uses Redrill!Community Park described earlier. The proposed total annual amount of . funds proposed to be charged to the District for the Public Hearing will be held on June 26, 1997 continuation of services in both parks is One Million at 7:00 p.m. in the City of Rancho Six Thousand Three Hundred Seventy dollars CucamongaCounci!Chambers, iocatedat ($1,006,370.00). The annual amount you will be 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho charged is stated on the enclosed ballot. Developed single family homes are charged Thirty-One dollars Cucamonga, California. Record owners of ($31.00). Developed multi-family parcels are charged parcels within District PD-85-R and all other Thirty-One dollars ($31.00) per residential unit interested persons are encouraged to attend the contained on each parcel, and other parcels are charged hearing and provide their input to City Council based upon the size of the parcel. All assessments are regarding the proposed continuation of the based upon the special benefits the parks provide to the maintenance and operation assessment for Red property. These special benefits include recreational Hill Community Park and Heritage Community opportunities, enhancement of the physical Park. environment, and support of property values. , Expense items included in the City budget for the RED HILL COMMUNITY PARK operation and maintenance of Red Hill and Heritage Red Hill Community Park is located at the intersection Community Parks are as follows: utility expenses, equipment, maintenance, emergency and regular of Vineyard Avenue and Baseline Road and contains vehicle rental, insurance costs, personnel costs, 44 acres, which includes two baseball fields, two including water costs and contract service costs for the softball fields, two soccer fields, an amphitheater, a maintenance of facilities. Specific detailed information lake, tot lots, walking paths, a physical fitness course, regarding the assessment formula and the maintenance picnic areas, horseshoe pits, restroom facilities, and and operation budget is contained in the Annual snackbars. In 1996, several recreational activities and Engineer's Report, Fiscal Year 1997-98, City of social events were held. Some of these special events Rancho Cucamonga Improvement District No. PD-85- included: R prepared by NBS Government Finance Group. A copy of this report can be obtained at the Office of the * A children's Easter egg hunt which involved City Clerk, City of Rancho Cucamonga, 10500 Civic 1,800-2,000 participants; Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California, between * Art in the Park, a day of cultural arts, crafLs, the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday. Again, the amount proposed to be assessed to sa~,e money. Fhere will be no polling places. Please note that your ballot must be RECEIVED by the City Clerk prior to the completion of the public hearing.on Thursday, June 26, 1997. A POSTMARK DATE IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. You must sign and ....... use the enclosed Identification Envelope for mailing your ballot by First Class Mail (postage has been paid ~ Of for you) or your ballot may be delivered BY YOU, C 'ty THE VOTER, in the Identification Envelope to the I City Clerk. Use the enclosed Business Reply VOTING INSTRUCTIONS Use a pencil, pen or other pointed object to push out ® INFORMATION RIGHT of the "YES" OR "NO." After voting, place PAMPHLET If you have any questions, please contact - Rick Gomez, Community Development MAINTENANCE DISTRICT PD-O5-R · Director at 477 27 0 exL 2298 Redhill and Heritage ' ' ' Community Parks . " PUBLIC HEARING THURSDAY, JUNE 26, 1997 Com0ilecl attO PrepareS Debra J. Adams, City Clerk and Rick Gomez, Community Development Director City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 909/477-2700 VOTE AND RETURN THE ENCLOSED OFFICIAL BALLOT BY MAIL OR iN PERSON TO THE CITY CLERK BY June 26, 1997 included in this process, it must be delivered to the Cit~' Clerk of tile City of Rancho Cucamonga prior to th~ conclusion of the public testimony at the public hearing. The hearing will begin at 7:00 p.m. on June 26, 1997 in the City of Rancho Cucamonga Council Chambers, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Heritage Community Park's equestrian center. COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH RED HILl, COMMUNITY PARK AND HERITAGF, '~ COMMUNITY PARK :~ The approval of the proposed continuation of the Red HillCommunity Park maintenance assessment will provide funds to continue operating and maintaining the parks for the uses described earlier. The proposed total annual mount of funds proposed to be charged to the District for the continuation of services in both parks is One Million Six Thousand Three Hundred Seventy dollars ($1,006,370.00). The annual mount you will be charged is stated on the enclosed ballot. Developed single family homes are charged Thirty-One dollars ($31.00). Developed multi-family parcels are charged Thirty-One dollars ($31.00) per residential unit contained on each parcel, and other parcels are charged based upon the size of the parcel. All assessments are based upon the special benefits the parks provide to the property. These special benefits include recreational opportunities, enhancement of the physical environment, and support of property values. RED HILL COMMUNITY PARK Expense items included in the City budget for the operation and maintenance of Red Hill and Heritage Red Hill Community Park is located at the intersection Community Parks are as follows: utility expenses, of Vineyard Avenue and Baseline Road and contains equipment, maintenance, emergency and regular 44 acres, which includes two baseball fields, two vehicle rental, insurance costs, personnel costs, softball fields, two soccer fields, an amphitheater, a including water costs and contract service costs for the lake, tot lots, walking paths, a physical fitness course, maintenance of facilities. Specific detailed information picnic areas, horseshoe pits, restroom facilities, and regarding the assessment formula and the maintenance snackbars. In 1996, several recreational activities and and operation budget is contained in the Annual social eventswereheld. Some ofthesespecialevents Engineer's Report, Fiscal Year 1997-98, City of included: Rancho Cucamonga Improvement District No. PD-85- R prepared by NBS Government Finance Group. A . A children's Easter egg hunt which involved copy of this report can be obtained at the Office of the 1,800-2,000 participants; City Clerk, City of Rancho Cucamonga, 10500 Civic . Art in the Park, a day of cultural arts, crafts, Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, Califomia, between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday. Again, the amount proposed to be assessed KEVIN E. MONSON A. TTORNEY AT LAW KEYIN E. NIONSON. ESQ. 17330 BROOKHL'RST STREET. SUITE 240 DOL'GL.~,S F. ROSE. J.D. Y, IARK R. NI.JkTTHEWS. ESQ. FOL'NT.~N VALLEY. CA 92708 TELEPHONE (7 14) 962-9897 FACSIMILE 17 14) 968-4039 February 25, 1997 BY FEDERAL EXPRESS AND FAX (909) 477-2847 Mr. Rick Gomez Community Development Director CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Re: OilMax 10 Minute Oil Change Dear Mr. Gomez: I represent OilMax 10 Minute Oil Change with regard to its appeal of a signage permit decision, currently on calendar for the hearing tomorrow (February 26, 1997) at 7:00 p.m. Three issues arose with regard to the signage proposed by OilMax: 1) OilMax proposed to use red and yellow colors in the signage (instead of just red as in the other approved signs), 2) OilMax proposed signage larger than 50 square feet, and 3) OilMax proposed using the name "OilMax 10 Minute Oil Change" (which Mr. Buller deemed to be des- criptive). OilMax is willing to comply with the limitations of color and size, i.e., OilMax will limit the signage to red lettering and to 50 square feet in size. OilMax requests a reversal of Mr. Buller's denial of OilMax's request to use its name in the signage. The name "OilMax 10 Minute Oil Change" is a legal and registered name of OilMax. The Sign Ordinance states 'in relevant part, "The name of the ... business shall be the dominant message on the sign." OilMax asks only to be able to use its name on the sign. In the highly competitive oil change industry, it is very important to establish and hold loyal customers who seek and recognize a specific prorider of automotive services. The use of OilMax's distinctive name is critical to the success of its business operation. Mr. Rick Gomez February 25, 1997 Page Two This exact issue, under very similar regulations, has arisen in connection with other new OilMax facilities. When this issue was reviewed for the signage at Carmel Moun- tain Ranch (an upscale shopping center in San Diego County), the use of "OilMax 10 Minute Oil Change" was approved. Enclosed is a copy of the letter approving the signage. Please accept this letter as a compromise of the three signage issues by approving the use of "OilMax 10 Minute Oil Change" at the Foothill Marketplace Shopping Center. If you have any questions with regard to this matter, please call me. Vi~y truly you iEVIN E. MONSON KEM/kkp cc: OilMax 10 Minute Oil Change Carmel Mountain Ranch April 19, 1993 Hal Tucker OilMax 9862 Adams Avenue · Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Dear Mr. Tucker: Thank you for your recent submittal of plans and elevations for a proposed OilMax facility at Carmel Mountain Plaza to the Carmel Mountain Ranch Business Community Association Master Ar.chitectura] Committee. The Committee met and reviewed the plans and elevations for the five bay garage on April 2, 1993. The architectural desiqn of the building with its clean lines and cornice treatment will complement other buildings in the center and blend in well with the overall architectural theme of Carmel Mountain Plaza. Plans and elevations are approved as submitted. The signage for OilMax has also been reviewed by the Committee and is approved on the condition that signage is in compliance with the PCD signage, program. (It is the Committee's understanding that signage will be internally illuminated.) We look forward to review..of final working drawings for Committee approval. Sincerely, CARMEL MOUNTAIN RANCH BUSINESS COMMUNITY' ASSOCIATION MASTER ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE Kathleen Riser Celia Lamendola cc: Walters Management 1,.,R:::)90 A',,enue of Science. Suite 201. San Diega CA 92128 (619)451-63CXD Fax (619) 487-7307 ~ .... CUCAMON~'~ .\ ~~ X"""'~/ C~AMBEI OF COMMERCE April 1, 1997 Industrial Welfare Commission P.O. Box 420603 San Francisco, CA 94142-0603 Attention: Robyn Black, Chairperson . Syed Alam Terry Arnold Charles H. Center 5ohn McCarthy R.e~rence: I.W.C. Overtime Reform Heating. April 4, 1997 . Los Angles, California Ladies and Gentlemen of the Commission: The Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Cornmere,.' is one oF the largest Chambers in Riverside and San Bemardino Counties, with membership at 850 bLminesses representing ov6r 10,000 employees. As the attached Resolution states, the Rancho C'~,camonga Chamber of Commerce is strongly supportive of reforming overtime regxtlations in C-Jifomia to allow our businesses to bc competitive with the 47 other states that now apply overtime regulations based on the 40 hour workweek and comply with the Federal guidelines found in the Fair Labor Standards Azt. The Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce b~lieves overtime reform is one vital element of fulfilling our State' s promise of fostering a busi?ess-frienztly environment designed to both attract new and retain existing businesses in California. We ask for your most favorable consideration o:; the proposed reform. Thank you. Sinc~rel~ . Holley Chief Executive Officer 8280 UTICA AVENUE, SUITE 160 · RANCHO C:JCAMONGA, CA 91730 · 909/987-1012 FAX 987-5917 Resolution 9703 12-1 A Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce supporting overtime reform in the State of California Whereas, the Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce is organized to promote the general welfare, development and prosperity of the Rancho Cucamonga business community, the Inland Empire and the State of California; and Whereas, current regulations in the State of California require overtime pay practices be based on the 8 hour workday rather than the 40 hour workweek; and Whereas, California is one of only three states in the nation to base overtime pay practices on the 8 hour workday rather than the 40 hour workweek; and Whereas, current California overtime regulations place California businesses at a competitive disadvantage to businesses in forty-seven other states in terms of instituting alternative work schedules tailored to production needs and employee preferences; and Whereas, current California overtime regulations dampens the economic business climate in California and is not reflective of the 'business-friendly-environment' rhetoric that is promulgated by the State to attract new businesses to California. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce that: The Chamber is fully supportive of and endorses the regulatory reform proposed by the Industrial Welfare Commission that changes overtime regulations in California to be based on the 40 hour work week and brings California in step with the majority of States in the nation and is fully consistent with the Federal guidelines found within the Fair Labor Standards Act. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, MARCH 12, 1997. //' · 9 , · Willi Holley ~.R 0/Secretary o the oard Resolution 9703 12-2 A Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce supporting PD-85, the funding mechanism for Red Hill Community Park and Heritage Community Park Whereas, the Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce is organized to promote the general welfare, development and prosperity of the Rancho Cucamonga business community, the Inland Empire and the State of Califomia; and ' Whereas, in 1985 the Chamber joined with the City in supporting the creation of PD-85 to build and maintain Red Hill and Heritage Community Parks; and Whereas, since the completion of these two parks in 1987, they have served hundreds of thousand of users annually and are a valuable asset to our community' s reputation as a first class community; and Whereas, the voters in Califomia in November of 1996 passed Proposition 218 which requires that PD-85 be ratified by a majority of the property owners within the district in order to continue the collection of the maintenance assessment for these two parks. NOW, THEEFOE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce that: The Chamber continues its support for Red Hill and Heritage Community Parks and it' s operational assessment vehicle, PD-85, as assets to the community and encourages the residential, commercial, and industrial property owners within the district to join with the Chamber in its support in the upcoming property owner election. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, MARCH 12, 1997. .7' Edward E Swistock, President \ ~ Wi . 11 Holley /Secretary of e Board