Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2004/07/07 - Agenda Packet
JFHE {2~T¥ ©P ~ANCH© ~UCAM©NGA 10500 Civ c Center Dr ve ~- Rancho Cucamonga, CA 9t730-380t AGENDAS J~JL¥ 7~ 2@@4 AGENCY~ ]~OARD & CITY COUNCIL IM[EMIIERS William J. Alexander .................... Mayor Diane Williams ............... Mayor Pro Tern Rex Gufierrez ............................ Member Robert J. Howdyshell ............... Member Donald J. Kurth, M.D ................ Member Jack Lam ......................... City Manager James L. Markman ............. City Attorney Debra J. Adams ..................... City Clerk ORDER OF ~US~NESS 5:30 p.m. Closed Session .................... Tapia Conference Room 7:00 p.m. Regular Redevelopment Agency Meeting... Council Chambers Regular Fire Protection District Meeting ... Counc# Chambers Regular City Council Meeting ............. Council Chambers INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC ,..,~CHO TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL The City Council encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the Agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the City Council on any agenda item. Please sign in on the clipboard located atthe desk behind the staff table. It is important to list your name, address and phone number. Comments am generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Communications". Them is opportunity to speak under this section at the beginning and the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the City Council should be given to the City Clerk for distribution. To address the City Council, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. All items to be placed on a City Council Agenda must be in writing. The deadline for submitting these items is 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, one week prior to the meeting. The City Clerk's office receives all such items. AGENDA BACK-UP MATERIALS Staff reports and back-up materials for agenda items are available for review at the City Clerk's counter and the Public Library. A complete copy of the agenda is also available at the sign in desk located behind the staff table during the Council meeting. LIVE BROADCAST Council meetings are broadcast live on Channel 3 for those with cable television access. Meetings are rebroadcast on the second and fourth Wednesdays of each month at 11:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. The City has added the option for customers without cable access to view the meetings "on-demand" from their computers. The added feature of "Streaming Video On Demand" is available on the City's website at www.ci.rancho- cucamonga.ca.us/whatsnew.htm for those with Hi-bandwidth (DSL/Cable Modem) or Low-bandwidth (Dial-up) Internet service. The City Council meets regularly on the first and third Wednesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers Located at 10500 Civic Center Drive. Members of the City Council also sit as the Redevelopment Agency and the Fire District Board. Copies of City Council agendas and minutes can be found at http:llwww, ci. rancho-cucamonga, ca. us If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's office at (909) 477-2700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA JULY 7, 2004 - 7:00 P.M. THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY 1 {.~RANcHO HALL, 10500 Civic CENTER DRIVE UCAMONGA [ A. CALL TO ORDER 1. Roll Call: Alexander__, Gutierrez__, Howdyshell_, Kurth__, and Williams__. B. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS l 1. Presentation of a Proclamation to Sunrise Life Development for their contributions to the community by operating the job center at no cost to the City. [ C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS 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. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS I This is the time and place for reports to be made by members of the City Council on matters not on the agenda. l[ E. CONSENT CALENDAR I 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 Minutes: May 27, 2004 May 27, 2004 (Special Study Session) June 2, 2004 June 3, 2004 (Specia! Study Session - Gutierrez absent) June 14, 2004 (Special Meeting) 2. Approval of Warrants, Register June 8 through June 29, 2004, and Payroll ending June 29, 2004, for the total amount of $5,919,646.16. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA JULY 7, 2004 - 7:00 P.M. THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS~ CITY 2 ~.~,RANCHO HALL, 10500 C~WC CENTER DRIVE UCAMONGA 3. Approval for the acceptance of the Additive Alternate Bid for the 37 Central Park Community Center kitchen equipment with Douglas E. Barnhart, Inc., in the amount of $55,000. 4. Approval of a Resolution supporting the Local Government Budget 39 Package as negotiated between Governor Schwarzenegger and cities, counties, and special districts. RESOLUTION NO. 04-213 41 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BUDGET PACKAGE AS NEGOTIATED BETWEEN GOVERNOR SCHWARZENEGGER AND CITIES, COUNTIES, AND SPECIAL DISTRICTS 5. Approval of IBM hardware and software maintenance agreements 43 with IBM for fiscal year 2004/2005 in the amount of $56,403 from Acct. No. 1001-209-5300. 6. Approval for the purchase of two (2) Ford F-250 Heavy Duty Super 54 Cab trucks with utility body and one (1) Ford F-350 DRW Super Duty stake bed truck for Engineering Department, Parks and Facilities Divisions, at Central Park, from Sunrise Ford of Fontana, in the amount of $79,406.12 and an appropriation of $79,406.12 from the Park Development Fund balance into Fund 1120-305-5604. 7. Approval of Improvement Agreement, Improvement Security, 58 Drainage Acceptance Agreement and Maintenance Agreement for Installation of the Orphan Flow Drainage System for Tentative Tract 14759, located at Wardman Bullock Road and the future Wilson Avenue, submitted by Pulte Homes. RESOLUTION NO. 04-214 61 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT SECURITY, DRAINAGE ACCEPTANCE AGREEMENT AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 14759 8. Approval of Map, Improvement Agreement, Improvement Security, 62 Ordering the Annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 3B and Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 1 and 3 for Parcel Map No. 15716-2 located on the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Day Creek Boulevard, submitted by Victoria Gardens, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA JULY 7, 2004 - 7:00 P.M. THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY {~,RANcHO HALL, 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE UCAMONGA RESOLUTION NO. 04-215 65 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 15716-2 AND IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT RESOLUTION NO. 04-216 66 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 3 FOR PARCEL MAP NUMBER 15716-2 9. Approval to utilize Associated Engineers, Inc. and Aufbau Corporation 73 to provide contract inspection services for fiscal year 2004/2005, to be funded from the following accounts: 1001-305-5300 - Development Management Contract Inspection, $37,500.00; 1001-305-5306 - Development Management Contract Services/CFD, $100,000.00; 1001-307-5300 - Project Management General Contract Services, $37,500.00; 1001-307-5306 - Project Management General Contract Services/CFD, $100,000.00; and 1170-303-5300 - Administration Gas Tax/Contract Services, $65,000.00. 10. Approval to utilize Dan Guerra and Associates, Aufbau Corporation and Architerra Design Group to provide development plan checking 75 services for fiscal year 2004/2005, to be funded from the following accounts: 1001-305-5300 - Development Management Contract Services, $520,000.00; 1001-305-5303 - Development Management Contract Services Reimbursable, $100,000.00; and 1110-316-5300 - Beautification Plan Check Services, $86,640.00. 11. Approval of Map for Parcel Map 16480, located at the northwest 78 corner of Spruce Street and Foothill Boulevard, submitted by Western Land Properties. RESOLUTION NO. 04-217 80 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CiTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 16480 12. Approval of a Master Plan Transportation Facility Reimbursement 81 Agreement, SRA-30, (CO 04-074) in conjunction with the development of Tract 14380, located at the northwest corner of Wilson and Etiwanda Avenues, submitted by Mastercraft Homes. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA JULY 7, 2004 - 7:00 P.M. THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS~ CITY 4 ~RANcHO HALL, 10500 Civic CENTER DRIVE UCAMONGA RESOLUTION NO. 04-218 84 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MASTER PLAN TRANSPORTATION FACILITY REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT FOR ONE TRAVEL LANE AND MEDIAN CURBS IN WILSON AVENUE, BETWEEN ETIWANDA AVENUE AND CERVANTES PLACE, SRA-30 13. Approval of a Resolution of the City Council authorizing 85 Transportation Enhancements (TEA-3) grant application for funding of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail project. RESOLUTION NO. 04-219 86 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES (TEA) PROGRAM FUNDING FOR THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC INLAND EMPIRE TRAIL PROJECT 14. Approval and authorize the execution of a sole source Professional 87 Services Agreement in the amount of $290,000.00 to Applied Metering Technology, Inc., (CO 04-075) for installation, configuration and meter testing services within the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility service area, to be funded from Acct. No. 17053035309. 15. Approval to accept the bids received and award and authorize the 92 execution of the contract in the amount of $413,474.00 to the apparent Iow bidder1 American Asphalt South, Inc., (CO 04-076) and authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $41,347.40 for the 2004/2005 Local Street Pavement Rehabilitation - Slurry Seal of Various Streets, to be funded from Gas Tax funds, Acct. No. 11703035650/1022170-0 and appropriate an additional amount of $60,000.00 from Measure "1" fund balance to Acct. No. 11763035650/1022176-0. 16. Approval to accept the bids received and award and authorize the 96 execution of the contract in the amount of $294,889.00 to the apparent Iow bidder, Belaire-West Landscape, Inc., (CO 04-077) and authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $29,488.90 for the Rochester Avenue, north of Highland Avenue and Haven Avenue, north of 19th Street Landscaping project, to be funded from Beautification funds, Acct. No. 11103165650/1339110-0 and appropriate $324,377.90 (contract award of $294,889.00 plus 10% contingency in the amount of $29,488.90) to Acct. No. 11103165650/1339110-0 from Beautification fund balance. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA JULY 7, 2004 - 7:00 P.M. THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY (.~,[~NCHO HALL, 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE UGAMONC~ 17. Approval to award and authorize the execution of a contract in the 100 amount of $29,000 to Bluecrane, Inc. of Redondo Beach, California, (CO 04-078) and authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $2,900 for consulting services for the purpose of the completion of a hazard mitigation plan and authorize an appropriation in the amount of $31,900 ($29,000 plus a 10% contingency of $2,900) into Acct. No. 1025001-5300 to fund the contract. 18. Approval to award and continue a Professional Services Agreement in an annual amount not to exceed $85,000 for the period of July 1,2004 102 through June 30, 2005, to Huls Environmental, LLC, (CO 04-079) with an option to renew for additional one year periods, upon review and confirmation of pricing and mutual consent, up to a total of three years, to be funded from Acct. No. 1001-313-5300. 19. Approval to accept the bids received and award and authorize the execution of the contract in the amount of $592,000.00 to the '104 apparent Iow bidder, Sully-Miller Contracting Company, (CO 04-080) and authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $59,200.00 for the 6th Street Storm Drain, Railroad Crossing Improvements and Pavement Rehabilitation from Archibald Avenue to 380' west of Hermosa Avenue, to be funded from Transportation funds, Acct. No. 11243035650/1081124-0. 20. Approval to release Maintenance Guarantee Bond for Parcel Map 112 15349, located on the northeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Church Street, submitted by LDC Cougar, LLC (aka Lewis Communities). 21. Approval to accept improvements, release the Faithful Performance 114 Bond, and file a Notice of Completion for improvements for PM 15970, located at the northeast corner of Hermosa Avenue and Victoria Street, submitted by HMC Professional Services, LLC. RESOLUTION NO. 04-220 116 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC iMPROVEMENTS FOR PARCEL MAP 15970 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK 22. Approval to release the Maintenance Guarantee Bond for Tract 119 14120, located on the south side of Vintage Drive, west of Etiwanda Avenue, submitted by Carriage Estates, LLC. 23. Approval to accept improvements, release the Faithful Performance Bond, accept a Maintenance Bond, and file a Notice of Completion '12'1 or improvements for Tract 14493-1, located on the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Banyan Street, submitted by Young California Cucamonga, L.P. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA JULY 7, 2004 - 7:00 P.M. THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY (~?~¢~.NCHO HALL, '10500 Civic CENTER DRIVE UGAMONC~ RESOLUTION NO. 04-221 123 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT 14493-1 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK 24. Approval to accept improvements, release the Faithful Pe~ormance 124 Bond, accept a Maintenance Bond, and file a Notice of Completion for improvements for Tract 15783, located on the west side of Carnelian Street at Vivero Street, submitted by G & D Construction, Inc. RESOLUTION NO. 04-222 126 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT 15783 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK 25. Approval to release the Maintenance Guarantee Bond for Tract 15947, located at the southwest corner of Base Line Road and 127 Etiwanda Avenue, submitted by WL Homes, LLC, dba John Laing Homes. 26. Approval to release the Maintenance Guarantee Bond for Tract 129 16001, located in the Terra Vista Planned Community, bounded by Church Street, Elm Avenue and Spruce Avenue, submitted by LDC Cougar, LLC (aka Lewis Communities). 27. Approval to release Maintenance Guarantee Bond No. 8492620M in 13'1 the amount of $53,638.06 for the Foothill Boulevard Storm Drain improvements from Etiwanda Avenue to 1600' easterly, Contract No. 02-133. 28. Approval of Tract Map 16179 and Monumentation cash deposit, 133 located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue, submitted by Burnett Development Corporation. RESOLUTION NO. 04-223 135 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TRACT MAP 16179 AND MONUMENTATION CASH DEPOSIT CITY COUNCIL AGENDA JULY 7, 2004 - 7:00 P.M. THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS~ CITY 7 {,~RANcHO HALL, 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE UOAMONG^ F. CONSENT ORDINANCESI The following Ordinances have had public hearings at the time of first reading. Second readings are expected to be routine and non- controversial. The Council will act upon them at one time without discussion. The City Clerk will read the title. Any item can be removed for discussion. 1. CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DRC2002-00156 - RICHLAND PINEHURST, INC. - A proposed Development Agreement to address specific conditions of development and annexation for 150.8 acres of land located on the north side of Wilson Avenue between Etiwanda Avenue and East Avenue - APN: 0225-083-01, 12, 13, 15, 16 and 20. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map SUB~1-16072, Annexation DRC2002-00865, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2002- 00461. ORDINANCE NO. 725 (second reading) 136 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DRC2002-00156, A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND RICHLAND-PINEHURST, INC., FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING AN APPROXIMATE 150.8 ACRE SITE WITH UP TO 358 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, FOR PROPERTIES GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF WILSON AVENUE BETWEEN ETIWANDA AVENUE AND EAST AVENUE-APN: 0225-083-01, 12, 13, 15, 16, AND 20 2. CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2003- 00750 - HENDERSON CREEK PROPERTIES, LLC - A proposed Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment from Very Low Residential (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) to Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) for 63.5 acres of land and the proposed modification of the circulation system in the Etiwanda Highlands Neighborhood of the Specific Plan -APN: 0225-084-04, 0226-081-09 and 10, and 0226- 082-29. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA JULY 7, 2004 - 7:00 P.M. THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS~ CITY 8 (~,RANcHO HALL, 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE ORDINANCE NO. 726 (second reading) 201 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2003-00750, TO CHANGE THE DISTRICT DESIGNATION FROM VERY LOW RESIDENTIAL (.1-2 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO LOW RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR 63.5 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT THE NORTHERLY END OF WARDMAN BULLOCK ROAD AT THE INTERSECTION OF COLONBERO ROAD; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0225-084-04, 0226-081-09 AND 10, 0226-082-29 3. CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DRC2003-00751 - HENDERSON CREEK PROPERTIES1 LLC - A proposed Development Agreement to address specific conditions of development and annexation for 63.5 acres of land, located at the northerly end of Wardman Bullock Road within the Etiwanda North Specific Plan - APN: 0225-084-04, 0226-081-09 and 10, and 0226-082-29. ORDINANCE NO. 727 (second reading) 217 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DRC2003-00751, A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND HENDERSON CREEK PROPERTIES, LLC, FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING AN APPROXIMATE 65.3 ACRE SITE WITH UP TO 123 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, FOR PROPERTIES GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHERLY END OF WARDMAN BULLOCK ROAD AT THE INTERSECTION OF COLONBERO ROAD - APN: 0225-084-04, 0226-081-09 AND 10, AND 0226-082-29 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA JULY 7, 2004 - 7:00 P.M. THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY 9 (,~CHO HALL, 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE UCAMONC~ 4. CONSIDERATION OF ASSESSMENT AND ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2003-01163 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A proposal to change the Etiwanda North Specific Plan land use designation from Very Low Residential (.1-2 dwelling units/acre) to Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units/acre) for approximately 80 acres and from Very Iow Residential (.1-2 dwelling units/acre) to Flood Control/Resource Conservation for approximately 45 acres of land, generally located north of Wilson Avenue between East Ave. and Wardman Bullock Rd. -APN: 0225- 084-08 (portion) and 09 and 0226-082-05, 06, 07, 08, 11, 12, and 13. The entire project area of approximately 300 acres is also referred to as the Etiwanda Creek Annexation. Related Files: Annexation DRC2003-01164, General Plan Amendment DRC2003- 01162, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT14749, and Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16324. ORDINANCE NO. 728 (second reading) 257 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CiTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2003-01163, A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE LAND DESIGNATION FROM VERY LOW RESIDENTIAL (.1-2 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO LOW RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR APPROXIMATELY 80 ACRES AND FROM VERY LOW RESIDENTIAL (.1-2 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO FLOOD CONTROL/RESOURCE CONSERVATION FOR APPROXIMATELY 45 ACRES OF LAND, GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF WILSON AVENUE BETWEEN EAST AVENUE AND WARDMAN BULLOCK ROAD; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0225-084-08 (PORTION) AND 09 AND 0226- 081-05, 06, 07, 08, 11, 12AND 13 Il G. 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 APPEAL OF HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW 265 DRC2003-00961 - LYNNE AND RENEE MASSEY - The appeal of the Planning Commission decision to approve a single-family residence in the Low Residential District, located at 8045 Camino Predera, Lot 12 of Tract 10035, as proposed by Mike and Wendy Stachowiak ? APN: 0207-631-02. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA JULY 7, 2004 - 7:00 P.M. THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY 10 (,~[~CHO HALL, 10500 Civic CENTER DRIVE UCAMONGA RESOLUTION NO. 04-224 300 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE ACTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND APPROVING HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00961, A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 3,628 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE-FAMILY HOME ON LOT 12 OF TRACT 10035 IN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED AT 8045 CAMINO PREDERA; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0207-63%02. H. PUBLIC HEARINGS ] The following items have no legal publication or posting requirements. The Chair will open the meeting to receive public testimony. No Items Submitted. I. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS 1 The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Chair may open the meeting for public input. 1. PRESENTATION ON CODE ENFORCEMENTS FIRST GRANT FUNDED NEIGHBORHOOD CLEAN-UP DAY - (Oral) J. 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 THE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AND CITY COUNCIL COMMUNITY SERVICES SUBCOMMITTEE'S 314 RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE ONE NEW APPOINTMENT TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2. LEGISLATIVE UPDATE - (Oral) CITY COUNCIL AGENDA JULY 7, 2004 - 7:00 P.M. THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY 1 1 (~,[~NCHO HALL, 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE UCA~ONGA K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR THE 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. II L, PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS 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 Council may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual. 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 July 1, 2004, seventy two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. May 27, 2004 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Special Meetin.q A. CALLTO ORD£R A special meetin§ of the Rancho ,Cucamonga City Council was held on Thursday, May 27, 2004~ in the Tapia Room of the Civic Center, located at '10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. The meeting was called to order at 3:30 p.m. Present were Councilmembers: Rex Gutierrez, Robert .J. Howdyshell, Dr. Donald J. Kurth, Diane Williams and Mayor William J. Alexander. Also present were: Pamela Easter, Deputy City Manager; Linda D. Daniels, Redevelopment Agency Director; Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director~ Bill Pallotto, Recreation Supervisor; and Jennifer Hunt~ Special Events. B. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC No communication was made from the public. C. ITEM OF BUSINESS C1. TOUR CONSTRUCTION SITES OF THE VICTORIA GARDENS SHOPPING CENTER AND CENTRAL PARK After leaving the Civic Center complex at 3:40 p.m., staff provided a tour of the construction sites of the Victoria Gardens Shopping Center and Central Park. ADJOURNMENT The tour concluded at 5:15 p.m. Sincerely, Debra J. Adams, CMC City Clerk Approved: * May 27, 2004 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL, REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT MINUTES Special Study Session A. CALL TO ORDER A special study session of the Rancho Cucamonga City Council, Redevelopment Agency and Fire Protection District was held on Thursday, May 27, 2004, in the Council Chambers of the Civic Center, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. The meeting was called to order at 6:10 p.m. by Mayor/Chairman/President William J. Alexander Present were Councilmembers/Agencymembers/Boardmembers: Rex Gutierrez, Robert J. Howdyshell, Dr. Donald J. Kurth, Diane Williams (arrived at 6:12 p.m.) and Mayor/Chairman/President William J. Alexander. Also present were: Jack Lam, City Manager/Executive Director; Pamela Easter, Deputy City Manager; Linda D. Daniels, Redevelopment Agency Director; Mike Nelson, Sr. RDA Analyst; Jim Frost, City Treasurer; Larry Temple, Administrative Services Director; Tamara Layne, Finance Officer; Rose Colum, Budget Analyst; Charles Scott, Sr. Information Systems Specialist; Brad Bullet, City Planner; Joe O'Neil, City Engineer; Trang Huynh, Building Official; Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director; Dave Moore, Recreation Superintendent; Francie Palmer, Marketing Manager; Deborah Clark, Library Director; Vivian Garcia, Sr. Administrative Secretary; Captain Pete Ortiz, Rancho Cucamonga Police Department; Fire Chief Peter Bryan, Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District; Michelle Dawson, Management Analyst Ill; Kimberly Thomas, Management Analyst II; and Debra J. Adams, City Clerk. B. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC No communication was made from the public. Jack Lam, City Manager/Executive Director, commented that the Council had gone on a tour of the Victoria Gardens Shopping Center and the Central Park construction sites just prior to this meeting in order to view the progress made. C. ITEM(S) OF BUSINESS Cl. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED BUDGETS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004/2005 Jack Lam, City Manager/Executive Director, presented a staff report and gave a power point presentation (which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk). Councilmember/Agencymember/Boardmember Gutierrez asked if the hotel tax revenue was figured into the budget. Jack Lam, City Manager/Executive Director, stated the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) projections are figured in the budget. He added there are four hotels proposed for next year that will hopefully be in operation, which will help the City in the future. Mayor/Chairman/President Alexander opened the meeting for public input. Addressing the City Council were: City Council/Redevelopment Agency, Fire Protection District Minutes May 27, 2004 Page :2 Charles Hill, 9771 Devon, asked to address the Council about his improvement project on Devon. MayodChairman/President Alexander asked City Engineer Joe O'Neil if this project was in the budget. Joe O'Neil, City Engineer, stated yes. Mr. Hill continued to inform the Council about the flooding problems he has had in his area and how it has affected his home. He stated every year it is in the budget, and then gets taken out. He stated there will be litigation if this is not taken care of this year. He asked if there will be another budget meeting. MayodChairman/President Alexander stated there will be another study session on Thursday, June 3 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. John Lyons, Etiwanda, commented that the utility tax was zeroed out and felt it should be brought back. He commented on the need for public safety. He also indicated it is a problem finding available space in hospitals. He felt public safety service should be increased and should be done through the utility tax coming back. Frank Ayala, Devon Street, also commented on the flooding problems that have occurred on his street. He thanked the Council for leaving this in the budget. Michelle Mills, Devon Street, stated she is one of the worst ones hit when it floods. She talked about her insurance payments because they are in a flood zone. She talked about the machine that pumps the water out of her property and how loud it is and the damage it does to her yard. Councilmember/Agencymember/Boardmember Williams asked about the time frame for the Devon Street project. Joe O'Neil, City Engineer, stated November 2004 once it is approved in the budget this year. CouncilmembedAgencymember/Boardmember Kurth thanked Jack and the staff for their work on this budget. D. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Moved by Williams, seconded by Howdyshell to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. The meeting adjourned at 7:16 p,m. Respectfully submitted, Debra J. Adams, CMC City Clerk Approved: * June 2~ 2004 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION MINUTES II ^. I The Rancho Cucamonga City Council held a closed session on Wednesday, June 2, 2004, in the Tapia Room of the Civic Center located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Mayor William J. Alexander. Present were Councilmembers: Rex Gutierrez, Robert J. Howdyshell, Donald J. Kurth, M.D., Diane Williams and Mayor William J. Alexander. Also present were: Jack Lam, City Manager; Pamela Easter, Deputy City Manager; William P. Curley III, Deputy City Attorney; Larry Temple, Administrative Services Director; and George Rivera, Administrative Services Manager. B. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S) Mayor Alexander announced the closed session item. B1. LABOR NEGOTIATIONS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6 TO GIVE GEORGE RIVERA, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES MANAGER; PAMELA EASTER, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER; AND LARRY TEMPLE, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR, DIRECTION IN REGARDS TO THE MEET AND CONFER PROCESS - CITY Il C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S) I No communication was made on the closed session item. D. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSION The closed session began at 5:35 p.m. The closed session recessed at 6:54 p.m. with no action taken. City Council Minutes June 2, 2004 Page 2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Re.qular Meetin,q A regular meeting of the Rancho Cucamonga City Council was held on Wednesday, June 2, 2004, in the Council Chambers of the Civic Center located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Mayor William J. Alexander called the meeting to order at 7:11 p.m. Present were Councilmembers: Rex Gutierrez, Robert J. Howdyshell, Donald J. Kurth, M.D., Diane Williams and Mayor William J. Alexander. Also present were: Also present were: Jack Lam, City Manager; James Markman, City Attorney; Pamela Easter, Deputy City Manager; Linde D. Daniels, RDA Director; Larry Temple, Administrative Services Director; Ingrid Bruce, GIS/Special Districts Supervisor; Lorraine Phong, Information Systems Analyst; Shelly Munson, Information Systems Specialist; Joe O'Neil, City Engineer; Mike TenEyck, Administrative Resource Manager; Dan James, Sr. Civil Engineer; Brad Bullet, City Planner; Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director; Dave Moore, Recreation Superintendent; Paula Pachon, Management Analyst III; Nettle Nielsen, Recreation Supervisor; Deborah Clark, Library Director; Captain Pete Ortiz, Rancho Cucamonga Police Department; Kimberly Thomas, Management Analyst II; Kathy Scott, Deputy City Clerk; and Debra J. Adams, City Clerk. It s. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS I Jack Lam, City Manager, requested the Council add as item B3, Resolution No. 04-185, to show support for the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVVVD) in their declaration of an emergency water condition existing in the District, with a presentation to be given by JoLynne Russo-Pereyra of CVVVD. Mr. Lam also stated it is also requested to add as item E13, Resolution No. 04-186, approval to go out to bid for the Victoria Gardens Cultural Center. MOTION: Moved by Kurth, seconded by Howdyshell to approve the addition of Resolution No. 04-186 to the agenda as stated above. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. BI. Presentation of a Retirement Badge and Commemorative Plaque to Robert Corcoran, Deputy Fire Chief, in honor of his retirement after 30 years with the Fire District. Mayor Alexander and Chief Peter Bryan presented a Retirement Badge and Commemorative Plaque to Robert Corcoran and talked about his accomplishments during his years with the Fire District. B2. Presentation of a Proclamation in recognition of"National Trails Day." The Council presented the Proclamation to Para Stewart, Planning Commissioner, Patricia Carlson, Parks and Recreation Commissioner, Nola Cannon, President of Alta Loma Riding Club, and Carol Douglas, City Liaison, Alta Loma Riding Club. Alison RowJen, Code Enforcement Officer, informed the Council about the trail clean-up program that would take place in June. City Council Minutes June 2, 2004 Page 3 Carol Douglas, Alta Loma Riding Club, thanked the City for its trails system. Patricia Carlson, Parks and Recreation Commissioner, thanked Nola Cannon, Carol Douglas, the City and all of the volunteers for what they have done for the trails system. She asked everyone to join them on June 12 for the trails clean up. B3. ADDED ITEM - Approval of Resolution 04-185 to show support for the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD) in their declaration of an emergency water condition existing in the District, with a presentation to be given by JoLynne Russo-Pereyra. MOTION: Moved by Kurth, seconded by Williams to approve the addition of Resolution No. 04-185 to the agenda as stated above. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. JoLynne Russo-Pereyra, Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVVVD), gave a presentation about the water conservation measure to take place beginning June 7 and lasting for five to seven days due to the upcoming closure of a major Metropolitan Water District line needing repairs. She added customers will be getting post cards in the mail informing them of these conservation efforts. She indicated there would be a community meeting on Thursday, June 3 at 6:00 p.m. at CVWD to answer any questions. She stated she has a "tip sheet" on the back table for customers to have and that it would also be on their website or people could call 987-2591. Mayor Alexander stated he is concerned if there is an emergency situation such as a fire. He felt a lot of people do not know about this. JoLynne Russo-Pereyra, CVWD, stated they are doing everything possible to inform the public and that they will be in contact with fire and police as well. Mayor Alexander inquired who was responsible for this bad water line. JoLynne Russo-Pereyra, CVWD, stated it is the Metropolitan Water District's (MWD) line. She stated the bad portion of the line that needs repaired is in the Claremont area. Councilmember Kurth asked if people cut back will there be enough water to last us. JoLynne Russo-Pereyra, CVVVD, felt there would be if people cut back by the suggested 50%, which is their conservation goal. Mayor Alexander asked if Mr. Russo-Pereyra could give some suggestions to people on how to water their landscape during this time of conservation. JoLynne Russo-Pereyra, CVWD, gave some suggestions as requested by the Mayor. Councilmember Williams asked if they have notified other public buildings and mobile home parks. JoLynne Russo-Pereyra, CVWD, stated they are contacting those people and also homeowner's associations, developers, businesses and many others about this. Councilmember Kurth felt everyone in the community should pull together and cut back on their water usage. Joe O'Neil, City Engineer, stated the City is the biggest user of water from CVWD because of the parks, but added the City will not be watering with CVWD water in order to cooperate. He stated there is the possibility of losing turf because of this. He stated the first priority for City facilities is the stadium, then the parks, the public buildings such as City Hall, the Central Park site and then the medians. He stated the City will have water trucks to help with these facilities. He added contractors will be bringing in their own water. City Council Minutes June 2, 2004 Page 4 JoLynne Russo-Pereyra, CVWD, stated they have been in contact with contractors and that they can get non-potable water from their regional plant #4. MOTION: Moved by Kurth, seconded by Howdyshell to approve Resolution No. 04-185. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. I] C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS I C1. Patricia Carlson asked the range of the area that will be affected. JoLynne Russo-Pereyra, CVWD, stated Fontana to LaVerne and south and that they are working to get water from Fontana and Ontario. She asked if they have worked with the Chamber of Commerce to get the word out to businesses. JoLynne Russo-Pereyra, CVWD, stated they have been in contact with the Chamber and will also be talking to Fontana's Chamber. She stated the Chamber is trying to help with our businesses. She stated she appreciates Councilmember Kurth's comments about pulling together. C2. Carol Douglass, Alta Loma Riding Club, had some recommendations how to care for large animals during a time like this. Councilmember Kurth felt the Alta Loma Riding Club does a very good job in the community. C3. Leslie Grimes commented on the Cucamonga Wash and the effects of it because of the Colonies project. She stated it is very important to protect the ground water and get involved in some of these things. She felt Upland would let anything be built in their City because they are almost bankrupt and need the revenue. She felt building and covering every part of the earth should not be done. She wished people would look at that more carefully. C4. Nicole Myerchin wanted to let Councilmembers Howdyshell and Gutierrez know that the Best Friends organization is actually 3,300 acres and has approximately 1,600 to 1,700 animals at all times and is much larger than the Helen Woodward facility. She also wanted to let them know that Captain Adams, who is in control of the Upland facility, did not have any prior experience, but is doing an upstanding job. C5. John Lyons stated this water situation brings about all kinds of bad problems. He stated if people are storing water in barrels they should keep it in the shade. He asked where people could go to pick up water. JoLynne Russo-Pereyra, CVWD, stated people can get non-potable water from regional plant #4. Mr. Lyons felt there are also problems for small animals and birds. He asked what would happen if we do run out of water. Mayor Alexander stated we will not run out, just run Iow. C6. Deputy Ron Ives with the Police Department talked about the Bicycle Rodeo that the Police Department sponsors which would be held this coming weekend. He stated they will start with a pancake breakfast and then will lead into the training of the kids about bicycle safety. He stated the event is Saturday, June 5 from 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. at the Epicenter East Parking Lot. C7. Sharon North, Bella Vista, stated she was speaking for Earl Anderson and representing their neighbors and stated they are glad the City is going to construct a trash rack north of their properties and extend the flood control channel in a 5' x 5' dimension from the existing to up north of Almond. She asked if there was a start date for this and offered assistance in any way to help move the project forward. City Council Minutes June 2, 2004 Page 5 Joe O'Neil, City Engineer, stated at the last meeting the Council authorized them to go ahead and begin the design. He stated unfortunately, there is no money in hand. He stated it will probably be a couple more months before they find out if they are even going to get any money. He stated the most impodant thing Ms. North can do for him is to start talking to people about getting the City right-of-way so they can start working in their area. Ms. North stated it was her understanding the City would fund this if they couldn't get the FEMA money. Joe O'Neil, City Engineer, stated he did not know at this time that it depends on budget constraints, etc. at the time. He stated the City will at least install the K-Rail to help protect them. II D. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS I D1. Councilmember Kudh talked about the West Nile Virus and felt people should protect themselves and not leave standing water around their property. He stated the Council toured the mall and Central Park construction sites, which includes the Senior Center. D2. Councilmember Williams stated the construction of the mall and Central Park gives a sense of pride for everyone. She stated she went to the Preschool Graduation last night and talked about what a wonderful event it was. She stated she wants to make sure State Farm Insurance gets credit for the "911 Center" that will be at the Bicycle Rodeo. She stated this is very beneficial for the kids. She talked about the celebration of a new Maloof water-wise garden for Rancho Cucamonga and the region that would take place June 19 from 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m., at 8744 Hidden Farm Road, which is the Historical Maloof Museum and Gardens. D3. Councilmember Howdyshell talked about the Fire Department breakfast they held for the people they have provided service to. He stated he appreciated their efforts. He stated Tarbell Realtors offered a "safe kids" event at their location on Milliken and Base Line. He stated the John Walsh Foundation was present to assist with fingerprinting kids. He mentioned our Police and Fire Departments were also there. He also recognized Congressman David Dreier who was at the Senior Center recently introducing some new federal programs for seniors. He stated he is a great guy and continues to help the City in many ways. D5. Councilmember Gutierrez stated he is very concerned about the Bella Vista area. He wanted to know when the City will know about the funding source for this area and felt it should be discussed during the budget process. He stated he went to the Fire Depadment breakfast. He stated he had also gone to the Senior Center and talked with Congressman Dreier. He mentioned the tour of the mall and Central Park that the Council had participated in. He stated he was sorry he missed the preschool graduation. He wanted to congratulate the music students at the high schools and also congratulated those that were graduating from high school this year. E. CONSENT CALENDAR El. Approval of Minutes: April 21,2004 (Kurth absent) E2. Approval of Warrants, Register May 12, 2004 through May 24, 2004, and Payroll ending May 24, 2004, for the total amount of $1,632,264.99. E3 Approval of Amendment No. 2 to City of Rancho Cucamonga, Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency and the Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce Agreement for a Plan of Cooperative Action for Economic Development. City Council Minutes June 2, 2004 Page 6 E4. Approval to proceed with the biennial review of the City's Conflict of Interest Code. E5. Approval of a request from American Youth Soccer Organization (AYSO) Region 65 for a Waiver of Fees and Charges for use of the soccer fields at the Rancho Cucamonga Epicenter Adult Sports Complex on September 11,2004, for their picture day. E6. Approval to appropriate $17,500 to Acct. No. 26608015300 from the 2004 Tax Allocation Bonds Fund Balance for the design survey of the Upper Cucamonga Storm Drain and Hellman Avenue Widening Improvements. E7. Approval of a resolution by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that the City Council covenants not to issue any additional bonds, except refunding bonds for Improvement Area No. 1, City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Facilities District No. 2003-01. RESOLUTION NO. 04-171 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, COVENANTING NOT TO ISSUE ANY ADDITIONAL BONDS, EXCEPT REFUNDING BONDS FOR IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 1 OF CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2003-01. E8. Approval to appropriate $1,700,000 to Acct. No. 1243035650/1026124-0 from the Transportation Development Fund balance for the developer reimbursement associated with the Construction of Day Creek Boulevard (south of Foothill Boulevard to the westerly property line of the Day Creek Flood Control Channel). E9. Approval for award and execution of an amended rental agreement in an additional amount of $167,820.00 for a total budgeted amount of $353,820.00 to Johnson Power Systems, Inc. for rental of mobile electric generators to provide temporary construction power within the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility service area. El0. Approval to authorize the City Manager to enter into a non-exclusive Master Power Purchase and Sale Agreement (Agreement) by and between the City and Sempra Energy Solutions, of Los Angeles, California (Septra) (CO 04-059), subject to any modifications approved by the City Manager and the City Attorney, authorize the City Manager to execute the Confirmation Orders with Sempra in amounts necessary to provide electric service to new customers to be funded from Account No. 17053035209. E11. Approval for award and execution of Professional Services Agreement in the amount of $56,172 to Signet Testing Laboratories, Inc. (CO 04-060), and authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $5,617.00 for geotechnical services for Phases lB(B), 3B(A) and 3B(B) of CFD 2003-01, to be funded from Fund 614 - CFD 2003-01, Acct. No. 16143035300/1442614-0. E12. Approval to accept Improvements, release the Faithful Performance Bond, accept a Maintenance Bond, and file a Notice of Completion for improvements for Tract 16398, located at the northwest corner of Hellman Avenue and 7th Street, submitted by W.F. Construction, Inc. RESOLUTION NO. 04-172 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT 16398 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK E13. ,ADDED ITEM - Approval to go out to bid for the Victoria Gardens Shopping Center. (See Resolution No. 04-'186 approved by the City Council.) City Council Minutes June 2, 2004 Page 7 RESOLUTION NO. 04-186 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE "CULTURAL CENTER CONSTRUCTION PROJECT" IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS MOTION: Moved by Kurth, seconded by Williams to approve the staff recommendations in the staff reports contained within the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. Fl. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT DRC2003- 01037 - JOHN LAING HOMES_ - A request to change the zone from Community Commercial to Mixed Use for a .7 acre portion of Subarea 3 of the Foothill Boulevard Districts, located north of Foothill Boulevard, between Hellman and Malachite Avenues - APN: 0208-151-20 thru 23. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16567, Development Review DRC2003-01036, Tree Removal Permit DRC200400139, and Historic Point of Interest DRC2004-00105. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Debra J. Adams, City Clerk, read the title of Ordinance No. 723. ORDINANCE NO. 723 (second reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT DRC2003-01037, A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE ZONE FROM COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL TO MIXED-USE FOR A .7 ACRE PORTION OF SUBAREA 3 OF THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD DISTRICTS, LOCATED NORTH OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BETWEEN HELLMAN AND MALACHITE AVENUES - APN: 0208-151- 20 THRU 23; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF MOTION: Moved by Williams, seconded by Gutierrez to waive full reading and approve Ordinance No. 723. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. F2. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2003- 00047 CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to amend the Etiwanda Specific Plan to allow RV storage for the southwest parcel of 9.87 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at the southwest corner of the 210 and 1-15 freeway interchange - APN: 0228-011-31. Related file: Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00048. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Debra J. Adams, City Clerk, read the title of Ordinance No. 724. City Council Minutes June 2, 2004 Page 8 ORDINANCE NO. 724 (second reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2003-00047 TO ALLOW A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE STORAGE FACILITY ON 9.87 ACRES OF LAND IN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) OF THE ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE 210 AND 1-15 FREEWAY INTERCHANGE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0228-011-31 MOTION: Moved by Williams, seconded by Gutierrez to waive full reading and approve Ordinance No. 724. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. II G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS I Gl. CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND CONSIDERATION OF ANNEXATION DRC2002-00865 - RICHLAND PINEHURST INC. - A proposed annexation of 160.0 acres of land into the City of Rancho Cucamonga, located within the Etiwanda North Specific Plan on the north side of Wilson Avenue between Etiwanda Avenue and East Avenue - APN - 0225-083-01, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 20. Related Files: Development Agreement DRC2002-00156, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00461. CERTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DRC2002-00156 - RICHLAND PINEHURST INC. - A proposed Development Agreement to address specific conditions of development and annexation for 150.8 acres of land located at the northwest corner of Wilson Avenue and East Avenue. APN: 0225-083-01, 12, 13, 15, 16, and 20. Related Files: Annexation DRC2002-00865, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2002-00461. Jack Lam, City Manager, stated there is a request to continue items G1 and G2 to the next meeting. Mayor Alexander opened the meeting for public hearing for those that could not be present on June 16. Addressing the City Council were: Harold Hayer, lives below this area, stated he does not want a lot of high-density property in this area. He stated he walked up to this site and could not believe where the notice for this project was posted. He felt this was one of the last remote areas left in the City and should be left alone. He stated he is opposed to higher density around him. He felt there should be 15 acres set aside for a preserve. Leslie Grimes stated she has heard this is a done deal with the County pertaining to this project. She asked if this is a done deal. She did not feel this open space should be built on. Mayor Alexander asked her how she felt the City should set up a deal to purchase this. Ms. Grimes stated she does not have the answer, but felt this property should not be 2 - 4 dwelling units per acre, but should be 1 - 2 units per acre. Jack Lam, City Manager, talked about the history of the sphere area. He said the whole issue of the sphere area has been talked about for the last 20 years in Rancho Cucamonga. He stated prior to the City incorporating, most of this area was General Planned Industrial. He stated a few years later, the General Plan was modified in the County area for Residential. He stated historically the City has fought with the County for many years because the County allowed higher densities than the City would allow. City Council Minutes June 2, 2004 Page 9 He stated because of the rights of property owners in that area to develop under the County codes, it became a disincentive for property owners to incorporate into the City because the cost would go up, the requirements would be higher and so forth. He stated the only thing the City could do at this time was to follow a legal process and file suit. He stated development couldn't be stopped, just delayed so that negotiations could take place to develop a better product. He stated the City has always had to negotiate regarding this area. He stated if this is left in the County, the development would still occur, they would use City services and facilities, and the City would get no revenue from that development. He stated the City would like to have greater control over this sphere area. Pauline Haver talked about the beautiful area they live in and hoped the Council will consider not letting this area be destroyed by it being developed. Hilda Phillips stated she lives in Terra Vista and stated the is concerned about the animals in the mountains and hoped whenever possible to keep certain lands vacant and not build on them. MOTION: Moved by Williams, seconded by Howdyshell to continue items G1 and G2 to the June 16, 2004 meeting at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. G2. CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND ANNEXATION DRC2003-00753 - HENDERSON CREEK PROPERTIES - A proposed Annexation of 96.9 acres of land into the City of Rancho Cucamonga, located within the Etiwanda North Specific Plan at the northerly end of Wardman- Bullock Road - APN: 0225-084-04, 0226-081-09 and 10, and 0226-082-28 and 29. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2003-00749, Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003-00750, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16324, and Development Agreement DRC2003-00751. CERTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND CONSIDERATION OF GENERAl PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2003-00749 - HENDERSON CREEK PROPERTIES, LLC - A proposed General Plan Land Use Amendment to change from Very Low Residential (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) to Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) for 63.5 acres of land located at the northerly end of Wardman Bullock Road - APN: 0225-084-04, 0226-081-09 and 10, and 0226-082-29. Related Files: Annexation DRC2003-00753, Development Agreement DRC2003-00751, Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003-00750, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16324, and Development Agreement DRC2003-00751. CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2003-00750 - HENDERSON CREEK PROPERTIES, LLC - A proposed Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment to change from Very Low Residential (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) to Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) for 63.5 acres of land and the proposed modification of the circulation system in the Etiwanda Highlands Neighborhood of the Specific Plan - APN: 0225-084- 04, 0226-081-09 and 10, and 0226-082-29. Related Files: Annexation DRC2003-00753, General Plan Amendment DRC2003-00749, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16324, and Development Agreement DRC2003-00751. CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DRC2003-00751 - HENDERSON CREEK PROPERTIES, LLC - A proposed Development Agreement to address specific conditions of development and annexation for 63.5 acres of land, located at the northerly end of Wardman Bullock Road within the Etiwanda North Specific Plan - APN: 0225-084-04, 0226~081- 09 and 10, and 0226-082-29. Related Files: Annexation DRC2003-00750, and Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16324. SEE ITEM G1 FOR DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM. G3. VACATION OF CENTER AVENUE (V-186) - CABOT INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES; APPROVAL OF A REQUEST TO VACATE CENTER AVENUE, NORTH OF TRADEMARK PARKVVAY; RELATED FILE: DRCDR00-41 Staff report presented by Dan James, Sr. Civil Engineer. City Council Minutes June 2, 2004 Page 10 Mayor Alexander opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the public hearing was closed. Councilmember Gutierrez left the room at 8:58 p.m. and returned at 9:03 p.m. RESOLUTION NO. 04-173 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING TO BE VACATED, CENTER AVENUE LOCATED NORTH OF TRADEMARK PARKVVAY APPROXIMATELY 66 FEET WIDE AND 243 FEET LONG MOTION: Moved by Kurth, seconded by Williams to approve Resolution No. 04-173. Motion carried unanimously 4-0-1 (Gutierrez absent). No Items Submitted. I1. UPDATE ON CONSTRUCTION PROGRESS OF CENTRAL PARK PROJECT (Oral) A power point presentation was given by Dave Moore, Recreation Superintendent, which is on file in the City Clerk's office. Councilmember Kurth stated this is a very exciting project. John Shanahan asked where the money came from for this project. Jack Lam, City Manager, stated it came from Park Bond money and federal dollars with the help of Congressman Dreier, from donations of private sources and other various funds. He added the City can only build 1/3 of this at this time. Councilmember Williams stated Senator Brulte was also very instrumental in getting the City funds for this project. 12. CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF USE DETERMINATION DRC2004-00093 - STEVE KNECHT - An appeal of the Planning Commission's decision denying a request to determine that a dog breeding establishment with outside runs is similar to an animal care facility within the Very Low Residential District at 10158 Sun Valley- APN: 1074-081-12. It was requested this be continued since the applicant was not present and that he be notified in writing. City Council Minutes June 2, 2004 Page11 RESOLUTION NO. 04-128 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE ACTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND DENYING THE APPEAL OF USE DETERMINATION DRC2004-00093, BY DETERMINING THAT DOG BREEDING ESTABLISHMENTS WITH OUTSIDE RUNS ARE NOT SIMILAR TO AN ANIMAL CARE FACILITY WITHIN THE VERY LOW (.1-2 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF MOTION: Moved by Williams, seconded by Gutierrez to continue this item to June 16, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Motion carried unanimously 3-2 (Alexander and Howdyshell voted no). 13. APPROVAL TO SET AN ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2003-01 (IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 2, ZONES 1, & 2), SERIES 2003-B. ITEMS 13 THROUGH 113 WERE DISCUSSED AT ONE TIME. Staff report presented by Ingrid Bruce, GIS/Special Districts Supervisor. Mayor Alexander asked if we will have any problems with any of these assessments districts I the future by not increasing rates now. Ingrid Bruce, GIS/Special Districts Supervisor, stated there will be no problems. Mayor Alexander opened the meeting for public comment. There being no input, public comments were closed. RESOLUTION NO. 04-174 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RE-ESTABLISHING ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2003-01 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004-2005 (IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 2, ZONES 1, & 2), SERIES 2003-B MOTION: Moved by Howdyshell, seconded by Kurth to approve Resolution Nos. 04-174 through 04-184. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. 14. APPROVAL TO SET AN ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2003-01 (IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 1, ZONES 1,2 & 3), SERIES 2003-A. SEE ITEM 13 FOR DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM. RESOLUTION NO. 04-175 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RE-ESTABLISHING ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX RATE FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2003-01 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004-2005 (IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 1, ZONES 1,2 & 3), SERIES 2003-A 15. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN ANNUAL LEVY WITHIN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 {MASI PLAZA) AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ROCHESTER AVENUE AND FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND REASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 1999-1 WITHOUT AN INCREASE THE CURRENT RATE. City Council Minutes June 2, 2004 Page12 SEE ITEM 13 FOR DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM. RESOLUTION NO. 04-176 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RE-AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF AN ASSESSMENT SURCHARGE FOR THE EXPENSES INCURRED IN THE COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS IN VARIOUS SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS 16. APPROVAL TO SET ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 93-3 {FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE) WITHOUT AN INCREASE TO THE CURRENT RATE. SEE ITEM 13 FOR DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM. RESOLUTION NO. 04-177 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RE-ESTABLISHING ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 93-3 (FOOTHILL MARKETPLACE) 17. APPROVAL TO SET ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 88- 2 (DRAINAGE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT) AT CURRENT LEVELS WITH NO INCREASE. SEE ITEM 13 FOR DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM. RESOLUTION NO. 04-178 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RE-ESTABLISHING ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 88-2 (DRAINAGE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT) 18. APPROVAL TO SET ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 84-1 (DAY CREEK DRAINAGE SYSTEM) WITHOUT AN INCREASE TO THE CURRENT RATE. SEE ITEM 13 FOR DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM. RESOLUTION NO. 04-179 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RE-ESTABLISHiNG ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 84-1R (DAY CREEK DRAINAGE SYSTEM) 19. APPROVAL TO SET AN ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2001-01 (IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 3, ZONE 7) SERIES 2001-B. SEE ITEM 13 FOR DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM. RESOLUTION NO. 04-180 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RE-ESTABLISHING ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2001-01 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004-2005 (iMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 3, ZONE 7), SERIES 2001-B City Council Minutes June 2, 2004 Page 13 110. APPROVAL TO SET AN ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2001-01 (IMPROVEMENT AREA NOS. 1 & 2), SERIES 2001-A. SEE ITEM 13 FOR DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM. RESOLUTION NO. 04-181 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RE-ESTABLISHING ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2001-01 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004-2005 (IMPROVEMENT AREA NOS. 1 & 2), SERIES 2001-A I11. APPROVAL TO SET ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000- 02 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARK). SEE ITEM 13 FOR DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM. RESOLUTION NO. 04-182 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RE-ESTABLISHING ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000-02 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA CORPORATE PARK) 112. APPROVAL TO SET ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000- 01 (SOUTH ETIWANDA) WITHOUT AN INCREASE TO THE CURRENT RATF. SEE ITEM 13 FOR DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM. RESOLUTION NO. 04-183 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RE-ESTABLISHING ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2000-01 (SOUTH ETIWANDA) 113. APPROVAL TO SET ANNUAL BENEFIT ASSESSMENTS FOR DRAINAGE AREA NO. 91-2 (DAY CANYON DRAINAGE BASIN) WITHOUT AN INCREASE TO THE CURRENT RATF SEE ITEM 13 FOR DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM. RESOLUTION NO. 04-184 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DETERMINING THE COST OF SERVICE TO BE FINANCED BY BENEFIT ASSESSMENTS TO BE LEVIED IN DRAINAGE AREA NO. 91-2 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004-2005 AND DETERMINING AND IMPOSING SUCH BENEFIT ASSESSMENTS II J. COUNCIL BUSINESS I J1. LEGISLATIVE UPDATE (Oral Report) City Council Minutes June 2, 2004 Page 14 Councilmember Williams stated last week Congressman Drier stopped by to see the Council. She stated they thanked him for his continued assistance with City projects. She mentioned legislation that would take control of what is built in the City away from cities and that Rancho Cucamonga is opposing this legislation. She stated Assemblyman Steinberg is threatening to take away the City's sales tax again. She mentioned there is legislation about putting cell phone numbers in a pool so they can do telemarketing this way, but there is also legislation so that cell companies would have to get permission to do this. [[ K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR THE NEXT MEETING [ K1. Councilmember Howdyshell stated he would like a report on soliciting requirements in the City. [[ L. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS [ No communication was made from the public. l[ M. ADJOURNMENT I MOTION: Moved by Alexander, seconded by Howdyshell to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. The meeting adjourned at 9:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Debra J. Adams, CMC City Clerk Approved: * June 3, 2004 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CiTY COUNCIL, REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT MINUTES Special Study Session A. CALL TO ORDER A special study session of the Rancho Cucamonga City Council, Redevelopment Agency and Fire Protection District was held on Thursday, June 3, 2004, in the Council Chambers of the Civic Center, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. The meeting was called to order at 6:06 p.m. by MayodChairman/President William J. Alexander Present were Councilmembers/Agencymembers/Boardmembers: Robert J. Howdyshell, Dr. Donald J. Kurth, Diane Williams (arrived at 6:12 p.m.) and Mayor/Chairman/President William J. Alexander. Absent was Councilmember/Agencymember/Boardmember: Rex Gutierrez Also present were: Jack Lam, City Manager/Executive Director; Pamela Easter, Deputy City Manager; Linda D. Daniels, Redevelopment Agency Director; Mike Nelson, Sr. RDA Analyst; Jim Frost, City Treasurer; Larry Temple, Administrative Services Director; Tamara Layne, Finance Officer; Rose Colum, Budget Analyst; Ingrid Bruce, GIS/Special Districts Supervisor; Shelly Munson, Information Systems Specialist; Brad Bullet, City Planner; Joe O'Neil, City Engineer; Trang Huynh, Building Official; Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director; Dave Moore, Recreation Superintendent; Paula Pachon, Management Analyst III; Deborah Clark, Library Director; Robed Karatsu, Library Services Manager; Vivian Garcia, Sr. Administrative Secretary; Captain Pete Ortiz, Rancho Cucamonga Police Department; Fire Chief Peter Bryan, Acting Deputy Chief Mike Bell, Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District; and Debra J. Adams, City Clerk. B. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC No communication was made from the public. C. ITEM(S) OF BUSINESS C1. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED BUDGETS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004/2005 Jack Lam, City ManagedExecutive Director, stated at the last study session a power point presentation was given as to the future of the City's budget with recommendations for the Council to consider. He stated earlier today he had made the same presentation to the Library Board and learned that the Friends of the Library has indicated they will give an additional $20,000 to the Library. He indicated that Library Director, Deborah Clark, felt this will help so there are four less hours that the Library will have to close. He stated there is nothing new to report at the State level as of today. He stated Mr. Steinberg is still involved in trying to modify the City's sales tax income, but that our lobbyist is working so this does not get passed. He stated the budget adoption is scheduled for June 14 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Councilmember/AgencymembedBoardmember Williams stated this has been beat to death and felt that every employee knows what the situation is. She felt employees will do what they can to save money wherever possible. City Council/Redevelopment Agency, Fire Protection District Minutes June 3, 2004 Page 2 MayodChairman/President Alexander stated that SCAG has formally taken opposition to Steinberg's bill. Councilmember/Agencymember/Boardmember Kurth stated people at the City understand what is gong on with the budget. He stated there is money in various funds for the mall and Central Park even though the budget is tight throughout other funds. He stated even the Council has cut their budget. He hoped next year there will be money to reward people for doing such a good job. He thanked the City Manager and staff for doing such a great job with the budget. Councilmember/AgencymembedBoardmember Howdyshell asked if some of the contracts the City has entered into are not going well, that the Council be made aware of this so changes can be made. D. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Moved by Williams, seconded by Alexander to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously 4-0-1 (Gutierrez absent). The meeting adjourned at 6:19 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Debra J. Adams, CMC City Clerk Approved: * June 14, 2004 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Special Meetinq A special meeting of the Rancho Cucamonga City Council was held on Monday, June 14, 2004, in the Council Chambers of the Civic Center located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Mayor William J. Alexander called the meeting to order at 6:13 p.m. Present were Councilmembers: Rex Gutierrez, Robert J. Howdyshell, Donald J. Kurth, M.D., Diane Williams and Mayor William J. Alexander. Also present were: Jack Lam, City Manager; Mike Nelson, Sr. RDA Analyst; Flavio Nunez, Assistant RDA Analyst; Tamara Layne, Finance Officer; Rose Colum, Budget Analyst; Helen Leeds, Sr. Accountant; Bullet, City Planner; Joe O'Neil, City Engineer; Various Maintenance Staff; Trang Huynh, Building Official; John Thomas, Plan Check ManagedFire; Kathy Pomella, Public Service Technician II; Brenda King, Public Service Technician I (Fire); Alison Rowlen, Code Enforcement Officer; Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director; Dave Moore, Recreation Superintendent; Deborah Clark, Library Director; Vivian Garcia, Sr. Administrative Secretary; Captain Pete Ortiz, Rancho Cucamonga Police Department; Fire Chief Peter Bryan, Acting Deputy Chief Mike Bell and Battalion Chief Curatalo, Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District; Duane Baker, Assistant to the City Manager; and Debra J. Adams, City Clerk. B. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC No communication was made from the public. I} C. CONSENT CALENDAR Cl. APPROVAL OF ANNUAL LOAN TRANSACTION BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHC) CUCAMONGA AND THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY C2. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT (CO 04-065) FOR CITY FUNDING FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE~ MOTION: Moved by Howdyshell, seconded by Williams to approve the staff recommendations in the staff reports contained within the Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. City Council Minutes June 14, 2004 Page 2 II D. PUBLIC HEARINGS I D1. ADOPTION OF FISCAL YEAR 2004/2005 BUDGET AND ARTICLE XIII-B APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT Staff report presented by Jack Lam, City Manager. Mayor Alexander wanted to make sure there was no problem with the drainage funding that was supposed for Devon Street that was supposed to be in the budget. Joe O'Neil, City Engineer, stated it is in the budget for approval. Mayor Alexander opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response the public hearing was closed. Councilmember Gutierrez wanted to confirm that the landscaping project near the freeway was still in the budget. Joe O'Neil, City Engineer, stated yes. RESOLUTION NO. 04-187 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE CITY'S FISCAL YEAR 2004/2005 BUDGET RESOLUTION NO. 04-188 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING AN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT PURSUANT TO ARTICLE XIII-B OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE CONSTITUTION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004/2005 MOTION: Moved by Gutierrez, seconded by Kurth to approve Resolution Nos. 04-187 and 04-188. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. Jack Lam, City Manager, thanked the department heads for their hard work in preparing the budgets and commented what a challenge it was. Councilmembe~: Kurth thanked the City Manager and staff for all of their work towards this budget. Councilmember Gutierrez concurred and stated he appreciated everyone's recent efforts in conserving water and felt this was an effort of people working together. Councilmember Howdyshell stated he also concurred. He stated he would like staff to look at a policy of ways the Council can cut costs in their budget, such as attendance at events that aren't critical for all five Councilmembers to be at. He felt we need to be represented, but felt there were some costs to be cut and manage the Council budget better than it has in the past. City Council Minutes June 14, 2004 Page 3 Mayor Alexander suggested this be agendized for a future meeting. Mayor Alexander felt once a Councilmember has committed to attend a meeting and then does not attend, that Councilmember should ultimately be responsible for paying for that when City funds have been expended. MOTION: Moved by Howdyshell, seconded by Williams to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. The meeting adjourned at 6:21 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Debra J. Adams, CMC City Clerk Approved: * CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount. AP - 00211079 6/9/2004 JUAN POLLO 139.29 AP - 00211080 6/9/2004 ORKIN PEST CONTROL 842.05 AP - 00211080 6/9/2004 ORKIN PEST CONTROL 409.00 AP - 00211080 6/9/2004 ORKIN PEST CONTROL 433.05 AP - 0021108 ! 6/9/2004 3T EQUIPMENT COMPANY INC 212.25 AP - 00211081 6/9/2004 3T EQUIPMENT COMPANY INC 212.32 AP - 00211082 6/9/2004 A R ANIMAL HOSPITAL 50.00 AP - 00211083 6/9/2004 AA EQUIPMENT RENTALS CO 1NC 324.11 AP - 00211083 6/9/2004 AA EQUIPMENT RENTALS CO INC 76.14 AP - 00211083 6/9/2004 AA EQUIPMENT RENTALS CO [NC 349.97 AP - 00211083 6/9/2004 AA EQUIPMENT RENTALS CO [NC 689.18 AP - 00211084 6/9/2004 ABC LOCKSMITHS 44.24 AP - 00211084 6/9/2004 ABC LOCKSMITHS 161.63 AP - 00211084 6/9/2004 ABC LOCKSMITHS 99.00 AP - 00211084 6/9/2004 ABC LOCKSMITHS 192.34 AP - 00211084 6/9/2004 ABC LOCKSMITHS 143.62 AP - 00211084 6/9/2004 ABC LOCKSMITHS 42.02 AP - 00211084 6/9/2004 ABC LOCKSMITHS 7.70 AP - 00211084 6/9/2004 ABC LOCKSMITHS 69.00 AP - 00211084 6/9/2004 ABC LOCKSMITHS 99.00 AP - 00211084 6/9/2004 ABC LOCKSMITHS 378.12 AP - 00211084 6/9/2004 ABC LOCKSMITHS 82.43 AP - 00211084 6/9/2004 ABC LOCKSMITHS 676.60 AP - 00211084 6/9/2004 ABC LOCKSMITHS 84.33 AP - 00211084 6/912004 ABC LOCKSMITHS 242.43 AP- 00211084 6/9/2004 ABC LOCKSMITHS 121.21 AP - 00211085 6/9/2004 ABLAC 16.39 AP - 00211086 6/9/2004 ADAMSON, RONALD 1,221.00 AP - 00211087 6/9/2004 ADVANCED ENGINEERING ACOUSTICS 1,400.00 AP - 00211089 6/9/2004 AEF SYSTEMS CONSULTING INC 1,400.00 AP - 00211089 6/9/2004 AEF SYSTEMS CONSULTING INC 2,625.00 AP - 00211090 6/9/2004 ALEXANDER, WILLIAM J 858.75 AP - 00211092 6/9/2004 ALTA LOMA ANIMAL HOSPITAL 50.00 AP - 00211093 6/9/2004 AMAZON.COM CREDIT 19.96 AP - 00211095 6/9/2004 AMTECH ELEVATOR SERVICES 187.00 AP - 00211095 6/9/2004 AMTECH ELEVATOR SERVICES 179.00 AP - 00211096 6/9/2004 APA 159.00 AP - 00211097 6/9/2004 ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP 3,000.00 AP - 0021 I097 6/9/2004 ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP 1,054.00 AP - 00211097 6/9/2004 ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP 2,186.00 AP - 00211097 6/9/2004 ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP 852.00 AP - 00211097 6/9/2004 ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP 4,160.00 AP - 00211097 6/9/2004 ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP 888.00 AP - 00211098 6/9/2004 ASSI SECURITY 450.00 AP - 00211098 6/9/2004 ASSI SECURITY 85.00 AP - 00211099 6/9/2004 ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS 15,417.00 AP - 00211100 6/9/2004 AUFBAU CORPORATION 6,092.00 AP - 00211100 6/9/2004 AUFB AU CORPORATION 1,095.00 AP - 00211100 6/9/2004 AUFBAU CORPORATION 19,074.00 AP - 00211100 6/9/2004 AUFB AU CORPORATION 547.50 AP - 00211 I00 6/9/2004 AUFBAU CORPORATION 5,150.00 · AP - 00211100 6/9/2004 AUFBAU CORPORATION 4,788.00 AP - 00211100 6~9~2004 AUFBAU CORPORATION 1,095.00 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: I Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time:a, 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register .6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211100 6/9/2004 AUFBAU CORPORATION 1,095.00 AP - 00211100 6/9/2004 AUFBAU CORPORATION 2,945.00 AP - 00211100 6/9/2004 AUFBAU CORPORATION 1,095.00 AP - 00211101 6/9/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 726.07 AP - 00211101 6/9/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 840.45 AP - 00211101 6/9/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 60.02 AP - 00211101 6/9/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 185.00 AP - 00211101 6/9/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 12.64 AP - 00211101 6/9/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 97.20 AP - 00211 I01 6/9/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 8.78 AP - 00211 i01 6/9/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 37.57 AP - 00211101 6/9/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 516.34 AP - 00211101 6/9/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 736.49 AP - 00211103 6/9/2004 BARNES AND NOBLE 150.45 AP - 00211105 6/9/2004 BILL BLANCHARDS LITTLE BIG BAND 400.00 AP - 00211106 6/9/2004 BODY SHOTS 1,232.00 AP - 00211107 6/9/2004 BORDNER, MARGIE 766.80 AP- 00211108 6/9/2004 BRODART BOOKS 418.81 AP - 00211109 6/9/2004 BROOKS, WENDY-GLADNEY 500.00 AP - 00211110 6/9/2004 BRUNSWICK DEER CREEK LANES 535.30 AP - 00211111 6/9/2004 BRYANT, ELIDA 847.50 AP - 00211112 6/9/2004 BUBALO CONSTRUCTION CO,STEVE 364,019.72 AP - 00211112 6/9/2004 BUBALO CONSTRUCTION CO,STEVE -174.40 AP - 00211112 6/9/2004 BUBALO CONSTRUCTION CO,STEVE 6,399.96 AP - 00211113 6/9/2004 BUCKNAM AND ASSOCIATES 1,684.50 AP - 00211114 6/9/2004 BURKE, KAREN 48.00 AP - 00211115 6/9/2004 CAL PERS LONG TERM CARE 354.45 AP - 00211116 6/9/2004 CALIFORNIA BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, STAT 1,474.00 AP - 0021 ! 117 6/9/2004 CALSENSE 1,000.00 AP - 00211117 6/9/2004 CALSENSE 343.58 AP - 00211117 6/9/2004 CALSENSE 1,000.00 AP - 00211118 6/9/2004 CAMERON WELDING SUPPLY 14.65 AP - 00211118 6/9/2004 CAMERON WELDING SUPPLY 35.83 AP - 00211119 6/9/2004 CHAMPION AWARDS AND SPECIAL1ES 1,370.58 AP - 00211120 6/9/2004 CITY RENTALS 290.33 AP - 00211121 6/9/2004 CLABBY, SANDRA 1,000.00 AP - 00211122 6/9/2004 CLARK, KAREN 316.80 AP - 00211123 6/9/2004 CLARKE PLUMBING SPECIALTIES INC. 62.47 AP - 00211123 6/9/2004 CLARKE PLUMBING SPECIALTIES INC. 104.00 AP - 00211124 6/9/2004 COASTAL BUILDING SERVICES INC 16,438.00 AP - 00211125 6/9/2004 COMBINED MARTIAL SCIENCE~INC 1,923.00 AP - 00211127 6/9/2004 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS ] 275.76 AP - 00211127 6/9/2004 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS 1 1,100.40 AP - 00211128 6/9/2004 COPP CRUSHING CORP, DAN 10.00 AP - 00211128 6/9/2004 COPP CRUSHING CORP, DAN 20.00 AP - 00211128 6/9/2004 COPP CRUSHING CORP, DAN 10.00 AP - 00211129 6/9/2004 CORNERPOINTE 257 LLC 1,000.00 AP - 00211129 6/9/2004 CORNERPOINTE 257 LLC 1,000.00 AP - 00211130 6/9/2004 CORONA CLAY COMPANY 808.13 AP - 00211131 6/9/2004 CPRS 485.00 AP - 00211132 6/9/2004 CRAFCO INC 631.50 AP - 00211132 6/9/2004 CRAFCO INC 236.62 AP - 00211133 6/9/2004 D AND K CONCRETE COMPANY 598.02 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 2 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA REG PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time' ~ 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Al~enda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211133 6/9/2004 D AND K CONCRETE COMPANY 642.19 AP - 00211133 6/9/2004 D AND K CONCRETE COMPANY 425.62 AP- 00211133 6/9/2004 D A/qD K CONCRETE COMPANY 727.32 AP - 00211133 6/9/2004 D AND K CONCRETE COMPANY 581.85 AP - 00211133 6/9/2004 D AND K CONCRETE COMPANY 748.87 AP - 00211133 6/9/2004 D AND K CONCRETE COMPANY 581.85 AP - 00211134 6/9/2004 DAGHDEVIRIAN, KATHY 626.40 AP - 00211135 6/9/2004 DANCE TERRIFIC 3,253.93 AP - 00211137 6/9/2004 DANKO INC 7,300.00 AP - 00211138 6/9/2004 DE LEISE, JENAE 519.24 AP- 00211139 6/9/2004 DELTA DENTAL 31,432.52 AP - 00211140 6/9/2004 DELTA MICROIMAGING INC 1,063.91 AP - 00211141 6/9/2004 DISPENSING TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION 838.13 AP - 00211142 6/9/2004 DRACHAND, DI ANNE 1,170.00 AP - 00211143 6/9/2004 DREAMAKER GIF~ BASKETS 348.47 AP 00211144 6/9/2004 DUPP¥,RICK 2,180.25 AP 00211145 6/9/2004 DUGAN, ALLISON 1,122.00 AP 00211147 6/9/2004 DYAN, DIANE 721.50 AP 00211148 6/9/2004 DYNASTY GYM 3,600.30 AP 00211149 6/9/2004 EASTER, PAMELA 42.00 AP 00211150 6/9/2004 EMCORSERVICE 1,243.84 AP- 00211150 6/9/2004 EMCOR SERVICE 7,081.16 AP - 00211150 6/9/2004 EMCOR SERVICE 8,325.00 AP - 00211150 6/9/2004 EMCOR SERVICE 8,325.00 AP - 00211151 6/9/2004 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 325.60 AP - 00211152 6/9/2004 EN POINTE TECHNOLOGIES 2,078.48 AP - 00211152 6/9/2004 EN POINTE TECHNOLOGIES 180.00 AP - 00211153 6/9/2004 ESSCO WHOLESALE ELECTRIC 482.44 AP - 00211153 6/9/2004 ESSCO WHOLESALE ELECTRIC 6,225.00 AP - 00211154 6/9/2004 EVANS SPORTING GOODS 18,760.78 AP - 00211155 6/9/2004 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 150.02 AP - 00211155 6/9/2004 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 43.37 AP - 00211155 6/9/2004 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 114.11 AP - 00211156 6/9/2004 EXPERIAN 50.00 AP - 00211157 6/9/2004 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 20.86 AP - 00211158 6/9/2004 FlLARSKY AND WATT 3,250.00 AP - 00211159 6/9/2004 FINCHER, KAREN 309.20 AP - 00211160 6/9/2004 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 868.00 AP - 00211160 6/9/2004 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 720.00 AP - 00211160 6/9/2004 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 486.00 AP - 00211160 6/9/2004 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 910.79 AP - 00211163 6/9/2004 FRIENDS OF THE READ SAN DIEGO 150.00 AP - 00211164 6/9/2004 FUKUSHIMA, JUDITH 2,370.00 AP - 00211165 6/9/2004 GAlL MATERIALS 693.00 AP - 00211165 6/9/2004 GAIL MATERIALS 241.02 AP - 00211165 6/9/2004 GAlL MATERIALS 948.20 AP - 00211165 6/9/2004 GAlL MATERIALS 1,070.66 AP - 00211165 6/9/2004 GAlL MATERIALS 1,071.50 AP - 00211165 6/9/2004 GAIL MATERIALS 821.62 AP - 00211165 6/9/2004 GAlL MATERIALS 391.98 AP - 00211166 6/9/2004 GARCIA, VIVIAN 35.62 AP - 00211167 6/9/2004 GCS SERVICE INC 154.25 AP - 00211169 6/9/2004 GEOGRAPHICS 3,932.17 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 3 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA PEG PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time:,~ 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 002 ! 1170 6/9/2004 GEORAL INTERNATIONAL 275.00 AP - 00211171 6/9/2004 GIORDANO, MARIANNA 345.00 AP - 00211172 6/9/2004 GO FAMILY 75.00 AP - 00211173 6/9/2004 GOLDEN WEST DISTRIBUTING 85.92 AP - 00211174 6/9/2004 GONSALVES AND SON,JOE A 2,500.00 AP - 00211175 6/9/2004 GRA1NGER, WW 540.21 AP - 00211176 6/9/2004 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 275.83 AP - 00211176 6/9/2004 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 232.73 AP - 00211176 6/9/2004 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 189.64 AP - 00211176 6/9/2004 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 323.20 AP - 00211176 6/9/2004 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 199.17 AP - 00211176 6/9/2004 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 58.42 AP - 00211176 6/9/2004 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 103.19 AP - 00211177 6/9/2004 GTSI CORP 121.99 AP - 00211177 6/9/2004 GTSI CORP 88.08 AP - 00211177 6/9/2004 GTSI CORP 425.00 AP - 00211177 6/9/2004 GTSI CORP 763.00 AP - 00211177 6/9/2004 GTSI CORP 1,799.41 AP - 00211178 6/9/2004 GUTIERREZ, REX 698.07 AP - 00211179 6/9/2004 HANGER 18 LLC. 294.00 AP - 00211181 6/9/2004 HCS CUTLER STEEL CO 922.79 AP - 00211182 6/9/2004 HEILIG, KELLY 1,277.00 AP - 00211183 6/9/2004 HEINZ TRAINING & CONSULTING 5,000.00 AP - 00211183 6/9/2004 HEINZ TRAINING & CONSULTING 2,500.00 AP - 00211184 6/9/2004 HENRY, LISA 165.00 AP - 00211185 6/9/2004 HERCHENRODER, SHERI 50.00 AP - 00211186 6/9/2004 HILL, GREGORY ROBERT 260.98 AP - 00211188 6/9/2004 HOLLIDAY'ROCK CO INC 78.41 AP - 00211188 6/9/2004 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 33.41 AP - 00211188 6/9/2004 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO/NC 116.63 AP - 00211188 6/9/2004 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 482.83 AP - 00211188 6/9/2004 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 136.03 AP - 00211188 6/9/2004 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 542.79 AP - 00211188 6/9/2004 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 45.00 AP - 00211188 6/9/2004 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 173.71 AP - 00211189 6/9/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 63.03 AP - 00211189 6/9/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 219.55 AP - 00211189 6/9/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 119.47 AP - 00211189 6/9/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 136.50 AP - 00211189 6/9/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 82.00 AP - 00211190 6/9/2004 HOOPER, ALISON 750.00 AP - 00211192 6/9/2004 HOYT, RAYMOND 1,242.30 AP - 00211193 6/9/2004 HSU, STEVE 450.00 AP - 00211195 6/9/2004 HYDROSCAPE PRODUCTS INC 350.00 AP - 00211195 6/9/2004 HYDROSCAPE PRODUCTS INC 185.05 AP - 00211195 6/9/2004 HYDROSCAPE PRODUCTS INC 956.49 AP - 00211195 6/9/2004 HYDROSCAPE PRODUCTS INC 78.20 AP - 00211195 6/9/2004 HYDROSCAPE PRODUCTS INC 69.18 AP - 00211196 6/9/2004 INDEPENDENT ELECTRONICS 256.50 AP - 00211196 6/9/2004 INDEPENDENT ELECTRONICS 342.00 AP - 00211197 6/9/2004 INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY COMPANY 69.07 AP - 00211197 6/9/2004 INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY COMPANY 217.17 AP - 00211199 6/9/2004 INLAND VALLEY DANCE ACADEMY 1,462.50 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 4 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time~ 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211200 6/9/2004 INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL 89.96 AP - 00211201 6/9/2004 INTERSTATE BATTERIES 95.68 AP - 00211202 6/9/2004 ISA 100.00 AP - 00211203 6/9/2004 ISA 200.00 AP - 00211204 6/9/2004 ISA 100.00 AP - 00211205 6/9/2004 JANECEK, LINDA 23.85 AP - 00211206 6/9/2004 JARAMILLO, ELVIA 20.00 AP - 00211207 6/9/2004 JAY INDECK PLUMBING 200.00 AP - 00211208 6/9/2004 JENSEN TREASURER, MARY LOU 50.00 AP 00211209 6/9/2004 JONES, BOB 2,560.00 AP 00211210 6/9/2004 JONES, JAMES 372.60 AP 00211211 6/9/2004 JONES, PHILIP 250.00 AP 00211212 6/9/2004 KC PRINTING & GRAPHICS INC 344.13 AP 00211213 6/9/2004 KELTNER, TRICIA 500.00 AP 00211214 6/9/2004 KERREY CONSULTING, JULES 210.00 AP 00211216 6/9/2004 KOCH MATERIALS COMPANY 89.64 AP 00211217 6/9/2004 KOZLOVICH, DEBBIE 3,054.30 AP - 00211218 6/9/2004 LAIDLAW TRANSIT INC 573.59 AP - 00211219 6/9/2004 LAIRD CONSTRUCTION CO 7,345.00 AP - 00211219 6/9/2004 LAIRD CONSTRUCTION CO -734.50 AP - 00211220 6/9/2004 LANCE SOLL AND LUNGHARD 1,500.00 AP- 00211221 6/9/2004 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 1,261.73 AP - 00211222 6/9/2004 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES 125.00 AP - 00211223 6/9/2004 LEIt41~IzR, LUKAS 243.00 AP- 00211224 6/9/2004 LILSTITCH 425.61 AP - 00211224 6/9/2004 LIL STITCH 120.68 AP - 00211225 6/9/2004 LIM, HEATHER 894.00 AP - 00211228 6/9/2004 LIU, HELEN 32.00 AP - 00211229 6/9/2004 LIVE OAK DOG OBEDIENCE 737.70 AP - 00211230 6/9/2004 LOS ANGELES TIMES 42.00 AP - 00211231 6/9/2004 LOS ANGELES TIMES 42.00 AP - 00211232 6/9/2004 LOWE'S COMPANIES INC. 4.70 AP - 00211232 6/9/2004 LOWE'S COMPANIES INC. 66.35 AP - 00211234 6/912004 LOZA, OMAR 69.50 AP - 00211235 6/9/2004 MAGRUDER, KAKEN 162.00 AP - 00211236 6/9/2004 MARANGAKIS, LORI 55.13 AP - 00211237 6/9/2004 MARIN, SHANNON 25.00 AP - 00211238 6/9/2004 MARIPOSA HORTICULTURAL ENT INC 1,900.00 AP - 00211238 6/9/2004 MARIPOSA HORTICULTURAL ENT INC 760.00 AP - 00211239 6/912004 MARSHALL PLUMBING 556.34 AP - 00211239 6/9/2004 MARSHALL PLUMBING 279.98 AP - 00211240 6/9/2004 MARSHALL, SYLVIA 1,018.70 AP - 00211241 619/2004 MARTINEZ, PETER 105.00 AP - 00211242 6/9/2004 MIDWEST TAPE 62.97 AP - 00211242 6/9/2004 MIDWEST TAPE 108.95 AP - 00211243 6/9/2004 MIJAC ALARM COMPANY 65.00 AP - 00211243 6/9/2004 MIJAC ALARM COMPANY 2,210.00 AP - 00211243 6/9/2004 MHAC ALARM COMPANY 260.00 AP - 0021 i244 6/9/2004 MILLIKEN, KEELY 1,200.00 AP - 00211245 6/9/2004 MITCHELL, WALTER Z 682.50 AP - 00211247 6/9/2004 MOE, JOHN 360.00 AP - 00211248 6/9/2004 MOORE ELECTRIC 250.00 AP - 00211248 6/9/2004 MOORE ELECTRIC 1,000.00 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 5 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time:~,' 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211249 6/9/2004 MORALES, MICHAEL 64.63 AP - 00211249 6/9/2004 MORALES, MICHAEL 30.13 AP - 00211250 6/9/2004 MORRISON, PAUL 312.89 AP - 00211251 6/9/2004 MOUNTAIN VIEW GLASS AND MIRROR 119.58 AP - 00211251 6/9/2004 MOUNTAIN VIEW GLASS AND MIRROR 80.00 AP - 00211252 6/9/2004 MOUNTAIN VIEW SMALL ENG REPAIR 520.31 AP - 00211252 6/9/2004 MOUNTAIN VIEW SMALL ENG REPAIR 75.37 AP - 00211253 6/9/2004 MOUSER, CYNTHIA 28.50 AP - 00211255 6/9/2004 NATHANI, NEETA 39.00 AP - 00211256 6/9/2004 NATIONAL DEFERRED 11,955.61 AP - 00211257 6/9/2004 NATIONS RENT 70.04 AP - 00211258 6/9/2004 NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV CORP. 2.24 AP - 00211259 6/9/2004 O C B REPROGRAPHICS INC 1,001.01 AP - 00211259 6/9/2004 O C B REPROGRAPHICS 1NC 502.04 AP - 00211259 6/9/2004 O C B REPROGRAPHICS INC 884.38 AP - 00211259 6/9/2004 O C B REPROGRAPHICS INC 123.93 AP 00211259 6/9/2004 O C B REPROGRAPHICS INC 162.61 AP 00211259 6/9/2004 O C B REPROGRAPHICS INC 342.32 AP 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 4.89 AP 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 166.87 AP 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 7.41 AP 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 68.22 AP 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 12.36 AP 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 11.76 AP 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 103.99 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 95.57 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT -14.83 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 122.71 AP- 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 118.31 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 24.88 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 71.58 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 220.00 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 47.72 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 332.49 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 1,127.65 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 18.55 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 88.55 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 592.24 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFPICE DEPOT 275.97 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT -8.85 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 40.46 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 5.30 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 319.41 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 73.34 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 5.19 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 67.83 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 22.20 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 11.10 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 123.52 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 26.53 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 330.24 AP- 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 28.90 AP - 00211261 6/9/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 74.22 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 6 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time~ 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Re~ister 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211261 6/912004 OFFICE DEPOT 303.71 AP - 002 ! 1262 6/9/2004 OLIVAS, KELLY 59.00 AP - 00211263 6/9/2004 ONTARIO ICE SKATING CENTER 722.40 AP - 00211264 6/9/2004 OTSUKA, DENNIS 63.00 AP - 00211265 6/9/2004 OWEN ELECTRIC 5.68 AP - 00211266 6/9/2004 PACIFIC PRODUCTS AND SERVICES 2,484.73 AP - 00211268 61912004 PARKER, SHANNON 252.00 AP - 00211269 6~9/2004 PARSAC 80,917.00 AP - 00211270 6~9~2004 PIRRONE, BETSY 60.00 AP- 00211271 6/9/2004 PITASSI ARCHITECTS INC 5,714.24 AP - 00211272 6/9~2004 PMI 1,030.28 AP - 00211273 6/9/2004 PRE-PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC 6.81 AP - 00211274 6/9~2004 PRECISION GYMNASTICS 1,401.40 AP - 00211275 6/9/2004 PRUITT, SHERRY 91.87 AP - 00211277 6/9/2004 RCPFA 6,166.71 AP - 00211278 6/9/2004 RECREONICS CORP 317.69 AP - 00211279 61912004 REED, JOHN 700.00 AP - 00211280 6/9/2004 REXEL CALCON 18.49 AP - 00211280 6/9/2004 REXEL CALCON 212.70 AP - 00211280 6/9/2004 REXEL CALCON 352.71 AP - 00211281 6/9/2004 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 125.00 AP - 00211282 6/9/2004 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 247.39 AP - 00211282 6/9/2004 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 248.36 AP - 00211282 6/9/2004 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 140.83 AP - 00211282 6/9/2004 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 63.03 AP - 00211282 6/9/2004 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 266.68 AP - 00211282 6/9/2004 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 33.94 AP - 00211282 6/9/2004 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 92.13 AP - 00211283 6/9/2004 ROBERT HALF TECHNOLOGY 1,056.00 AP - 00211284 6/9/2004 ROMAN, LISA 98.00 AP - 00211286 6/9/2004 ROUTE 66 MAGAZINE 12.00 AP - 00211287 6/9/2004 SAFETY FIRST 113. ! 3 AP - 00211288 6/9/2004 SALVIATI, MARTHA 210.00 AP - 00211289 6/9/2004 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 92,075.00 AP - 00211290 6/9/2004 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 35.00 AP - 00211291 6/9/2004 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 35.00 AP - 00211292 6/9/2004 SAN BERNARD1NO COUNTY SHERIFFS 278.33 AP - 00211293 6/9/2004 SAN DI~GO ROTARY BROOM CO INC 288.75 AP - 00211293 6/9/2004 SAN DIEGO ROTARY BROOM CO INC 148.69 AP - 00211295 6/9/2004 SHERII~'FS COURT SERVICES 75.00 AP - 00211296 6/9/2004 SIERRA SPRINGS 94.35 AP 00211297 6/9/2004 SIGN SHOP, THE 447.16 AP 00211297 6/9/2004 SIGN SHOP, THE 280.15 AP 00211297 6/9/2004 SIGN SHOP, THE 21.55 AP 00211298 6/9/2004 SMITH, LA DONNA 200.00 AP 00211299 6/9/2004 SOCIAL VOCATIONAL SERVICES 1,500.00 AP 00211299 6/9/2004 SOCIAL VOCATIONAL SERVICES 1,500.00 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2,430.83 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.72 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.59 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.57 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 60.92 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 7 Current Date: 06/30/20¢ Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time7 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 46.17 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.90 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 84.61 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.01 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 0.34 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 19.78 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 19.78 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.21 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.58 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 29.30 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.51 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.14 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.53 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.47 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.46 AP- 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.01 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 91.59 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 119.38 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 149.04 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.03 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 293.16 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 37.54 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 120.56 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 19.28 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 36.13 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.73 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 4,666.32 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 158.83 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTI-IERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 715.08 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 102.41 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 119.38 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.58 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 77.99 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 49.44 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS ON 13.01 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS ON 13.01 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.47 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS ON 12.16 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS ON 12.47 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.47 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 61.77 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.83 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 49.95 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 .SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 24.05 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 68.47 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.69 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 29.11 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.04 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.83 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 36.37 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.57 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 78.40 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.59 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 8 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA_PdEG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Timeilk"~ 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.01 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.28 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.46 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 119.67 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.59 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.58 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.47 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.84 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.15 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 1,424.57 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 71.49 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 43.11 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS ON 12.94 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 101.66 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS ON 12.47 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS ON 14.07 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.68 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 100.05 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.47 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 72.18 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 79.41 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 119.98 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 26.88 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.47 AP 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS ON 83.59 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 8,060.40 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 21.97 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.47 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 60.53 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.47 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 3,053.15 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 1,622.38 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 167.87 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.46 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 54.52 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 100.90 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 76.90 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 49.66 AP - 00211304 6~9~2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 111.14 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.03 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 48.49 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.40 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.04 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.68 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.59 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 25.92 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTH]~RN CALIFORNIA EDISON 148.87 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 309.32 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.01 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 30.05 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 65.41 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 180.80 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 148.02 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 9 Current Date: 06/30/20G Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time~ 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 143.68 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 79.52 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 21.10 AP - 00211304 61912004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 115.12 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.67 AP - 00211304 6/912004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 5,401.17 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTItERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.82 AP - 00211304 6~9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 49.68 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.16 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 142.69 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 77.29 AP - 00211304 6~9~2004 SOUTI-~RN CALIFORNIA EDISON 87.29 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 40.17 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.70 AP - 00211304 6~9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 132.05 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.47 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.59 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.39 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 91.11 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 88.72 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 111.51 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 229.58 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.57 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 4.14 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.48 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.58 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.83 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.47 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 849.32 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 23,154.39 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.58 AP - 002i 1304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.58 AP - 00211304 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 5,131.85 AP - 00211305 6/9/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 5,312.53 AP - 00211306 6/9/2004 SOUTHLAND SPORTS OFFICIALS 332.00 AP - 00211308 6/9/2004 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 269.86 AP - 00211309 6/9/2004 STARK, GAIL 95.00 AP - 00211310 6/9/2004 STEINY AND COMPANY INC 3,667.40 AP - 00211311 6/9/2004 STERLING COIq~EE SERVICE 25.00 AP- 00211311 6/9/2004 STERLING COI~I~EE SERVICE 131.38 AP - 00211311 6/9/2004 STERLING COiq~EE SERVICE 192.45 AP - 00211312 6/9/2004 STOVER SEED COMPANY 3,388.74 AP - 00211315 6/9/2004 SUNSHINE WINDOWS 3,540.00 AP - 00211316 6/9/2004 SURE SHRED DOCUMENT DESTRUCTION 20.00 AP - 00211317 6/9/2004 SWAZE, DAN1ELLE 10.00 AP - 00211319 6/9/2004 TERRY, DONNA 636.00 AP - 00211320 6/9/2004 TIMES COMMUNITY NEWS 126.00 AP - 00211320 6/9/2004 TIMES COMMUNITY NEWS 126.00 AP - 00211320 6/9/2004 TIMES COMMUNITY NEWS 126.00 AP - 00211320 6/9/2004 TIMES COMMUNITY NEWS 126.00 AP - 00211320 6/9/2004 TIMES COMMUNITY NEWS 126.00 AP - 00211321 6/9/2004 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS INC 2,569.09 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 10 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA REG PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time:,A 07:22:2 /0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211322 6/9/2004 TRAFFIC SPECIALTIES 156.78 AP - 00211323 6/9/2004 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 3,455.00 AP - 00211324 6/9/2004 TUTORWHIZ INC 1,234.80 AP - 00211327 6/9/2004 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA TRUSTEE FOR P, 2,618.90 AP - 00211327 6/9/2004 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA TRUSTEE FOR P, 22,260.67 AP 00211328 6/9/2004 UNIQUE CREATIONS 237.57 AP 00211329 6/9/2004 UNITED RENTALS NORTHWEST INC 580.90 AP 00211330 6/9/2004 UNITED WAY 49.00 AP 00211331 6/9/2004 UPLAND TENNIS CLUB 1,365.00 AP 00211332 6/9/2004 VALLEY SLURRY SEAL CO 15,985.52 AP 00211335 6/9/2004 VERIZON 67.35 AP 00211335 6/9/2004 VERIZON 21.89 AP 00211335 6/9/2004 VERIZON 27.91 AP 00211335 6/9/2004 VERIZON 20.41 AP 00211335 6/9/2004 VERIZON 27.91 AP 00211335 6/9/2004 VERIZON 29.33 AP 00211335 6/9/2004 VERIZON 29.33 AP 00211335 6/9/2004 VERIZON 28.88 AP 00211335 6/9/2004 VERIZON 20.41 AP 00211335 6/9/2004 VERIZON 20.41 AP 00211335 6/9/2004 VERIZON 27.56 AP 00211335 6/9/2004 VERIZON 20.41 AP 00211335 6/9/2004 VERIZON 30.68 AP 00211335 6/9/2004 VERIZON 28.88 AP 00211335 6/9/2004 VERIZON 20.41 AP 00211335 6/9/2004 VERIZON 36.44 AP - 00211335 6/9/2004 VERIZON 60.28 AP - 00211335 6/9/2004 VER1ZON 53.16 AP - 00211335 6/9/2004 VERIZON 20.41 AP - 00211335 6/9/2004 VERIZON 20.41 AP - 00211335 6/9/2004 VERIZON 28.34 AP - 00211336 6/9/2004 VERMEER CALIFORNIA 1,449.89 AP - 00211337 6/9/2004 VIGILANCE, TERRENCE 267.75 AP - 00211338 6/9/2004 VISTA PAINT 601.33 AP - 00211339 6/9/2004 VULCAN MATERIALS LA DISTR 35.36 AP - 00211340 6/9/2004 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 162.43 AP - 00211340 6/9/2004 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 10.33 AP - 00211340 6/9/2004 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 593.19 AP - 00211342 6/9/2004 WARREN, JULIE 39.00 AP - 00211343 6/9/2004 WATSON, DON 75.00 AP - 00211344 6/9/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 840.41 AP - 00211344 6/9/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 31.46 AP - 00211344 6/9/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 409.87 AP - 00211344 6/9/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 133.34 AP - 00211344 6/9/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 440.42 AP - 00211344 6/9/2004 WAX1E SANITARY SUPPLY 241.05 AP - 00211344 6/9/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 212.96 AP - 00211344 6/9/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 8.19 AP - 00211344 6/9/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 128.96 AP - 0021t344 6/9/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 416.72 AP - 00211344 6/9/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 41.91 AP - 00211345 6/9/2004 WE DO EQUIFM]~NT REPAIR AND SUPPLY INC 508.87 AP - 00211346 6/9/2004 WEST END FAMILY COUNSELING SERVICES 200.00 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 11 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time:,s 07:22:2 I1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211347 6/9/2004 WEST END MATERIAL SUPPLY 113.90 AP - 00211348 6/9/2004 WEST VALLEY MRF LLC 215.82 AP - 00211348 6/9/2004 WEST VALLEY MRF LLC 9.24 AP - 00211348 6/9/2004 WEST VALLEY MRF LLC 33.33 AP - 00211348 6/9/2004 WEST VALLEY MRF LLC 74.36 AP - 00211348 6/9/2004 WEST VALLEY MRF LLC 125.18 AP - 00211348 6/9/2004 WEST VALLEY MRF LLC 117.26 AP - 00211348 6/9/2004 WEST VALLEY MRF LLC 128.04 AP - 00211348 6/9/2004 WEST VALLEY MRF LLC 148.28 AP - 00211348 6/9/2004 WEST VALLEY MRF LLC 132.00 AP - 00211350 6/9/2004 YOUNG, CORRINE 76.00 AP- 00211351 6/9/2004 ZAILO, ROBERT 187.20 AP - 00211354 6/14/2004 HAAKER EQUIPMENT CO 2,464.38 AP- 00211354 6/14/2004 HAAKER EQUIPMENT CO 2,544.38 AP - 00211355 6/15/2004 GAY, LORIANNE 869.59 AP- 00211356 6/15/2004 KORANDA CONSTRUCTION 7,123.50 AP - 00211357 6/16/2004 A AND A AUTOMOTIVE 50.00 AP - 00211358 6/16/2004 A AND R TIRE SERVICE 8,928.77 AP - 00211359 6/16/2004 AA EQUIPMENT RENTALS CO INC 21.65 AP - 00211359 6/16/2004 AA EQUIPMENT RENTALS CO INC 60.06 AP - 00211360 6/16/2004 AA EQUIPMENT -50.35 AP - 00211360 6/16/2004 AA EQUIPMENT 54.07 AP 00211361 6/16/2004 ABC LOCKSMITHS 70.52 AP 00211362 6/16/2004 ABLAC 281.36 AP 00211363 6/16/2004 ABLETRONICS 2.41 AP 00211365 6/16/2004 ADAMSON, RONALD 1,056.00 AP 00211366 6/16/2004 AFFORDABLE TOW SERVICE 35.00 AP 00211367 6/16/20tM ALEXANDER, WILLIAM J 142.00 AP 00211368 6/16/2004 ALLEN, SYLVESTER R 68.22 AP - 00211369 6/16/2004 ALONSO, SYLVIA 80.00 AP - 00211371 6/16/2004 ALTA LOMA ANIMAL HOSPITAL 50.00 AP - 00211372 6/16/2004 ALTA LOMA HIGH SCHOOL 5,000.00 AP - 00211374 6/16/2004 AMERICAN EXPRESS 75.00 AP- 00211376 6/16/2004 AMTECH ELEVATOR SERVICES 187.00 AP - 00211377 6/16/2004 ARCHIBALD PET HOSPITAL 50.00 AP - 00211378 6/16/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 330.59 AP - 00211378 6/16/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 409.44 AP - 00211378 6/16/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION -283.35 AP- 00211379 6/16/2004 ASSI SECURITY 395.00 AP - 00211379 6/16/2004 ASSI SECURITY 410.00 AP - 002tt380 6/16/2004 ASTRUM UTILITY SERVICES 8,365.00 AP- 00211381 6/16/2004 AUFBAU CORPORATION 7,992.00 AP- 00211381 6/16/2004 AIJFBAU CORPORATION 1,870.00 AP- 00211381 6/16/2004 AUFBAU CORPORATION 4,635.00 AP- 00211382 6/16/2004 AUTO RESTORATORS INC 376.60 AP- 00211382 6/16/2004 AUTO RESTORATORS INC 455.00 AP- 00211382 6/16/2004 AUTO RESTORATORS INC 220.00 AP - 00211383 6/16/2004 AUTOMOTIVE ENVIRONMENTAL & SAFETY El', 517.20 AP - 00211384 6/16/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 218.19 AP - 00211384 6/16/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 205.33 AP - 00211384 6/16/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 808.13 AP - 00211384 6/16/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 365.92 AP - 00211384 6/16/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 228.58 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 12 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time:o .a 07:22:2 /7. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211384 6/16/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 459.14 AP - 00211384 6/16/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 794.66 AP - 00211384 6/16/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 191.99 AP - 00211384 6/16/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 206.07 AP - 00211384 6/16/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 101.29 AP - 00211385 6/16/2004 BAKER, SHARI 600.00 AP - 00211386 6/16/2004 BALDY FIRE AND SAFETY 106.00 AP - 00211388 6/16/2004 BARNES, MELODY 27.40 AP- 00211389 6/16/2004 BARNHART INC 88,881.82 AP - 00211389 6/16/2004 BARNHART INC 633,086.30 AP- 00211389 6/16/2004 BARNHART INC -8,080.16 AP - 002I 1389 6/16/2004 BARNHART INC -42,833.92 AP- 00211389 6/16/2004 BARNHART INC -57,553.30 AP- 00211389 6/16/2004 BARNHART INC 471,173.21 AP- 00211391 6/16/2004 BOCTOR, ALFRED 100.00 AP- 00211393 6/16/2004 BROWER, DENISE 264.00 AP - 00211394 6/16/2004 BRUCE, INGRID 57.08 AP - 00211394 6/16/2004 BRUCE, INGRID 30.04 AP - 00211395 6/16/2004 BURNETT DEVELOPMENT CORP 1,698.00 AP - 00211396 6/16/2004 BURNS, SUSAN 40.00 AP - 00211397 6/16/2004 BUTLER, ALMA 80.00 AP - 00211398 6/16/2004 CALIFORNIA FRANCHISE TAX BOARD 22.50 AP - 00211398 6/16/2004 CALIFORNIA FRANCHISE TAX BOARD 25.00 AP - 00211399 6/16/2004 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 16,000.00 AP - 00211400 6/16/2004 CAMASTRA, MARY ANN 184.00 AP - 00211401 6/16/2004 CAMERON WELDING SUPPLY 17.92 AP - 00211402 6/16/2004 CARLOS, BRENDA 76.00 AP - 00211403 6/16/2004 CARRILLO, AMBER 98.00 AP - 00211403 6/16/2004 CARRILLO, AMBER 7.50 AP - 00211404 6/16/2004 CCI HERNDON SA LLC 847.50 AP 00211405 6/16/2004 CHARTER MEDIA 324.00 AP 00211405 6/16/2004 CHARTER MEDIA 702.00 AP 00211405 6/16/2004 CHARTER MEDIA 842.00 AP 00211406 6/16/2004 CHAVEZ, CONNY 50.00 AP 00211408 6/16/2004 CITY RENTALS 279.30 AP 00211409 6/16/2004 CLARKE PLUMBING SPECIALTIES INC. 155.71 AP - 00211410 6/16/2004 CLEAR CHANNEL BROADCASTING INC. 3,650.00 AP 00211412 6/16/2004 COLTON TRUCK SUPPLY 1.72 AP 00211412 6/16/2004 COLTON TRUCK SUPPLY 22.97 AP 00211412 6/16/2004 COLTON TRUCK SUPPLY 104.91 AP 00211412 6/16/2004 COLTON TRUCK SUPPLY 110.99 AP 00211412 6/16/2004 COLTON TRUCK SUPPLY 5.26 AP 00211412 6/16/2004 COLTON TRUCK SUPPLY 178.43 AP 00211412 6/16/2004 COLTON TRUCK SUPPLY 31.00 AP 00211412 6/16/2004 COLTON TRUCK SUPPLY 54.98 AP 00211414 6/16/2004 COURT TRUSTEE 118.50 AP 00211414 6/16/2004 COURT TRUSTEE 200.00 AP 00211415 6/16/2004 CREATIVE BUILDING CONCEPT 1,000.00 AP 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,003.93 AP 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 211.48 AP- 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 295.53 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 126.83 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 157.43 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 13 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time:,~ ~ 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 tlu-ough 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 104.98 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 248.73 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 605.93 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 157.53 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 6,405.43 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 95.78 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 144.46 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 187.89 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 247.36 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 221.03 AP- 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER'DISTRICT 156.86 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 341.43 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 844.43 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 203.93 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 199.36 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 404.78 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 87.38 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 298.88 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 198.83 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 146.38 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 176.98 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 52.08 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 259.88 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 147.08 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 40.88 AP - 00211416 6/16/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 79.33 AP - 00211417 6/16/2004 D 7 CONSULTING INC 500.00 AP- 00211418 6/16/2004 DAPPER TIRE CO 56.76 AP- 00211419 6/16/2004 DAPPER TIRE CO 1,656.56 AP- 00211420 6/16/2004 DAVIS, GEORGE 175.00 AP - 00211421 6/16/2004 DEER CREEK CAR CARE CENTER 59.50 AP - 00211422 6/16/2004 DEPARTMENT ISSUE INCORPORATED 1,099.05 AP - 00211424 6/16/2004 DIETER/CH INTERNATIONAL TRUCK 8.01 AP - 00211424 6/16/2004 DIETERICH INTERNATIONAL TRUCK 35.29 AP - 00211424 6/16/2004 DIETERICH INTERNATIONAL TRUCK 153.90 AP- 00211425 6/16/2004 DIRECT SOURCE LEASING 3,791.25 AP - 00211426 6/16/2004 DOMINGUEZ, ROBERTO 2,640.00 AP - 00211427 6/16/2004 DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATION 196.50 AP - 00211427 6/16/2004 DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATION 201.79 AP - 00211428 6/16/2004 EDIOR, ANTHONY 80.00 AP - 00211429 6/16/2004 EIGHTH AVENUE GRAPHICS 2,289.64 AP- 00211431 6/16/2004 ESRI INC 630.43 AP- 00211432 6/16/2004 EVENHUIS, ERIC 200.00 AP- 00211433 6/16/2004 EXCLUSIVE EMAGES 25.86 AP - 00211434 6/16/2004 F S MOTOR SPORTS INC 145.00 AP - 00211434 6/16/2004 F S MOTOR SPORTS INC 200.00 AP - 00211434 6/16/2004 F S MOTOR SPORTS INC 585.00 AP - 00211434 6/16/2004 F S MOTOR SPORTS INC 423.32 AP - 00211434 6/16/2004 F S MOTOR SPORTS INC 150.00 AP - 00211434 6/16/2004 F S MOTOR SPORTS INC 150.00 AP - 00211435 6/16/2004 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 17.02 AP - 00211435 6/16/2004 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 22.38 AP - 00211435 6/16/2004 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 17.35 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 14 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA REG PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time:ttt 07:22:2 1"/ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211435 6/1612004 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 19.86 AP - 00211435 6/16/2004 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 20.86 AP - 00211437 6/16/2004 FIRST PLACE TROPHIES 370.07 AP- 00211438 6/16/2004 FLEET GLASS 38.50 AP- 00211439 6/16/2004 FLUORESCOLIGHTING 1,217.81 AP - 00211440 6/16/2004 FORD OF UPLAND INC 75.89 AP - 00211440 6/16/2004 FORD OF UPLAND INC 13.79 AP - 00211441 6/16/2004 FOWLKES, TINA 49.00 AP - 0021 I443 6/16/2004 FREEMAN, RENAE 1,665.00 AP - 00211444 6/16/2004 FRIEND, PAUL 440.00 AP - 00211445 6/16/2004 GALLS INC 227.24 AP- 00211445 6/16/2004 GALLS INC 995.91 AP - 00211445 6/16/2004 GALLS INC 207.85 AP- 00211450 6/16/2004 GRANADOS, CINDY 62.00 AP - 00211451 6/16/2004 GRAY, CATHY 5.00 AP - 00211452 6/16/2004 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 58.62 AP - 00211452 6/16/2004 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 217.42 AP 00211452 6/16/2004 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 922.21 AP 00211452 6/16/2004 GREEN ROCK POWER EQUIPMENT 90.64 AP 00211453 6/16/2004 GTSI CORP 1,043.02 AP 00211454 6/16/2004 GUZMAN, DAWN 100.00 AP 00211455 6/16/201M HAKIMI, SUSAN 255.82 AP 00211456 6/16/2004 HARBIN, JERRY 76.00 AP 00211457 6/16/2004 HARDY, BRADLEY 260.50 AP 00211458 6/16/2004 HOFFMAN ASSOCIATES, STANLEY R 9,000.00 AP 00211458 6/16/2004 HOFFMAN ASSOCIATES, STANLEY R 400.00 AP 00211459 6/16/2004 HOLIDAY PRINTING 18,811.09 AP - 00211460 6/16/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 29.46 AP - 00211460 6/16/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 41.99 AP - 00211460 6/16/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 24.67 AP - 002I 1460 6/16/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 27.59 AP - 00211461 6/16/2004 HOSE MAN INC 569.10 AP- 0021146I 6/16/2004 HOSE MAN INC 27.67 AP- 00211461 6/16/2004 HOSE MAN INC 63.54 AP - 00211462 6/16/2004 HOYT LUMBER CO., SM 223.74 AP - 00211462 6/16/2004 HOYT LUMBER CO., SM 217.22 AP - 00211463 6/16/2004 HUAMAN, IVAN 15.00 AP- 00211463 6/16/2004 HUAMAN, IVAN 15.00 AP- 00211463 6/16/2004 HUAMAN, IVAN 15.00 AP - 00211464 6/16/2004 HULS ENVIRONMENTAL MGT LLC 9,783.75 AP - 00211465 6/16/2004 HUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN BERNARDINO VALI 50.00 AP- 00211466 6/16/2004 HURST, CHERYL 288.50 AP- 00211467 6/16/2004 HYDROSCAPE PRODUCTS INC 42.62 AP - 00211468 6/16/2004 INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY COMPANY 148.87 AP- 00211468 6/16/2004 INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY COMPANY 92.21 AP - 00211469 6/16/2004 INIGUEZ, DAVID 200.00 AP - 00211470 6/16/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 195.50 AP - 00211470 6/16/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 354.20 AP - 00211470 6/16/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 348.45 AP - 00211470 6/16/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 342.70 AP - 00211470 6/16/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 124.20 AP - 00211470 6/16/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 420.90 AP - 00211470 6/16/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 156.40 User: AItAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 15 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time:, ~, 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211470 6/16/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 78.20 AP - 00211470 6/16/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 110.40 AP - 00211470 6/16/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 648.60 AP - 00211470 6/16/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 600.30 AP - 00211470 6/16/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 604.90 AP - 00211470 6/16/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 621.00 AP - 00211470 6/16/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 326.60 AP - 00211470 6/16/2004 INLAND VALLEY DALLY BULLETIN 169.05 AP - 00211470 6/16/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 190.90 AP - 00211470 6/16/2004 INLAND VALLEY DALLY BULLETIN 166.75 AP - 00211470 6/16/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 611.80 AP - 00211470 6/16/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 627.90 AP - 00211470 6/16/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BUIJ~ETIN 156.40 AP - 00211471 6/16/2004 INLAND WATER WORKS SUPPLY COMPANY 207.96 AP - 00211471 6/16/2004 INLAND WATER WORKS SUPPLY COMPANY 1,997.44 AP - 00211471 6/16/2004 INLAND WATER WORKS SUPPLY COMPANY 1,540.83 AP - 00211472 6/16/2004 INLAND WHOLESALE NURSERY 150.85 AP - 00211474 6/16/2004 INTERSTATE BATTERIES 228.34 AP- 00211475 6/16/2004 JOHNSON POWER SYSTEMS 2,373.98 AP - 00211476 6/16/2004 JOHNSON, KlM 76.00 AP - 00211477 6/16/2004 KEAN, CATHY 80.00 AP- 00211478 6/16/2004 KELLEY BLUE BOOK 56.00 AP - 00211479 6/16/2004 KENDRENA, DONNA 12.47 AP - 00211479 6/16/2004 KENDRENA, DONNA 5.45 AP - 00211479 6/16/2004 KENDRENA, DONNA 7.99 AP - 00211479 6/16/2004 KENDRENA, DONNA 14.97 AP - 00211479 6/16/2004 KENDRENA, DONNA 10.19 AP - 00211479 6/16/2004 KENDRENA, DONNA 12.76 AP - 00211479 6/16/2004 KENDRENA, DONNA 17.97 AP - 00211479 6/16/2004 KENDRENA, DONNA 7.88 AP - 00211479 6/16/2004 KENDRENA, DONNA 41.96 AP - 00211479 6/16/2004 KENDRENA, DONNA 11.18 AP- 00211479 6/16/2004 KENDRENA, DONNA 7.21 AP - 00211479 6/16/2004 KENDRENA, DONNA 25.46 AP - 00211479 6/16/2004 KENDRENA, DONNA 43.08 AP - 00211479 6/16/2004 KENDRENA, DONNA 6.99 AP- 00211479 6/16/2004 KENDRENA, DONNA 16.46 AP- 00211479 6/16/2004 KENDRENA, DONNA 17.00 AP- 00211480 6/16/2004 KING, BRENDA 235.57 AP - 00211482 6/16/2004 KOMAR INVESTMENTS LLC 213.00 AP - 00211483 6/16/2004 KORANDA CONSTRUCTION 125.00 AP - 00211484 6/16/2004 KRAZAN AND ASSOCIATES INC 3,840.00 AP - 00211485 6/16/2004 KSPA AM 2,154.28 AP- 00211486 6/16/2004 LAING, STEVE 30.00 AP- 00211487 6/16/2004 LAIRD CONSTRUCTION CO 1,179.77 AP - 00211489 6/16/2004 LEIIqqzR, LUKAS 288.00 AP - 00211490 6/16/2004 LGC HOMECOMING AT TERRA VISTA LL~t 134.25 AP - 00211493 6/16/2004 LOPEZ, ROBERT 60.00 AP - 00211494 6/16/2004 LOS ANGELES FREIGHTLINER 49.72 AP - 00211494 6/16/2004 LOS ANGELES FREIGHTLINER 28.02 AP - 00211494 6/16/2004 LOS ANGELES FREIGHTLINER 103.27 AP - 00211496 6/16/2004 LOWER, DARLENE 251.00 AP - 00211499 6/16/2004 MARANGAKIS, LORI 42.87 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 16 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA REG PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time.~/ 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 002I I500 6/16/2004 MARK A. AND HOLLY A. HARTWIG 588.32 AP - 00211500 6/16/2004 MARK A. AND HOLLY A. HARTWIG 165.00 AP- 00211501 6/16/2004 MARK CHRIS INC 472.50 AP- 00211501 6/16/2004 MARK CHRIS INC 66.08 AP- 00211501 6/16/2004 MARK CHRIS INC 34.29 AP- 00211502 6/16/2004 MARSHALL PLUMBING 101.00 AP - 00211502 6/16/2004 MARSHALL PLUMBING 673.56 AP - 00211502 6/16/2004 MARSHALL PLUMBING 22.44 AP - 00211502 6/16/2004 MARSHALL PLUMBING 77.00 AP - 00211503 6/16/2004 MARTINEZ UNION SERVICE 45.00 AP - 00211504 611612004 MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 42.34 AP - 00211505 6/16/2004 McDANIEL, SANDY 200.00 AP - 00211506 6/16/2004 MCMURRAY AND STERN INC 499.00 AP - 00211507 6/16/2004 MDS CONSULTING 2,550.00 AP - 00211509 6/16/2004 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 144.50 AP - 00211509 6/16/2004 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 429.74 AP - 00211509 6/16/2004 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 254.08 AP- 00211509 6/16/2004 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 135.83 AP - 00211509 6/16/2004 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 144.50 AP - 00211509 6/16/2004 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 144.50 AP - 00211509 6/16/2004 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 170.00 AP - 00211509 6/16/2004 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 45.00 AP- 00211509 6/16/2004 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 427.I0 AP - 00211509 6/16/2004 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 144.50 AP - 00211509 6/16/2004 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 165.50 AP - 00211509 6/16/2004 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 426.39 AP - 00211509 6/16/2004 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 144.50 AP - 00211509 6/16/2004 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 144.50 AP - 00211509 6/16/2004 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 144.50 AP - 00211509 6/16/2004 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 144.50 AP- 00211510 6/16/2004 MIDWEST TAPE 109.89 AP- 00211510 6/16/2004 MIDWEST TAPE 54.97 AP - 00211511 6/16/2004 MOUNTAIN VIEW GLASS AND MIRROR 200.00 AP - 00211511 6/16/2004 MOUNTAIN VIEW GLASS AND MIRROR 554.55 AP - 00211512 6/16/2004 MOUNTAIN VIEW SMALL ENG REPAIR 289.33 AP- 00211513 6/16/2004 N M A DUES C/O NAOMI ROBERTS 8.31 AP- 00211514 6/16/2004 NATIONAL DEFERRED 26,111.53 AP - 00211516 6/16/2004 NATURE TECH LANDSCAPE INC 7,886.80 AP - 00211517 6/16/2004 NBSGOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP 3,750.00 AP - 00211517 6/16/2004 NBSGOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP 5,250.00 AP - 00211517 6/16/2004 NBSGOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP 2,250.00 AP- 00211518 6/16/2004 NEAULT, SHARON 76.00 AP- 00211519 6/16/2004 NESTOR TRAFFIC SYSTEMS 33,840.00 AP- 00211521 6/16/2004 NEWTON, CRAIG 300.00 AP - 00211522 6/16/2004 NIKPOUR, MOHAMMED 90.00 AP- 00211523 6/16/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 55.78 AP- 00211523 6/16/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 175.80 AP- 00211523 6/16/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 67.99 AP- 00211523 6/16/2004 OFFICE DEPOT -55.90 AP- 00211523 6/16/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 347.87 AP- 00211523 6/16/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 20.32 AP- 00211523 6/16/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 81.20 AP- 00211523 6/16/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 828.55 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 17 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time'- ,,~ 07:22:2 / 7 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211523 6/16/20~4 OFFICE DEPOT 1,~/65.20 AP - 00211523 6/16/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 33.40 AP - 00211524 6/16/2004 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 35.73 AP - 00211524 6/16/2004 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 140.03 AP - 00211524 6/16/2004 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 42.63 AP - 00211524 6/16/2004 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 755.68 AP - 00211524 6/16/2004 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 117.81 AP- 00211524 6/16/2004 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 131.41 AP - 00211525 6/16/2004 OWEN ELECTRIC 24.24 AP - 00211525 6/16/2004 OWEN ELECTRIC 124.49 AP - 00211526 6/16/2004 P A P A 55.00 AP - 00211527 6/16/2004 PACIFIC EQUIP AND IRRIGATION INC 125.32 AP - 00211527 6/16/2004 PACIFIC EQUIP AND IRRIGATION INC 303.83 AP - 00211528 6/16/2004 PACIFICARE OF CALIFORNIA 59,057.53 AP - 00211528 6/16/2004 PACIFICARE OF CALIFORNIA 2,178.06 AP - 00211530 6/16/2004 PENNELL, JENNIFER 60.29 AP - 00211532 6/16/2004 PEP BOYS 33.60 AP - 00211535 6/16/2004 PETES ROAD SERVICE INC 197.70 AP- 00211536 6/16/2004 PETPRO PRODUCTS INC 618.21 AP - 00211537 6/16/2004 PHOTOGRAPHY BY KENNETH 35.00 AP- 00211538 6/16/2004 POMA DISTRIBUTING CO 2,221.40 AP - 00211539 6/16/2004 POMONA VALLEY KAWASAKI 436.20 AP - 00211540 6/16/2004 POURHASSANIAN, ABBY 100.00 AP - 00211541 6/16/2004 PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION INC 163.45 AP - 00211542 6/16/2004 PRE-PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC 156.63 AP - 00211544 6/16/2004 PROTECTION SERVICE INDUSTRIES L.P. 99.37 AP - 00211544 6/16/2004 PROTECTION SERVICE INDUSTRIES L.P. 93.70 AP - 00211545 6/16/2004 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 7.00 AP - 00211545 6/16/2004 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 7.00 AP- 00211547 6/1612004 QUINTANA, ZITA 193.00 AP - 00211548 6/16/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 88.95 AP- 00211548 6/16/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 933.96 AP - 00211548 6/16/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 381.70 AP - 00211548 6/16/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 27.50 AP - 00211548 6/16/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 27.50 AP - 00211548 6/16/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 1,994.33 AP - 00211548 6/16/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 330.03 AP - 00211548 6/16/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 41.92 AP - 00211548 6/16/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 244.00 AP - 0021t548 6/16/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 389.82 AP 00211548 6/16/2004 R ANDR AUTOMOTIVE 230.38 AP 00211548 6/16/2004 R ANDR AUTOMOTIVE 465.38 AP 00211548 6/16/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 335.15 AP 00211548 6/16/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 285.80 AP 00211548 6/16/2004 RANDR AUTOMOTIVE 356.19 AP 00211548 6/16/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 267.00 AP 00211548 6/16/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 402.71 AP 00211548 6/16/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 30.00 AP 00211548 6/16/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 41.92 AP - 00211548 6/16/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 235.59 AP - 00211548 6/16/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 517.89 AP - 00211548 6/16/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 212.12 AP - 00211548 6/i6/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 771.36 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 18 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time4 ~ 07:22:2 / CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211548 6/16/2004 R AND R AUTOMOTIVE 734.21 AP - 00211549 6/16/2004 R H F INC 94.12 AP - 00211550 6/16/2004 RANCHO CUCAMONGA CHAMBER OF COMME1 200.00 AP - 00211551 6/16/2004 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FONTANA FAMILY YM~ 1,075.57 AP - 00211552 6/16/2004 RANGEL, CARMEN 200.00 AP - 00211554 6/16/2004 RBM LOCK AND KEY SERVICE 7.54 AP - 00211554 6/16/2004 RBM LOCK AND KEY SERVICE 5.82 AP - 00211555 6/16/2004 REINI-IARDT, RITA 840.00 AP - 00211556 6/16/2004 REINI-IARDTSEN, DEBRA 282.50 AP - 00211558 6/16/2004 REXEL CALCON 122.84 AP - 00211560 6/16/2004 RIVERSIDE CO DEPT CHILD SUPPORT 226.00 AP - 00211561 6/16/2004 RIVERSIDE CO DEPT CHILD SUPPORT 250.00 AP - 00211563 6/16/2004 ROBERT HALF TECHNOLOGY 1,056.00 AP - 00211563 6/16/2004 ROBERT HALF TECHNOLOGY 792.00 AP - 00211564 6/16/2004 ROBLES SR, RAUL P 85.00 AP - 00211564 6/16/2004 ROBLES SR, RAUL P 135.00 AP - 00211565 6/16/2004 ROJAS, TERI 190.00 AP - 00211566 6/16/2004 ROWLEY, DEVI BISHOP 205.00 AP - 00211567 6/16/2004 SAKELLARIADIS, VASILIO 90.00 AP - 00211568 6/16/2004 SAN BERNARDINO CO FIRE DEPT 19.80 AP - 00211570 6/16/2004 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 109.54 AP - 00211571 6/16/2004 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFFS 1,139,408.00 AP - 00211571 6/16/2004 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFFS 12,680.00 AP - 00211571 6/16/2004 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFFS 24,281.00 AP - 00211572 6/16/2004 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL 19,625.00 AP - 00211574 6/16/2004 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT 180.00 AP - 00211575 6/16/2004 SAN BERNARD1NO CTY CHILD SUPPORT PAY1M 213.00 AP - 00211576 6/16/2004 SAN BERNARDINO CTY CHILD SUPPORT PAYiM 213.50 AP - 00211577 6/16/2004 SAN DIEGO NATIONAL BANK 8,080.16 AP - 00211577 6/16/2004 SAN DIEGO NATIONAL BANK 57,553.30 AP - 00211577 6/16/2004 SAN DIEGO NATIONAL BANK 42,833.93 AP q 00211578 6/16/2004 SANCHEZ, MIRYAM 62.00 AP - 00211579 6/16/2004 SANDOVAL, BLANCA 40.00 AP - 00211580 6/16/2004 SANTA FE SPRINGS, CITY OF 452.54 AP- 00211581 6/16/2004 SBC 55.23 AP- 00211581 6/16/2004 SBC 55.23 AP- 00211581 6/16/2004 SBC 5,214.19 AP - 00211582 6/16/2004 SHEA INFORMATION SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENq 750.00 AP - 00211583 6/16/2004 SHEARER, JANA 200.00 AP- 00211584 6/16/2004 SHOETERIA 150.00 AP- 00211584 6/16/2004 SHOETERIA 150.00 AP- 00211584 6/16/2004 SHOETERIA 150.00 AP- 00211584 6/16/2004 SHOETERIA 150.00 AP- 00211584 6/16/2004 SHOETERIA 150.00 AP- 00211584 6/16/2004 SHOETERIA 150.00 AP - 00211584 6/16/2004 SHOETERIA -37.17 AP- 00211584 6/16/2004 SHOETERIA 150.00 AP- 00211584 6/16/2004 SHOETERIA 126.06 AP- 00211585 6/16/2004 SIMS, DIANA LAURIE 250.00 AP- 00211586 6/16/2004 SMART AND FINAL 36.29 AP- 00211587 6/16/2004 SMIDERLE, BEA 8,000.00 AP- 00211588 6/16/2004 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 38.87 AP- 00211588 6/16/2004 SO CALlF GAS COMPANY 194.31 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 19 Current Date: 06/30/20E Report:CK AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time;//~, 07:22:2 /'/ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP- 00211588 6/16/2004 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 168.87 AP - 00211588 6/16/2004 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 1,799.24 AP - 00211588 6/16/2004 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 160.11 AP - 00211589 6/16/2004 SONSATIONAL ACTIVITIES 3,000.00 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.89 AP- 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 22.98 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.46 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 21.60 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 79.66 AP- 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 56.17 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 106.08 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 137.86 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 101.72 AP- 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.33 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.04 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.46 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIEORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.57 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 90.88 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.33 AP- 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 22.17 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.04 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 64.00 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 107.94 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 8,060.40 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 74.48 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 997.34 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 1,069.33 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 20.60 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 22.59 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 39.78 AP- 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 47.85 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 38.83 AP - 00211592 6/1612004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 30.58 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP- 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 124.42 AP- 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 438.66 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP- 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 24.36 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 143.49 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 62.91 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 156.11 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 90.88 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 20 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA REG PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time~.A 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP- 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 148.15 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 34.14 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 54.51 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP- 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.36 AP- 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 667.43 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 66.69 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.00 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.33 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 19.10 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.71 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON '~ 13.61 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 34.10 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 6.95 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 40.31 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 8.88 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.46 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ' 59.67 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 86.82 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 20.27 AP 00211592 6/t6/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.71 AP 00211592 6/t6/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 48.31 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.10 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SoIYrHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CAL1FORNIA EDISON 26.41 AP 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 44.99 AP- 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 49.12 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP - 00211592 6/16/201M SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 56.48 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.82 AP- 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 56.45 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 90.26 AP- 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 70.91 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 115.09 AP- 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP- 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.61 AP- 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.33 AP- 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.61 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.55 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP - 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.46 AP ~ 00211592 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP - 00211593 6/16/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 10,476.36 AP- 00211594 6/16/2004 SPARKLETTS 226.75 AP - 00211596 6/i6/2004 STEINY AND COMPANY INC 30,780.00 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 21 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Tim~:~ / 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211596 6/16/2004 STEINY AND COMPANY INC 5,875.09 AP - 00211596 6/16/2004 STE1NY AND COMPANY INC -587.51 AP - 00211596 6/16/2004 STEINY AND COMPANY INC -587.51 AP - 00211596 6/16/2004 STEINY AND COMPANY INC -5,237.57 AP - 00211596 6/16/2004 STEINY AND COMPANY INC 5,875.09 AP - 00211596 6/16/2004 STEINY AND COMPANY INC -3,078.00 AP - 00211596 6/16/2004 STEINY AND COMPANY INC 52,375.69 AP- 00211597 6/16/2004 STOFA, JOSEPH 15.00 AP - 00211599 6/16/2004 SUNRISE FORD 53.34 AP- 00211599 6/16/2004 SUNRISE FORD 16.32 AP - 00211602 6/16/2004 TAUSSIG AND ASSOCIATES INC, DAVID 1,444.69 AP - 00211603 6/16/2004 TEMP POWER SYSTEMS 120.00 AP - 00211603 6/16/2004 TEMP POWER SYSTEMS 110.00 AP - 00211604 6/16/2004 TERICH, CINDY 40.00 AP- 00211605 6/16/2004 TIMES COMMUNITY NEWS 126.00 AP 00211605 6/16/2004 TIMES COMMUNITY NEWS 126.00 AP 00211605 6/16/2004 TIMES COMMUNITY NEWS 126.00 AP 00211605 6/16/2004 TIMES COMMUNITY NEWS 126.00 AP 00211606 6/16/2004 TOMARKSPORTS INC 142.22 AP 00211606 6/16/2004 TOMARKSPORTS INC 968.36 AP 00211606 6/16/2004 TOMARK SPORTS INC 106.90 AP 00211606 6/16/2004 TOMARK SPORTS INC 384.20 AP 00211607 6/16/2004 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 9,008.00 AP - 00211608 6/16/2004 TURCH AND ASSOCIATES, DAVID 4,000.00 AP- 00211609 6/16/2004 TYPECARE 55.00 AP - 00211610 6/16/2004 UNII~IRST UNiFORM SERVICE 46.48 AP - 00211610 6/16/2004 UNiFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 36.99 AP - 00211610 6/16/2004 UN1FIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 555.76 AP - 00211610 6/16/2004 UNiFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 36.99 AP - 00211610 6/16/2004 UNII~'IRST UNiFORM SERVICE 101.58 AP - 00211610 6/16/2004 UNiFIRST UNiFORM SERVICE 36.99 AP - 00211610 6/16/2004 UNIFIRST UNiFORM SERVICE 561.46 AP- 00211610 6/16/2004 UN 11~ IRST UNIFORM SERVICE 116.45 AP - 00211610 6/16/2004 LINiFIRST UNiFORM SERVICE 179.28 AP - 00211610 6/16/2004 UNII~IRST UNIFORM SERVICE 24.91 AP - 00211610 6/16/2004 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 46.48 AP- 00211610 6/16/2004 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 23.56 AP - 00211610 6/16/2004 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 23.56 AP - 00211612 6/16/2004 UNITED CALiFORNIA FACTORS 28.02 AP- 00211613 6/16/2004 UNITED WAY 590.32 AP- 00211614 6/16/2004 UPS 49.45 AP - 00211614 6/16/2004 UPS 36.71 AP - 00211614 6/16/2004 UPS 44.44 AP - 00211614 6/16/2004 UPS 21.07 AP- 00211614 6/16/2004 UPS 28.04 AP- 00211616 6/16/2004 VAZQUEZ, CLARA 14.00 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 82.74 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 48.53 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 70.92 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP - 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 85.04 AP - 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 93.47 User: AHAWORTH ~ Ann Haworth Page: 22 Current Date: 06/30/20¢ Report:CK_AGENDA REG PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time:.. ~ 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP-00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 29.34 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 58.70 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 27.58 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 27.56 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 180.11 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 591.93 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 545.95 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 821.88 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 29.33 AP - 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 375.71 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 386.74 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 31.49 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 59.76 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 29.34 AP - 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 318.09 AP - 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 28.65 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 29.34 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 47.06 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 464.25 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 42.54 AP ~ 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 205.43 AP- 00211617 6/16/2004 VERIZON 464.25 AP- 00211618 6/16/2004 VERIZON 1,805.03 AP - 00211619 6/16/2004 VIGILANCE, TERRENCE 357.00 AP - 00211620 6/16/2004 VOLM, LIZA 112.50 AP - 00211621 6/16/2004 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 779.74 AP - 00211622 6/16/2004 WARD, DESIREE 525.00 AP - 00211623 6/16/2004 WASHINGTON, LINDA 100.00 AP - 00211624 6/16/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 71.44 AP - 00211624 6/16/2004 WAXI~ SANITARY SUPPLY 169.71 AP - 00211624 6/16/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 78.52 AP - 00211624 6/16/2004 WAX1E SANITARY SUPPLY 339.41 AP ~ 00211624 6/16/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 908.46 AP - 00211624 6/16/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 71.44 AP - 00211624 6/16/2004 WAX1E SANITARY SUPPLY 944.04 AP - 00211624 6/16/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 305.24 AP- 00211624 6/16/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 998.33 AP - 00211624 6/16/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY -36.85 AP- 00211625 6/16/2004 WEST, PATRICIA 32.00 AP - 00211626 6/16/2004 WESTIN ST FRANCIS, THE 588.65 AP - 00211627 6/16/2004 WESTIN ST FRANCIS, THE 588.65 AP- 00211628 6/16/2004 WHITSON, CLINTON R 100.00 AP- 00211629 6/i6/2004 WILSON AND BELL 202.05 AP- 00211629 6/16/2004 WILSON AND BELL 376.29 AP- 00211630 6/16/2004 WOLSKI, GRETCHEN 28.95 AP- 00211630 6/16/2004 WOLSKI, GRETCHEN 98.00 AP - 00211631 · 6/16/2004 XEROX CORPORATION 150.53 AP- 0021163i 6/16/2004 XEROX CORPORATION 150.53 AP- 00211631 6/16/2004 XEROX CORPORATION 1,794.04 AP- 00211632 6/16/2004 XEROX CORPORATION 1,151.10 AP - 00211633 6/16/2004 YEE, LARRY 93.00 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 23 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA REG PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time2,~ ,.~, 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP- 00211634 6/16/2004 YORK INDUSTRIES 792.01 AP - 00211636 6/16/2004 ZEP MANUFACTURING COMPANY 838.08 AP - 00211637 6/16/2004 ZWISSLER, JAMES 100.00 AP - 00211638 6/16/2004 F S MOTOR SPORTS INC 150.00 AP - 00211638 6/16/2004 F S MOTOR SPORTS INC 150.00 AP - 00211638 6/16/2004 F S MOTOR SPORTS INC 423.32 AP - 00211638 6/16/2004 F S MOTOR SPORTS 1NC 200.00 AP - 00211638 6/16/2004 F S MOTOR SPORTS INC 585.00 AP - 00211639 6/16/2004 FILTER RECYCLING SERVICE INC 145.00 AP - 00211641 6/21/2004 ALTA LOMA ASSISTED LIVING LLC 6,443.25 AP - 00211642 6/21/2004 CLOUT 80.00 AP - 00211643 6/21/2004 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 1,344.00 AP - 00211643 6/21/2004 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 480.00 AP- 00211643 6/21/2004 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 1,812.00 AP- 00211643 6/21/2004 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 2,912.00 AP - 00211643 6/21/2004 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 2,507.00 AP - 00211643 6/21/2004 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 2,191.00 AP - 00211643 6/21/2004 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 3,211.00 AP - 00211643 6/21/2004 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 1,680.00 AP - 00211644 6/21/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 143.67 AP - 00211644 6/21/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 857.69 AP - 00211645 6/21/2004 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 331.00 AP - 00211646 6/21/2004 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 36.00 AP - 00211647 6/22/2004 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 3,337.00 AP - 00211647 6/22/2004 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 3,095.00 AP - 00211647 6/22/2004 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 4,052.00 AP - 00211648 6/22/2004 CMTA 5.00 AP - 00211648 6/22/2004 CMTA 20.00 AP- 00211648 6/22/2004 CMTA 25.00 AP - 00211651 6/23/2004 A.C.I. GROUP 500.00 AP - 00211652 6/23/2004 ABC LOCKSMITHS 23.23 AP- 00211653 6/23/2004 ABLAC 16.39 AP - 00211655 6/23/2004 ADAMSON, RONALD 1,287.00 AP - 00211657 6/23/2004 ADT SECURITY SERVICES INC 331.14 AP - 00211659 6/23/2004 AIR CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENTS 50.00 AP - 00211660 6/23/2004 ALCO PRODUCTS INC 299.98 AP - 00211662 6/23/2004 ALLERTON, SHEILA 27.50 AP - 00211663 6/23/2004 ALLIGATOR AL 500.00 AP - 00211665 6/23/2004 ALTA LOMA ANIMAL HOSPITAL 25.00 AP - 00211666 6/23/2004 AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATION 147.50 AP - 00211667 6/23/2004 AMTECH ELEVATOR SERVICES 146.31 AP - 00211667 6/23/2004 AMTECH ELEVATOR SERVICES 146.31 AP - 00211667 6/23/2004 AMTECH ELEVATOR SERVICES 179.00 AP - 00211668 6/23/2004 ARBOR NURSERY INC 302.53 AP - 00211668 6/23/2004 ARBOR NURSERY INC 400.00 AP - 00211669 6/23/2004 ARCHIBALD PET HOSPITAL 50.00 AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 249.59 AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 634.00 AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 106.72 AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 4.49 AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 63.46 AP- 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 134.38 AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 158.52 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 24 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA REG PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time~ #1 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 31.14 AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 228.86 AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 83.67 AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 172.70 AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 46.46 AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 487.20 AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 230.18 AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 42.46 AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 1,223.84 AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 39.51 AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 45.85 AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 43.88 AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 43.71 AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 105.32 AP - 00211671 6/23/2004 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 537.27 AP - 00211672 6/23/2004 ASBURY ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 553.50 AP - 00211672 6/23/2004 ASBURY ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 904.38 AP - 00211673 6/23/2004 ASSI SECURITY 135.00 AP - 00211674 6/23/2004 ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS 420.00 AP - 00211675 6/23/2004 AUFBAU CORPORATION 1,975.00 AP - 00211675 6/23/2004 AUFBAU CORPORATION 7,918.00 AP - 00211675 6/23/2004 AUFBAU CORPORATION 11,840.00 AP - 00211675 6/23/2004 AUFBAU CORPORATION 15,946.00 AP - 00211676 6/23/2004 AUTO RESTORATORS INC 150.00 AP - 00211677 6/23/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 140.02 AP - 00211677 6/23/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 76.65 AP - 00211677 6/23/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 105.08 AP - 00211677 6/23/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 7.50 AP - 00211677 6/23/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 181.86 AP - 00211677 6/23/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 97.13 AP - 00211677 6/23/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 181.86 AP - 00211677 6/23/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 7.50 AP - 00211677 6/23/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 552.59 AP - 00211677 6/23/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 270.18 AP - 00211677 6/23/2004 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 252.14 AP - 00211678 6/23/2004 BARNES AND NOBLE 312.66 AP- 00211679 6/23/2004 BEI BETTER ENERGY IDEAS 464.40 AP - 00211684 6/23/2004 BOLKE, SHAYLEEN 12.00 AP ~ 00211685 6/23/2004 BRODART BOOKS 881.18 AP- 00211685 6/23/2004 BRODART BOOKS 281.50 AP- 00211685 6/23/2004 BRODART BOOKS 133.63 AP - 00211686 6/23/2004 BUTSKO UT1LITY DESIGN INC 6,378.18 AP - 00211686 6/23/2004 BUTSKO UTILITY DESIGN INC 16,076.50 AP - 00211686 6/23/2004 BUTSKO UTILITY DESIGN INC 64.00 AP - 00211686 6/23/2004 BUTSKO UTILITY DESIGN INC 10.92 AP- 00211686 6/23/2004 BUTSKO UTILITY DESIGN INC 17,547.00 AP - 00211686 6/23/2004 BUTSKO UTILITY DESIGN INC 7,800.00 AP - 00211686 6/23/2004 BUTSKO UTILITY DESIGN INC 4,015.00 AP - 00211687 6/23/2004 C.W. DRIVER CONTRACTORS 20,452.00 AP - 00211688 6/23/2004 CAL PERS LONG TERM CARE 320.26 AP- 00211691 6/23/2004 CALSENSE 172.39 AP- 00211691 6/23/2004 CALSENSE 164.17 AP- 00211691 6/23/2004 CALSENSE 172.39 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 25 Current Date: 06/30/20(2 Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time.~t ~a,07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name ~mount AP- 00211691 6/23/2004 CALSENSE 889.34 AP - 0021169I 6/23/2004 CALSENSE 28.85 AP- 00211691 6/23/2004 CALSENSE 172.39 AP - 00211691 6/23/2004 CALSENSE 1,000.00 AP- 00211691 6/23/2004 CALSENSE 99.04 AP- 00211691 6/23/2004 CALSENSE 1,070.19 AP- 00211691 6/23/2004 CALSENSE 769.99 AP- 00211691 6/23/2004 CALSENSE 1,646.01 AP - 00211692 6/23/2004 CARDINAL INDUSTRIAL FINISHES 256.45 AP - 00211693 6/23/2004 CENTEX HOMES 4,200.00 AP - 00211693 6/23/2004 CENTEX HOMES 2,100.00 AP ~ 002 i1694 6/23/2004 CENTRAL CITIES SIGNS INC 15.89 AP - 00211695 6/23/2004 CHAVlqzY' COLLEGE 1,054.32 AP ~ 00211699 6/23/2004 CISNEROS, JENNY 38.79 AP - 00211700 6/23/2004 CITY RENTALS 153.00 AP - 00211701 6/23/2004 CLABBY, SANDRA 1,000.00 AP - 00211702 6/23/2004. CLARKE PLUMBING SPECIALTIES INC. 36.00 AP - 00211702 6/23/2004 CLARKE PLUMBING SPECIALTIES 1NC. 106.42 AP - 00211702 6/23/2004 CLARKE PLUMBING SPECIALTIES INC. 31.55 AP - 00211703 6/23/2004 CLAYTON GROUP SERVICES INC 1,536.83 AP - 00211703 6/23/2004 CLAYTON GROUP SERVICES INC 1,643.53 AP - 00211703 6/23/2004 CLAYTON GROUP SERVICES INC 1,400.00 AP - 0021t704 6/23/2004 COAST RECREATION INC 541.65 AP - 00211704 6/23/2004 COAST RECREATION 1NC 936.61 AP - 00211705 6/23/2004 COASTAL BUILDING SERVICES INC 237.50 AP - 00211706 6/23/2004 CONCENTRA MEDICAL CENTERS 824.95 AP - 00211706 6/23/2004 CONCENTRA MEDICAL CENTERS 108.00 AP - 00211706 6/23/2004 CONCENTRA MEDICAL CENTERS 1,275.00 AP - 00211706 6/23/2004 CONCENTRA MEDICAL CENTERS 46.00 AP - 00211707 6/23/2004 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS ] 151.93 AP - 00211707 6/23/2004 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS ] 336.72 AP - 00211708 6/23/2004 COSCO FIRE PROTECTION 460.00 AP - 00211709 6/23/2004 COUNTS UNLIMITED 450.00 AP - 00211709 6/23/2004 COUNTS UNLIMITED 225.00 AP - 00211709 6/23/2004 COUNTS UNLIMITED 235.00 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,003.93 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 106.48 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 270.22 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 161.81 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 52.08 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 285.08 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 105.46 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 183.88 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 174.07 AP- 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 164.43 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 710.58 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 626.63 AP- 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 263.68 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 545.08 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 315.49 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 864.68 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 674.93 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 446.08 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 26 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 355.23 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 177.61 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 177.62 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 356.38 AP ~ 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 190.78 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 101.18 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 73.59 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 73.59 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 219.64 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 219.64 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 316.23 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 495.21 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 262.18 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 282.88 AP - 00211712 6/2312004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 286.33 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 117.81 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 117.82 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 167.78 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 389.73 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 131.43 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 116.03 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 309.68 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 1,060.63 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 479.08 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 302.43 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 344.98 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CIJCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 155.23 AP - 002 ! 1712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 275.98 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 603.63 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 101.53 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 694.48 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 508.18 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 304.63 AP - 06211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 221.83 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 168.23 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 426.63 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 548.88 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 341.53 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 124.08 AP- 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 109.86 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 266.68 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 86.58 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 697.93 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 132.23 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 174.68 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 157.53 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 605.93 AP - 0021t712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 248.73 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 266.68 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 104.98 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 6,405.43 AP - 00211712 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 79.33 AP - 00211713 6/23/2004 CUCAMONGA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 45,504.00 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 27 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA REG PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time:~ ~.~ 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP- 00211714 6/23/2004 CYBERCOM RESOURCES INC 2,135.00 AP - 00211714 6/2312004 CYBERCOM RESOURCES INC 2,695.00 AP- 00211714 6/23/2004 CYBERCOM RESOURCES INC 455.00 AP - 00211714 6/23/2004 CYBERCOM RESOURCES INC 70.00 AP - 00211714 6/23/2004 CYBERCOM RESOURCES INC 245.00 AP - 00211715 6/23/2004 DE LEISE, JENAE 519.24 AP - 00211717 6/23/2004 DELTA STAR INC 7,000.00 AP- 00211718 6/23/2004 DICK, ERIC 50.00 AP - 00211718 6/23/2004 DICK, ERIC 50.00 AP- 00211719 6/23/2004 DRAGONFLYER PRESS 745.88 AP- 00211719 6/23/2004 DRAGONFLYER PRESS 745.88 AP- 00211721 6/23/2004 DREAMSHAPERS 225.00 AP - 00211722 6/23/2004 DURA ART STONE 1,890.20 AP - 00211724 6/23/2004 EW1NG IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 350.00 AP- 00211724 6/23/2004 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 80.17 AP - 00211724 6/23/2004 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 50.06 AP - 00211725 6/23/2004 EXPERIAN 50.00 AP - 00211726 6/23/2004 EZ RENTALS 1,295.97 AP - 00211727 6/23/2004 F S MOTOR SPORTS INC 380.00 AP - 00211728 6/23/2004 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 16.86 AP - 00211728 6/23/2004 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 17.02 AP - 00211729 6/23/2004 FENCE CRAFt OF UPLAND INC 2,373.94 AP - 00211730 6/23/2004 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 121.50 AP - 00211730 6/23/2004 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 826.50 AP - 00211730 6/23/2004 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 486.00 AP - 00211730 6/23/2004 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 674.25 AP - 00211732 6/23/2004 FISHER SCIENTiFIC 80.94 AP - 00211732 6/23/2004 FISIIER SCIENTIFIC 543.58 AP - 00211732 6/23/2004 FISHER SCIENTiFIC 129.64 AP - 00211733 6/23/2004 FITNESS REPAIR SHOP 79.00 AP - 00211734 6/23/2004 FLEET GLASS 43.50 AP - 00211735 6/23/2004 FORD OF UPLAND INC 69.10 AP - 00211735 6/23/2004 FORD OF UPLAND INC 69.18 AP- 00211737 6/23/2004 FUKUSHIMA, JUDITH 1,081.00 AP - 00211737 6/23/2004 FUKUSHIMA, JUDITH 464.00 AP - 00211738 6/23/2004 FULLMER CONSTRUCTION 1,000.00 AP - 00211739 6/23/2004 GAIL MATERIALS 330.92 AP - 00211739 6/23/2004 GAIL MATERIALS 1,200.00 AP - 00211739 6/23/2004 GAIL MATERIALS 291.02 AP - 00211739 6/23/2004 GAIL MATERIALS 399.00 AP - 00211740 6/23/2004 GALLS INC 768.90 AP - 00211741 6/23/2004 GARCIA, VIVIAN 25.98 AP - 00211741 6/23/2004 GARCIA, VIVIAN 30.37 AP - 00211743 6/23/2004 GEOGRAPHICS 322.17 AP - 00211744 6/23/2004 GILLI, CHRIS 313.29 AP- 00211745 6/23/2004 GRAINGER, WW 389.71 AP- 00211745 6/23/2004 GRAINGER, WW -163.91 AP - 00211745 6/23/2004 GRAINGER, WW 392.51 AP - 00211745 6/23/2004 GRAINGER, W33/ 81.88 AP - 00211745 6/23/2004 GRAINGER, WW 92.75 AP - 00211746 6/23/2004 GRAVES AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY 25.09 AP - 00211746 6/23/2004 GRAVES AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY 74.37 AP - 0021 i746 6/23/2004 GRAVES AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY 7.40 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 28 Current Date: 06/30/20E Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Tim~i, ~,~ 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211746 6/23/2004 GRAVES AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY 59.65 AP - 00211746 6/23/2004 GRAVES AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY 92.54 AP - 00211746 6/23/2004 GRAVES AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY 69.29 AP - 00211746 6/23/2004 GRAVES AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY 38.50 AP - 00211746 6/23/2004 GRAVES AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY 15.62 AP - 00211746 6/23/2004 GRAVES AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY -21.55 AP - 00211746 6/23/2004 GRAVES AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY 103.50 AP - 00211746 6/23/2004 GRAVES AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY 13.88 AP - 00211746 6/23/2004 GRAVES AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY 206.98 AP - 00211746 6/23/2004 GRAVES AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY 60.86 AP - 00211746 6/23/2004 GRAVES AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY 13.88 AP - 00211746 6/23/2004 GRAVES AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY 111.55 AP- 00211747 6/23/2004 GRESSCO LTD 1,095.10 AP - 00211749 6/23/2004 HERTZ 94.39 AP - 00211750 6/23/2004 HI STANDARD AUTOMOTIVE 139.36 AP- 00211751 6/23/2004 HOLL1DAY ROCK CO INC 318.41 AP - 00211751 6/23/2004 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 190.72 AP - 00211751 6/23/2004 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 72.76 AP - 00211752 6/23/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 40.22 AP - 00211752 6/23/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 36.53 AP - 00211752 6/23/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 123.19 AP - 00211752 6/23/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 408.37 AP - 00211752 6/23/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 21.38 AP - 00211752 6/23/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 42.74 AP - 00211752 6/23/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 15.35 AP - 00211752 6/23/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 135.15 AP - 00211752 6/23/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 166.97 AP - 00211752 6/23/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 50.75 AP - 00211752 6/23/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 70.74 AP - 00211752 6/23/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 692.34 AP - 00211752 6/23/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 88.80 AP - 00211752 6/23/2004 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 46.13 AP - 00211753 6/23/2004 HOYT LUMBER CO., SM 848.73 AP - 00211753 6/23/2004 HOYT LUMBER CO., SM 191.54 AP - 00211753 6/23/2004 HOYT LUMBER CO., SM 187.68 AP - 00211755 6/23/2004 IBM CORPORATION 756.56 AP- 00211755 6/23/2004 IBM CORPORATION 417.38 AP- 00211755 6/23/2004 IBM CORPORATION 347.87 AP - 00211756 6/23/2004 ICI DULUX PAINT CENTERS 56.03 AP - 00211758 6/23/2004 INDEPENDENT ELECTRONICS 866.31 AP - 00211758 6/23/2004 INDEPENDENT ELECTRONICS 278.16 AP - 00211759 6/23/2004 INLAND EMPIRE TOURS AND TRANSPORTATIC 673.25 AP - 00211761 6/23/2004 INLAND VALLEY DALLY BULLETIN 88.80 AP - 00211761 6/23/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 88.80 AP - 00211761 6/23/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 88.80 AP - 00211761 6/23/2004 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 88.80 AP - 00211763 6/23/2004 INTRAVAIA ROCK AND SAND 183.18 AP - 00211764 6/23/2004 IRON MOUNTAIN OSDP 362.00 AP - 00211765 6/23/2004 JACKSON HIRSH INC 148.76 AP - 00211766 6/23/2004 JONES AND MAYER LAW OFFICES OF 137.50 AP - 00211767 6/23/2004 JW DESERT SPRINGS RESORT & SPA 216.32 AP - 00211767 6/23/2004 JW DESERT SPRINGS RESORT & SPA 216.32 AP - 00211768 6/23/2004 KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN INC 73,210.34 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 29 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: ~,t07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211768 6/23/2004 KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN INC 2,363.72 AP - 00211769 6/23/2004 KC PRINTING & GRAPHICS INC 618.57 AP - 00211770 6/23/2004 KERREY CONSULTING, JULES 350.00 AP- 00211772 6/23/2004 KNECHT, STEVEN 435.00 AP - 00211773 6/23/2004 KORANDA CONSTRUCTION 791.50 AP - 00211774 6/23/2004 LAACO LIMITED 1,000.00 AP - 00211775 6/23/2004 LAIRD CONSTRUCTION CO 236,806.64 AP - 00211775 6/23/2004 LAIRD CONSTRUCTION CO -23,680.66 AP - 00211776 6/23/2004 LASER LINE 89.95 AP- 00211777 6/23/2004 LASER TECHNOLOGY INC 183.26 AP - 00211778 6/23/2004 LEIPFER, LUKAS 117.00 AP - 00211778 6/23/2004 LE~P~zR, LUKAS 288.00 AP- 00211779 6/23/2004 LETS STOR IT 58.00 AP - 00211783 6/23/2004 MANELA, ROSARIO 41.25 AP - 00211784 6/23/2004 MARK CHRIS INC 66.08 AP - 00211785 6/23/2004 MARK CHRIS INC -5.68 AP - 00211785 6/23/2004 MARK CHRIS INC 5.68 AP - 00211785 6/23/2004 MARK CHRIS INC 197.65 AP - 00211785 6/23/2004 MARK CHRIS INC 5.68 AP - 00211786 6/23/2004 MARSHALL PLUMBING 112.99 AP - 00211787 6/23/2004 MCALONEY ENTERPRISES INC 18.99 AP - 00211790 6/23/2004 MCMASTER CARR SUPPLY COMPANY 949.02 AP - 00211790 6/23/2004 MCMASTER CARP, SUPPLY COMPANY 1,110.91 AP - 00211790 6/23/2004 MCMASTER CARP, SUPPLY COMPANY 188.98 AP - 00211790 6/23/2004 MCMASTER CARR SUPPLY COMPANY 53.47 AP - 00211790 6/23/2004 MCMASTER CARR SUPPLY COMPANY 130.81 AP- 00211791 6/23/2004 MIDWEST TAPE 21.99 AP - 00211791 6/23/2004 MDWEST TAPE 48.94 AP - 00211791 6/23/2004 MDWEST TAPE 93.95 AP - 00211792 6/23/2004 MIJAC ALARM COMPANY 130.00 AP - 00211792 6/23/2004 MIJAC ALARM COMPANY 617.50 AP - 00211793 6/23/2004 MINUTEMAN PRESS 64.65 AP - 00211794 6/23/2004 MOLINA, VICKY 200.00 AP - 00211797 6/23/2004 NATIONAL DEFERRED 10,489.19 AP - 00211798 6/23/2004 NEW WEST SIGNAL 340.00 AP - 00211799 6/23/2004 NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEMS 49.53 AP - 00211799 6/23/2004 NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEMS 46.28 AP - 00211799 6/23/2004 NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEMS 46.28 AP - 00211799 6/23/2004 NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEMS 46.28 AP - 00211799 6/23/2004 NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEMS 46.28 AP - 00211800 6/23/2004 OCLC INC 40.00 AP- 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 21.98 AP - 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 65.30 AP - 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 54.83 AP - 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 36.11 AP - 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 144.71 AP- 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 25.88 AP - 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 207.42 AP - 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 780.76 AP- 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 47.83 AP - 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 83.59 AP- 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 7.82 AP - 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 305.26 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 30 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA REG PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time~ ,~ 07:22:2 O CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 171.76 AP - 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 113.72 AP - 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 247.05 AP- 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 63.52 AP - 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 2.88 AP - 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 355.96 AP - 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 8.31 AP - 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 123.52 AP - 00211801 6/23/2004 OFFICE DEPOT 25.82 AP - 00211802 6/23/2004 OPEN APPS 550.00 AP - 00211803 6/23/2004 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 49.54 AP - 00211803 6/23/2004 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 82.69 AP - 00211803 6/23/2004 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 88.80 AP - 00211803 6/23/2004 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 86.15 AP - 00211803 6/23/2004 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE -16.15 AP - 00211803 6/23/2004 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 267.64 AP - 00211803 6/23/2004 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 30.62 AP - 00211803 6/23/2004 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 59.68 AP - 00211804 6/23/2004 ORIENTAL TRADING 305.80 AP - 00211805 6/23/2004 OWEN ELECTRIC 527.24 AP - 00211805 6/23/2004 OWEN ELECTRIC 113.03 AP - 00211806 6/23/2004 PACIFICARE OF CALIFORNIA 55,198.29 AP - 00211807 6/23/2004 PAIGE, ROSALINDA 85.00 AP - 00211808 6/23/2004 PETES ROAD SERVICE INC 232.53 AP - 00211809 6/23/2004 'PHOTOGRAPHY BY KENNETH 35.00 AP - 00211809 6/23/2004 PHOTOGRAPHY BY KENNETH 35.00 AP- 00211810 6/23/2004 POMA DISTRIBUTING CO 1,553.99 AP - 00211810 6/23/2004 POMA DISTRIBUTING CO 15,370.54 AP - 00211810 6/23/2004 POMA DISTRIBUTING CO 11,622.78 AP - 00211810 6/23/2004 POMA DISTRIBUTING CO 7,430.96 AP - 00211811 6/23/2004 POUK AND STEINLE INC. 161,511.63 AP- 00211812 6/23/2004 PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION INC 158.50 AP - 00211813 6/23/2004 PRE-PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC 6.81 AP - 00211814 6/23/2004 PRECISION DYNAMICS CORPORATION 300.00 AP- 00211815 6/23/2004 PRINCIPAL LIFE 1,603.10 AP - 00211816 6/23/2004 PROVENCE, ANITA 81.00 AP - 00211817 6/23/2004 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 7.00 AP - 00211817 6/23/2004 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 7.00 AP - 002i 1818 6/23/2004 PRUITT CONSTRUCTION INC, R L 1,000.00 AP - 00211819 6/23/2004 RANCHO 2002 LLC 1,000.00 AP - 00211820 6~23~2004 RANCHO CUCAMONGA PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUr 12.00 AP- 00211821 6/23/2004 RCPFA 6,174.71 AP - 00211822 6/23/2004 RED WING SHOE STORE 91.58 AP - 00211824 6/23/2004 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 32.00 AP - 00211824 6/23/2004 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 64.00 AP - 00211824 6/23/2004 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 9,380.85 AP - 00211824 6/23/2004 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 33.60 AP - 00211824 6123/2004 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 733.56 AP - 00211824 6/23~2004 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 28,514.90 AP - 00211824 6/23/2004 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 32.00 AP - 00211824 6/23/2004 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 873.20 AP- 00211824 6/23/2004 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 181.92 AP - 00211824 6/23/2004 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 1,038.72 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 31 Current Date: 06/30/20G Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time,~ / 07:22:2 1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211824 6/23/2004 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 550.00 AP - 00211824 6/23/2004 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 725.00 AP - 00211824 6/23/2004 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 932.40 AP - 00211824 6/23/2004 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 1,804.66 AP - 00211824 6/23/2004 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 1,591.95 AP - 00211824 6/23/2004 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 12,732.25 AP - 00211824 6/23/2004 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 672.00 AP - 002t1824 6/23/2004 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 64.00 AP - 00211824 6/23/2004 RICHARDS WATSON AND GERSHON 78.00 AP - 00211825 6/23/2004 RITE WAY ROOF CORP 2,498.00 AP - 00211826 6/23/2004 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 142.23 AP - 00211826 6/23/2004 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 320.34 AP - 00211828 6/23/2004 RMA GROUP 13,329.00 AP - 00211828 6/23/2004 RMA GROUP 380.00 AP - 00211828 6/23/2004 RMA GROUP 795.00 AP - 00211829 6/23/2004 SALCEDO, BEVERLY 48.00 AP - 00211830 6/23/2004 SAN ANTONIO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL 41.80 AP - 00211831 6/23/2004 SAN ANTONIO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL 236.80 AP - 00211831 6/23/2004 SAN ANTONIO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL 236.80 AP - 00211832 6/23/2004 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY DEPT PUBLIC WOI 26,407.71 AP - 00211832 6/23/2004 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY DEPT PUBLIC WOl 1,928.16 AP - 00211834 6/23/2004 SENCHAL, CAL 206.50 AP - 00211834 6/23/2004 SENCHAL, CAL 49.00 AP - 00211834 6/23/2004 SENCHAL, CAL 73.00 AP - 00211836 6/23/2004 SHERIFFS COURT SERVICES 75.00 AP- 00211838 6/23/2004 SIGNET TESTING LABS INC 4,713.00 AP - 00211839 6/23/2004 SLUKA, SUSAN 77.67 AP - 00211841 6/23/2004 SMATHERS, MELISSA 50.00 AP - 00211842 6/23/2004 SMOLINSKI, BARBARA 500.00 AP - 00211843 6/23/2004 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY 34.44 AP - 00211844 6/23/2004 SOCIAL VOCATIONAL SERVICES 1,500.00 AP - 00211844 6/23/2004 SOCIAL VOCATIONAL SERVICES 1,500.00 AP - 00211845 6/23/2004 SONSATIONAL ACTIVITIES 100.00 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 19,429.89 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.26 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALEFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.00 AP- 00211848 6/23/2004 SOIJTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS ON 13.15 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63 AP- 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2,159.06 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2,296.59 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2,586.42 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.47 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 98.75 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 108.48 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 117.08 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 114.39 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 26.85 AP - 002 ! 1848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 164.59 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 90.54 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 80.01 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.61 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 32 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.52 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 134.52 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 135.11 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 59.68 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 18.02 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 10.50 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 99.50 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.34 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 88.82 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 114.04 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 22.01 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 78.93 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 92.92 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 25.48 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 44.73 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 5,943.80 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 491.39 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 5,817.48 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 41.12 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 35.26 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 33,418.88 AP - 00211848 6~23~2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 4,212.90 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2,868.67 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2,727.75 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 181.47 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 44.24 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12,120.96 AP - 00211848 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14,992.80 AP - 00211849 6/23/2004 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 628.41 AP - 00211850 6/23/2004 SPARKLETTS 68.25 AP - 00211852 6/23/2004 SPORT CHALET 172.40 AP - 00211852 6/23/2004 SPORT CHALET 340.12 AP - 00211853 6/23/2004 STERICYCLE INC 35.00 AP - 00211854 6/23/2004 STERLING COFI~EE SERVICE 293.78 AP - 00211855 6/23/2004 STOVER SEED COMPANY 210.11 AP - 00211856 6/23/2004 STRESS LESS ENVIRONMENTAL 1,400.00 AP- 00211858 6/23/2004 SUNRISE FORD 25.21 AP - 00211859 6/23/2004 SUNSHINE WINDOWS 2,665.00 AP- 00211861 6/23/2004 TARGET 219.67 AP - 00211861 6/23/2004 TARGET 224.62 AP- 00211861 6/23/2004 TARGET 247.15 AP - 00211862 6/23/2004 TEMP POWER SYSTEMS 90.00 AP - 00211864 6/23/2004 THOMAS, KIMBERLY 47.25 AP - 00211865 6/23/2004 TORALEZ, DALILA 100.00 AP- 00211866 6/23/2004 TORRES, JESSICA 57.38 AP - 00211867 6/23/2004 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 7,199.00 AP - 00211867 6/23/2004 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 6,660.00 AP - 00211867 6/23/2004 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 5,967.00 AP - 00211867 6/23/2004 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 3,360.00 AP - 00211867 6/23/2004 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 4,620.00 AP - 00211867 6/23/2004 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 6,275.00 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 33 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA REG PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211868 6/23/2004 UMPS ARE US ASSOCIATION 320.00 AP - 0021 ! 869 6/23/2004 UNDERGROUND SVC ALERT OF SO CAL 71.40 AP - 00211869 6/23/2004 UNDERGROUND SVC ALERT OF SO CAL 128.80 AP - 00211869 6/23/2004 UNDERGROUND SVC ALERT OF SO CAL 102.20 AP - 00211870 6/23/2004 UNDERGROUND TECHNOLOGY INC 535.70 AP - 00211870 6/23/2004 UNDERGROUND TECHNOLOGY INC 354.31 AP - 00211870 6/23/2004 UNDERGROUND TECHNOLOGY INC 518.93 AP - 00211870 6/23/2004 UNDERGROUND TECHNOLOGY INC 393.54 AP - 00211870 6/23/2004 UNDERGROUND TECHNOLOGY INC 211.08 AP - 00211870 6/23/2004 UNDERGROUND TECHNOLOGY INC 434.31 AP - 00211871 6/23/2004 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 573.93 AP - 00211871 6/23/2004 UNIF1RST UNIFORM SERVICE 109.37 AP - 00211871 6/23/2004 UNIIqRST UNIFORM SERVICE 57.96 AP - 00211871 6/23/2004 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 23.56 AP - 00211871 6/23/2004 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 36.99 AP - 00211871 6/23/2004 UNtFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 559.53 AP - 00211871 6/23/2004 UNIFIRST UNIFORM SERVICE 104.09 AP - 00211872 6/23/2004 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA TRUSTEE FOR P, 2,622.06 AP - 00211872 6/23/2004 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA TRUSTEE FOR P, 22,287.52 AP - 00211873 6/23/2004 UNIQUE CREATIONS 50.00 AP - 00211874 6/23/2004 UNIQUE MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC 397.47 AP - 00211876 6/23/2004 UNITED WAY 49.00 AP - 00211878 6/23/2004 UPS 28.00 AP - 00211879 6/23/2004 US HOME CORPORATION 52.88 AP - 00211880 6/23/2004 VALERDI, MAURICIO 124.00 AP - 00211882 6/23/2004 VEND U COMPANY 102.83 AP- 00211883 6/23/2004 VERDICON INC 102.36 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 27.91 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 27.91 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 28.92 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 20.74 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 20.41 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 20.41 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 27.91 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 205.92 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 28.35 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 29.34 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 29.60 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 28.35 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 28.34 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 29.34 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 28.35 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 34 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA REG PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time~ #/07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 33.24 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 29.34 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 158.86 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 29.34 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 28.35 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 131.95 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VER1ZON 29.34 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 91.19 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 164.54 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 128.97 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 1,249.61 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 43.69 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 20.41 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 20.41 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 20.92 AP - 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 29.17 AP- 00211886 6/23/2004 VERIZON 20.41 AP - 00211887 6/23/2004 VICTORIA ANIMAL HOSPITAL 50.00 AP - 00211888 6/23/2004 VIGILANCE, TERRENCE 357.00 AP - 00211888 6/23/2004 VIGILANCE, TERRENCE 357.00 AP - 00211889 6/23/2004 VISTA PAINT 95.00 AP - 00211889 6/23/2004 VISTA PAINT 888.64 AP - 00211890 6/23/2004 W F CONSTRUCTION INC 3,000.00 AP - 00211892 6/23/2004 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 119.74 AP - 00211892 6/23/2004 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO -51.94 AP - 00211892 6/23/2004 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO -30.55 AP - 00211892 6/23/2004 WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO 91.15 AP - 00211893 6/23/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 421.78 AP - 00211893 6/23/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 586.34 AP - 00211893 6/23/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 263.53 AP - 00211893 6/23/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 193.75 AP - 00211893 6/23/2004 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 142.88 AP - 00211894 6/23/2004 WEST GROUP PAYMENT CENTER 129.30 AP - 00211896 6/23/2004 WHISENAND, SARAH 45.00 AP - 0021189') 6/23/2004 WHITE CAP CONST SUPPLY 195.80 AP - 00211897 6/23/2004 WHITE CAP CONST SUPPLY 264.04 AP - 00211898 6/23/2004 WHITTLE, LINDA 85.00 AP - 00211899 6/23/2004 WL HOMES LLC 3,600.00 AP - 00211900 6/23/2004 WUMBUS CORPORATION 1,081.63 AP- 00211901 6/23/2004 YORK INDUSTRIES 382.77 AP - 00211902 6/23/2004 YOUNG, BRENDA 34.00 AP - 00211904 6/24/2004 UMPS ARE US ASSOCIATION 1,173.00 AP - 00211905 6/24/2004 LOYOLA AND CITI FINANCIAL, LISA 2,132.36 AP- 00211910 6/29/2004 US POSTMASTER 5,978.62 Total for Check ID AP: 5,177,890.37 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 35 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA REG PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time~07:22:2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Agenda Check Register 6/8/2004 through 6/29/2004 Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount Total for Entity: 5,177,890.37 User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 36 Current Date: 06/30/20C Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time.~., 07:22:2 DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director SUBJECT: APPROVAL FOR THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID FOR THE CENTRAL PARK COMMUNITY CENTER KITCHEN EQUIPMENT WITH DOUGLAS E. BARNHART, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $55,000 RECOMMENDATION: To approve the acceptance of the Additive Alternate Bid for the Central Park Community Center Kitchen Equipment with Douglas E. Barnhart, Inc., in the amount of $55,000. BACKGROUND: On September 17, 2003, the City Council awarded a Contract to Douglas E. Barnhart, Inc., for the construction of the Central Park Phase I improvements and authorized a 10% project contingency amount. The contract award to Barnhart followed a contractor pre- qualification process and a competitive bid period. During the bid phase, all contractors provided competitive bids on thirteen (13) additive alternate bids. None of these additive alternate bids were awarded by the City Council to Barnhart at the time of the original contract approval. Staff had not recommended approval of any alternates with the original award desiring to wait until the project was well underway and on budget before considering the alternates. FINDINGS: The most critical of the additive alternates, in terms of Community Center operations, is installation of the kitchen equipment in the Community Center portion of the building. The base bid portion of the Phase I plans did not contain manufacturing and installation of the kitchen equipment which includes items such as the reach-in refrigerator, work tables, heated cabinets, gas range, ice maker, dishwasher, disposer, exhaust hood, etc. These were competitively bid as an additive alternate to give the City the flexibility to add this scope of work during construction, if funding permitted. Installation of the kitchen equipment is critical to the operation of the Rancho Cucamonga Hall facilities. It should be noted that the Senior Center kitchen, adjacent to David Dreier Hall, is already approved to be fully equipped. ADDITIVE ALTERNATE BID- CENTRAL PARK July 7, 2004 Page 2 The Central Park Phase I project has proceeded in a very cost effective manner and funds are available within the approved contingency amount for installation of the Community Center kitchen equipment. Of the approved contingency amount of $1,760,286, only $214,000 has been approved for the project to date for miscellaneous items related to civil work and for adjustments to drawing details. This represents use of approximately 1% of the total bid amount of the project to date for change orders. Staff is recommending that the City Council approve the acceptance of the original Additive Alternate bid amount of $55,000 for Community Center kitchen equipment. Even though the cost of metal materials has increased significantly in the past few months, the kitchen equipment supplier and Douglas E. Barnhart, Inc. have agreed to maintain their original price for equipment and installation. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost to the City for acceptance of the additive alternate will be $55,000 currently funded through the approved contingency amount. Respectfully submitted, Community Services Director h~C~MMSER~C~unc#&B~ards~ity~unc~Sta~Rep~rts~2~3~Centra~PkAdd#iveBid ~7~7~4~d~c T H E C I T Y 0 F [ ~ I~ANCHO CUCAHONGA Staff Repo DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Michelle Dawson, Management Analyst III SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BUDGET PACKAGE AS NEGOTIATED BETWEEN GOVERNOR SCHWARZENEGGER AND CITIES, COUNTIES, AND SPECIAL DISTRICTS Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council approve the attached resolution supporting the Local Government Budget Package negotiated between Governor Schwarzenegger and local government. Back.qround For more than a decade, the California State Legislature has been taking away increasing amounts of local tax dollars that cities and counties use to provide essential services such as police and fire protection, roads, parks, libraries, and senior and youth programs. Last Fall, the General Membership of voting delegates of the League of California Cities unanimously passed a resolution supporting a statewide ballot initiative to protect local funds from the State. On April 16, 2004, the League of California Cities and its local government partners filed over 1.1 million signatures with county registrars to place this initiative on the November 2004 ballot. That same day, Governor Schwarzenegger proposed a package of local government funding reductions with strengthened constitutional protections for local revenues. The Local Government Budget Package, as negotiated by the Governor and local government, would do the following: · Require repayment in 2006-07 of our 2003-04 Vehicle License Fee (VLF) backfill "loan" to the State. This would guarantee that the City of Rancho Cucamonga is reimbursed over $1.$7 million in funds lost this year due to the State's budget problems. · Permanently lower the VLF to 0.65% from 2% and provide property taxes to cities and counties to offset the VLF backfill. · Prohibit the State from taking the property tax, sales tax, and the remaining VLF of local governments. July 7, 2004 Staff Report: APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BUDGET PACKAGE AS NEGOTIATED BETWEEN GOVERNOR SCHWARZENEGGER AND CITIES, COUNTIES, AND SPECIAL DISTRICTS Page 2 of 2 · Require payment of deferred mandate reimbursements to local governments beginning in 2006-07, and require that failure to pay mandate reimbursements in a timely fashion will trigger repeal of the law imposing such mandates. · Guarantee payment of the property tax backfill to cities and counties due to the Proposition 57 "Triple Flip". · Guarantee that cities' sales tax is restored to the full rate when the Proposition 57 bonds are repaid. · Oppose any property tax-sales tax exchange. · The Governor would serve as Chairman of the campaign to secure voter approval of the ballot measure for constitutional protection of local revenues. The budget package means that local governments will endure two painful years of revenue losses totaling $1.3 billion for each year ($350 million from cities, $350 million from counties, $350 million from special districts and $250 million from redevelopment agencies). The City of Rancho Cucamonga's "contribution" to the State each year would be $1,113,927 in City funds and $3,971,568 from the Redevelopment Agency. What cities gain is Governor Schwarzenegger's strong commitment that he will work with local government officials for passage by the voters of a constitutional measure that would prevent any further state takeaways of local revenues needed to fund police, fire, health and welfare and other essential local services. The Governor and members of the Legislature continue to negotiate agreements on a number of budget issues, however the local government budget package had not been resolved at the time this staff report was submitted. The League of California Cities has requested that cities pass resolutions in support of the budget package as negotiated by the Governor and local government. The City will continue to work closely with our legislative advocates and the League in expressing our support of constitutional protection of local revenues. Respectfully Submitted, Michelle Dawson Management Analyst III Attachment RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BUDGET PACKAGE AS NEGOTIATED BETWEEN GOVERNOR SCHWARZENEGGER AND CITIES, COUNTIES, AND SPECIAL DISTRICTS WHEREAS, State government annually seizes more than $5.2 billion in local property tax funds (ERAF) statewide, costing local governments more than $40 billion in revenues over the past 12 years; and, WHEREAS, continual shifts and raids by the State of local property tax funds and other funding dedicated to cities, counties and special districts has seriously reduced resources available for local public safety, health, emergency medical, roads, parks, libraries and other essential local services; and, WHEREAS, this drain of local resources has continued even during periods when the state's budget has been overflowing with surpluses as well as during difficult economic times; and, WHEREAS, the adopted State budget for FY 2003/04 assumes an on-going structural deficit of approximately $15 billion, putting local government funding at on-going risk for future years; and, WHEREAS, long-term constitutional reform is the most important priority for local services, constitutional protection is the only way to provide predictability and stability for local services and to ensure there are enough firefighters to answer calls, that parks stay open and that enough police and sheriff patrol the streets; and, WHEREAS, as part of the May Budget Revision, Governor Schwarzenegger proposed two- years of reductions to local governments ($1.3 billion each year) linked to a long-term constitutional protection measure that needs to be placed on the November Ballot by 2/3 of Legislature; and, WHEREAS, local governments are willing to help the state in its hour of need one last time so long as these cuts are linked to constitutional protection of local revenues; and WHEREAS, the LOCAL Coalition is in strong support of this package and is actively encouraging the Legislature to support this package, as currently negotiated, to restore long- term fiscal stability to California communities and to place a constitutional protection measure on the November ballot; and, WHEREAS, we continue to affirm our support for the Local Taxpayers and Public Safety Protection Act for which the members of LOCAL coalition gathered more than 1.1 million signatures and which will be on the November 2004 ballot; and, WHEREAS, if the Legislature fails to act and place the constitutional protection measure on the ballot as negotiated by local governments, the coalition is prepared to move forward in suppod of the Local Taxpayers and Public Safety Protection Act. Resolution No. Page 2 of 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga that the City of R§ncho Cucamonga hereby expresses strong support for the Local Government Budget Package, which includes two years of cuts linked to a strong constitutional protection measure that will be placed on the November ballot; and, RESOLVED FURTHER, that Rancho Cucamonga officials and staff are authorized to write letters to their legislators supporting the local government budget package; and, RESOLVED FURTHER, that we will send a copy of this resolution to the LOCAL Coalition. Fax: 916-442-3510 or 1121 L Street, #803, Sacramento, CA 95814. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 7th day of July, 2004. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAINED: 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 7th day of July, 2004. Executed this __ day of ,2004, at Rancho Cucamonga, California. Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Cterk StaffRewrt DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor William J. Alexander, Members of the City Council and Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Lawrence I. Temple, Administrative Services Director BY: Robert Bowery, Information Systems Manager AC~-Z¢ SUBJECT: APPROVE A MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT IBM, FOR HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004/2005 IN THE AMOUNT OF $567403 FROM ACCOUNT 1001-209-5300 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve IBM hardware and software maintenance agreements with IBM for fiscal'year 2004/2005 in the amount of $56,403 from account 1001209-5300. BACKGROUND As a routine and best business practice the Information Systems Division enters into annual hardware and software maintenance agreements covering the City's computer servers, related devices, and system software. The agreements cover hardware and software that are proprietary to IBM. IBM does not license third party providers to provide similar support. These agreements provide Division staff access to IBM technical support, allow for the repair or replacement of failed components, and ensure the receipt of updates to operating system software. The contract commences on July 1,2004 and runs through June 30, 2005. Respectfully submitted, Lawrence I. Temple Administrative Services Director Schedule for Services This Schedule contains a listing of the Eligible Machines at the Specified Locations identified below for which we will provide the identified Services as described in the referenced Statement of Work These terms are in addition to those of the referenced Statement of Work and IBM International Customer Agreement (or any equivalent signed by both of us and identified below), Name and Address of Customer Customer Billing Address CiTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA FINANCE DEPT-ACC PAYABLE 10500 CIVIC CENTER DR CUCAMONGA CA 91730-3801 Agreement Number: HQ12291 Revised Schedule (Yes/No): No Statement of Work Number: A8RB3W Schedule Effective Date: 04/07/2004 Customer Number: 07452054 Charqe Period Char~es/Payment Plan: Charqe Period: *Total Charges: 46,206.50 Start Date: 07101/2004 Quarterly End Date: 06/30/2005 Contract Term: 5 Year(s) Type of Discount(s) Applied: Scope Incentive Term Incentive *Charges are based on the current inventory and services identified in this Schedule. Actual charges may vary with any additions, deletions, or changes to the inventory or services. For a Machine subject to usage charges, in addition to the Service charge identified herein, you will be separately billed for usage in accordance with applicable usage rates and billing cycles. INFORMAL QUOTE: FOR BUDGET AND PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY The Parties need not to sign this Schedule, unless either of us requests it. Agreed to: Agreed to: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA International Business Machines Corporation By: By: Authorized signature Authorized signature Name (type or print): Name (type or print): Date: Date: Z125o5511-13 (7/2003) contract A8RB3W (prepared 06/14/04 13:52) Page 1 of 5 =----- Schedule for Services Enterprise Total for Charoe Period bv Customer Number: 01788374 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 10500 CIVIC CENTER DR, CUCAMONGA CA 91730-3801 2,405.47 07452054 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 10500 CIVIC CENTER DR, CUCAMONGA CA 91730-3801 43,801.03 Total 46,206.50 ,~ Z125-5511-13 (7/2003) contract A8RB3W (prepared 06/14/04 13:52) Page 2 of 5 Schedule for Services Maintenance Machine List ........ Eligible Machine Description- I Retatad Order/ Order/ Product Type Maint, Charges Charges M Mod/ Add/ Serial Serial Description Qty. of~Svc ~c Charges' fg Type Feat Rem Number Number Start** Stop" Specified Location: 01788374 City, State: CUCAMONGA CA 91730-3801 IBM 3600 LXU 0024P2392 LTO 1 B 1 2,405.47 W 07/13/2004 Total 2,405.47 Specified Location: 07452054 City, State: CUCAMONGA CA 91730-3801 IBM 7043 140 000037079 WORKSTATION/ENTRY SERVER 1 B 1 757.32 IBM 7133 D40 0000KY089 SERIAL DISK SYSTEM 1 B 1 1,233.11 W 11/18/2004 IBM 7206 110 0000D2934 EXTERNAL TAPE DRIVE 1 B 1 476.04 IBM 7131 105 000002269 SCSI MULTI-STORAGE TOWER 1 B 1 1,395.72 IBM 2104 DU3 0000ER160 EXPANDABLE STORAGE PLUS 1 B 1 2,055.60 iBM 3151 310 0000MFVN6 ASCt114" MONOCHROME DISPLAY 1 A 1 39.67 IBM 3600 R20 00MA00202 LTO 1 B 1 2,405.47 W 07/13/2004 IBM 7014 T42 0000AACCF RS/6000 SYSTEM RACK 1 B 1 400.32 IBM 7017 S7A 000093840 ENTERPRISE SERVER S70 ADVANCED 1 B 1 19,496.16 IBM 7025 F40 000041084 RS/6000 DESKSIDE SERVER SMP 1 B 1 1,601.28 IBM 7026 Ba0 0000930FF PSERIES 640 1 B 1 1,893.36 IBM 7028 6C1 00001DFAA PSERIES 610 1 A 1 1,081.92 IBM 7028 6C4 000043FAA PSERIES 630 1 A 1 1,352.40 IBM 7316 TF2 00000442H FLAT PANEL COLOR MONITOR 1 B 1 259.68 IBM 8363 WUS 00BNFA32G IBM NETVISTA 1 A 1 39.48 W 08/16/2004 IBM 8662 3RY 0023C3053 . NF5500M20 500 512 2 1 B 1 1,392.97 IBM 8666 11Y 0023A0116 NF7100 550 512 256/ 1 B 1 2,163.84 IBM 9511 AO4 0055BW383 T540 15.01NLCD 15.0V BLK MPR 1 A I 73.60 W 11/15/2004 IBM 9511 AG1 0055C5649 MONT54A 15.0TFT 15.0 VIEWABLE 1 B 1 175.81 Total 38,293.75 Zq25-551 '1- i3 (7/2003) contract A8RB3W (prepared 06/14/04 ~ 3.52t Page 3 of 5 = ----==-- Schedule for Services Service List Customer Technical Contact Name (if applicable): Customer Primary Technical Contact name: Customer Primary Technical Contact phone number: ......... Eligible Machine Description ....... Product Group I Qty. Charges Charges Serial/ Support Service Charges * Order # Service Option Start** Stop** Type Model Specified Location: 07452054 City, State: CUCAMONGA CA 91730-3801 ALERT FOR pSERIES 486.84 H~PER PTF NOTIFICATION SL SELECTED SYS SW SUPT-AIX 627.60 06/30/2005 AIX VOLUME DISCOUNT/04 MACHINES AiX SERVICE GROUP A FULL SHIFT SL SELECTED SYS SW SUPT-AiX 2,196.36 06/30/2005 AIX VOLUME DISCOUNT/04 MACHINES FULL SHIFT AIX SERVICE GROUP D SL SELECTED SYS SW SUPT-AIX 1,568.88 06/3012005 AIX VOLUME DISCOUNT/04 MACHINES AIX SERVICE GROUP C FULL SHIFT SL SELECTED SYS SW SUPT-AIX 627.60 06/30/2005 AIX VOLUME DISCOUNT/04 MACHINES AIX SERVICE GROUP A FULL SHIFT Total 5,507.28 ~' ' Z125-5511-13 (7/2003) contract A8RB3W (prepared 06114/04 13:52) Page 4 of 5 =------- Schedule for Services Legends: # TYPE OF SERVICE A) On-Site Repair/Exchange Services, Monday through Friday(excluding holidays),8amto5pm,next business day B) On-Site Repair/Exchange Services, 7 days a week, 24hfs/day C) On-Site RepaidExchange Services, Monday through Friday (excluding holidays), 8am to 5pm, 4 hour response objective This type of repair service includes a response objective and is not a guarantee. D) On-Site RepaidExchange Services, 7 days a week, 24hrs/day, 2 hour response objective This type of repair service includes a response objective and is not a guarantee. X) EasyServe (remotely delivered services) ~¢ MAINTENAN E E~ 1) Maintenance of IBM Machines 2) Maintenance of non-IBM Machines 3) Warranty Service Upgrade 4) Maintenance of Cisco Products 5) Maintenance of IBM Machines - Enhanced Service Response 6) Service for Machines Withdrawn from IBM Maintenance 7) Non-IBM Service for Machines Withdrawn from IBM Maintenance 8) Maintenance of IBM Machines (Labor Only) 9) Non-IBM Memory Exchange 10) Enhanced Parts Inventory 11) Spare Machine 12) Key Operator Support 13) Maintenance of non-IBM Machines for SUN Microsystems Machines during the SUN Warranty Period 16) IBM Maintenance Services - First Line Maintenance for Wincor Nixdorf ATMs 17) IBM Maintenance Services - Applications Maintenance Services for Wincer Nixdorf ATMs 18) Post Installation Coverage (PIC) Service Upgrade, for selected Non-IBM Machines *Charges shown are for the Charge Period A (C) indicates a Machine that will have Usage Charges billed separately An (E) indicates a Machine that has been announced as withdrawn from generally available Maintenance Service An (H) identifies a Machine on an existing ServiceSuite/ServiceElect CHiS contract A (K) indicates Assumptive priced products included in the total Charge Period Price but will be billed based on the terms of the Contract An (N) indicates that the product is a non-GSA Schedule item An (O) indicates a One Time Charge A (P) indicates averaged billing or annual prepayment An (R) indicates the usage charge rate (Feet, Hours, or Impressions) for a machine under a usage plan A (U) indicates Usage Charges which are measured in either Feet, Hours, or Impressions A (W) indicates a Machine under Warranty An (X) indicates On-order Products which are shown for p~anning purposes only A fY) indicates On-order MES products which are shown for planning purposes only, these charges are included in the related machine charges **Charges StartJStop dates shown are those that differ from the Contract Period StartJEnd Dates Z125-5511-13 (7/2003) contract ASRB3W (prepared 06/14/04 13:52) Page 5 of 5 -----' - Schedule for Services This Schedule contains a listing of the Eligible Machines at the Specified Locations identified below for which we will provide the identified Services as described in the referenced Statement of Work. These terms are in addition to those of the referenced Statement of Work and IBM International Customer Agreement (or any equivalent signed by both of us and identified below). Name and Address of Customer Customer Billing Address CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA FINANCE DEPT-ACC PAYABLE 10500 CIVIC CENTER DR CUCAMONGA CA 91730-5801 Agreement Number: GTB0947 Revised Schedule (Yes/No): No Statement of Work Number: A21JOJ Schedule Effective Date: 01/17/2002 Customer Number: 01788374 CharRe Period CharqeslPayment Plan: Charqe Period: *Total Charges: 10,195.92 Start Date: 07/01/2004 Monthly End Date: 06/30/2005 Contract Term: 1 Year(s) Type of Discount(s) Applied: Scope Incentive *Charges are based on the current inventory and services identified in this Schedule. Actual charges may vary with any additions, deletions, or changes to the inventory or services. For a Machine subject to usage charges, in addition to the Service charge identified herein, you will be separately billed for usage in accordance with applicable usage rates and billing cycles. INFORMAL QUOTE: FOR BUDGET AND PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY The Parties need not to sign this Schedule, unless either of us requests it. Agreed to: Agreed to: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA International Business Machines Corporation By: By: Authorized signature Authorized signature Name (type or print): Name (type or print): Date: Date: .,~ z125-5511-13 (7/2003) contract A21JOJ (prepared 06/14/04 13:44) Page 1 of 5 Imm ~ -----.- .... ---- Schedule for Services Enterprise Total for Charne Period bv Customer Number: 01788374 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 10500 CIVIC CENTER DR, CUCAMONGA CA 91730-3801 10,195.92 Total 10,195.92 ~ Z125-5511-13 (7/2003) contract A21JOJ (prepared 06/14/04 13:44) Page 2 of 5 =------- Schedule for Services Maintenance Machine List Eligible Machine Description ........ Order/ Order/ Product Type Maint, Charges Charges M Mod/ Add/ Serial Qty, of~vc ~c Charges* fg Type Feat Rem Serial Description Start** Stop** Number Number Specified Location: 01788374 City, State: CUCAMONGA 'CA 91730-3801 IBM 7026 B80 00009898F PSERIES 640 1 B 1 1,646.40 IBM 7044 170 00007727F WORKSTATiON/ENTRY SERVER 1 B 1 846.72 IBM 7044 170 00007728F WORKSTATION/ENTRY SERVER 1 B 1 846.72 iBM 7046 B50 O0003A1BA ENTRY SERVER 1 B 1 564.48 IBM 7046 BS0 00003AlCA ENTRY SERVER 1 B 1 564.48 IBM 3583 L18 000014401 ULTRIUM TAPE LIBRARY 1 B 1 5,197.92 Total 9,666.72 contract A21JOJ (prepared 06/14/04 13:44) Page 3 of 5 Z125-5511-13 (7/2003) =---------------- Schedule for Services Service List Customer Technical Contact Name {if applicable): Customer Primary Technical Contact name: Customer Primary Technical Contact phone number: ........ Eligible Machine Description ....... Product Group I Charges I Charges Serial/ Support Service Qty. Charges ' Type Model Order # Service Option Start** I Stop** Specified Location: 01788374 City, State: CUCAMONGA CA 91730-3801 ALERT FOR pSERIES 529.20 HIPER PTF NOTIFICATION Total 529.20 Z125-5511-13 (7/2003) contract A21JOJ (prepared 06/14/04 13:44) Page 4 of 5 -'" ---==- =------ Schedule for Services Legends: ~ OF SERVICE A) On-Site RepaidExchange Services, Monday through Friday (excluding holidays), 8am to 5pm,next business day B) On-Site Repair/Exchange Services, 7 days a week, 24hrs/day C) On-Site Repair/Exchange Services, Monday through Friday (excluding holidays), 8am to 5pm, 4 hour response objective This type of repair service includes a response objective and is not a guarantee. D) On-Site Repair/Exchange Services, 7 days a week, 24hrs/day, 2 hour response objective This type of repair service includes a response objective and is not a guarantee. X) EasyServe (remotely delivered services) ~ MAINTENANCE SERVICES 1) Maintenance of IBM Machines 2) Maintenance of non-IBM Machines 3) Warranty Service Upgrade 4) Maintenance of Cisco Products 5) Maintenance of iBM Machines - Enhanced Service Response 6) Service for Machines Withdrawn from IBM Maintenance 7) Non-IBM Service for Machines Withdrawn from IBM Maintenance 8) Maintenance of IBM Machines (Labor Only) 9) Non-[BM Memory Exchange 10) Enhanced Parts Inventory 11) Spare Machine 12) Key Operator Suppor~ 13) Maintenance of non-IBM Machines for SUN Microsystems Machines during the SUN Warranty Period 16) IBM Maintenance Services - First Line Maintenance for Wincor Nixdon~ ATMs 17) iBM Maintenance Services - Applications Maintenance Services for Wincor Nixdorf ATMs 18) Post Installation Coverage (PIC) Service Upgrade, for selected Non-IBM Machines *Charges shown are for the Charge Period A (C) indicates a Machine that will have Usage Charges billed separately An (E) indicates a Machine that has been announced as withdrawn from generally available Maintenance Service An (H) identifies a Machine on an existing ServiceSuite/ServiceElect CHIS contract A (K) indicates Assumptive priced products included in the total Charge Period Price but will be billed based on the terms of the Contract An (N) indicates that the product is a non-GSA Schedule item An (O) indicates a One Time Charge A (P) indicates averaged billing or annual prepayment An (R) indicates the usage charge rate (Feet, Hours, or Impressions) for a machine under a usage plan A (U) indicates Usage Charges which are measured in either Feet, Hours, or impressions A (W) indicates a Machine under Warranty An (X) indicates On-order Products which are shown for planning purposes only A (Y) indicates On-order MES products which are shown for planning purposes only, these charges are included in the related machine charges **Charges Start/Stop dates shown are those that differ from the Contract Period StarVEnd Dates Z125-5511-13 (712003) contract A21JOJ (prepared 06/14/04 13:44) Page 5 of 5 TH CITY OF l~AN ilO C U CAH 0 N OA S tffRet rt TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY.' Dawn Haddon, Purchasing Manager DATE: July 7, 2004 SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION FOR THE PURCHASE OF TWO (2) FORD F-250 HEAVY DUTY SUPER CAB TRUCKS WITH UTILITY BODY AND ONE (1) FORD F-350 DRW SUPER DUTY STAKE BED TRUCK FOR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, PARKS AND FACILITIES DIVISIONS, AT CENTRAL PARK, FROM SUNRISE FORD, OF FONTANA, IN THE AMOUNT OF $79,406.12, AND AN APPROPRIATION OF $79,406.12 FROM THE PARK DEVELOPMENT FUND BALANCE INTO FUND 1120-305-5604 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council authorize the pumhase of two (2) Ford F- 250 Heavy Duty Super Cab Trucks with Utility Body and one (1) Ford F-350 DRW Super Duty Stake Bed Truck for Engineering Department, Parks and Facilities Divisions, at Central Park, from Sunrise Ford, of Fontana, in the amount of $79,406.12, and an appropriation of $79,406.12 from the Park Development Fund balance into fund 1120-305-5604. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS With the development of Central Park comes the need for two (2) Ford F-250 Heavy Duty Super Cab Trucks with Utility Body and one (1) Ford F-350 DRW Super Duty Stake Bed Truck for the Engineering Depadment, Parks and Facilities Divisions. Fleet Maintenance provided specifications for these trucks to Pumhasing. Purchasing prepared a formal Request for Bid and sent it to seven (7) vendors and posted the Request for Bid to the Purchasing website. Six (6) responses were received. After analysis of the bid responses by the Fleet Maintenance Supervisor AUTHORIZATION FOR TRUCK PURCHASE July 7, 2004 Page 2 and Purchasing staff, it has been determined that Sunrise Ford is the lowest, most responsive, responsible bidder, when an allowable discount of $500.00 per vehicle Net 30 is taken, that meets the specifications required by the Engineering Department as highlighted in the attached copy of the abstract of the bid. ~~iPi~~itted' ~'~lam~J. 0 Neil Community Services Director City Engineer Attachment I:\COMMS E RV~Cou ncil&Boards~Cit yCou ncii\StaffRepor t s~004\Ce ntralPkT~uckP urchase.070704.doc ,.,<'5 ClT? OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA REMARKS: 13)) Ung Cost highllghted in yellow is the Iow bid for each vehicle PURCHASING DIVISION 2) Items highlighted in pink need special note ABSTRACT OF BID Greg - please confirm spec, with any changes, for Iow bid is correct & complete RECEIVED FOR: ~.o~ ......................................................................... ~;.~ ~:o~ ...................................................................... ~:~: ~:o~ ........................................................................... ~..~ .............................................................................. ~.o~ q~o~ ............................................................................. ~:.~ ........................................................................... ~.o~ ........................................................................... [-~ ........................................................................................................................................................... ~.~,~.:~.~ .............................................. 5.710.1.; ....... 5_,811 5~ .... 5.82537 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA REMARKS: 1 ) Unit Cost highlighted in yellow is the Iow bid for each vehicle ] PURCHASING DMSlON 2) Items highlighted in pink need special note J ABSTRACT OF BID 3 Greg - p ease confirm spec, w th any changes, for Iow bid is correct & complete RECEIVED FOR: _. _ftr Gunskl, Fleet Maintenance BID NO.: RFB 03/~4~t2 Two i r ~ ~ Stake Bed Truck 5 6 Vendor Name Ramsey Street Ford ~los$ Bros. Ford Contact Name Je~ Timper ~ Wang Phone No. 9~9~849-622t }09-825-t2t2 ~_~..~:~.H_:~.~u~C~.~.Tp~,~ .................. ~ ............................... ~_~:.~7.~.~ .................. ,~7..~.~..~ .......................... ~7.~.~2 . ~ ~53.04 _ _ _ 0.00 ~p~.~: ~.p~.§~ ...~__.[?.,~_s.~.~ .............. ~ .................................. ~7:.~Z~:~q ................... ~7_,?._9..~ ......................... :~..~,~_0 ................. ~0_!.~.~:.~~ .................. 0.~ ~ o~< ~:.~ ............................................................................. ~°~. ........................................................................ ~..~ ........................................................................... ~:.~ ............................................................................... ~:0p. .......................................................................... Not a Ii .o~..~..~...6~._._o~_..~_(~ ............................................... ~ .e.~..,~ ~ v ~!.i~E ~_!_o._s...~_. _~,~L.~_.~ ~ ........ ~.~ e_~ _d_~v~.~_Lo..~_'~ ~t_'~ ~ _ed. ................................................................................................................................................................... Ta:~ ..................................................................................................................................................... ~,_8.~..~_~ ................................................................... q,~.7~.~ .......................................................................... ~:(3~...................................................................... Prepared by Pamela Pane 6/29/2004 [~ A C H O C U C A M O N G A ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Stafl:Re rt DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Joe Stofa Jr., Associate Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT SECURITY, DRAINAGE ACCEPTANCE AGREEMENT AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT FOR INSTALLATION OF THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 14759 LOCATED AT WARDMAN BULLOCK ROAD AND THE FUTURE WILSON AVENUE SUBMITTED BY PULTE HOMES RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the subject agreements and security for the Drainage System for Tentative Tract 14759 and authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign said agreement. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Tentative Tract 14759, located at Wardman Bullock Road and Wilson Avenue was approved by the City Planning Commission on November 10, 1999 with the approval of Resolution No. 99-11 for the development of 358 single-family homes and 3 lettered lots for common open space/parks totaling 18.3 acres on 132 acres of land. The Developer, Pulte Homes is submitting agreements and security to guarantee the construction of a Drainage System in the following amounts: Faithful Performance $120,600.00 Labor and Material $ 50,300.00 Maintenance Cash Deposit $ 10,000.00 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TR 14759 JULY 7, 2004 PAGE 2 The Developer, Pulte Homes, is in the process of finalizing the improvement plans and tract map, which will be forwarded to City Council in the near future. They want to begin construction of the drainage facility during the non-rainy season. Copies of the agreement and security are available in the City Clerk's Office William J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:JS:dlw VICINITY MAP ~ "'1 ......... '-::':'::':':':':':' ': ........ '.':':':':':':':': ........... '.':':':':':':-:-:': ..... ° ":: :i:i:i:i:~:i:i:.:.:.:. -' I Ii i ~ ~ ~ i i i;i~!i¢!i~i~if:~i~i~i~ ~ ~ ~i~':~:': ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::.::: w~ I~!!;!ii~if:!!i i ! i i ! ~ !ii i~ ~!~. I:::::~::~:~....... ,,! - _:::..,_, ,.,,, ~_. / ..... CITY HALL CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA "l'~ tq- 7$ ? SO UTION NO. 0q' 2 ! A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA APPROVING IMPROVEIVlENT AGREBMENT, IMPROVEMENT SECURITY, DRAINAGE ACCEPTANCE AGREEMENT AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 14759 WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map 14759, submitted by Pulte Homes and consisting of 358 single family homes located at Wardman Bullock Road and Wilson Avenue, was approved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on November 10, 1999 and is in colnpliance with the State Subdivision Map Act and Local Ordinance No. 28 adopted pursuant to that Act; and WHEREAS, the requirement established as prerequisite to approval of the final map by the City Council of said City have now been met by entry into an Improvement Agreement for the installation of the Drainage System guaranteed by acceptable Improvement Security, Drainage Acceptance Agreement and Maintenance Agreement by Pulte Homes, as developer. NOW, THERF~ORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HEREBY RESOLVES, that said Improvement Agreement, said Improvement Security, said Drainage Acceptance Agreement and said Maintenance Agreement submitted by said developer be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Agreements on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest. R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A ENGINEERING DE PARTFIEN T Staff Report DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Joe Stofa, Jr., Associate Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF MAP, IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT SECURITY, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 3 FOR PARCEL MAP NO. 15716-2 LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND DAY CREEK BOU1,EVARD SUBMITTED BY VICTORIA GARDENS MALL, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution approving Parcel Map No. 15716-2 accepting the subject agreement and security, ordering the maintenance annexations and authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign said agreement. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Parcel Map No.15716-2, a phased development of Parcel Map 15716 approved by the Planning Commission on January 23, 2002 for the development of 97 parcels and 39 lots for open space, landscaping and maintenance purposes, is located on the northeast corner of Foothill Blvd. and Day Creek Blvd. The Developer, Victoria Gardens Mall, LLC, is submitting an agreement and security to guarantee the construction of thc off-site improvements in the following amounts: Faithful Performance Bond: $12,500.00 (Cash Deposit) Labor and Material Bond: $ 6,250.00 (Cash Deposit) CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT PARCEL MAP 15716-2 - VICTORIA GARDENS MALL, LLC July 7, 2004 Page 2 Copies of the agreement and security are available in the City Clerk's Office Respectfully submitted, William J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:JS :tch VICINITY MAP ,- ~:i:iiiiiiiiiiiilE:i:i:i:i::':':':':':':':':'::::: :':': .............. i-I Ii .... i:~:!::.:.:.:.:.:.: :.:.:.:.:.:.: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.-.v.- :.:.:. ::::::::::::::::::::::: lii~ii~ii~ii:E:Eiiii!iiii~ii~iiiii!!iiii~':~'~, ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~:::::::': I:.:i:i:i:!:i:':.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.':! ,~ ) CITY HALL CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Pti IS?Il,,-'/.. RESOLUTION NO. ~ ~'/'- A RESOLUTION OF THE C1TY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 15716-2 AND IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT WHEREAS, Parcel Map No. 15716-2 (Phased Parcel Map No. 15716), submitted by Victoria Gardens Mall, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, and consisting of 16 numbered parcels and one (1) lettered lot, located on the northeast comer of Foothill Blvd. and Day Creek Blvd., was approved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on January 23, 2003, and is in compliance with the State Subdivision Map Act and Local Ordinance No. 28 adopted pursuant to that Act; and WHEREAS, Parcel Map No. 15761-2 is the final map of the division of land approved as shown on said Tentative Parcel Map No. 15716; and WHEREAS, all of the requirements established as prerequisite to approval of the final map by the City Council of said City have now been met by entry into an Improvement Agreement by Victoria Gardens Mall, LLC, as developer; and WHEREAS, said Developer submits for approval said Parcel Map offering for dedication, for street, highway and related purposes, the streets delineated thereon and the easements dedicated thereon for storm drain, sidewalk, street tree and landscape purposes. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HEREBY RESOLVES, that said Improvement Agreement submitted by said developer be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest; and that the offers for dedication, easements and the final map delineating the same for said Parcel Map No. 15716-2 is hereby approved and the City Engineer is authorized to present same to the County Recorder to be flied for record. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 3 FOR PARCEL MAP NUMBER 15716-2 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has previously formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972", being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, said special maintenance district known and designated as Landscape Maintenance District No. 3B, Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 3 (referred to collectively as the "Maintenance Districts"); and WHEREAS, the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 2 of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972" authorize the annexation of additional territory to the Maintenance Districts; and WHEREAS, such provisions also provide that the requirement for the preparation resolutions, an assessment engineer's report, notices of public hearing and the right of majority protest may be waived in writing with the written consent of all of the owners of property within the territory to be annexed; and WHEREAS, notwithstanding that such provisions of the 1972 Act related to the annexation of territory to the Maintenance District, Article XIIID of the Constitution of the State of California ("Article XIIID") establishes certain procedural requirements for the authorization to levy assessments which apply to the levy of annual assessments for the Maintenance Districts on the territory proposed to be annexed to such districts; and WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference have requested that such property (collectively, the 'Territory") be annexed to the Maintenance Districts in order to provide for the levy of annual assessments to finance the maintenance of certain improvements described in Exhibit B hereto (the "Improvements"); and WHEREAS, all of the owners of the Territory have filed with the City Clerk duly executed forms entitled "Consent And Waiver To Annexation Of Certain Real Property To A Maintenance District And Approval Of The Levy Of Assessments On Such Real Property" (the "Consent and Waiver"); and WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the 1972 Act to the annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts and have expressly consented to the annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts; and RESOLUTION NO. PM 15716-2 July 7, 2004 Page 2 WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as proscribed in the 1972 Act and/or Article XIIID applicable to the authorization to the levy the proposed annual assessment against the Territory set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and have declared support for, consent to and approval of the authorization of levy such proposed annual assessment set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto; and WHEREAS, at this time the City Council desires to order the annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts and to authorize the levy of annual assessments against the Territory in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit C hereto. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the above recitals are all tree and correct. SECTION 2: The City Council hereby finds and determines that: a. The annual assessments proposed to be levied on each parcel in the Territory do not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on each such parcel from the Improvements. b. The proportional special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory from the Improvements has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the cost of the maintenance of the Improvement. c. Only special benefits will be assessed on the Territory by the levy of the proposed annual assessments. SECTION 3: This legislative body hereby orders the annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts, approves the financing of the maintenance of the Improvements from the proceeds of annual assessments to be levied against the Tendtory and approves and orders the levy of annual assessments against the Territory in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit B. SECTION 4: All future proceedings of the Maintenance Districts, including the levy of all assessments, shall be applicable to the Territory. Exhibit A Identification of the Owner and Description of the Property To Be Annexed The Owner of the Property is: VICTORIA GARDENS, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY The legal description of the Property is: BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THOSE CERTAIN PARCELS OF LAND SHOWN AS "DESIGNATED REMAINDER PARCEL - 6.050 AC." AND "DESIGNATED REMAINDER PARCEL - 6.630 AC." OF PARCEL MAP NO. 15716-1, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON Fr[.E IN PARCEL MAP BOOK 199, PAGES 61 TO 81, INCLUSIVE; Al J. OF LOT U OF SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 15716-2; A PORTION OF VICTORIA GARDENS LANE AS SHOWN ON SAID PARCEL MAP O. 15716-1; AND A PORTION OF FOOTHII l~ BOULEVARD AS SHOWN ON SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 15716-1, Al J. IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. The above-described parcels are shown on sheet A-2 attached herewith and by this reference made a part hereof. A-1 PM 15716-1 ~ Exhibit B To Description of the District Improvements Fiscal Year 2002/2003 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B (COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL): Landscape Maintenance District No. 3b (LMD #3b) represents landscape sites throughout the Commercial/Industrial Maintenance District. These sites are associated with areas within that district and as such any benefit derived from the landscape installation can be directly attributed to those parcels within that district. Because of this, assessments required for this district are charged to those parcels within that district. The various landscape sites that are maintained by this district consist of median islands, parkways, street trees, entry monuments, the landscaping within the Metrolink Station and 22.87 acres associated with the Adult Sports Park (not including the stadium, parking lots or the maintenance building). STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (ARTERIAL STREETS): Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 (SLD #1)) is used to fund the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located on arterial streets throughout the City. The facilities within this district, being located on arterial streets, have been determined to benefit the City as a whole on an equal basis and as such those costs associated with the maintenance and/or installation of the facilities is assigned to the City-wide district. The sites maintained by the district consist of street lights on arterial streets and traffic signals on arterial streets within the rights-of-way or designated easements of streets dedicated to the City. STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 (VICTORIA PLANNED COMMUNITY): Street Light Maintenance District No. 3 (SLD #3) is used to fund the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located within the Victoria Planned Community. Generally, this area encompasses the area of the City east of Deer Creek Channel, south of Highland Avenue, north of Base Line Road, and west of Etiwanda Avenue. It has been determined that the facilities in this district benefit the properties within this area of the City. This sites maintained by the district consist of streetlights on local streets and traffic signals (or a portion thereof) on local streets within the Victoria Planned Community. Exhibit "B" continued Proposed additions to Work Program (Fiscal Year 2002/2003) For Project: Parcel Map 15716-2 Number of Lamps Street Lights 5800L 9500L 16,000L 22,000L 27,500L SLD # 1 --- 0 ......... SLD#3 0 ............ Community Trail Turf Non-Turf Trees Landscaping DGSF SF SF EA L 3B ...... 0 70 *Existing items installed with original project B-2 70 Exhibit C Proposed Annual Assessment Fiscal Year 2002/2003 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B (COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL): The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $352.80 for the fiscal year 2002/03. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for Landscape Maintenance District No. 3B (Commercial/Industrial): # of # of Rate Per Physical Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment Land Use Unit Type Units Units Units Unit Revenue Comm/Ind Acre 2115.92 1.0 2115.92 $352.80 $746,496.5 8 The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (PM 15716-2) is: 14.195 Parcels x 1 A.U. Factor x $352.80 Rate Per A.U. = $5,008.00 Annual Assessment STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (ARTERIAL STREETS): The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $17.77 for the fiscal year 2002/03. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 (Arterial Streets): # of # of Rate Per Physical Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment Land Use Unit Type Units Units Units Unit Revenue Fantnr Single Parcel 21,151 1.00 21,151 $17.77 $375,853.27 Familv Multi- Unit 8,540 1.00 8,540 $17.77 $151,755.80 Family Commercia Acre 2,380.36 2.00 4,760.72 $17.77 $84,597.99 1 TOTAL $612,207.06 The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (PM 15716-2) is: 14.195 Parcels x 2 A.U. Factor x $17.77 Rate Per A.U. = $504.49 Annual Assessment Exhibit "C" continued STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 (VICTORIA PLANNED COMMUNITY): The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $47.15 for the fiscal year 2002/03. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No. 3 (Victoria Planned Community): # of # of Rate Per Physical Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment Land Use Unit Type Units Units Units Unit Revenue Single Parcel 5160 1.00 5160 $47.15 $243,294.00 Family Multi- Unit 124 1.00 124 $47.15 $5,84660 Family Commercia Acre 44.18 2.00 88.36 $47.15 $4,166.17 1 Vacant 10.95 2.0 21.90 $47.15 $1,032.59 TOTAL $254,339.36' The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property is (PM 15716-2): 14.195 acres x 2.0 A.U. Factor x $47.15 Rate Per A.U. = $1,338.59 R A N H O C U ~ A M O N ~ A ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO UTILIZE ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS, INC. AND AUFBAU CORPORATION TO PROVIDE CONTRACT INSPECTION SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004/2005, TO BE FUNDED FROM THE FOLLOWING ACCOUNTS: 1001-305-5300 DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT CONTRACT INSPECTION $37,500.00, 1001-305-5306 DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT CONTRACT SERVICES/CFD $100,000.00, 1001-307-5300 PROJECT MANAGEMENT GENERAL CONTRACT SERVICES $37,500.00, 1001-307-5306 PROJECT MANAGEMENT GENERAL CONTRACT SERVICES/CFD $100,000.00 AND 1170-303-5300 ADMINISTRATION GAS TAX/CONTRACT SERVICES $65,000.00 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council, by minute action, authorize Dan Guerra and Associates, Aufbau Corporation and Amhiterra Design Group to provide development plan checking services for Fiscal Year 2004-05. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Associated Engineers and Aufbau Corporation have provided contract inspection services for the City of Rancho Cucamonga for several years. Both consultants provide construction inspection for both public infrastructure improvements related to land development and city-funded capital improvement projects. Inspection duties are assigned between the two consultants based upon project type, consultant availability, and project location. Both consultants are currently operating under agreements that were last amended and approved by the City Council on September 3, 2003. These two consultants have been contacted and both companies have indicated that they are agreeable to continue '73 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT INSPECTION SERVICES July 7, 2004 Page 2 providing services at the hourly rates, terms, and conditions established in September 2003. These rates are as follows: Associated Enqineers Hourly rates In-house staff inspector $58 hourly Aufbau Corporation Hourly rates Construction inspector: Public works projects $68 hourly Non-Public works projects $65 hourly The City Attorney has reviewed the agreements and has indicated that they are still valid. Additionally, staff has informally contacted various other construction inspection consultants to determine the market rate for inspection services and has determined that the existing fee structures of Associated Engineers and Aufbau Corporation are consistent with the average market rate. For this reason, and in consideration of the existing consultants' familiarity with the City of Rancho Cucamonga's construction standards and codes, an established track record of exemplary service in meeting the City's construction inspection needs, and the recentness of their current agreements (which are less than one year old), it is recommended that the City forgo a request-for- proposals process and authorize the continuation of services from Associated Engineers and Aufbau Corporation for Fiscal Year 2004-05 under the rates, terms and conditions of their existing agreements. The total dollar amounts and funding sources identified are consistent with the recently approved Fiscal Year 2004-05 budget and the total cost of both consultants will be monitored throughout the fiscal year to ensure that the total cost does not exceed the budgeted amounts. Respectfully submitted, City Engineer WJO:DJ:tch R A N C.H O C U C A M O N G A I~NGINEI~I~ING DEPAI}T~II~NT Report DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer. BY: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO UTILIZE DAN GUERRA AND ASSOCIATES, AUFBAU CORPORATION AND ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP TO PROVIDE DEVELOPMENT PLAN CHECKING SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004/2005, TO BE FUNDED FROM THE FOLLOWING ACCOUNTS: 1001-305-5300 DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT CONTRACT SERVICES $520,000.00, 1001-305-5303 DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT CONTRACT SERVICES REIMBURSABLE $100,000.00 AND 1110-316-5300 BEAUTIFICATION PLAN CHECK SERVICES $86,640.00. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council, by minute action, authorize Dan Guerra and Associates, Aufbau Corporation and Architerra Design Group to provide development plan checking services for Fiscal Year 2004-05. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Dan Guerra and Associates, Aufbau Corporation and Architerra Design Group have been providing plan check services for the City for twenty-two, five, and four years, respectively. Dan Guerra and Associates performs civil engineering plan checking. Aufbau Corporation performs civil engineering and landscape plan checking. Architerra Design Group performs landscape plan checking only. Plan checking is assigned between the three consultants based upon type of project, consultant availability and location of project. All three consultants are currently operating under agreements that were last amended and approved by the City Council on February 20, 2002. These three consultants have been contacted and all three companies have indicated that they are agreeable to continue providing services at the per-sheet and hourly rates, terms, and conditions established two and one-half years ago. These rates are as follows: CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT PARCEL MAP 15731 - MDC RANCHO 'I'~VO, LLC December 17, 2003 Page 2 Dan Guerra and Associates Plan Checking Maximum Charges Residential parcel maps $548 + $72/parcel Tracts maps/Non-residential parcel maps $688 + $14/parcel ($828 minimum) Street improvement/storm drain plans: Street widening $0.54/L.F. + per-sheet charge Interior streets (1-2 sheets) $548/sheet Interior streets (3-5 sheets) $1096 + $480/sheet for all sheets over 2 Interior streets (6-10 sheets) $2356 + $438/sheet for all sheets over 5 Interior streets (11 or more sheets) $4726 + $410/sheet for all sheets over 10 Hydrology study: Areas up to 150 acres $548/drainage system Areas over 150 acres $1096/drainage system Legal descriptions $234/description Hourly rates Principal Engineer $160 hourly Map and Legal Check $115 hourly General Research $110 hourly Aufbau Corporation Plan Checking Maximum Charges Residential parcel maps $548 + $72/parcel Tracts maps/Non-residential parcel maps $688 + $14/parcel ($828 minimum) Street improvement/storm drain plans: Street widening $0.54/L.F. + per-sheet charge Interior streets (1-2 sheets) $548/sheet Interior streets (3-5 sheets) $1096 + $480/sheet for all sheets over 2 Interior streets (6-10 sheets) $2356 + $438/sheet for all sheets over 5 Interior streets (11 or more sheets) $4726 + $410/sheet for all sheets over 10 Hydrology study: Areas up to 150 acres $548/drainage system Areas over 150 acres $1096/drainage system Legal descriptions $234/description Hourly rates In-house civil engineer $74 hourly CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT PARCEL MAP 15731 - MDC RANCHO TWO, LLC December 17, 2003 Page 3 Architerra Design Group Plan Checking Maximum Charges Landscape plans $240/sheet Hourly rates Principal $100 hourly Senior Project Manager $ 75 hourly Project Manager $ 65 hourly CAD Operator $ 55 hourly Clerical $ 35 hourly The City Attorney has reviewed the agreements and has indicated that they are still valid. Additionally, staff has informally contacted various other plan check consultants to determine the market rate for per-sheet maximum charges and has determined that the existing fee structures of Dan Guerra and Associates, Aufbau Corporation and Architerra Design Group remain significantly below the average market rate. For this reason, and in consideration of the existing consultants' familiarity with the City of Rancho Cucamonga's design standards and codes and an established track record of exemplary service in meeting the City's plan check needs, it is recommended that the City forgo a request-for-proposals process and authorize the continuation of services from Dan Guerra and Associates, Aufbau Corporation and Architerra Design Group for Fiscal Year 2004-05 under the rates, terms and conditions of their existing agreements. The total dollar amounts and funding sources identified are consistent with the recently approved Fiscal Year 2004-05 budget and the total cost of all three consultants will be monitored throughout the fiscal year to ensure that the total cost does not exceed the budgeted amounts. Respectfully submitted, City Engineer WJO:DJ:tch 77 R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Staff Report DALE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Shelley Hayes, Engineer Technician SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF MAP FOR PARCEL MAP 16480, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SPRUCE STREET AND FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, SUBMITTED BY WESTERN LAND PROPERTIES RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City adopt the attached resolution approving PM 16480 and to cause said map to record. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS PM 16480, located at the northwest corner of Spruce Street and Foothill Boulevard in the community Commercial Development District, was approved by the Planning commission on June 6 2004 for the division of 26.13 acres into 14 parcels. Respectfully submitted, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ENG/IN,~ERING DIVISION / IIW~ J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO;SH;tch Attachment Vicinity Map City of Rancho Cucamonga Parcel Map 16480 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 16480 WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map No. 16480, submitted by Western Land Properties, and consisting of 14 parcels, located at the northwest corner of Spruce Street and Foothill Boulevard being a division of 26.13 acres was approved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, on June 9, 2004, and is in compliance with the State Subdivision Map Act and Local Ordinance No. 28 adopted pursuant to that Act; and WHEREAS, Parcel Map No. 16480 is the final map of the division of land approved as shown on said Tentative Parcel Map; and WHEREAS, all of the requirements established as prerequisite to approval of the final map by the City Council of said city have now been met by Western Land Properties as developer; and NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE that the offers for dedication, easements and the final map delineating the same for said Parcel Map No. 16480 is hereby approved and the City Engineer is authorized to present same to the County Recorder to be filed for record. T H C ~ T Y 0 F I~AN CI~O Cg CAH ON C,A DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Betty Miller, Associate Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF A MASTER PLAN TRANSPORTATION FACILITY REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT, SRA-30, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF TRACT 14380, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF WILSON AND ETIWANDA AVENUES, SUBMITTED BY MASTERCRAFT HOMES RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the Transportation Facility Reimbursement Agreement for one travel lane and median curbs in Wilson Avenue, between Etiwanda Avenue and Cervantes Place, in conjunction with the development of Tract 14380, and authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign said agreement. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS As a condition of approval of Tentative Tract 13527, the Developer, MasterCraft Homes, was required to install frontage improvements in Wilson Avenue, between Etiwanda Avenue and Cervantes Place. The Developer completed these improvements with Tract 14380, the second of five final maps. All Tract 14380 improvements have been accepted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The Developer has submitted an itemized accounting of the construction costs for the required street improvements. Staff has reviewed and concurs with the submittal. The total cost of said improvements was $65,374.72. There have been not Transportation Development Fee credits given. ?/ CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT SRA-30 - MASTERCRAFT HOMES July 7, 2004 Page 2 Copies of the agreement signed by the Developer are available in the City Clerk's office. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ENGINEERING DIVISION Respectfully submitted, Willia(t~'~l. 0 Neil City Engineer WJO:BM:tch Attachments ~ --NORTH 'fi' 1"= 1000' CITY OF ITEM: SRA-30 RANCHO CUCAMONGA ?.~q~ TITLE: Tract 14380 ENGINEERING DWISION EXHIBIT: Vicinity Map .ESO'UTIO. 2. / A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MASTER PLAN TRANSPORTATION FACILITY REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT FOR ONE TRAVEL LANE AND MEDIAN CURBS IN WILSON AVENUE, BETWEEN ETIWANDA AVENUE AND CERVANTES PLACE, SRA-30 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has for its consideration a Master Plan Transportation Facility Reimbursement Agreement submitted by MasterCraft Homes, the Developer of Tract 14380, located at the northwest corner of Wilson Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue; and WHEREAS, the Developer, at Developer's expense, has completed the required street improvements; and WHEREAS, the Developer has requested reimbursement for the backbone portion of the street improvements, as he is entitled to per the conditions of approval of this development, by means of said Reimbursement Agreement. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIlE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE that said Reimbursement Agreement be and the same is hereby approved, and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk attest thereto. THE CITY OF ~ANCHO CUCAHONGA Staff Report DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Joe O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner SUBJECT: Approval of Resolution of the City Council authorizing Transportation Enhancements (TEA-3) grant application for funding of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail project. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the attached Resolution in support of application for grant funds. BACKGROUND.: The City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, joined together with the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) and surrounding cities to develop a multi-purpose trail to link the city of Claremont, Montclair, Upland, Rancho Cucamonga, Fontana, and Rialto. The purpose of the trail is to provide recreational opportunities for cyclists, pedestrians, runners, and equestrians. Trail users will enjoy exercise and convenient access to jobs, public facilities, and shopping, while exploring the history and culture of the area. The 21-mile long rail trail will begin in downtown Claremont and end in downtown Rialto. As the responsible agency for regional transportation planning, the SANBAG prepared a Non-Motorized Transportation Plan 2001 Update for San Bernardino County, which this Council has adopted, with local supplement, as the City's Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP). The Non-Motorized Transportation Plan 2001 Update for San Bemardino recommends the Pacific Electric Trail project as a highest priority project in the primary bikeway system for the region. This great application would provide nearly $7 million in funding to design and construct the trail from Grove to Haven Avenues and from 1,300 feet east of Etiwanda Avenue to the I-15 Freeway. Re~rc"~lly submitted, Jo O~¢~eil City Engineer BB:DC\ma RESOLUTION NO. 0 ~J~"" ~-~/~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES (TEA) PROGRAM FUNDING FOR THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC INLAND EMPIRE TRAIL PROJECT. WHEREAS, the Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) provides funding to local agencies for transportation projects; and WHEREAS, the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) is the agency responsible for allocating TEA funding in San Bernardino County; WHEREAS, as the responsible agency, SANBAG, in conjunction with Caltrans TEA program staff, will award TEA funding to projects in the Valley region of San Bernardino County based on criteria established by its Board; and WHEREAS, the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail achieves regional goals to reduce traffic congestion by providing an alternative form of transportation; hence, was identified as a highest priority project in the San Bernardino County Non-Motorized Transportation Plan 2001 Update. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, that it confirms (1) the project submitted by Rancho Cucamonga for TEA funding; and (2) its commitment to local agency participation as specified in the application, and (3) its commitment to ongoing maintenance if project is selected. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 7TH DAY OF JULY 2004. DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Michael TenEyck, Administrative Resource Manager SUBJECT: Approve and authorize the execution of a sole source Professional Services Agreement in the amount of $290,000.00 to Applied Metering Technology, Inc., for installation, configuration and meter testing services within the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility service area to be funded from 17053035309 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve and authorize the execution of a sole source Professional Services Agreement in the amount of $290,000.00 to Applied Metering Technology, Inc., for installation, configuration and meter testing services within the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility service area to be funded from 17053035309 BACKGROUND ANALYSIS: On August 31, 2001, the Rancho Cucamonga City Council authorized the creation and operation of a municipally owned utility for the purpose of providing various utility services. Subsequently, on August 21, 2002, the Redevelopment Agency authorized the filing of a Wholesale Distribution Access Tariff (WDAT) Application with Southern California Edison Company for the provision of electric service to the Victoria Arbors development area by the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility. This development area will receive permanent electric service from the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility via an electrical substation facility at the southeast corner of Rochester Avenue and Stadium Parkway. The substation began construction on October 13, 2003 and is currently operational. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTS APPLIED METERING TECHNOLOGY, INC. July 7, 2004 Page 2 On September 17, 2003 and November 12, 2003, the City Council award construction contracts for the installation of the Municipal Utilities backbone infrastructure which runs north along Rochester Ave. from the substation to Foothill Blvd. and then east along Foothill Blvd. to Day Creek Blvd. then north on Day Creek Blvd. to Base Line Rd. With the substation operational and the backbone infrastructure installed the City is ready to begin serving Victoria Gardens Mall as well as other developments with the Municipal Utility Service Area permanent electric service. There is a need to provide retail customers with permanent metered electric service. Staff research found (i) other cities also did research and found AMT was the only service provider available. (ii) Our researched confirmed the results of other cities. (iii) They are also certified and used by each of the three Investor Owned Utilities (Edison, San Diego Gas and Electric, PG&E). (iv) The City was able to negotiate a lower cost compared to other cities. AMT is currently the only provider in the area certified by the California Public Utilities Commission as a Meter Service Provider (MSP No. 1011). They are also certified by each of the three Investor Owned Utilities (leU's) to install, maintain, test and calibrate utility meters. Additionally, AMT is an Independent System Operator (ISO) cedified meter inspector. AMT is the service provider for three other recently formed municipal utilities, City of Corona, City of Industry and the City of Beaumont. It is staffs recommendation that the City Council approve and authorize the and execution of a sole source Professional Services Agreement in the amount of $290,000.00 to Applied Metering Technology, Inc., for installation, configuration and meter testing services within the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility service area to be funded from 17053035309. Respectfully submitted, City Engineer W JO:MT ~:~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SINGLE/SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION FOR PURCHASES $1,501 AND ABOVE R^NCHO CtICAMONGA The below information is provided in support of my Department requesting approval for a single/sole source. Outside of a duly declared emergency, the time to develop a statement of work or specifications is not in itself justification for single or sole source. Vendor: Applied Metering Technology Date: July 7, 2004 Commodity/Service: Meter installation, configuration and testing services Estimated expenditure: $290,000 Your Name: MichaeITen Eyck Extent of market search conducted: Surveyed other Municipal Utilities and Cities Electrical Engineering Contactor for vendor recommendations Price Reasonableness: good Does moving forward on this product/service further obligate the City to future similar contractual arrangements? [--~ No [~ Yes If Yes, Explain: Currently only vendor providing service DEFINITIONS: SINGLE SOURCE - a transaction with a business entity that is chosen, without competition, from among two or more business entities capable of supplying or providing the goods or services that meet the specified need. SOLE SOURCE - A transaction with the only business entity capable of supplying or providing the goods or services that meet the specified need. Initial all entries below that apply to the proposed purchase (more than one entry will apply to most single/sole source products/services requested). If needed, attach a memorandum containing complete justification and support documentation as directed in initial entry. THIS IS A SINGLE SOURCE [] THIS IS A SOLE SOURCE PURCHASE [] (check one). 1. r'-] SINGLE/SOLE SOURCE REQUEST iS FOR THE ORIGINAL MANUFACTURER, THERE ARE NO REGIONAL DISTRIBUTORS. (Item no. 3 also must also be completed). Single/Sole Source Justification Form Revised: 4/1/03 Single/Sole Source Justification Form Page 2 2. [-~ THE PARTS/EQUIPMENT ARE NOT INTERCHANGEABLE WITH SIMILAR PARTS OF ANOTHER MANUFACTURER. (Explain in separate memorandum). 3. [--~ THIS IS THE ONLY KNOWN ITEM OR SERVICE THAT WILL MEET THE SPECIALIZED NEEDS OF THIS DEPARTMENT OR PERFORM THE INTENDED FUNCTION. (Attach memorandum with details of specialized function or application). 4. I--'] UNIQUE FEATURES OF THE SUPPLY/SERVICE BEING REQUESTED. THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE SUPPLIER. (Attach memorandum with reasons why these unique features are and what benefit the City will accrue.) 5. [--] THE PARTS/EQUIPMENT ARE REQUIRED FROM THIS SOURCE TO PERMIT STANDARDIZATION (Attach memorandum describing basis for standardization request). 6. [~ NONE Of THE ABOVE APPLY. A DETAILED EXPLANATION AND JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS SINGLE/SOLE SOURCE REQUEST IS CONTAINED IN A'I-I'ACHED MEMORANDUM. $c,,~c s~,~-t ¢~p,--~- ~,~ ~,~;~.~ The undersigned requests that competitive procurement be waived and that the vendor identified as the supplier of the service or material described in this single/sole source justification be authorized as a single/sole source~'~r the s, ervice or mate, rial. Department Head: /~'~(/"~~ Department: ! t ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Purchasing Department ! ! ! ! ! I ! ! I ~] APPROVED [~ APPROVED WITH CONDITION/S DISAPPROVE Comments: $1,501 - $19,999 APPROVED BY PURCHASING MANAGER: Date: $20,000 AND ABOVE See comments above by Purchasing Division Attach to Council Request CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Date: I:'xMunJcipaJ Utility\-Mikes-Muni Electdc-file~Staff Reports\Sole Sourc¢-AMT. doc 4./I/2003 AMT Proposal No. FY04-118 INSTALLED COST COMPARISON ARB Schlumberger Schlumberger Minimum Form Full function' Full function Function Single Phase, kWh 25 Meter -'100~00 590.00 38.00 Installation 40.00 40.00 40.00 Programming 10.00 10.00 0.00 Total 150.00 640.00 78.00 kW Demand I TOU 16S / 12S Meter 200.00 760.00 240.00 Installation 60.00 60.00 60.00 Programming 20.00 20.00 0.00 Total 280.00 840.00 300.00 9S/5S/ CT Rated 3S Meter 500.00 760.00 240.00 Installation 370.00 370.00 370.00 Programming 20.00 20.00 20.00 CTs (3) 175.00 - 300.00 175.00 - 300.00 175.00 - 300.00 Test Switch 75.00 75.00 75.00 Block & Ring 80.00 80.00 80.00 Total 1220 o 1345 1480 - 1605 960 - 1085 Notes: 1. All houdy rates above assume work is completed during normal work hours Monday - Friday, 8:00AM - 4:30PM. A premium rate of 1.5 times our normal hourly rate will apply for all hours outside of these except for Sundays and holidays, which are at double time. 2. Rates above include all labor, equipment, materials and transportation fees. 3. Prices do not include applicable sales tax. 4 [~ A N C H O C U C A M O N G A ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT StaffR l rt DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Cindy Hackett, Associate Engineer Richard Oaxaca, Engineering Technician ~1~ SUBJECT: ACCEPT THE BIDS RECEIVED AND AWARD AND AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTION OF THE CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $413,474.00 TO THE APPARENT LOW BIDDER, AMERICAN ASPHALT SOUTH, INC., AND AUTHORIZE THE EXPENDITURE OF A 10% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $41,347.40 FOR THE 2004/2005 LOCAL STREET PAVEMENT REHABILITATION - SLURRY SEAL OF VARIOUS STREETS, TO BE FUNDED FROM GAS TAX FUNDS, ACCOUNT NO. 11703035650/1022170-0 AND APPROPRIATE AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF $60,000.00 FROM MEASURE I FUND BALANCE TO ACCOUNT NO. 11763035650/1022176-0 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council accept the bids received and award and authorize the execution of the contract in the amount of $413,474.00 to the apparent Iow bidder, American Asphalt South, Inc., and authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $41,347.40, for the 2004/2005 Local Street Pavement Rehabilitation - Slurry Seal of Various Streets, to be funded from Gas Tax funds, Account No. 11703035650/1022170-0 and appropriate an additional amount of $60,000.00 from Measure I fund balance to Account No. 11763035650/1022176-0. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Per previous Council action, bids were solicited, received and opened on June 1, 2004, for the subject project. The Engineer's estimate was $425,278.22. Staff has reviewed all bids received and found them to be complete and in accordance with the bid requirements with any irregularities to be inconsequential. Staff has completed the required background investigation and finds all bidders to meet the requirements of the bid documents. CiTY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT RE: 2004/2005 Local Street Pavement Rehabilitation - Slurry Seal of Various Streets July 7, 2004 Page 2 The construction of this project is to construct crack sealing, slurry sealing, including protection and/or adjustment of existing valve covers, survey monuments and manholes; pneumatic rolling, re-striping and pavement markings. The contract documents call for thirty-five (35) working days to complete this construction. Respect_fully submitted, William. O'Neil City Engineer W JO:CH/Re:Is Attachment BID SUMMARY FOR BID OPENING JUNE 1, 2004 .dPPARENTLOWBIDDER ENGINEERS COST 2004/2005 Local Street Pavement Rehabilitation - Slurry Seal of Various Locations ESTIMATE American Asphalt South, Inc. Bond Blacktop, Inc. Map UNIT UNIT UNIT NO QTY UNIT DESCRIPTION COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT 1 thru 6 and 8, Rubberized Slurry Seal Type II, 1. 335930 SY incl crack sealing, protection of existing monuments, manholes, valve covers, etc., re-striping and pavement $1.03 $346,007.90 $1.00 $335,930.00 $1.15 $386,319.50 markings and pneumatic rolling 2. I LS Traffic Control $20,000.00 $20,000.0~3 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $40,500.00 $40,500.00 Total Base Bid $366,007.90 $355,930.0~3 $426,819.5~3 Additive Bid: Map 7, Rubberized Slurry Seal Type II, incl crack 3. 57544 SY sealing, protection of existing monuments, manholes, $1.03 $59,270.32 $1.00 $57,544.00 $1.20 $69,052.80 valve covers, etc., re-striping and pavement markings and pneumatic rollin[~ Total Base Bid & Additive Bid I$425,278.22 $413,474.00 $495,872.30 Page 1 VICINITY MAP I , , ~ ~ ~~~: ..- · ~ ........ ~':------']l .... ':'-I ..... $TRE~ FOR (SLUR~ S~ ~ fl) ,~~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA FY 2004/05 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION SLURRY SEAL PROJECT R ^ N C H O C U C A M O N G A ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Staff Report DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Walt Stickney, Associate Engineer Richard Oaxaca, Engineering Technician ~ SUBJECT: ACCEPT THE BIDS RECEIVED AND AWARD AND AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTION OF THE CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $294,889.00 TO THE APPARENT LOW BIDDER, BELAIRE-WEST LANDSCAPE, iNC., AND, AUTHORIZE THE EXPENDITURE OF A 10% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $29,488.90 FOR THE ROCHESTER AVENUE, NORTH OF HIGHLAND AVENUE AND HAVEN AVENUE, NORTH OF 19TM STREET, LANDSCAPING PROJECT, TO BE FUNDED FROM BEAUTIFICATION FUNDS, ACCOUNT NO. 11103165650/1339110-0 AND APPROPRIATE $324,377.90 (CONTRACT AWARD OF $294,889.00 PLUS 10% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OE $29,488.90) TO ACCOUNT NO. 11103165650/1339110-0 FROM BEAUTIFICATION FUND BALANCE RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council accept the bids received and award and authorize the execution of the contract in the amount of $294,889.00 to the apparent Iow bidder, Belaire-West Landscape, Inc., and authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $29,488.90, for the Rochester Avenue, North of Highland Avenue and Haven Avenue, North of 19th Street, Landscaping Project, to be funded from Beautification funds, Account No. 11103165650/1339110-0 and appropriate $324,377.90 (Contract award of $294,889.00 plus 10% contingency in the amount of $29,488.90) to Account No. 11103185650/1339110-0 from Beautification fund balance. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Per previous Council action, bids were solicited, received and opened on June 8, 2004, for the subject project. The Engineer's estimate was $272,897.45. Staff has reviewed all bids received and found them to be complete and in accordance with the bid requirements with CiTY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT RE: Rochester Avenue Landscaping Project July 7, 2004 Page 2 any irregularities to be inconsequential. Staff has completed the required background investigation and finds all bidders to meet the requirements of the bid documents. The construction of this project is to install landscaping on both sides of Rochester Avenue north of the 210 Freeway, the re-installation of landscaping on both the east side of Rochester Avenue south of Highland Avenue and within the Haven Avenue median north of the 210 Freeway, and the construction of street improvements on the east side of Rochester Avenue between Lone Peak Drive and Vintage Drive. The contract documents call for fifty (50) working days to complete this construction. Approximately two thirds of this project is a result of the construction of the 210 Freeway. During the construction of the freeway it was necessary to lower Rochester Avenue as it passed under the freeway. In doing so the existing landscaping both north and south of the freeway was removed. The City and SANBAG have entered into a reimbursement agreement whereas SANBAG will pay for the design and re-landscaping of those impacted areas. A portion (the final one-third) of this project will landscape an area north of the area impacted by the freeway. That area is funded from amounts collected from adjacent developers. Respectfully submitted, William. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:WS/RO:Is Attachment BID SUMMARY FOR BID OPENING JUNE 8, 2004 APPARENT LOW BIDDER Rochester Avenue, North of Highland Avenue and Haven ENGINEERS COST Avenue, North of 19th Street, Landscaping Project ESTIMATE Belaire-West Landscape, Inc. America West Landscape, Inc. UNIT ' UNIT UNIT BID CORRECTED NO QTY UNIT DESCRIPTION COST I AMOUNT COST i AMOUNT COST I AMOUNT AMOUNT 1. 1 LS Clearing&Grubbing $5,000.001$5,000.00 $28,000.001$28,000.00 $27,389.24~1 .$27,389.24: $27,389.24 2. 1850 SF Remove A.C. Pavement (including sawcut) $0.501 $925.00 $2.001 $3,700.00 $I.621 $2,997.00! $2,997.00 3. 262 LF RemoveA. C. Berm $0.50 $131.0C $4.ooi $1,048.00 $1.10', $288.20~, $288.20 4. 3020 SF Grind existing A.C. Pavement $3.00 $9,060.013 $1.001 $3,020.00 $2.001 $6,040.001 $6,040.00 5. 33 CY Srushed Aggregate Base (4") $50.001 $1,650.0(3 $100.001 $3,300.00 $53.531 $1,766.491 $1,766.49 6. 82 TON ~,sphalt Concrete Pavement (5") $45.00[ $3,690.00 $125.ool $10,250.00 $73.161 $5,999.121 $5,999.12 7. 302£ SF ~,sphalt Concrete Oveday $0.501 $1,510.00 $1.50 $4,530.00 $2.66 $8,o33.2oI $8,033.20 8. EA Adjust CAIV Cox to finish grade $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $465.50 $465.50 $465.50 9. 262 LF 8" P.C.C. Curb and 24" Gutter $11.00 $2,882.00 $25.00 $6,550.00 $19.96 $5,229.52 $5,229.52 10. 1530 SF 4" P.C.C. Sidewalk $2.50 $3,825.00 $4.00 $6,120.00 $5.32 $8,139.60 $8,139.60 l 1. LS Raised Pavement Markers $50.00 $50.00 $5OO.00 $500.00 $1,995.001 $1,995.00 $1,995.00 12.i 2 EA Relocate Traffc Signs $50.00 $100.00 $200.00 $400.00 $332.50 $665.00 $665.00 13.! 7 EA Relocte Inductive Loops $500.00 $3,500.00 $750.00 $5,250.00 $742.14 $5,194.98 $5,194.98 14 EA Relocate Traffic SignaI Service Enclosure $4,500.001 $4,500.00 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $3,724.00! $3,724.00 $3,724.00 15. LS Automatic Irrigation System $25,000.001 $25,000.00 $80,000.001 $80,000.00 $75,124.65! $75,124.65 $75,124.65 16. ~.1035 SF WeedKill/Abatementonl¥ $0.07 $1,472.45 $0.10 $2,103.50 $0.02 $420.70 $420.70 17. ~1035 SF Soil Preparation/ Fine Grading $0.40 $8,414.00 $0.30 $6,310.50 $0.16 $3,365.60 $3,365.60 18. 1 LS Maintenance Period $1,200.001 $1,200.00 $6,000.001 $6,000.00 $2,226.61 $2,226.61 $2,226.61 19. 408 EA 1GalShurb $7.00 $2,856.00 $7.00 $2,856.0£ $5.19! $2,117.52 $2,117.52 20. 751 EA 5 Gal Shrub $16.00 $12,016.00 $16.00 $12,016.0C $13.361 $1o,o33.361 $10,033.36 21. 40 EA 5GalVine $35.00 $1,400.00 $18.00[ $720.012 $31.521 $1,260.80 $1,260.80 22. 17 EA 15 Gal Tree $75.00 $1,275.00 $90.00 $1,530.012 $104.69 $1,779.73 $1,779.73 23. 51 EA 24"BoxTree $220.00[ $11,220.00 $200.00 $10,200.0(3 $208.32 $10,624.32 $10,624.32 24. 6 EA 36" Boxlree $650.001 $3,900.00 $600.00 $3,600.00 $593.62 $3,561.72 $3,561.72 25. 11203 SF CobblePavingwith6"mowcurb $12.00 $134,436.00 $6.00 $67,218.00 $8.721 $97,690.16 $97,690.16 26. 35 EA 18" Landscape Boulders $40.00 $1,400.00 $40.00 $1,400.00 $88.68 $3,103.80 $3,103.80 27. 34 EA 24"Landscape Boulders $60.001 $2,040.00 $50.00 $1,700.00 $90.57 $3,079.38 $3,079.38 28. 31 EA 36" Landscape Boulders $110.001 $3,410.00 $60.00 $1,860.00 $132.64 $4,111.84 $4,111.84 29. 1 EA Landscape Lighting (2 Palm Trees with 2 lights each) $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $16,509.29 $16,509.29 $16,509.29 30. 21035 SF 4"Shredded Mulch $1.00 $21,035.00 $0.20 $4,207.00 $0.41 $8,624.35 $8,624.35 31. 1 LS rrafficStriping $1,000.001 $1,000.00 $3,000.00, $3,000.00 $3,325.00 $3,325.00 $3,325.00 32. 1 LS rrafficControl $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $4,655.001 $4,655.00 $4,655.00 ' I ~ TOTAL $272,897.45 15294,889.00 $329,540.661 $329,540.68 ~ . a w~so.^w~ ~ I !1 ~~'-I'~' ,--- '1 ~ ., - ~'~ ~rs ~ . ' L ~ ~ PROJECT ~"~lIT-~ ~ ~ ~- ' t IJ ~Jf~l Ijl~" .J J J ClT~ O~ ~C~O CgC~ONGA ~C~ITY gP ROCHESTER AVENUE~ N/0 HIGHL~D AVENUE ~D T H E' C I ~f Y 0 F [~ANCH 0 ~UCAHONGA Staff Report DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Peter Bryan, Fire Chief BY: Dawn Haddon, Purchasing Manager /0¢/ SUBJECT: APPROVAL TO AWARD AND AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $29~000 TO BLUECRANE~ INC. OF REDONDO BEACH~ CALIFORNIA~ AND AUTHORIZE THE EXPENDITURE OF A 10% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $2~900 FOR CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE COMPLETION OF A HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN AND AUTHORIZE AN APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $31~900 ($29,000 PLUS A 10% CONTINGENCY OF $2~900) INTO ACCOUNT NUMBER 1025001-5300 TO FUND THE CONTRACT. RECOMMENDATIONS: It is recommended that the City Council approve the award and authorization of the execution of a contract in the amount of $29,000 to Bluecrane, Inc., of Redondo Beach, California, and authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $2,900 for consulting services for the purpose of the completion of a Hazard Mitigation Plan and authorize an appropriation in the amount of $31,900, ($29,000 plus a 10% contingency) into account 1025001-5300 for contract funding. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 proposed major changes to hazard mitigation planning, primarily by moving from post-disaster mitigation to pre-disaster mitigation, planning and projects. The DMA 2000 emphasizes greater interaction between State and local hazard identification, mitigation planning and other mitigation activities. In February 2002, FEMA Page 2 Hazard Mitigation Consultant Award Staff Report July 7, 2004 established planning criteria so that State and local jurisdictions may actively begin the hazard mitigation planning process, and by October 2002, the date for submittal of this Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) was extended to its current deadline of November 1, 2004. In August 2003, State OES nor FEMA had provided guidance on the development of the LHMP. It was then that State OES scheduled workshops for sections 1, 2 and 3 of the LHMP with additional workshops for sections 4, 5, and 6 to be offered in early 2004. Once these orientation workshops were underway, the Operational Area Coordinating Council (OACC) suggested creating a multi-jurisdictional plan that would encompass the county and its jurisdictions within and began providing information to the OACC members. In an effort to provide guidance in developing this plan, the OACC proposed the pumhasing of a web-based program that would aid in information gathering and formatting of the LHMP. Although the use of this program would make the production of the plan easier, the research for the project would require hundreds of City staff hours tO complete. With the vacancy of the Emergency Preparedness Coordinator position, it was determined that additional outside contract services from a consultant, was essential for the completion of this project by the November 1, 2004 deadline. The consultant will work closely with City/Fire District staff throughout the development of the plan, but their main responsibility rests on the Risk Assessment and Mitigation Strategies sections of the LHMP. Working with Purchasing, Fire Chief Bryan and Fire Prevention Specialist, Kelley Larson developed a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the purpose of hiring a consultant to complete this FEMA required Hazard Mitigation Plan. This plan will asses the risk from earthquake, fire and flooding hazards within the City/District , evaluate the vulnerability of assets, including structures and infrastructures to these risks, and assist the City/District with determining mitigation initiatives to address the vulnerability. The RFP was mailed and posted the City's bid page. Seven responses were received. Three consultants were selected for final interviews and City Staff selected as the lowest, most responsive/responsible vendor, Bluecrane, Inc. Among many qualifying factors, Bluecrane has recently completed a Hazard Mitigation Plan for the Riverside County Fire Department, Emergency Services Division. Bluecrane's project management team includes 15 years of consulting with an emphasis on emergency operations planning; hazard risk assessment and mitigation measures for all levels of government. Bluecrane's team also includes two members who have been recently appointed to senior positions in the California OES and FEMA organizations. It is recommended that the City Council approve staff's recommendation for award to Bluecrane, Inc. for the completion of the City's Hazard Mitigation Plan. Respectfully submitted, Peter Bryan Fire Chief RANCHO C UCA M O N GA E N G I N E E R I N G D E PA R TIll E N T Staff Report DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL TO AWARD AND CONTINUE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT IN AN ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $85,000 FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY l, 2004 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2005, TO HULS ENVIRONMENTAL, LLC, WITH AN OPTION TO RENEW FOR ADDITIONAL ONE YEAR PERIODS, UPON REVIEW AND CONFIRMATION OF PRICING AND MUTUAL CONSENT, UP TO A TOTAL OF THREE YEARS, TO BE FUNDED FROM 1001-313-5300 RECOMMENDATION It is Eecommended that the City Council approve the continuation of the professional services agreement with Huls Environmental LLC. Huls Environmental will to continue to monitor the commercial sector (NB routing), construction and demolition waste diversion pro§rams established by ordinance and assist the current staff' in implementing and operating the pEogram. The consultant's trained staff' and expertise in implementing and monitoring a successful commercial integrated waste diversion plan will determine the adequacies or problems with the new programs. The consultant will work in conjunction with City staff to monitor the commercial sector and construction and demolition integrated waste diversion plans to insure their continued operation~ BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS In order to meet the mandated 50% diversion rate, in July 2002 the City of Rancho Cucamonga hired Huls Environmental LLC, to perform a waste audit and help develop and implement new oEdinances and programs to reach this mandate. Recommendations made by Huls Environmental /LC, helped to design and pass a Construction & Demolition (C&D) and Illegal Hauler Ordinances to begin the process of improving waste diversion. This was accomplished through the implementation of an NB routing, C&D Ordinance and an illegal hauler ordinances. Ordinances were passed by the CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT RE: Professional Services Agreement with Huls Environmental, LLC July 7, 2004 Page 2 City Council on July 2, 16 and August 6, 2003. The NB routing began August 1,2003 and the C&D Diversion program will begin October 1,2003. In order to meet the requirements of the State granted time extension the City will need to monitor the progress of these programs and report to the California Integrated Waste Management Board on a quarterly basis. This will be done by City Staff and Huls Environmental LLC. The quarterly review gives the City the opportunity to monitor the progress made in reaching AB 939 goals and identify any shortcomings that would be necessary to achieve the mandated diversion rate of 50%, as stipulated by the time extension granted by the California Integrated Waste Management Board. We have not seen a substantial decrease in the waste stream and with the Town Center nearing completion we are evaluating the need for new programs to be implemented at this site and follow up on C&D Ordinance. This item is budgeted in the 2004-05 Budget. Respectfully submitted, Wi~iarr'/'O. O'Neil Cit~/-Engineer R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A E NGIN E ERIN G DEPARTIq EN T SlaffReport DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Cindy Hackett, Associate Engineer Richard Oaxaca, Engineering Technician.¢~ SUBJECT: ACCEPT THE BIDS RECEIVED AND AWARD AND AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTION OF THE CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $592,000.00 TO THE APPARENT LOW BIDDER, SULLY-MILLER CONTRACTING COMPANY, AND AUTHORIZE THE EXPENDITURE OF A 10% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $59,200.00 FOR THE 6TM STREET STORM DRAIN, RAILROAD CROSSING IMPROVEMENTS AND PAVEMENT REHABILITATION FROM ARCHIBALD AVENUE TO 380' WEST OF HERMOSA AVENUE, TO BE FUNDED FROM TRANSPORTATION FUNDS, ACCOUNT NO. 11243035650/1081124-0 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council accept the bids received and award and authorize the execution of the contract in the amount of $592,000.00 to the apparent Iow bidder, Sully-Miller Contracting Company, and authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $59,200.00, for the 6th Street Storm Drain, Railroad Crossing Improvements and Pavement Rehabilitation from Archibald Avenue to 380' West of Hermosa Avenue, to be funded from Transportation funds, Account No. 11243035650/1081124-0. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Per previous Council action, bids were solicited, received and opened on June 8, 2004, for the subject project. The Engineer's estimate was $549,850.00. Staff has reviewed all bids received and found them to be complete and in accordance with the bid requirements with any irregularities to be inconsequential. Staff has completed the required background investigation and finds all bidders to meet the requirements of the bid documents. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT RE: 6th Street Storm Drain a'nd Railroad Crossing Improvements - Accept Bid July 7, 2004 Page 2 The construction of this project is to construct curb and gutter, sidewalk, asphalt concrete pavement, asphalt rubber hot mix overlay, storm drain with pertinent laterals and catch basins, grading, cold milling, adjust,merit of all utilities to new grade, and railroad crossing improvements. The contract documents call for sixty (60) working days to complete this construction. Respectfully submitted, O'Neil City Engineer WJO:CH/RO:Is Attachment BID SUMMARY FOR BID OPENING JUNE 8, 2004 A~'PA~.~/rLO~rZWD£R 6th St Storm Drain, Railroad Crossing Improvements ENGINEERS COST Sully-Miller Contracting & Pavement Rehab from Archibald Ave to 380' West of Hermosa Ave ESTIMATE Company' UNIT i BID UNIT NO ~TY UNIT DESCRIPTION COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT 1. 1 LS CLEARING AND GRUBBING, INCL ALL ] REMOVALS, UNCLASSIFIED EXCAV/FILL $20,000.001 $20,000.00 $16,000.00. $16,000.00 2. 720 TONS CRUSHED AGG. BASE (0.50') $20.00i $14,400.00 $20.001 $14,400.00 3.' 500 TONS PREPARATIoNASPHALT CONCRETE INCLUDING $40.00 $20,000.00 $80.00] $40,000.00 4. 11001 TONS ASPHALT RUBBER HOT MIX $55.00~ $60,500.00 $60.001 $66,000.00 5. 3100 SY DEEpVARIABLE COLD PLANE FROM 0' TO 0.12' $1.20i. $3,720.00 $2.25 $6,975.00 6. 8 EA ADJUST MANHOLE TO NEW GRADE $250.00~, $2,000:00 $270.00 $2,160.00 7. 20 EA ADJUST WATER VALVE TO NEW GRADE $150.00: $3,000.00 $75.001 $1,500.00 8. 2 EA INCLUDING CONSTRUCTLocAL CATCHDEP. BASIN, W=21', $6,000.00 $12,000.00 $9,800.00] $19,600.00 9. 7 EA INCLUDING CONSTRUCTLOCAL CATCHDEP. BASIN, W=14', $4,500.00 , $31,500.00 $7,400.00] $51,800.00 10. 2 EA A-10 AND A-11.TEMPORARY CMP CATCH BASIN FOR LAT. $5,000.00 $10,000.00 $2,300.001 $4,600.00 11. 9 EA MONOLITHIC CATCH BASIN CONNECTION $500.00 $4,500.00 $325.001 $2,925.00 12. 4 EA B=24"CONSTRUCT JUNCTION STRUCTURE NO.2 $4,000.00' $16,000.00 $1,700.00] $6,800.00 13. 2 EA DRAINREMOVE AND ABANDON EXISTING CURB $500.00, $1,000.00 $900.00] $1,800.00 14. 3 EA CONSTRUCT MANHOLE NO.2 $7,500.00! $22,500.00 $5,900.00] $17,700.00 · $1,100.00 15. 1 EA CONSTRUCT CONCRETE COLLAR $500.00'. $500.00 $1,100.00 16. 930 LF 8" CURB AND GUTTER $25.00. $23,250.00 $17.501 $16,275.00 17. 400 SF 4-INCH THIC PCC SIDEWALK $4.00 $1,600.00 $5.251 $2,100.00 18. 160 SF CONST. DRIVEWAY APPROACH $8.00 $1,280.00 $11.001 $1,760.00 19. 350 LF 3' WIDE A.C. SWALE $5.00: $1,750.00 $11.00 $3,850.00 20. 1 LS BRACING AND SHORING $30,000.00; $30,000.00 $18,000.00] $18,000.00 INSTALL 54-INCH DIAMETER RCP 21. 692 LF MAINLINE}. $160.00! $110,720.00 $175.00 $121,100.00 INSTALL 48-INCH DIAMETER RCP 22. 62/3 LF MAINLINE}. $150.001 $93,000.00 $160.00 $99,200.00 INSTALL 30-INCH DIAMETER RCP ~ 23. 73! LF LATERAL}. $110.00i ~ $8,030.00 $200.00 $14,600.00 24. 27i3 LF INSTALLLATERAL}.24-INCB DIAMETER RCP $100.00[, $27,000.00 $180.00 $48,600.00 25. 16 EA LOOP DETECTORS, COMPLETE IN PLACE $350.00i, $5,600.00 $240.00 $3,840.00 96. 1 LS PLUG REMOVE EXIST. EXISTING 12" RCP CATCH BASIN AND $1,000.00[ ~ $1,000.00 $1,100.00] $1,100.00 27. 1 LS TRAFFIC CONTROL, INCL. K-RAIL $15,000.001 $15,000.00 $5,215.00 $5,215.00 28. 1 LS STRIPING PLAN, COMPLETE IN PLACE $I0,000.00[ $10,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 Page l /~/~ Total [ $549,850.00 15592,000.00 BID SUMMARY FOR BID OPENING JUNE 8, 2004 6th St Storm Drain, Railroad Crossing Improvements Southern California & Pavement Rehab from Archibald Ave to 380' West of Hermosa Ave Underground Contractors~ Inc. SRD Engineering, Inc. UNIT ~ UNIT : ,~o QTY UNIT DESCRIPTIOH COST I AMOUNT COST AMOUNT 1. 1 LS CLEARING AND GRUBBING, INCL ALL REMOVALS~ UNCLASSIFIED EXCAV/FILL $5 000.001 $5,000.00 $34,000.00 $34,000.00 2. 720 TONS CRUSHED AGG. BASE (0.50') $12.00i $8,640.00 $27.00[ $19,440.00 3. 500 TONS ASPHALTpREPARATioNCONCRETE INCLUDING $16.00i $8,000.00 $61.00[ $30,500.00 4. 1100 TONS ASPHALT RUBBER HOT MIX $65.00! $71 500.00 $69.00[ $75,900.00 5. 3100 SY VARIABLE COLD PLANE FROM 0' TO 0.19' DEEP $3.00 $9,300.00 $2.40[ $7,440.00 6. 8 EA ADJUST MANHOLE TO NEW GRADE $275.001 $2,200.00 $275.00[ $2,200.00 7. 20 EA ADJUST WATER VALVE TO NEW GRADE $200.001 $4,000.00 $150.00[ $3,000.00 8. 2 EA INCLUDING CONSTRUCTLocAL CATCHDEP. BASIN, W--21', $5,000.00:, $10,000.00 $7,100.00 $14,200.00 9. 7 EA INCLUDING CONSTRUCTLOCAL CATCHDEp.BASIN, W=14', $3,500.00'. $24,500.00 $4,800.001 $33,600.00 10. 2 EA A-TEMPORARY10 AND A-1CMP1. CATCH BASIN FOR LAT. $1,500.00 $3,000.00 $4,250.00[ $8,500.00 11. 9 EA MONOLITHIC CATCH BASIN CONNECTION $400.00 $3,600.00 $230.00[ $2,070.00 12. 4 EA CONSTRUCT JUNCTION STRUCTURE NO.2 B=24' $3,000.00 $12,000.00 $1,520.00 $6,080.00 13. 2 EA REMOVE AND ABANDON EXISTING CURB DRAIN $1,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,100.00 $4,200.00 14. 3 EA CONSTRUCT MANHOLE NO.2 $4,000.00 $12,000.00 $3,900.00[ $11,700.00 15. 1 EA CONSTRUCT CONCRETE COLLAR $500.00, $500.00 $600.00] $600.00 16. 930 LF 8" CURB AND GUTTER $24.00 $22,320.00 $31.00[ $28,830.00 l?. 400 SF 4-INCH THIC PCC SIDEWALK $5.00 $2,000.00 $4.80] $1,920.00 18. 160 SF CONST. DRIVEWAY APPROACH $8.00 $1,280.00 $8.00[ $1,280.00 19. 350 LF. 3' WIDE A.C. SWALE $40.00. $14,000.00 $35.00[ $12,250.00 20. 1 LS BRACING AND SHORING $115,000.00 $115,000.00 $4,000.00[ $4,000.00 INSTALL 54-INCH DIAMETER RCP ' 21. 692 LF (MAINLINEi' $160.00 $110,720.00 $214.00 $148,088.00 INSTALL 48-1NCH DIAMETER RCP 22. 620 LF 'MAINLINE~. $155.00' $96,100.00 $195.00 $120,900.00 INSTALL 30-1NCH DIAMETER RCP 23. 73 LF tLATERAL}. $125.00! $9,125.00 $170.00i $12,410.00 INSTALL 24-1NCH DIAMETER RCP 24. 270 LF (LATERAL}. $120.001 $32,400.00 $150.00 $40,500.00 25. 16 EA LOOP DETECTORS, COMPLETE IN PLACE $400.00i $6,400.00 $253.00 $4,048.00 26. LS PLuGREMOVEExIST.EXISTING12" RcpCATCH BASIN AND $2,000 00!~ $2,000.00 $2,300.001 $2,300.00 27. 1 LS TRAFFIC CONTROL, INCL. K-RAIL $5,000.00i $5,000.00 $36,000.00 $36,000.00 28. 1 LS STRIPING PLAN, COMPLETE IN PLACE $5,000.00! $5,000.00 $3,030.00 $3,030.00 Page2 /0 / Total i $597,585.00 $668,986.00 BID SUMMARY FOR BID OPENING JUNE 8, 2004 6th St Storm Drain, Railroad Crossing Improvements & Pavement Rehab from Archibald Ave to 380' West of Hermosa Ave Bonadimart-Mc/"~aln, In,,, UNIT BID CORRECTED No QTY UNIT DESCRIPTION COST AMOUNT AMOUNT 1. 1 LS CLEARING AND GRUBBING, INCL ALL REMOVALS, UNCLASSIFIED EXCAV/FILL $10,000.00, $10.00 $10,000.00 2. 720 TONS CRUSHED AGG. BASE (0.50') $55.00 $39,600.00'~ $39,600.00 3. 500 TONS ASPHALT CONCRETE INCLUDING PREPARATION $118.00, $59,000.00i $59,000.00 4. 1100 TONS ASPHALT RUBBER HOT MIX $65.00 $71,500.00: $71,500.00 5. 3100 SY VARIABLE COLD PLANE FROM 0' TO 0.12' DEEP $4.00 $12,400.001 $12,400.00 6. 8~ EA ADJUST MANHOLE TO NEW GRADE $600.00 $4,800.00~ $4,800.00 7. 2C EA ADJUST WATER VALVE TO NEW GRADE $210.00' $4,200.00; $4,200.00 8. 2 EA CONSTRUCT CATCH BASIN, W=21', INCLUDING LOCAL DEP. $8,000.00 $16,000.001 $16,000.00 9. ? EA CONSTRUCT CATCH BASIN, W=14', INCLUDING LOCAL DEP. $7,000.00 $49,000.00~, $49,000.00 10. 2 EA TEMPORARY CMP CATCH BASIN FOR LAT. A-10 AND A-11. $2,000.00 $4,000.00' $4,000.00 ll. 9 EA MONOLITHIC CATCH BASIN CONNECTION $400.00 $3,600.00i $3,600,00 12. 4 EA CONSTRUCT JUNCTION STRUCTURE NO.2 B=24" $425.00 $1,700.00:: $1,700.00 13. 2 EA REMOVE AND ABANDON EXISTING CURB DRAIN $1,600.00 $3,200.00 $3,200.00 14 3 EA CONSTRUCT MANHOLE NO.2 $4,500.00 $13,500.00~ $13,500.00' 15. 1 EA CONSTRUCT CONCRETE COLLAR $1,000.00 $1,000.00~ $1,000.00 16. 930 LF 8' CURB AND GUTTER $17.00 $15,810.00 $15,810.00 l?. 400 SF 4-INCH THIC PCC SIDEWALK $8.00 $3,200.001 $3,200.00 ~8. 160 SF CONST. DRIVEWAY APPROACH $13.00 $280.00 $2,080.00 19. 350 .LF 3' WIDE A.C. SWALE $18.00 $6,300.00! $6,300.00 20. 1 LS BRACING AND SHORING $25,000.00' $25,000.00~ $25,000.00 2~. 692 LF INSTALL 54-1NCH DIAMETER RCP MAINLINE}. $202.95' $140,440.001 $140,441.40 INSTALL 48-INCH DIAMETER RCP 22. 620 LF MAINLINE}. $185.55 $115,040.00 $115,O41.00 23. 73 LF INSTALL 30-1NCH DIAMETER RCP LATERALi' $85.00; $6,205.00] $6,205.00 24. 27(~ LF INSTALL 24-1NCH DIAMETER RCP LATERAL}. $66.071 $17,840.00! $17,838.90 25. 16 EA LOOP DETECTORS, COMPLETE IN PLACE $500.001, $8,000.00!. $8,000.00 26 1 LS REMOVE EXISTING CATCH BASIN AND PLUG EXIST. 12" RCP $1,900.00! $1,900.00[ $1,900.00 27. i LS rRAFFIC CONTROL, INCL. K-RAIL $30,000.00[ $30,000.00i $30,000.00 28. 1 LS STPdPING PLAN, COMPLETE IN PLACE $8,270.001 $8,270.00i $8,270.00 Page 3 / ~ Total $673,585.00 $673,586.301 BID SUMMARY FOR BID OPENING JUNE 8, 2004 6th St Storm Drain, Railroad Crossing Improvements & Pavement Rehab from Archibald Ave to 380' West of Hermosa Ave Hillcreat Contracting, Ina. Albert W. Davies, Ina. UNIT ~ UNIT No (~TY UNIT DESCRIPTION COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT 1. 1 LS CLEARING AND GRUBBING, 1NCL ALL $86,000 00] $86,000.00 $70,000.00[ $70,000.0( REMOVALS~ UNCLASSIFIED EXCAV/FILL : 2. 720 TONS CRUSHED AGG. BASE (0.50'} $29.00!: $20,880.00 $29.00 $20,880.0( 3. S00 TONS ASPHALTpREPARATioNCONCRETE INCLUDING $111.00~I, $55,500.00 $98.001 $49,000.0( 4. 1100 TONS ASPHALT RUBBER HOT MIX $69 00~ $75,900.00 $67.00 $73,700.0( 5. 3100 SY VARIABLEDEEP COLD PLANE FROM 0' TO 0.12' $2.00! $6,200.00 $2.50 $7,750.0C 6. 8 EA ADJUST MANHOLE TO NEW GRADE $460.00! $3,680.00' $480.00 $3,840.0(; 7. 20 EA ADJUST WATER VALVE TO NEW GRADE $35.00i $700.00 $360.00 $7,200.0(; 8. 2 EA INCLUDINGCONSTRUCTLocALCATCHDEp.BASIN' W=21', $9,000.00 ~ $18,000.00 $11,200.00[ $22,400.00 9. 7 EA INCLUDING CONSTRUCTLocAL CATCHDEP. BASIN, W--14', $7,000.001 $49,000.00 $8,800.001 $61,600.00 10. 2 EA TEMPORARY CMP CATCH BASIN FOR LAT. [ A-10 AND A-11. $5,200.001 $10,400.00 $3,000.00 $6,000.0(1 11. 9 EA MONOLITHIC CATCH BASIN CONNECTION $540.00: $4,860.00 $360.00[ $3,240.00 12. 4 EA CONSTRUCT JUNCTION STRUCTURE NO.2 B=24" $860.00. $3,440.00 $1,800.00i $7,200.00 13. 2 EA REMOVE AND ABANDON EXISTING CURB I DRAIN $1,300.00 $2,600.00 $1,300.00 $2,600.00 14. 3 EA CONSTRUCT MANHOLE NO.2 $6,700.00, $20,100.00 $5,000.00[ $15,000.00 15. 1 EA CONSTRUCT CONCRETE COLLAR $860.00 $860.00 $1,100.00[ $1,100.00 16. 930 LF 8' CURB AND GUTTER $13.50: $12,555.00 $27.50[ $25,575.00 17. 400 SF 4-INCH THIC PCC SIDEWALK $7.40 $2,960.00 $12.001 $4,800.00 18. 160 SF CONST. DRIVEWAY APPROACH $11.40~ $1,824.00 $15.50[ $2,480.00 19. 350 LF. 3' WIDE A.C. SWALE $19.70, $6,895.00 $47.00[ $16,450.00 20. 1 LS BRACING AND SHORING $9,500.00' $9,500.00 $10,000.00[ $10,000.00 INSTALL 54-INCH DIAMETER RCP [ 21. 692 LF MAiNLiNEi. $203.00', $140,476.00 $206.00 $142,552.00 INSTALL 48-INCH DIAM~'r~:R RCP $197.00 22. 620 LF MAINLINE). $198.00[ $122,760.00 $122,140.00 INSTALL 30-INCH DIAMETER RCP ~ I 23. 73 LF LATERAL). $160.00! $11,680.00 $185.00 $13,505.00 INSTALL 24-INCH DIAMETER RCP ; 24. 270 LF LATERAL). $152.00! $41,040.00 $177.00 $47,790.00 25. 16 EA LOOP DETECTORS, COMPLETE IN PLACE $250.001 $4,000.00 $250.00 $4,000.00 26. 1: LS PLuGREMOVEExisT.EXISTING12" RcpCATCH BASIN AND $4,900.001 $4,900.00 $710.00 $710.00 27. 1 LS TRAFFIC CONTROL, INCL. K-RAIL $11,000.001 $11,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 28. 1 LS STRIPING PLAN, COMPLETE IN PLACE $3,000.00] $3,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Page 4 / O~ Total ' $730,710.00 I $766,512.00 BID SUMMARY FOR BID OPENING JUNE 8, 2004 6th St Storm Drain, Railroad Crossing Improvements Mladen Grbavae & Pavement Rehab from Archibald Ave to 380' West of Hermosa Ave Construction Co. The S J & B Group, Inc. UNIT ] UNIT Nc QTY UNIT DESCRIPTION COST I AMOUNT COST AMOUNT 'l.[ 1 LS CLEARING AND GRUBBING, INCL ALL REMOVALS, UNCLASSIFIED EXCAV/FILL $17,400.00 $17,400.00 $74,497.00 $74,497.00 2. 720 TONS CRUSHED AGG. BASE (0.50'} $20.00[ $14,400.00 $22.00 $15,840.00 3. 500 TONS ASPHALT CONCRETE INCLUDING I PREPARATION $50.00 $25,000.00 $53.00 $26,500.00 4. 1100 TONS ASPHALT RUBBER HOT MIX $85.00!. $93,500.0(3 $56.00[ $61,600.0(] 5. 3100 SY VARIABLEDEEP COLD PLANE FROM 0' TO 0.12' $2.501 $7,750.00 $1.5oI $4,650.00 6. 8 EA ADJUST MANHOLE TO NEW GRADE $400.00[ $3,200.00 $550.00 $4,400.00 7. 20 EA ADJUST WATER VALVE TO NEW GRADE $200.001! $4,000.00 $320.00 $6,400.00 8. 2 EA INCLUDING CONSTRUCTLocAL CATCHDEP. BASIN, W=21', $10,000.00[ $20,000.00 $8,600.00 $17,200.00 9. 7 EA CONSTRUCT CATCH BASIN, W=14', $8,000.00i $56,000.00 $6,800.00 $47,600.00 INCLUDING LOCAL DEP. 10. 2, EA TEMPORARY CMP CATCH BASIN FOR LAT. $6,000.00[ $12,000.00 $5,900.00 $11,800.00 A-10 AND A-11. ll. 9 EA MONOLITHIC CATCH BASIN CONNECTION $500.00i $4,500.00 $400.00 $3,600.00 12. 4 EA B=24"CONSTRUCT JUNCTION STRUCTURE NO.2 $2,200.001 $8,800.00 $2,900.00 $11,600.00 ~3., 2 EA DRAINREMOVE AND ABANDON EXISTING CURB $500.00 [~ $1,000.00 $500.001 $1,000.00 ~4. 3 EA CONSTRUCT MANHOLE NO.2 $6,000.00[ $18,000.00 $6,500.00 $19,500.00 15. 1 EA CONSTRUCT CONCRETE COLLAR $1,000.00i~ $1,000.00 $900.00 $900.00 ~6. 930 LF 8"CURB AND GUTTER $40.001 $37,200.00 $26.00 $24,180.00 ~7. 400 SF 4-1NCH THIC PCC SIDEWALK $7.001 $2,800.00 $8.00 $3,200.00 18. 160 SF CONST. DRIVEWAY APPROACH $20.00[ $3,200.00 $21.00[ $3,360.00 ~9. 350 LF. 3' WIDE A.C. SWALE $25.001 $8,750.00 $19.00[ $6,650.00 20. 1 LS BRACING AND SHORING $50,000.00i $50,000.00 $9,000.001 $9,000.00 INSTALL S4-INCH DIAMETER RCP ' I 2~. 692 LF MAINLINE). $250.00] $173,000.00 $275.00 $190,300.00 INSTALL 48-INCH DIAMEI'I~b~ RCP 22. 620 LF MAINLiNEi. $220.001 $136,400.00 $250.00 $155,000.00 INSTALL 30-INCH DIAMETER RCP 23. 73 LF LATERAL}. $180.00 $13,140.00 $195.00 $14,235.00 INSTALL 24-1NCH DIAMETER RCP 24. 270 LF LATERALi' $160.00 $43,200.00 $172.00 $46,440.00 25. 16 EA LOOP DETECTORS, COMPLETE IN PLACE $500.001 $8,000.00 $320.00 $5,120.00 26. 1 LS REMOVE EXISTING CATCH BASIN AND PLUG EXIST. 12" RCP $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $2,700.00 $2,700.00 27. 1 LS TRAFFIC CONTROL, INCL. K-R~UL $20,000.00[ $20,000.00 $55,000.00 $55,000.00 28. 1 LS STPaPING PLAN. COMPLETE IN PLACE $10,000.00] $10,000.00 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 Page 5 //~.~ Total [ $795,740.00l $834,272.00 6TH STREET STORM DRAIN, RAILROAD CROSSING AND PAVEMENT REHAB. (FROM ARCHIBAI,~ AVENUE TO +380' WEST OF HERMOSA AVENUE) "~ r"l I / I I \ _JL~o~l I[ P(~THILL ~m. .~__ . PRO.~EC? SITE' R A C h O C U C A M O N G A ~CIN l~l~l~lN G D1]PAI~T~I]N T Report DALE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Karen Tarlton, Public Services Tech I SUBJECT: RELEASE OF MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BOND, FOR PARCEL MAP 15349, LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MILLIKEN AVENUE AND CHURCH STREET, SUBMITTED BY LDC COUGAR, LLC (aka LEWIS COMMUNITIES) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Clerk to release the Maintenance Guarantee Bond, for PM 15349, located on the northeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Church Street submitted by LDC Cougar, LLC (aka Lewis Communities). BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS The required one-year maintenance period has ended and the street improvements remain free from defects in materials and workmanship. Developer: LDC Cougar, LLC, aka Lewis Communities 1156 North Mountain Avenue Upland, Ca 91785-0670 Release: Bond No. 817833S $14,040.00 Respeqtfully submitted, WilliamS. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:KT:tch Attachments 112_ BOULk~ARD '1 N RANCHO CUCAMONGA Trr~w.: M/C/F/fF')'/,/,,4~ R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A ENGINEERING DEPARTHENT DA'I~: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Karen Tarlton, Public Services Tech I SLTI~IF~'-T: ACCEPT IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASE THE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND AND FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR PM 15970, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF HERMOSA AVENUE AND VICTORIA STREET, SUBMITTED BY HMC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, LLC. RECOMMENDATION The required improvements for PM 15970 have been completed in an acceptable manner, and it is recommended that the 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 Bond (cash deposit). BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS As a condition of approval of completion of PM 15970, located at the northeast corner of Hermosa Avenue and Victoria Street, the applicant was required to complete street improvements. The improvements have been completed and it is recommended that the City Council release the existing Faithful Performance Bond (cash deposit). No Maintenance Bond is required. Developer: HMC Professional Services, LLC Release: Faithful Performance Bond (cash deposit) $1,100.00 Resp~c-"d~ully submitted, William J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:KT:tch Attachments CITY OF Pa~-cel Map 15970 RANCHO CUCAMONGA TrI~,~.; Vlcl~ l'r'r' ?4,~F EN(]IN~.~mG DIVL~ON KX~-IT~IT: .~t A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR PARCEL MAP 15970 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for Parcel Map 15970 have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work is complete; and NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE that the work is hereby accept and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA NO- 17733 ENGINEERING DIVISION OFFICIAL RECEIPT NAME: ADDRESS: PHONE: --~ ~ G"~ /[ ~q~-I,~J~ ENGINEERING FEES: Plan Check Public Work Inspection Fee map Contract Bid Document street Overload/Wideload Permit storm drain Standard Drawings # Legal description 1001-000-4570 hydrology Bid Packet landscape 1-City 2-RDA misc Lot Line Adjustment 1-City 2-RDA Improv Agree Ext Merger TRUSTS (Refundable): Street Vacation Monumentation 1882-000-2312 Printing St Improvement Attach estimate 1001-000-4s70 1882-000-2314 J, L, 5D - Reapportionment Constr Permit 1882-000-2315 1100-000-4901 Maintenance Retention Basin AD (Copy to Assess Revenue)1882-000-2322 Mailing Fee Public Works OT Inspect Deposit 1001-205 -5200 1882-000-2319 TOTAL ), ~ .~'~ -- IN-LIEU FEES: Location Amount Median Island Utility Undergrounding 1882-000-2328 St. Light Energy Deposit -000-4808 Miscellaneous Comments: Form No: CNG51450 White-Engineering File Yellow-Engineering Log Pink-Finance CITY OF RHNCHO CUCA~ONGA CITY HALL FINANCE ~EPART~ENT 1~58~ CIVIC CENTER ~RIVE RANCHG CUCH~ONGA, CA 91738 9~-477-2788 RECEIPT: CR037772 DATE: 85/15183 CASHIER It: CSFOSI§I TIME: 09:22:12 P~15970, ENGR 17733 St i~.;rove~ent Surety Bepo 1,650.88 TOTAL PAI~ 1,650.88 ~ECEIV£~ FRO~: H~C PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LLC. BOX 967 RA~JCND CUCA~aNDA~ CH 91781 R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A ENGINEERING D E PAR T~IEN T Staff Report DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Karen Tarlton, Public Services Tech I SUBJECT': RELEASE OF MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BOND, FOR TRACT 14120, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF VINTAGE DRIVE, WEST OF ETIWANDA AVENUE, SUBMITTED BY CARRIAGE ESTATES, LLC RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Clerk to release the Maintenance Guarantee Bond, for Tract 14120, located on the south side of Vintage Drive, west of Etiwanda Avenue submitted by Carriage Estates, LLC. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS The City inspector has accepted the maintenance turnover and the street improvements remain free from defects in materials and workmanship. Developer: Carriage Estates, LLC 4141 Inland Empire Blvd, Ste. 345 Ontario, CA 91764 Release: Bond No. B32652345 $18,500.00 Resl~ctfully submitted, Wil~n J. O'Neil City Engineer Attachment EXHIBIT "A" ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 7 " CITY OF rtEM: Tract 14120-3 RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: Map ENGINEERING DMSION EXHIBIT: "A" ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT StaffRelmrt DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Karen Tarlton, Public Services Tech I 5'UIIJEcr: ACCEPT IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASE THE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND, ACCEPT A MAINTENANCE BOND AND FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT 14493-1, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF DAY CREEK BOULEVARD AND BANYAN STREET, SUBMI'I-rED BY YOUNG CALIFORNIA CUCAMONGA, L.P. RECOMMENDATION: The required improvements for Tract 14493-1 have been completed in an acceptable manner, and it is recommended that the 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 Bond and accept a Maintenance Bond. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: As a condition of approval of completion of Tract 14493-1, located on the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Banyan Street, the applicant was required to complete street improvements. The improvements have been completed and it is recommended that the City Council release the existing Faithful Performance Bond and accept the Maintenance Bond. Developer: Young California Cucamonga, L.P. Release: Faithful Performance Bond No. 1849580 $643,100.00 Accept: Maintenance Bond No. 2133515 $ 64,310.00 Re.spe~,tfully submitted, Willi~j~ J. O Nell City Engineer WJ©;KT;tch Attachments 12.1 BOUNDARY OF ANNEXATION NORTH ('[ NTS CITY OF ITEM: Tract RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: Rancho Etiwanda ENGINEERING DIVISION /22 EXHIBIT: Vicinity Map A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT 14493-1 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for Tract 14493-1 have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work is complete; and NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE that the work is hereby accept and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. I~ A N C H O C U C A M O N G A StaffRe rt DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Karen Tarlton, Public Services Tech I SUBJECT: ACCEPT IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASE THE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND, ACCEPT A MAINTENANCE BOND AND FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT 15783, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF CARNELIAN STREET AT VlVERO STREET, SUBMITTED BY G & D CONSTRUCTION, INC. RECOMMENDATION: The required improvements for Tract 15783 have been completed in an acceptable manner, and it is recommended that the 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 Bond and accept a Maintenance Bond. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: As a condition of approval of completion of Tract 15783, located on the west side of Carnelian Street at Vivero Street, the applicant was required to complete street improvements. The improvements have been completed and it is recommended that the City Council release the existing Faithful Performance Bond and accept the Maintenance Bond. Developer: G & D Construction, Inc. Release: Faithful Performance Bond No. 833723P $316,900.00 Accept: Maintenance Bond No. 833723P $31,690.00 Resp~cl~_y submitted, Williar~. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:KT:th Vivero Street 210 FWY ~ Baseline , ~V,vero Foo~ 10 FWY CITY OF ITEM: RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: Vicinity Map ENGtT4EERING DIVISION /,2~5 EXHIBIT: Tract 15783 RESOLUTION NO. ~ 2Z~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT 15783 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for Tract 15783 have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work is 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. R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A I~NGINI~I~DING DI~DAD~I~NT StaffRe rt DALE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Karen Tarlton, Public Services Tech I SUBJECT': RELEASE OF MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BOND, FOR TRACT 15947, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BASE LINE ROAD AND ETIWANDA AVENUE, SUBMITTED BY WL HOMES, LLC, DBA JOHN LAING HOMES. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Clerk to release the Maintenance Guarantee Bond, for Tract 15947, located at the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Etiwanda Avenue submitted by WL Homes LLC, DBA John Laing Homes. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS The required one-year maintenance period has ended and the street improvements remain free from defects in materials and workmanship. Developer: WL Homes LLC, DBA John Laing Homes 10737 Laurel Street, Suite 280 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Release: Bond No. 403576 $39,600.00 Re§pe~ully submitted, Willi~r'J. O'Neil City Engineer /,27 " C ~ ~.~ _ > ~' - ~SE LINE RO~ CITY OF ITEM: 1'!'15947/)~ "/'F/,~'~/,~ TITLE: VIIIINITY BJiF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~X#leIT: ENGINEERING DIVISION R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Repor DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Karen Tarlton, Public Services Tech I SUBJECT: RELEASE OF MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BOND, FOR TRACT 16001, LOCATED IN THE TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY, BouNDED BY CHURCH STREET, ELM AVENUE AND SPRUCE AVENUE, SUBMITTED BY LDC COUGAR, LLC (aka LEWIS COMMUNITIES) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Clerk to release the Maintenance Guarantee Bond, for Tract 16001, located in the Terra Vista Planned Community, bounded by Church Street, Elm Avenue and Spruce Avenue submitted by LDC Cougar, LLC (aka Lewis Communities). BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS The required one-year maintenance period has ended and the street improvements remain free from defects in materials and workmanship. Developer: LDC Cougar, LLC, aka Lewis Communities 1156 North Mountain Avenue Upland, Ca 91785-0670 Release: Bond No. 81739S $11,200.00 Resp/ecffully submitted, Williarff-'J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:KT:tch Attachments WILSON' ~ WILSON ~ WILSC · '° --~ ) BANYAt BANYAN ~ ~ BANYAN m kNYt N 0 I I~NO~ VICTO CHUF ~H ~ ICH C lURCH TH JERS~ I~ A N H O C U C A M O N G A ~.~: ~: -- ] 1~ N G IN I~ ~]1~ I N G D I~ PAI~ T ~1 ~ N T Staff Report OA'I'~: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Jerry A. Dyer, Senior Civil Engineer ~ Oaxaca, Engineering Techni~'ian/~ Richard SUBJECT: RELEASE OF MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BOND NO. 8492620M IN THE AMOUNT OF $53,638.06, FOR THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS FROM ETIWANDA AVENUE TO 1600' EASTERLY, CONTRACT NO. 02-133 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Clerk to release Maintenance Guarantee Bond No. 8492620M in the amount of $53,638.06 for the Foothill Boulevard Storm Drain Improvements from Etiwanda Avenue to 1600' Easterly, Contract No. 02-133. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS The required one-year maintenance period has ended and the storm drain improvements remain free from defects in materials and workmanship. Contractor: AIbertW. Davies, Inc. 8737 Helms Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Respectfully submitted, Willia . O'Neil City Engineer WJO:JAD/RO:Is Attachments I,.~ ,~ :~ ~ ~ '~ ~ I ~ m ~ ~ ~ '~.- ~ ) - / ~ I I ~ } ' · ~ .' a : :~'. '~ ~.:L~~, ........ ~ ' ~ ,i ~ -~ '~' ~ &~ ..... ~:~ ~ ....... (~ ~, ~ .... / I ~- ........ --~- ~~ ~ ., _ ?, PROJECT LOCATION DANCHO > ~ ~ 9 ~ :( ~ · ~ VICINI~ MAP , . . R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Staff Report DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Willie Valbuena, Assistant Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF TRACT MAP 16179 AND MONUMENTATION CASH DEPOSIT, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND HAVEN AVENUE, SUBMITTED BY BURNETT DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving Tract Map 16179 and Monumentation Cash Deposit. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Tentative Tract Map 16179, in the mixed use in the Haven Overlay District, located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue, was approved by the Planning Commission on August 22, 2001. This development is a mixed-use project of approximately 414 apartment units and lofts over retail and retail and professional office uses on 31.5 acres of land. The Developer, Burnett Development Corporation, is submitting a monumentation cash deposit to guarantee the setting of the monuments in the following amount: Monumentation Cash Deposit: $ 2,750.00 Copy of the improvement security is available in the City Clerk's Office. Respectfully submitted, Wil~ii~/m d. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:WV:toh Attachments CIVIC CENTER 25.t8,41' (2638.4~')R~ / ~. NOm~NG. FO. q' I.P. TAGGED LS. 2722, NO REF. CITY OF ITEM: ~ RANCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: ~ ENGINEERING DIVISION EXHIBIT: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TRACT MAP 16179 AND THE MONUMENTATION CASH DEPOSIT WHEREAS, Tentative Tract Map 16179, submitted by Burnett Development Corporation and consisting of a subdivision of 31.5 acres of land into 7 parcels, located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue, in the Mixed Use in the Haven Avenue Overlay District was approved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on August 22, 2001; and WHEREAS, Tract Map 16179 is the final map of the division of land approved as shown on the Tentative Map; and WHEREAS, all the requirements established as prerequisite to approval of the final map by the City Council of said City have now been met by posting the Monumentation Cash Deposit by Burnett Development Corporation; and NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE that said Monumentation Cash Deposit submitted by said developer be and the same is hereby approved and that said Tract Map 16179 be and the same is hereby approved and the City Engineer is authorized to present same to the County Recorder to be filed for record. ORDINANCE NO. 725 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DRC2002-00156, A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND RICHLAND- PINEHURST, INC., FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING AN APPROXIMATE 150.8 ACRE SITE WITH UP TO 358 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, FOR PROPERTIES GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF WILSON AVENUE BETWEEN ETIWANDA AVENUE AND EAST AVENUE - APN: 0225-083-01, '12, 13, 15, 16, AND 20. A. RECITALS. 1. Carifornia Government Code Section 65864 provides, in pertinent part, as follows: "The Legislature finds and declares that: (a) The lack of certainty in the approval of development projects can result in a waste of resources, escalate the cost of housing and other development to the consumer, and discourage investment in and commitment to comprehensive planning, which would make maximum efficient utilization of resources at the least economic cost to the public. (b) Assurance to the applicant for a development project that upon approval of the project, the applicant may proceed with the project in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations, and subject to conditions of approval, will strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning, and reduce the economic costs of development." 2. California Government Code Section 65865 provides, in pertinent part, as follows: "(a)Any city...may enter into a development agreement with any person having a legal or equitable interest in real property for the development of the property as provided in this article..." 3. California Government Code Section 65865.2 provides, in part, as follows: "A development agreement shall specify the duration of the agreement, the permitted uses of the property, the density or intensity of use, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes. The development agreement may include conditions, terms, restrictions, and requirements for subsequent discretionary actions, provided that such conditions, terms, restrictions, and requirements for discretionary actions shall not prevent development of the land for the uses and to the density or intensity of development set forth in the agreement..." 4. Attached to this Ordinance, marked as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference, is proposed Development Agreement DRC2002-00156, concerning that property generally located at the northwest corner of Wilson Avenue and East Avenue and legally described in the attached Development Agreement. Hereinafter in this Ordinance, the Development Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is referred to as the "Development Agreement." 5. On May 12, 2004, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held a duly noticed public hearing concerning the Development Agreement and concluded said hearing on that date and recommended approval through adoption of its Resolution No. 04-57. 6. On June 2, 2004 and continued to June 16, 2004, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing regarding the Development Agreement. 7. APl legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. B. ORDINANCE. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby find, determine, and ordain as follows: SECTION 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. SECTION 2: Based upon the facts and information contained in the record of this project, the City Council makes the following findings and statements, and takes the following actions, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. seq.): a. Richland Pinehurst, Inc. (the "Applicant") seeks approval of a series of actions related to the annexation of land from unincorporated San Bernardino County into the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the approval of Tentative Tract Map SUB']-1'16072, and associated Development Agreement. The actions also include the development of 358 single- family housing units on approximately 150.8 acres. The total area to be annexed is approximately 160 acres. The average density of the development is approximately 2.38 dwelling units per gross acre for the entire site. These series of actions and approvals are hereinafter defined in this Ordinance as the "Project." b. The Applicant has submitted the following applications relating to the Project: Annexation DRC2002-00865, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072, and Development Agreement DRC2002-00156 (collectively the "Project Applications"). These Project Applications, as well as the appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072, constitute the matters involving the Project, which are submitted to the City Council for decision and action. c. The City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, prepared the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Project, including certain technical appendices (the "Appendices") to the Draft EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 2002091053). The Draft EIR was circulated for a 45-day public review and comment period from December 2, 2003 through January 21, 2004. Comments were received during that period and written responses were prepared and sent to all persons and entities submitting comments. Those comments and the responses thereto have been included in the Final EIR, as have the Appendices to the Draft EIR. Those documents together comprise the Final EIR. d. The City Council finds that the Final EIR was completed pursuant to CEQA, and the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA, 14 California Code of Regulations, Section 15000, et. seq. ("the Guidelines"). By Resolution No. 04-204, the City Council has certified the Final EIR as being in compliance with the requirements of CEQA. e. The City Council finds that the Final EIR was presented to the City Council and that the City Council reviewed and considered the information in the Final EIR and has reached its own conclusions with respect to the Project and as to whether and how to approve the various components of the Project approvals. f. The City Council finds that the Final EIR represents the independent judgment of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and adequately addresses the impacts of the Project and imposes appropriate mitigation measures for the Project. g. Public Resources Code Section 21081 provides that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been completed which identifies one or more significant environmental effects unless the public agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant effect: i. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects thereof as identified in the completed environmental impact report. ii. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and such changes have been adopted by such agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. iii. Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental impact report. h. The City Council finds, based upon the Initial Study, the Final EIR, public comments, public agency comments, and the entire record before it, that the Project may create significant impacts in the areas of Geology and Soils, Biological Resources, Transportation/Traffic, Air Quality, Noise, Aesthetics, Cultural Resources, and Public Services and Utilities. However, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Project, which will mitigate, and in some cases, avoid the significant impacts. The specific changes and alterations required, and a brief explanation of the rationale for the findings with regard to each impact, are contained in the "CEQA Findings" for the Project (Exhibit "F" to the June 16, 2004 City Council Staff Report) and are incorporated herein by reference. In addition to the rationale and explanation contained in the "CEQA Findings," the City Council makes the following additional findings regarding the impacts to the resources and services listed in this paragraph: i. Geolocly and Soils. The Final EIR identifies that development of the Project will expose people and structures to risks associated with seismic hazards, slope instability, and foundation instability. With respect to seismic hazards, this risk arises because of the existence of regional faults located in the area and the existence of the Etiwanda Avenue Scarp fault that runs northeasterly across the Project site. The risks presented by these faults include, fault- induced ground rupture, seismically induced slope instability, ground lurching, seismically induced settlement, and seismic ground shaking. Mitigation measures are imposed which require the Applicant to set back structures north of the Etiwanda Avenue Scarp thrust fault by at least 100 feet and to set back all structures south of that fault zone by 50 feet (Mitigation Measure GS-1). All structures within Seismic Zone 4 of the site shall be designed in accordance with the Uniform Building Code and general engineering standards for seismic safety (Mitigation Measure GS- 2). In addition, graded slopes will be designed to resist seismically induced failures, loose, cohesionless soils located on the surface of the site shall be removed and properly recompacted, and Iow density native surficial and artificial fills shall be removed and recompacted or exported offsite. (Mitigation Measures GS-3 - GS-5). Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the potential for fault-induced ground rupture, seismically induced slope instability, ground lurching, and seismically induced settlement will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. The City Council finds that even after these mitigation measures, the risks of seismic ground shaking will not be reduced to less than significant levels. With respect to slope instability, graded slopes are proposed on the Project site, with gradients for the slopes to be variable to provide a natural visual appearance, and cut and fill slopes of approximately 40 feet high are proposed to be constructed. Mitigation Measure GS-6 is imposed which requires additional stabilization measures for potentially unstable graded slopes exceeding 15 feet in height. Based on this mitigation measure, the City Council finds that the potential for slope instability will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. With respect to foundation instability, the upper few feet of native soil onsite and uncontrolled fills existing on the site are potentially compressible. Because of variation in grain size within alluvial fan deposits on the site, potential collapse of soil material may result in localized areas. The presence of oversized rocks on the site and the removal of such rocks can result in deficiencies of fill material. Mitigations measures are imposed which require the Applicant to remove and recompact potentially compressible soils (Mitigation Measure GS-7), to identify methods for eliminating the potential for collapsible soils and after construction, to minimize the infiltration of water into subsurface soils by proper surface drainage (Mitigation Measure GS-8), and to relocate oversize rocks on the Project site during grading operations to reduce the potential deficiency of fill materials (Mitigation Measure GS-9). Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the potential for foundation instability will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. ii. Bioloqical Resources. The Final EIR indicates that, prior to the Grand Prix fire of October 2003, that area was previously covered with California Buckwheat-White Sage Scrub (44.1 acres), White Sage Scrub (82.5 acres), Scalebroom Scrub (11.2 acres), non- native grassland (2.1 acres), disturbed and cleared areas (6.0 acres) and ornamental landscaping (4.1 acres). In categorizing the vegetation in accordance with the "Holland System," the Final EIR identifies Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS) divided into two subgroups: the Etiwanda Alluvial Fan Group (171.3 acres), the Prickly Group/Alluvial Chaparral Group (39.5 acres). In addition, the final EIR identifies an area of Ornamental Woodland and Disturbed plants (13.8 acres). The proposed Project would result in the loss of approximately 147.7 acres of Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS). In addition, the Final EIR identifies 213 trees that satisfy the City's criteria for "heritage trees," 15 sensitive plant specifies as occurring within the general vicinity of the Project site, and the existence of Plummer's mariposa lily plants (a sensitive species) on the site. To mitigate impacts for the loss of approximately 147.7 acres of RAFSS, a mitigation measure is imposed to require the Applicant to acquire 147.7 acres of land within or near the North Etiwanda Open Space and Habitat Preservation Program (NEOSHPP) area that supports similar RAFSS habitat (Mitigation Measure B-l). In addition, measures are imposed to ensure limits are kept on grading activities, that new landscaping is consistent with native landscaping, that lighting is controlled into areas of sensitive wildlife habitat, and that future residents of the Project are informed about sensitive wildlife areas and encouraged not to plant invasive plants (Mitigation Measures B-2 - B-5). To mitigate impacts to common plant species, all 213 heritage trees shall be removed and replaced with native trees at a replacement ratio of one to one (Mitigation Measure B-6). With respect to sensitive plant species, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, focused surveys for Plummer's mariposa lily shall be conducted by a qualified biologist for possible collection and relocation (Mitigation Measure B-7). Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the impacts to natural plant communities, common plant species and sensitive plant species will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. The Final EIR indicates that the site is within the critical habitat of the federally listed endangered San Bernardino kangaroo rat. However, protocol surveys were conducted in 2001 and 2002 and revealed no presence of this species on the site. The site is also within the known range and within designated critical habitat for the federally listed threatened coastal California gnatcatcher. In addition, species of concern were found on the site which include the Northwestern San Diego pocket mouse, the San Diego desert wood rat, and the Los Angeles little pocket mouse. The site does support nesting habitat for raptor species and suitable habitat for the San Diego horned lizard and orange-throated whiptail (state species of special concern). In addition, 1.13 acres of waters would be affected and drainage courses would be impacted by the Project. To address these impacts, a mitigation measure is imposed to provide follow-up focus surveys for the San Bernardino kangaroo rat and the coastal California gnatcatcher prior to issuance of grading permits (Mitigation Measures B-8 and B-9). A qualified biological monitor will be on-site during grading to reduce mortality to sensitive species, including rodent species and incidental species (Mitigation Measure B-10). If grading activities occur during active nesting season, a field survey will be conducted to preserve any active nests and the areas around them until the nesting cycle is complete (Mitigation Measure B- 11). With respect to impacts on waters and streambeds, the Applicant shall obtain required permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the California Department of Fish and Game and comply with those permit requirements (Mitigation Measure B-12). Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the impacts to sensitive wildlife species, and jurisdictional areas (waters and streambeds) will be mitigated to a level of less than significance. iii. Transportation/Traffic. The Final EIR indicates that the proposed Project will increase vehicle trips and impact the Level of Service (LOS) along arterial streets and intersections. LOS levels of "D" or better do not represent a significant traffic impact, whereas LOS levels of "E" or worse do represent a significant traffic impact. Specifically, the Final EIR found that Project traffic, together with other anticipated traffic, will likely cause traffic flow to be deficient by experiencing a LOS of "F" during the AM peak hour at the intersections of Etiwanda Avenue at Banyan Street, Etiwanda Avenue at Highland Avenue, and East Avenue at Banyan Street. During the PM peak hour, the intersection of Etiwanda Avenue at Banyan Street, which will operate at an LOS of "E". At build-out, certain intersections in the immediate area will have LOS levels of "F". Mitigation Measures are imposed to require the Applicant to construct various roadway improvements at certain phases of the Project. For example, during the opening year of the Project, the Applicant will be required to construct Wilson Avenue from Etiwanda Avenue to East Avenue and to make various improvements to East Avenue (Mitigation Measures TT-3 - TT-5). The Applicant will also be required to construct Etiwanda Avenue from the north Project boundary to Golden Prairie Drive at its ultimate half-section width (Mitigation Measure TT-6). In addition, traffic signals, turn lanes and other improvements are required at various intersections in the vicinity of the Project (Mitigation Measures TT-7 and TT-8). Finally, the Applicant will be required to contribute its fair share toward the cost of off-site roadway improvements (TT-1 and TT-2). Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the impacts of the Project on traffic and circulation will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. iv. Air Quality. The City Council finds, based upon the Initial Study, the Final EIR, public comments, public agency comments, and the entire record before it, that the Project may create significant and unavoidable impacts to air quality. Specifically, the Final EIR identifies that shod-term emissions from construction related activities are likely to exceed the thresholds of significance specified by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Shod-term emissions are caused by fugitive dust and other padiculate matter, exhaust emissions generated by eadhmoving activities and operation of grading equipment, emissions generated during building construction as a result of equipment and vehicle operation, electrical consumption, and coating and paint applications. During the building phase of the Project, levels of nitrogen oxide (NOx), reactive organic compounds (ROC) and atmospheric padiculates (PM~o) will likely exceed the recommended SCAQMD daily thresholds, and NO× and ROC emissions will likely exceed the recommended SCAQMD quaderly thresholds, thereby resulting in significant short-term air quality impacts. Long-term emissions are caused by motor vehicle emissions and emissions from the consumption of natural gas and electricity, the use of landscape equipment, and the storage and use of consumer products. These emissions exceed the recommended SCAQMD thresholds for NO×, Carbon Monoxide (CO) and ROC. Mitigation measures for short-term impacts upon air quality are imposed on the Project (Mitigation Measure AQ-1 - AQ-10) which will require various dust control measures, emission control measures and off-site actions. Included in those measures are requirements to limit the treat the site with water or other soil-stability agents, sweep haul roads, suspend grading operations when wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour, apply chemical soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas, select equipment based on Iow emission factors, use only Iow volatility paints and architectural coatings, and implement temporary traffic control during soil transpod activities. Mitigation measures for long-term impacts upon air quality are imposed on the Project (Mitigation Measure AQ-11 - AQ-13) which require the Applicant to padicipate in the cost of off-site traffic signal installation and synchronization through payment of a mitigation fee, equip the residential structures with energy efficient appliances, and coordinate bus routing with transit agencies to determine locations and feasibility of providing bus stop shelters at Applicant's expense. The City Council finds that with implementation of the recommended measures, shod and long- term emissions will be reduced, and that the Project's contribution to regional emission of criteria pollutants will be minimized. However, the City Councii finds that despite the imposition of all these comprehensive mitigation measures, shod-term construction emissions (building phase) will exceed SCAQMD's thresholds for ROC and NOx, and that long-term stationary and mobile emissions will exceed applicable thresholds for NOx, CO and ROC, and therefore, would remain significant after mitigation. v. Noise. The Final EIR identifies the likelihood of shod-term impacts on ambient noise levels during construction of the Project. The primary source of construction noise is heavy equipment associated with construction activities, such as trucks, graders, bulldozers, concrete mixers, cranes and portable generators with high levels of sound generation. In addition, the Final EIR identifies the likelihood of long-term significant noise impacts on residences proposed on the perimeter of the Project site and adjacent to Etiwanda Avenue, Wilson Avenue, and East Avenue. For shod-term noise impacts, mitigation measures are imposed that will require the construction contractors to equip all construction equipment with properly operating and maintained mufflers, implement specific noise reduction measures when construction takes place near existing residences, locate equipment staging areas away from sensitive receptors, and comply with the City's Development Code for hours of construction activity - 6:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, with no construction to take place on Sundays or holidays (Mitigation Measures N-1 - N-4). To address long-term impacts to certain residential structures within the Project, sound barriers shall be placed at specified locations near Project road intersections and perimeter street intersections, and residential structures fronting on Etiwanda Avenue, Wilson Avenue and East Avenue will have mechanical ventilation so that windows can remain closed, and upgraded windows and other improvements will be installed on said residential structures so that interior noise levels are reduced to 45 dB CNEL or less (Mitigation Measures N- 5 - N-6). Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the shod term and long-term noise impacts from the Project will be mitigated to less than significant levels. vi. Aesthetics. The Final EIR indicates that implementation of the proposed residential community may substantially alter the existing character of the Project site as well as views of the San Gabriel Mountains. In addition, the proposed Project and the cumulative effect of development in the Project vicinity may permanently alter the visual landscape of the San Gabriel Mountains. To address these impacts, landscaping and perimeter walls shall be installed, landscaped transitions will be made between developed and the natural un-built environment, a strong landscaped edge will be required along roadways adjacent to the Project, utilities will be undergrounded where feasible, and trees and structures shall be used to frame and orient views at key locations (Mitigation Measures AES-1 - AES-5). Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that although the implementation of the above mitigation measures will mitigate visual impacts associated with the proposed Project to a level that is less that significant, the cumulative impact of the Project upon aesthetics as well as future development in the Project vicinity will remain significant and unavoidable. vii. Cultural Resources. The Final EIR indicates that three archeological sites are within the Project area. It is also likely that prehistoric remains may still be buried at these sites. To mitigate for the potential loss in Native American archeological resources, the Applicant is required to retain a City-appreved archeologist to develop an archaeological mitigation plan and a discovery/treatment plan. These plans will require the monitoring of 50 percent of the excavation activities, the treatment of found material and its recordation, mapping and disposition (Mitigation Measures CR-1 - CR-6). The Final EIR also identifies the possible presence of buried fossilized remains. To mitigate these impacts, the Applicant shall retain a City-approved paleontologist to monitor excavation activities and to prepare, identify and curate all recovered fossils for documentation and transfer to an appropriate depository. (Mitigation Measures CR-7 - CR-11). Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the impacts of the Project on archeological and paleontological resources will be mitigated to less than significant levels. viii. Public Services and Utilities. The Final EIR identifies that the proposed Project will create a demand for fire services, water services, wastewater services, and schools, and will contribute to cumulative impacts to the need for water supplies, wastewater treatment, and schools. Mitigation Measures have been imposed to require the Applicant to obtain approval of the specific designs for fire flow and proposed fire resistant materials (Mitigation Measure F~I), pay a water service development fee (Mitigation Measure W-l), utilize a xeriscape landscape and irrigation design to conserve water on Project common areas (Mitigation Measure W-2), provide funds to the Cucamonga County Water District for sewer service prior to occupancy (Mitigation Measure WW-1), and pay the required school impact fee as required by Government Code Section 65995, which is deemed to constitute full and complete mitigation of the Project's impacts to schools (Mitigation Measure S-1). Based on these mitigation measures and requirements, the City Council finds that the impacts of the Project on public services and utilities will be mitigated to less than significant levels. i. The Project is also anticipated to have the potential to create contaminated runoff containing compounds such as landscaped chemicals and automotive fluids. To reduce this impact, the Applicant will be required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan (SWPPP) and file a Notice of Intent with the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). As part of standard construction practices, best management practices (BMPs) are required to ensure that potentially harmful chemicals or pollutants are not discharged from the site. These measures include sandbags, temporary diversion and temporary containment areas. Based on these requirements, the City Council finds that the impacts of the Project on hydrology and water quality will be reduced to less than significant levels. j. The City Council finds, based on the Final EIR, that after implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the following impacts associated with the proposed Project would remain significant: geology and soils (seismic ground shaking), air quality (short-term and long-term emissions), and aesthetics/visual (cumulative views). k. The City Council finds, based on the Final EIR, that the Project will not create significant growth inducing impacts because the Project will be an extension of existing residential development to the west and the Project is consistent with development contemplated in the 2001 General Plan update as well as the Etiwanda North Specific Plan approved in 1991. The City Council also finds that the Project would result in an irretrievable commitment of natural resources (energy demands) and land. I. The Final EIR describes a range of alternatives to the Project that might fulfill basic objectives of the Project. These alternatives include the required "No Project/No Development" alternative, the "Retention of Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub Alternative," and the "Less Intense Development" Alternative. As set forth below, the alternatives identified in the EIR are not feasible because they would not achieve the basic objectives of the Project or would do so only to a much smaller degree and, therefore, leave unaddressed the significant economic, infrastructure, and General Plan goals that the Project is intended to accomplish, and are thus infeasible due to social and economic considerations, and/or they are infeasible because they would not eliminate the adverse environmental impacts of the proposed Project. Accordingly, each of the alternatives is infeasible. In making this finding, the City Council determines as follows: i. The objectives of the Project are: a. To provide single-family housing units consistent with the intent of the City's General Plan and the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. b. To annex the proposed tentative tract into the City of Rancho Cucamonga. c. To create a project that is generally consistent and compatible with other existing and proposed uses in the vicinity of the project and the community of Etiwanda in general. d. To provide project infrastructure including streets, water and sewer mains, and flood control consistent with City and regional plans related to these services. e. To phase the development of the proposed project to ensure adequate utilities are provided. f. To design and landscape the proposed project to create an aesthetically pleasing living environment. ii. The "No ProjectYNo Development" Alternative assumes that no new land uses would be constructed on the Project site and that the site would remain vacant and undeveloped. Although this alternative is environmentally superior to the proposed Project, it would not meet any of the Project objectives. As the subject property is under private ownership, the elimination of future development within a previously approved Specific Plan is not legally or financially feasible. Therefore this alternative is rejected. iii. The "Retention of Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub" Alternative assumes that all vegetation classified as RAFFS are not affected by development. As the Project site contains approximately 10.6 to 13.8 acres of disturbed or ornamental woodland, this alternative would only involve the development of those 10.6 to 13.8 acres. Based on the same residential density as the proposed Project (i.e. 2.4 units per acre), 25 to 33 single- family housing units would be constructed. Although this level of development could eliminate the potential significant unavoidable effects associated with the loss of RAFFS, this alternative would not meet the objectives of the Project, including, but not limited to, providing single-family housing units consistent with the intent of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. In addition, the City Council finds, based on substantial evidence, that it is not economically feasible for the Applicant to construct the required infrastructure as contemplated by the Etiwanda North Specific Plan while constructing only 25 to 33 housing units on the entire property. The City Council specifically finds the required improvements to roadways, pipelines, water supplies, and other infrastructure would not be economically feasible with a return on investment of only 25 to 33 housing units. iv. The "Less Intense Development" Alternative is an alternative that attempts to avoid all significant, unavoidable, adverse long-term air emission impacts. To accomplish this result, approximately 104 housing units would need to be eliminated. This would result in approximately 255 residential units on the site with an average dwelling unit per acre density of approximately 1.7 units per acre compared with the proposed 2.4 units per acre. This project density is not consistent with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan and would not meet many of the objectives of the proposed Project. m. Mitigation measures described in the Mitigation Monitoring Program will avoid or substantially lessen the potentially significant environmental effects of the Project. Further, the environmental, physical, social, economic and other benefits of the Project, as set forth in this section and in the "CEQA Findings" for the Project (Exhibit "F" to the June 16, 2004 City Council Staff Report), which is incorporated herein by this reference, outweigh any unavoidable, significant, adverse impacts that may occur as a result of the Project. Therefore, due to overriding benefits of the Project and because the alternatives identified in the Final EIR are not feasible, as discussed in paragraph I above, the City Council hereby finds, based on substantial evidence presented during the June 2, 2004 and June 16, 2004 public hearing, including written and oral staff reports and public testimony, that any unavoidable impacts of the Project, including the mitigated but unavoidable impacts from seismic ground shaking, the shod-term and long-term impacts to air quality, and the cumulative impacts to aesthetics from the permanent alteration of the visual landscape of this region, are acceptable based on the findings contained herein and in the "CEQA Findings" for the Project. This determination shall constitute a statement of overriding considerations within the meaning of CEQA and is based on any one of the following environmental and other benefits of the Project identified in the Final EIR and the record of the City Council's proceedings: i. Provision for the use of land consistent with the established policies and goals of the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, Etiwanda North Specific Plan, City Development Code, and all other City Development guidelines; ii. Annexation of the 150-acre Project site and adjacent 10.0-acre area into the City of Rancho Cucamonga; iii. Implementation and consistency with the policies and goals of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Genera~ Plan, Etiwanda North Specific Plan, City Development Code and all other City development guidelines; iv. Creation of a Project that is generally consistent and compatible with other existing and proposed uses in the vicinity of the Project and community of Etiwanda in general; v. Provision of Project infrastructure including streets, water and sewer mains, and flood control consistent with City and regional plans related to these services. vi. Phasing of the development of the proposed Project to ensure adequate utilities are provided; vii. Integration of the Project with the character of the surrounding neighborhoods and establishment of a development that results in logical, coordinated growth; viii. Provision of a system of public/community facilities, including trails, open space areas, and landscaping to support the residents of the Project and surrounding area in an efficient and timely manner; ix. Design and landscaping of the proposed Project to create an aesthetically pleasing living environment. n. The mitigation measures in the Final EIR that correspond to the environmental impacts which may result from the Project are hereby adopted and made a condition of approval of, or incorporated into, the Project. The City Council also hereby adopts the "Mitigation Monitoring Plan" attached as Exhibit "H" to the June 16, 2004 City Council Staff Report for this Project. The Mitigation Monitoring Plan will be used to monitor compliance with the mitigation measures and conditions that have been adopted or made a condition of Project approval as set forth in this Section of this Ordinance and Exhibit "H" to the June 16, 2004 City Council Staff Report. o. Pursuant to provisions of California Public Resources Code Section 21089 (b), the findings contained in this Ordinance shall not be operative, vested or final until all required filing fees assessed pursuant to California Fish and Game Code Section 711.4, together with any required handling charges, are paid to the County Clerk of the County of San Bernardino. SECTION 3: The City Council finds that the Development Agreement does comply with the requirements of California Government Code Sections 65865 through 65869.5 in that the Development Agreement does specify in detail and contains the following: a. Provisions are included in Section 3(A) of the Development Agreement requiring periodic review of the Agreement at least every twelve months, at which time the applicant shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the Agreement (California Government Code Section 65865.1). b. The duration of the Development Agreement is specified in Section I(B) of the Agreement as being for ten (10) years (Government Code Section 65865.2). c. The permitted uses of the property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height and size of the proposed structures, and other required provisions are referred to in Section 2(A) of the Development Agreement (Government Code Section 65865.2). d. The Development Agreement includes conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements for subsequent discretionary actions in Section 2(B) of the Agreement (Government Code Section 65865.2). e. The Development Agreement includes terms and conditions in Section 2(C)7 that require the developer to improve portions of public streets around the perimeter of the property and provide for and improve streets inside the development (Government Code Section 65865.2). f. The Development Agreement specifies that the Project is to be constructed in coordination with the construction of certain public infrastructure improvements as specified in Section 2 of the Agreement. (Government Code Section 65865.2). SECTION 4: Based upon substantial evidence presented during the above- referenced public hearinq on June 2, 2004 and June 16, 2004, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds that the Development Agreement will provide for development which is consistent with the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. The City Council bases its findings of consistency with the General Plan on the compliance of the project entitlements specified in the Development Agreement with the General Plan's land use designation for the site, the fact that the project entitlements specified in the Development Agreement provide for the extension of the Iow density image of Old Etiwanda into the area as provided in General Plan Policy 2.4.4.5, the fact that the proposed uses set forth in the Development Agreement are compatible with the character of existing development in the vicinity, and that the Development Agreement is consistent with the General Plan's intent to keep substantial portions of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan area as open space. SECTION 5: Based on substantial evidence presented during the above- referenced public hearing on June 2, 2004 and June 16, 2004, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, the City Council hereby specifically finds that the Development Agreement will provide for development which is consistent with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. The City Council bases its findings of consistency with the Project's consistency with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan land use designations for the site and the fact that the Project is designed to contain a trails system, provide for views of the mountains, and will comply with the Specific Plan's requirements for landscape treatments and required walls, fencing, lighting and community entry that is consistent with the design scheme specified in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. SECTION 6: Based on the findings contained in this Ordinance, this City Council hereby approves Development Agreement DRC2003- 00751, attached hereto as Exhibit "A." SECTION 7: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within 15 days after its passage 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. Upon the effective date of this Ordinance, the Mayor shall execute the Development Agreement on behalf of the City and the City Clerk shall cause the Agreement to be recorded in the offices of the County Recorder for the County of San Bernardino at the time and as required by law. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DRC2002-00156 (as amended 05/12/2004) DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETVVEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND RICHLAND COMMUNITIES, INC. CONCERNING PROPOSED TENTATIVE TRACT 16072 This Agreement (the "Development Agreement") is made and entered into this day of .., 2004, by and between the applicant Hill Country S.A. Ltd., a Texas limited partnership; and RiChland Tracy Ltd., a Florida Limited partnership, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga, a municipal corporation (the "CITY") pursuant to the authority of Section 65864 through 65869.5 of the Califomia Govemment Code. Hill Country S.A. Ltd., and Richland Trac¥ Ltd., and their successors and assigns, if any, are referred to collectively hereinafter as the "Property Owners". The CITY and Property Owners are collectively referred to herein as the "Parties". RECITALS: A. To provide more certainty in the approval of development projects, to encourage pdvate participation in comprehensive planning, and to reduce the economic risk of development, the Legislature of the State of California has adopted Sections 65864, et seq. of the California Government Code, thus authorizing the CITY to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property, in order to establish development rights with respect thereto. B. Section 65865(b) of the California Govemment Code authorizes the CIT~ to enter into a binding development agreement with respect to real property which is in unincorporated territory but also within the CITY's sphere of influence, provided that the effectiveness of the development agreement is conditioned upon the annexation of such reap property to the CITY within the pedod of time for annexation as specified in the Development Agreement. C. Property Owners owns fee title to approximately 150.79 acres of real property located entirely within the County of San Bernardino (the "County") and more particularly described in Exhibit "A" and depicted on Exhibit "B" attached hereto (the "Project Site"). D. On March 5, 2002, the CITY received an application for Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT16072), Development Agreement (DRC2002-00156), and a request for Annexation of the Proposed Project. An Environmental impact Report has been prepared to address the potential environment impacts of the proposed project and all discretionary actions anticipated by the CITY and the Local Agency Formation Commission. E. As set forth in Ordinance No. __ adopted by the City Council on (the "Enacting Ordinance"), the execution of this Development Agreement and performance of and compliance with the terms and conditions set'forth herein by the Parties hereto: (i) is in the best interest of the CITY; (ii) will promote the public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practices in the CITY; (iii) will promote Exhibit "A" Development Agreement 1 Richland Communities, Inc. preservation of land values; (iv) will encourage the development of the Project by providing a level of certainty to the Property Owners; and (v) will provide for orderly growth and development of the CITY consistent with the CITY's General Plan. AGREEMENT: NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals, and the mutual promises and covenants of the Parties, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which us hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows: Section 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS A. Effectiveness of Development Aqreement Notwithstanding the effective date of the Enacting Ordinance, this Development Agreement shall only become operative and the rights and obligations of the Parties shall only arise, upon the date that the last of the following have occurred: 1. The project site has been annexed to the CITY and said annexation is final as to any and all administrative actions, and is not subject to judicial challenge; and 2. The Project and the Final EIR have been approved by the CITY and all entitlements have been issued for completion by property Owners. B. Term The ~'erm of this Development Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date of the enacting Ordinance and shall extend for a period of 10 years thereafter, unless this Development Agreement is terminated, modified or extended by circumstances set forth in this Development Agreement, including, without limitation, the extensions provided below and any extensions attributable to "fome majeure" circumstances described in Section 2D5 hereof or by mutual written consent of the Parties. Following the expiration of the Term, this Development Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of no further force and effect; provided, however, that such termination shall not affect any right or duty arising from the project entitlements granted prior to, concun-ently with, or subsequent to the approval of this Development Agreement and the structures that are developed in accordance with this Development Agreement and the use of those structures shall continue to be governed by this Development Agreement for purposes of ensuring, for land use purposes, that those structures continue to be legal conforming structures and that those uses continue to be legal conforming uses. C. Assiclnment Subject to the terms of this Development Agreement, Property Owners shall have the right to convey, assign, sell, lease, sublease, encumber, hypothecate or otherwise transfer (for purposes of this Development Agreement, "Transfer") the Project Site, in whole or in part, to any person, partnership, joint venture, firm or corporation or other entity at any time during the term of this Development Agreement, and to the extent of each such Transfer, the transferor shall be relieved of its legal duty to perform such obligations under this Development Agreement at the time of the Transfer, except to the extent Property Owners are in default, as defined in Section 3.C hereof, of any of the terms of this Development Agreement when the Transfer occurs. Development Agreement 2 Richland Communities, Inc. If all or a portion of the Project Site is Transferred and there is noncompliance by the transferee owner with respect to any term and condition of this Development Agreement, or by the transferor with respect to any portion of the Project Site not sold or Transferred, such noncompliance shall be deemed a breach of this Agreement by that transferee or transferor, as applicable, but shall not be deemed to be a breach hereunder against other persons then owning or holding any interest in any portion of the Project Site and not themselves in breach under this Development Agreement. Any alleged breach shall be governed by the provisions of Section 3.C hereof. In no event shall the reservation or dedication of a portion of the Project Site to a public agency cause a transfer of duties and obligations under this agreement unless specifically stated to be the case in this Development Agreement, any of the exhibits attached to this Development Agreement, the instrument of conveyance used for such reservation or dedication, or other form of agreement with such public agency. Concurrently, with any such sale, transfer or assignment, or within ten business days thereafter, the Property Owners shall notify the CITY, in wdting, of such sale, transfer or assignment and shall provide the CITY with an executed agreement, in a form reasonably acceptable to the CITY, by the purchaser, transferee or assignee and providing therein that the purchaser, transferee or assignee expressly and unconditionally assumes all the duties and obligations of the Property Owners under this agreement. D. Amendment of A.qreement This Development Agreement may be amended from time to time by mutual consent of the Parties in accordance with the provisions of Government Code Sections 65867 and 65868. Notwithstanding anything stated to the contrary in this Development Agreement, the parties may enter into one or more implementing agreements, as set forth below, to clarify the intended application or interpretation of this Development Agreement, without amending this Development Agreement. Property Owners and the CITY acknowledge that the provisions of this Development Agreement require a close degree of cooperation between Property Owners and the CITY and that, in the course of the development of the Project Site, it may be necessary to supplement this Development Agreement to address the details of the Parties' respective performance and obligations, and to otherwise effectuate the purposes of this Development Agreement and the intent of the Parties. If and when, from time to time, the Parties find that it is necessary or appropriate to clarify the application or interpretation of this Development Agreement, the Parties may do so through one or more implementing agreements (the "Implementing Agreement"), which shall be' executed by the City Planner and by an authorized representative of the Property Owners. After execution, each implementing Agreement shall be attached as an addendum and become a part of this Development Agreement, and may be further changed or supplemented from time to time as necessary. Such Implementing Agreement shall not require the approval of the City Council of the CITY and shall only be executed by the City Planner (on Behalf of the CITY), if the City Planner has made a reasonable determination that such implementing agreements are not materially inconsistent with this Development Agreement, and applicable ordinances, rules, regulations and official policies of the CITY in effect at the time of execution of this Development Agreement. Any changes to this Development Agreement which would 3 Richland Communities, Inc. /5¢ Development Agreement impose additional obligations on the CITY beyond those which would be deemed to arise under a reasonable interpretation of this Development Agreement, or which would purport to change land use designations applicable to the Project Site under the applicable Project Entitlements, shall be considered "material" and shall require amendment of this Agreement in accordance with the provisions of California Government Code Sections 65867 and 65868. Section 2. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT A. Land Use and Proiect Entitlements The Project Entitlements are depicted on the Tentative Tract Map and Conceptual Grading Plan attached hereto as Exhibits 1 - 17. Project Entitlements refers to the foliowing material related to the approval of the Development Agreement (DRC2002-00156) and the Tentative Tract Map (SUB'l-1'16072): all plans that constitute the approved project, all Planning Commission and City Council Resolutions of Approval including the associated conditions of approval, and all mitigation measures included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan and the Environmental Impact Report. The Parties acknowledge that, without being obligated to do so, Property Owners plans to develop the Project Site in substantial conformity with the Project Entitlements as approved by this Development Agreement. During the Term of this agreement, the permitted uses for the Project, or any portion thereof, the density and intensity of use, zoning, maximum height and size of proposed buildings, building and yard setback requirements, provisions for the reservation or dedication of land, design and performance standards and other terms and conditions of development of the Project constitute the Entitlements as approved by this Development Agreement. The specific terms of this Development Agreement shall supersede and be controlling over any conflict and/or inconsistency with the Project Entitlements. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the total number of lots in the approved tract totals 358 lots and that lots may be modified, without indreasing the overall number of lots, as long as the proposed modification is found to be in substantial conformity with the Project Entitlements as approved by this Development Agreement. The City Planner shall exemise his reasonable discretion in the review of any proposed modifications to lots, and make the determination of substantial compliance. Other certain specific modifications of the Project Entitlements to which the Parties agree are set forth below. All Exhibits attached hereto constitute material provisions of the Development Agreement, and are incorporated herein. B. Rules and Re.qulations Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65856 and except as otherwise explicitly provided in this Development Agreement, (1) the ordinance, rules and regulations and official policies governing permitted uses of the Project Site, the density and intensity of such uses, and the design, improvement, and construction standards and specifications applicable to development of the Project and in effect as of the date of this Development Agreement, and (2) and those ordinances of the CITY, as implemented by this Development Agreement, rules, regulations and official policies in effect as of the date of this Development Agreement, but only to the extent that they are consistent with the Project Entitlements, as modified and/or amended by this Development Agreement (collectively the "Existing Laws"), except that the CiTY's street improvement, lighting, storm drain, and the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") Development Agreement 4 Richland Communities, Inc. standards shall be followed, and the landscape standards applicable shall be those specified in this Development Agreement or if none are so specified, the CITY's Standards. In the event of any conflict between the Existing Laws and the other CITY ordinances, rules, regulations and official policies, then the Existing Laws shall control. The CITY shall not be prevented in subsequent actions applicable to the Project, from applying new ordinances, rules regulations, and policies in effect ("Future Policies") to the extent that they do not conflict with the Existing Laws. Such conflict shall be deemed to occur if, without limitation, such Future Policies: 1. modify the permitted types of land uses, the density or intensity of use, the maximum height or size of proposed buildings on the property, building and yard setback requirements, or impose requirements for the construction or provisions of on- site or offsite improvements or the reservation or dedication of land for public use, or the payment of fees or the imposition of extractions, other than as are in each case specifically provided for in this Development Agreement; 2. prevent the Property Owners from obtaining all necessary approvals, permits, certificates or other entitlements at such dates and under such circumstances as the Property Owners would otherwise be entitled under this Development Agreement; 3. render any conforming use of the Project Site a non-conforming use or any structure on the Project Site a non-conforming structure. C. Design and Infrastructu?e Issues 1. Street Sections The CITY desires that the design of Wilson Avenue, Etiwanda Avenue and East Avenue be designed as depicted in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan Exhibit 13(B)/Section A-l, Exhibit 13(D)/with community trail, and Exhibit 13(E), respectively. The following deviations from the standard CITY Engineering Division street standards or policies are acceptable as depicted on the approved plans included as part of the Project Entitlements: Street 'C' is acceptable as a non-standard cul-de-sac design; the centedine radius of Street 'A' is acceptable with a radius of 650-feet; and street sections on straight interior streets may be greater than 800-feet. 2. Dry Utilities The Project Entitlements do not require that Burd vaults be installed and the CITY and Property Owners agree that no Burd vaults will be required throughout the Project Site. The aboveground transformers/switchgear are acceptable subject to selective placement subject to approval of the City Planner and SCE. 3. Private Landscape Maintenance This project shall form a Homeowners Association (HOA), which shall own and be responsible for maintenance of all lettered lots interior and exterior to the tract. Maintenance responsibility shall include all perimeter walls and interim detention basins, as well as slopes and landscape areas adjacent to Community Trails within the Development Agreement 5 Richland Communities, Inc. Fault Zone and along perimeter streets, in addition, the Property Owner agrees to join Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) No. 7. a. City will support the creation of a new LMD for the above- mentioned areas if the Property Owner can provide a design that can be cost-effectively maintained to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. This would replace the requirement for a HOA and joining LMD 7. b. If entrances are gated, they shall conform to City design standards and all interior improvements will become private. In that case, the HOA will also assume responsibility for streets, streetlights, sidewalks, utility easements, and storm drains/drainage facilities. 4. View Fencinq Open fencing may be utilized in rear-yard conditions only where view opportunities are present, subject to mitigation measures that may otherwise be required for sound attenuation and/or fire protection. 5. Grading The Grading Plan, included in the Project Entitlements, shall conform to the Design Guidelines of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. However, with an average slope across the site of less than 8%, the Project is exempt from the CITY Hillside Development Regulations of the Development Code. 6. Community Trail The Property Owners shall design and construct improvements to the CITY Community Trail network along Etiwanda Avenue north of 'U' Street to the north tract boundary, and along East Avenue north of the Fault Zone Trail to the northerly tract boundary, in accordance with CITY standard Drawing 1002-A. In addition, a Community Trail shall be developed through the Fault Zone, - between Etiwanda Avenue and East Avenue, in accordance with CITY Standard Drawing 1004. Improvements to the Regional Trail within the Edison Corridor are not required as a condition of this development. 7. Circulation Issues and Fees a. Revisions to the Etiwanda north Specific Plan/Phasing Plan The Property Owners shall construct East Avenue southerly between Wilson Avenue and Banyan Street, in lieu of extending Wilson Avenue easterly to connect to Wardman-Bullock Road. b. Transportation Fee/Traffic Impact Analysis The Properly Owners shall construct circulation improvements necessary to serve the area in and around the Project Site as generally depicted on Exhibit 18 - 20; and Property Owners shall construct additional regional transportation improvements depicted on Exhibit 22. In addition, the Property Owners shall comply with Development Agreement 6 Richland Communities, Inc. /'-.-'~ 7 Transportation Development Fees In accordance with CITY ordinance. Upon formation of a Community Facilities District ("CFD") Property Owners may include the cost of the improvement specified in this Section 2.C.7.c as part of the CFD financing. The Property Owners shall receive credit against, or reimbursement of costs, in excess of the Transportation Development Fee for the "backbone" improvements as described herein, in conformance with CITY Policy. c. Circulation Improvements/Reimbursement Requests The Property Owners shall design, construct, and complete the following improvements: (i) Etiwanda Avenue: Improve as a Secondary Arterial along the property frontage, as depicted in Exhibit 20. These improvements shall be completed prior to the first release of occupancy, or to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (ii) East Avenue: North of Wilson Avenue to the northerly Tract boundary - Construct Collector Street improvements west of centerline and 18-feet of pavement east of centedine, for a total of 40-feet pavement width along with a 2-foot graded shoulder, as depicted in Exhibit 19. In addition, construct 44-feet of pavement for a distance of 200-feet north of Wilson Avenue, transitioning back to 40-feet north of that point. These improvements shall be completed prior to the first release of occupancy, or to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The Property Owner may request a reimbursement agreement whereby the Property shall recover the cost for improvements east of the centerline from future development as it occurs on adjacent properties in the CITY limits. If the Property Owners fail to submit for said reimbursement agreement within 6-months of the public improvements being accepted by the CITY, all rights of the Property Owners to reimbursement shall terminate. South of Wilson Avenue to Banyan Street - Construct 36-feet pavement width, as depicted in Exhibit 19. These improvements shall be completed prior to the first release of occupancy, or to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The Property Owners shall receive credit against the Transportation Development Fee for backbone improvements, in conformance with CITY Policy. The Property Owner may request a reimbursement agreement whereby the Property shall recover the cost for improvements south of the southerly Tract boundary from future development as it occurs on adjacent properties in the CITY limits. If the Property Owners fail to submit for said reimbursement agreement within 6-months of the public improvements being accepted by the CITY, all rights of the Properly Owners to reimbursement shall terminate. (iii) Wilson Avenue: Between Etiwanda Avenue to East Avenue - Install full-width Divided Secondary Arterial improvements as depicted in Exhibit 20. These improvements shall be completed prior to the first release of occupancy, or to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The Property Owners (or future developer) shall acquire right-of-way from Metropolitan Water District (MWD), along with a permit for the improvements, on the south side of Wilson Avenue. The Property Owners shall receive credit against, and reimbursement of costs in excess of, the Transportation Development Fee for the median curbs and 14-feet of pavement on both sides, in conformance with CITY Policy. Development Agreement 7 Richland Communities, Inc. /5 ¢ The Property Owner may request a reimbursement agreement whereby the Property Owners shall recover the cost for improvements, other than the 'backbone', including median landscaping south of the centerline and along the Not-A-Part parcel, from future development on adjacent properties. If the Property Owners fail to request said reimbursement agreement within 6-months of the public improvements being accepted by the CITY, all rights of the Property Owners to reimbursement shall terminate. 8. Storm Drains a. Deviation from the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Drainaqe Policy The Project shall comply with the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Drainage Policy with the construction of the 25th Street Interceptor Channel along the ProjectsI north boundary line. The Project will deviate from the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Drainage Policy with the construction of an interim detention basin to attenuate only developed storm flows to Wilson Avenue storm drain not currently attenuated by existing basins in Tracts 13527 and 14139. b. Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area 3 Master Plan Storm Drain The Property Owners shall construct Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area 3 Master Plan Storm Drain facilities along the north property boundary from Etiwanda Avenue to the Etiwanda Spreading Grounds, including culverts for both Etiwanda Avenue and East Avenue to cross the facility. These improvements shall be completed prior to the first release of occupancy, or to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Standard drainage fees for the project shall be credited to the cost of permanent master plan facilities, in accordance with CITY Policy. The Property Owner may request a reimbursement agreement whereby the Property Owners shall recover the cost for such improvements from future development on adjacent properties. If the Property Owners fail to request said reimbursement agreement within 6 months of public improvements being accepted by the CITY, or all dghts of the development to reimbursement shall terminate. If San Bernardino County Flood Control District requires an interim basin for this facility, the same easement, maintenance and reimbursement issues will apply as for the Wilson storm drain basin(s). c. Intedm Detention Basin The Property Owners shall design, construct and install, an "lntedm Detention Basin" for the Wilson Avenue Storm Drain, located as shown conceptually on Exhibit 22, justified by a Final Drainage Repod, which shall be approved by the City Engineer. The Property Owners shall: (i) Design the basin to mitigate developed flows from area bounded by Wilson, East and Etiwanda Avenues, and Southern California Edison; (ii) Provide a temporary easement to the CITY over the lots that contain the basin; (iii) Provide for maintence of the Interim Detention Basin through annexation to an existing Assessment District, the formation of a new Assessment District, or the execution of a maintenance agreement satisfactory to the Development Agreement 8 Richland Communities, Inc. City Engineer and the City Attorney that guarantees the private maintenance of the facility. The Property Owners shall be responsible for the costs relating to the annexation to an existing Assessment District, the formation of a new District, or the preparation of a maintenance agreement. The CITY shall be provided with rights of access to maintain the facility if private maintenance is insufficient. The CITY shall have the right to assess those maintenance costs incurred by the CITY to the Property Owners. Said agreement shall include a cash deposit as security for any maintenance costs the CITY may incur. Said agreement shall be recorded to run with the property. (iv) Pay an in-lieu fee for the removal of any interim basin improvements within the LMD areas (if applicable) and their replacement with the LMD Landscaping, pdor to final map recordation. (v) Request that the CITY execute a reimbursement agreement to recover the proportionate cost of the land and ultimate basin related facilities (outlet, etc.) from future development using the basin. If the 'Property Owners fail to request said reimbursement agreement within 6-months of the public improvements being accepted by the CITY, all dghts of the Property Owners to such reimbursement shall terminate. (vi) Install local storm drains to convey development drainage to the existing Master Plan Storm Drain in Wilson Avenue, and extend the local storm drain system as far on-site as needed to contain Q25 within the tops of curbs, Q100 'within rights-of-way and provide a 10-foot dry lane in Q 10. The cost of local storm drains shall be borne by the Property Owners with no fee credit. 9. Park Fee/Equestrian Fee/Beautification Fee Property Owners shall pay the following development fees: a. The Property Owners shall pay CITY a sum totaling $358,000 (based upon $1,000 per unit) for equestrian purposes. The sum may be paid from CFD formation and funding. However, the prorated share of the fee for each individual tract map must be paid prior to recording of said tract map. The CITY shall reserve said funds for the intended purpose, or the Property Owners may directly participate in the construction of the CITY-approved North Etiwanda Equestrian Arena. b. The Property Owners shall pay the CITY a sum totaling $2,362,800 ($6,600 per unit) for park purposes. The sum may be paid from CFD formation and funding. However, the prorated share of the fee for each individual tract map must be paid prior to recording of said tract map. In addition, the applicant shall receive park credit for improvements to the Community Trail that traverses the site within the Fault Zone, in accordance with General Plan Policy. The Trail Credit Graph (Exhibit 111-12) of the General Plan establishes the basis upon which park credit is determined for Community or Regional Trail improvements. Based on the analysis using the Trail Credit Graph, the Property Owners will receive credit for 1.5 acres, which is 35 percent of the total trail area. The 1.5-acre credit equates to a dollar value of $600,000, which will be applied to the total value of the Park Fee as required in the paragraph above. Development Agreement 9 Richland Communities, Inc. c. The Property Owner shall not pay the CITY Beautification Fee of $0.20 per square foot for residential construction if improvements to Wilson south parkway are made. 10. Development Standards The project shall be developed in accordance the CITY's Low-Density Residential District of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. a. Number of Housing Units: The project entitlements include 358 housing units. 11. Desiqn Review Process The Project, and all subsequent applications for residential development, shall be subject to the CITY Development/Design Review process. 12. Architectural Guidelines The Project, and all subsequent applications for residential development, shall be subject to the Architectural Guidelines of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. 13. Etiwanda Avenue Scarp Fault Zone The Etiwanda Avenue Scarp is located within an Alquist-Pdolo Fault Zone as depicted in the CITY General Plan Exhibit V-1; and is identified as a Fault Zone land use district as depicted in the CITY Etiwanda North Specific Plan Exhibit 10. The Property Owners have conducted a Geotechnical Investigation (GeoSoils, Inc. November 11, 1998) in order to define and identify the actual zone of faulting of the Etiwanda Avenue Scarp where it traverses the project site. A Fault Setback Zone, as recommended by the Investigation, is depicted on the Tentative Tract Map and the Conceptual Grading Plan included in the Project Entitlements. Habitable structures shall not be developed within the Fault Setback Zone, however, portions of the lot area may encroach in the Fault Setback Zone as depicted on the Tentative Tract Map and Conceptual Grading Plan included in the Project Entitlements. All improvements within the Fault Zone, as described in this paragraph and depicted in the Project Entitlements. shall be completed prior to the issuance of building permit of the 150t~ dwelling within the project. 14. Open Space Transfer Plan The Property Owners shall transfer to the County of San Bernardino Special Districts OS~1, other qualified conservation entity approved by the City in fee, a minimum of 150-acres of off-site land for permanent open space and habitat preservation; along with funding in an amount to be determined by County of San Bernardino Special Districts (or other conservation entity), to provide for long-term maintenance of said land. The preferred location of the off-site land is in the environment surrounding the North Etiwanda Preserve in the CITY Sphere of Influence, other properties may be considered based the review of appropriate Biological Habitat Assessments and concurrence of the City Planner. The transfer and funding shall occur prior to recording of the first final map of the Project. Development Agreement 10 Richland Communities, Inc. /~:~ / D. Timing of Development and Fees 1. Development of the Perimeter Landscapinq and the Etiwanda North Specific Plan Nei,qhborhood Monumentation All perimeter landscaping, including the Upper Etiwanda Neighborhood Monumentation as depicted in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan Exhibit 25A-C, shall be completed according the following schedule: (1) the East Avenue Perimeter, the Wilson Avenue perimeter, and the western Project perimeter south of the Fault Zone shall be completed prior to the release of occupancy of the 150th dwelling within the project; and (2) the Etiwanda Avenue perimeter, north of the Fault Zone shall be completed prior to the release of the 250th dwelling unit within the project. 2. Development of the Remainder of the Site Neither the Property Owners nor CITY can presently predict when or the rate at which phases of the project shall be developed, since such decisions depend on numerous factors which are not within the control of the Property Owners including, without limitation, market orientation and demand, interest rates, absorption, competition and other factors. The parties acknowledge and agree that Property Owners, subject to the restrictions and conditions of this Development Agreement, retains flexibility under this Development Agreement to develop the Project in such order and at such rate and times as are appropriate within the exercise of the Prepedy Owners' business judgment. The CITY further acknowledges that Property Owners may desire to market, sell, or otherwise arrange for disposition of some or all of the Project Site, prior to development, and that the rate at which the Project develops will likely depend upon the business judgment of subsequent owners of the Project Site. 3. CITY's Cooperation CITY shall use good faith, diligent efforts to promptly process and take final action on any applications for permits or approvals filed by Property Owners with respect to the Project. Such cooperation shall include, without limitation, (a) using good faith, diligent efforts to process subsequent Development/Design Review in accordance with state regulations; and (b) promptly processing all ministerial permits in accordance with Section 2.1 below. Without limiting the effect of any other provision of this Development Agreement, any future regulation, whether adopted by initiative or otherwise, limiting the rate or timing of development of the Project Site or the extent thereof, shall be deemed to conflict with Property Owners' vested rights to develop the Project under this Development Agreement and shall, to that extent, not apply to the development of the Project. Processing and review of development proposals shall be subject to established procedures in effect in the entire CITY, including Development and Design Review, as specified in the Existing Laws. However, the criteria used in the evaluation of each development proposa~ shall be based on the objectives, policies and specific development standards specified herein. Development Agreement 11 Richland Communities, Inc. 4. Force Majeure Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Development Agreement, Property Owners and CITY shall be excused from performance of their obligations under this Development Agreement during any period of delay caused by acts of God or civil commotion, riots, strikes, picketing, or other labor disputes, shortage of materials or supplies, or damage to or prevention of work by reason of fire, floods, earthquake, or other casualties, litigation, acts or neglect of the Property Owners, as applicable. The time of performance of such obligations as well as the term of this Development agreement shall automatically be extended by the pedod of such delay hereunder. E. Future Entitlements With respect to any entitlements that Property Owners may require in the future, including, without limitation, tentative tract and parcel map approvals, conditional use permits, and Development/Design Review, the CITY shall retain its discretionary review authority and the CITY's applicable ordinances, rules, regulations and official policies. However, any such discretionary review shall be expressly subject to the provisions of this Development Agreement and the CITY may only impose conditions upon such discretionary entitlements which are consistent with the Project Entitlements as approved by this Development Agreement, except as otherwise specifically required by state or federal law. F. Environmental Review Other than the mitigation measures and conditions of approval set forth in the EIR and the Project Entitlements (and any additional future mitigation programs contemplated therein), no other mitigation measures for environmental impacts created by the Project, as presently approved and as evaluated in the EIR, shall be required. In connection with the CITY's issuance of any further entitlement (as contemplated in Section 2.F above), which is subject to CEQA, the CITY shall promptly commence and diligently process any and all initial studies and assessments required by CEQA, and to the extent permitted by CEQA, the CITY shall use the EIR and other existing environmental reports and studies as adequately addressing the environmental impacts of such matter or matters, without requiring new or supplemental environmental documentation. In the event CEQA requires any additional environmental review, the CITY may impose additional measures (or conditions) to mitigate, as permitted by CEQA, the adverse environmental impacts of such future entitlements, which were not considered at the time of approval of the Project. G. CITY Fees and Mandates by State and Federal Laws The Parties acknowledge and agree that the fees and impositions which may potentially be imposed by the CITY on the Project and Property Owners (collectively "fees") fall within one of three categories: (a) fees for processing land use and construction permit applications which are not otherwise governed by the provisions of Section 66000 of the Government Code (but which are subject to the limitations set forth in Sections 66013, 66014, and 66016-66018.5 of the Government Code) (collectively, the "Processing Fees"); (b) fees or other monetary exactions which are contemplated under ordinances or resolutions in effect as of the date of this Development Agreement and which purport to defray all or a portion of the cost of impacts to certain public facilities, improvements and other amenities from the development projects, including any fees described in Government Code Sections 66000 et seq. (collectively, the Development Agreement 12 Richtand Communities, inc. /~ "Existing Fee Categories") (the Existing Fee Categories include any increases, decreases, or other modifications to existing fees, so long as such modified fees relate to the same category of impacts identified in the Existing Fee Categories); and (c) fees or other monetary exactions which may be imposed in the future by the CiTY for purposes of defraying all or a portion of the cost of public facilities, improvements, or amenities related to development projects, but excluding the Existing Fee Categories ("other Fees"). The Property Owners' obligation to pay Fees shall be specifically governed by the following provisions: 1. Processinq Fees, The CITY may charge Planning and Engineering Plan Check and Permit Fees and Building Permit Fees which are in force and effect on a CITY-wide basis at the time of Property Owners' application for a land use entitlement or a construction permit. The amount of any Processing Fees shall be determined by the CITY in accordance with all applicable laws, including, without limitation, Govemment Code Sections 66013, 66014, and 66017-66018.5 (or any successor laws, as applicable). Unless otherwise agreed by Properly Owners and the CITY, the Processing Fees assessed Property Owners shall be the same as those imposed upon other development projects throughout the jurisdictional limits of the CITY. 2. Other Fees. In consideration of the Property Owners' Agreement to modify the Project Entitlements as specifically set forth in this Development Agreement and implement the timing of development in accordance with the terms set forth above, no Other Fees shall be imposed upon the Property Owners or the Project during the Term of this Development Agreement, except as may be specifically required to carry out any state or federal law or mandate enacted after the effective date of this Development Agreement, as necessary to mitigate environmental impacts of the project in accordance with 2.G above. 3. Fiscal Impact Analysis. CITY does not require Property Owners or the Project to complete a fiscal impact analysis for application or issuance of any approvals or permits that CITY might issue under this Development Agreement. H. Non-discretionary Permits The Parties acknowledge that in the course of implementing the Project, Property Owners will, from time to time, apply to the CITY for vadous ministerial permits, licenses, consents, certificates, and approvals, including, without limitation, non-discretionary subdivision approvals, grading permits, construction permits, certificates of occupancy and permits required to connect the Project to utility systems under the CiTY's jurisdiction (collectively the "Non-Discretionary Permits"). Property Owners shall have the right to apply for any such Non-Discretionary Permits in accordance with the Existing Laws (and any applicable Future Policies under Section 2.B, above). The CITY shall issue to Property Owners, upon such applications, all required Non-Discretionary Permits, subject only to compliance with the terms of this Development Agreement, the CITY's usual and customary fees and charges for such applications and Non- Discretionary Permits (subject to the provisions of Section H above) and the terms and conditions of the applicable permit applications. The CITY further agrees that upon its approval of any plans, specifications, design drawings, maps, or other submittals of Property Owners in conjunction with such Non-Discretionary Permits (the "Approved Plans"), all further entitlements, approvals and consents required from the CITY to implement the Project which are consistent with and further implement such Approved Development Agreement 13 Richland Communities, Inc. Plans, shall be expeditiously processed and approved by the CiTY in accordance with this Development Agreement. I. Cooperation 1. Cooperation with Other Public Aqencies. The CITY acknowledges that the Property Owners may apply from time to time for permits and approvals as may be required by other governmental or quasi-governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the Project, in conjunction with the development of or provision of services to the Project, including, without limitation, approvals in connection with developing and implementing a tertiary water system, potential transportation improvements and other on-site and off- site infrastructure. The CITY shall cooperate with Property Owners in its efforts to obtain such permits and approvals from such agencies (including without limitation, the Cucamonga Valley Water District, and the Inland Empire Utilities Agency). 2. Construction of Off-Site Improvements. To the extent that Property Owners are required to construct off-site street improvements as a condition of developing the Project, the Property Owners shall make good faith efforts to acquire the off-site property interests required to construct such public improvements. If Property Owners fail to do so, Property Owners shall, at least 120 days pdor to submittal of the first final subdivision map for approval, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements under Government Code Sections 66462 and 66462.5 at such time as the CITY decides to acquire the property interests required for the public improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by Property Owners of all costs incurred by the CITY if the CITY decides to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security for a portion of those costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the CITY at Property Owners' cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the CITY prior to commencement of the appraisal. To the extent that such off-site improvements, or the construction of any substantial infrastructure on-site, substantially benefit other property owners or other portions of the jurisdiction of limits of the CITY, the CITY agrees to assist Property Owners to the fullest extent possible in obtaining reimbursement or other fair share contribution by such other benefited property owners. Such assistance may include, without limitation, conditioning the approval of development projects proposed by such benefited property owners upon such owners' contribution, on a fair share, pro-rata basis, to the construction cost of such improvements. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the CITY agrees with respect to the infrastructure improvements which are adjacent to and benefit other properties (whether such properties are undeveloped or developed), any further discretionary approvals sought by such property owners shall be conditioned to require fair share reimbursement to Property Owners for construction and related costs incurred in providing such improvements to the extent legally permissible. 3. Public Financinq. The Parties hereby acknowledge that substantial public improvements must be funded in order to contribute to the Park Fee, Equestrian Fee and School Fees and the remainder of the Project Site and that public financing of a substantial portion of these improvements will be critical to the economic viability of the Project. Subject to CITY's ability to make all findings required by applicable law and complying with all applicable legal procedures and requirements, the CiTY agrees to cooperate with and assist Property Owners to the fullest extent possible in developing Development Agreement 14 Richland Communities, Inc. and implementing a public financing plan for the construction of the public infrastructure improvements. The implementation of such plan may include, without limitation, the formation of one or more assessment districts, or Mello-Roos community facilities districts, or the issuance of bonds, certificates of participation, or other debt securities necessary to implement such plan. All formation costs shall be borne by Property Owners subject to reimbursement by the Community Facilities District. J. Creation of the Landscape and Street Li.clhting Maintenance District The CITY agrees to promptly form the necessary Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code Sections 22500 et seq (the "Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972") for the Project development to encompass the Project Site as well as the area being annexed by the CITY. However, the Property Owners shall annex to the existing Street Lighting District. The Property Owners shall pay for the formation of the LMD. The Parties agree that the LMD must be established no later than recordation of the first final tract map and that the CITY may create an LMD, which allow annexation of other areas. In addition, if outside agencies, upon their review and approval of various components of the project, impose any non-standard improvements that require extraordinary maintenance responsibilities of the CITY, the CITY may impose the creation additional maintenance districts upon the proposed development. Upon formation of the LMD, the CITY (through the LMD) shall assume full responsibility for the maintenance, repair and replacement of the improvements to be maintained by the LMD pursuant to the LMDs governing documents. The Parties also acknowledge that assessments for the LMDs are collected annually in June, and to the extent that assessments are collected through the LMD for the period ending June 2006, the CITY may' request, and the Property Owners agree to provide, a reasonable cash deposit to fund the LMD. The CITY shall promptly upon receipt of assessments the following June, reimburse Property Owners for any such cash advances to fund the LMDs. Section 3. ANNUAL REVIEW A. Good Faith Compliance pursuant to California Government Code Section 65866.1, the CITY shall once every twelve (12) months during the term of this Development Agreement, review the extent of good faith substantial compliance by Property Owners with the terms of this Development Agreement; provided, however, that it is intended that this review shall apply to the Project Site as a whole, as opposed to each individual property owner who may own a parcel comprising the Project Site. In connection with such annual review, Property Owners shall provide such information as may reasonably be requested by the CITY in order to determine whether any provisions of this Agreement have been breached by Property Owners. If at any time prior to the review period there is an issue concerning a Property Owners' compliance with the terms of this Development Agreement, the provisions of this Section 3 shall apply. B. Certificate of Compliance If Property Owners are found to be in compliance with this Development Agreement after annual review, the City Planner shall, upon written request by Property Owners, issue a certificate of compliance ("Certificate of Compliance") to Property Owners stating that, based upon information known to the CITY, the Development Agreement remains in effect and Property Owners are not in default. The Certificate of Development Agreement 15 Richland Communities, Inc. /~_~ Compliance shall be in recordable form and shall contain such information as shall impart constructive record of notice of compliance. Properly Owners may record the Certificate of Compliance in the Official Records of the County of San Bernardino. C. Findin.q of Default If, upon completion of the annual review, the City Planner intends to find that Property Owners have not complied in good faith with the material terms of this Agreement (a "Default"), he shall first give wdtten notice of such effect to the Property Owners, pursuant to Section 3, Annual Review, subsection M - Notices, of this Agreement. The notice shall be accompanied by copies of all staff reports, staff recommendations and other information conceming Property Owners' compliance with the terms of this Development Agreement as the CITY may possess and which is relevant to determining Property Owners' performance under this Development Agreement. The notice shall specify in detail the grounds and all facts allegedly demonstrating such noncompliance, so Property Owners may address the issues raised on a point-by-point basis. Property Owners shall have twenty (20) days after its receipt of such notice to file a written response with the City Planner. Within 10 days after the expiration of such 20-day response period, the City Planner shall notify Property Owners whether he has determined that Properly Owners are in Default under this Development Agreement ("Notice of Default"). Such Notice of Default shall specify the instances in which the Property Owners have allegedly failed to comply with this Development Agreement and the terms under which compliance can be obtained. The Notice of Default shall also specify a reasonable time for Property Owners to meet the terms of compliance, which time shall not be less than thirty (30) days from the date the Notice of Default was served on the Property Owners, and which shall be reasonably related to the time necessary to bring Proper'tX Owners' performance into good faith compliance. D. Riaht to Appeal Upon receipt of the Notice of Default, the property Owners may appeal the City Planner's decision directly to the City Council. Such appeal shall be initiated by filing a written notice of appeal with the City Clerk within the (10) calendar days following the Property Owners' receipt of the Notice of Default~ The hearing on such appeal shall be scheduled in accordance with Section 17.02.080 of the CITY Development Code. At the hearing, Property Owners shall be entitled to submit evidence and to address all the issues raised by the Notice of Default. If, after considering all the evidence presented at the hearing, the City Council finds and determines on the basis of substantial evidence the Property Owners are in Default, then the City Council shall specify in writing to Property Owners the instances in which the Property Owners has failed to comply and the terms under which compliance can be obtained, and shall also specify a reasonable time for Property Owners to meet the terms of compliance, which time shall not be less than thirty (30) days from the date of such writing from the City Council and which shall be reasonably related to the time necessary to bring Property Owners' performance into good faith compliance. In the event of a Notice of Default, the timeframe for compliance in Section 3 - Annual Review, subsection C - Finding of Default, of this Agreement cannot be enforced during this appeal process. E. Property Owners' Cure Ri.qhts If property Owners are in Default under this Development Agreement, it shall have a reasonable period of time to cure such Default before action is taken by the CITY to terminate this Development Agreement or to otherwise amend or limit Property Owners' rights under this Development Agreement. In no event shall such cure period Development Agreement 16 Richland Communities, Inc. be less than the time set forth in the finding of Default made under Sections 3C or 3D above (as applicable) or less than the time reasonably necessary to cure such Default. Any such cure period shall be extended by force majeure circumstances described in Section 2D5 above. Section 4. ENFORCEMENT A. Enforcement by Either Party Subject to all requirements mandated by applicable state or federal or other law, this Development Agreement shall be enforceable by any of the parties to this Agreement. B. Cumulative Remedies In addition to any other rights or remedies, any of the Parties may institute legal action to cure, correct or remedy any Default (to the extent otherwise permitted herein and in Government Code Section 65864 et seq. or any successor laws and regulations), to enforce any covenant or agreement herein in this Development Agreement or to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation, including suits for declaratory relief, specific performance, and relief in the nature of mandamus. All of the remedies described above shall be cumulative and not exclusive of one another, and the exercise of any one or more of the remedies shall not constitute a waiver or election with respect to any other available remedy. The provisions of this Section 4B are not intended to modify other provisions of the Development Agreement and are not intended to provide additional remedies not otherwise permitted by law. C. Attorney's Fees In any legal proceedings brought by either party to enforce any covenant or any of the Parties' dghts or remedies under this Development Agreement including, without limitation, any action for declaratory or equitable relief, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and all reasonable costs, expenses and disbursements in connection with such action. Any such attorneys' fees and other expenses incurred by either of the Parties in enforcing a judgment in its favor under this Development Agreement, shall be recoverable separately from and in addition to any other amount included in this judgment, and such attorneys' fees obligation is intended to be severable from the other previsions of this Development Agreement and to survive and not be merged into any such judgment. Section 5. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS A. Successors and Assigns Subject to the provisions of Section 1C above, the terms of this DeveJopment Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Padies, and their successors and assigns. Insofar as this Development Agreement refers to Property Owners, as defined herein, if the rights under this Development Agreement are assigned, the term "Property Owners" shall refer to any such successor or assign. B. Project as a Private Undertakin.q It is specifically understood and agreed by and between the Parties that the Project is a private development, that neither party is acting as the agent of the other in any respect under this Development Agreement, and that each of the Parties is an Development Agreement 17 Richland Communities, Inc. independent contracting entity with respect to the terms, covenants and conditions contained in this Development Agreement. No partnemhip, joint venture, or other association of any kind is formed by this Development Agreement. The only relationship between the CITY and Property Owners is that of a government entity regulating the development of pdvate property and the owner of such private property. C. Captions The captions of this Development Agreement are for convenience and reference only and shall in no way define, explain, modify, construe, limit, amplify or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of any of the provisions of this Development Agreement. D. Mortqa,qe Protection 1. Discretion to Encumber. This Development Agreement shall not prevent or limit Property Owners, in any manner, at Property Owners' sole discretion, from encumbering the Project or any portion of the Project or any improvements on the Project, by any mortgage, deed of trust or other security device securing financing with respect to all or any part of the Project or any improvements thereon (a "Mortgage"). 2. Effect of Default. This Development Agreement shall be superior and senior to any mortgage subsequently placed upon the property, or any portion thereof, or any improvement thereon, including the lien of any mortgage or deed of trust. Despite the foregoing, breach of any provision of this Development Agreement shall not defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith for value. 3. Mortqaqee Not Obliqated. Notwithstanding anything in this Development Agreement to the contrary, (a) any holder of the beneficial interest under a Mortgage ("Mortgagee") may acquire to or possession of all or any portion of the Project or any improvement thereon pursuant to the remedies provided by its Mortgage, whether by judicial or non-judicial foreclosure, deed in lieu of foreclosure, or otherwise, and such Mortgagee shall not have any obligation under this Development .Agreement to construct, fund or otherwise perform any affirmative obligation or affirmative covenant of Property Owners hereunder or to guarantee such performance, and Mortgagee may, after acquiring title to all or any portion of the Project as aforesaid, assign or otherwise transfer the Project or any such portion thereof to any person or entity, and upon the giving of notice of such assignment or transfer to the CITY and the assumption by the assignee or transferee of the obligations of the Property Owners with respect to the Property Owners or portion thereof so acquired which arise or accrue from and after the date of assignment or transfer, Mortgagee shall be relieved and discharged of and from any and all further obligations or liabilities under this Development Agreement with respect to the Project or portion thereof so assigned or transferred; and (b) the consent of CITY shall not be required for the acquisition of all or any portion of the Project by any purchaser at a foreclosure sale conducted pursuant to the terms of any Mortgage, and such purchaser shall, by virtue of acquiring title to the Project or such portion thereof, be deemed to have assumed all obligations of Property Owners with respect to the Project or portion thereof so acquired which arise or accrue subsequent to the purchase date, but such purchaser shall not be responsible for any prior defaults of Property Owners; provided, however, that in either of the instances referred to in clauses (a) or (b) above, to the extent any obligation or covenant to be performed by Property Owners is a condition to granting of a specific benefit or to the performance of a specific covenant by Development Agreement 18 Richland Communities, Inc. /~--4:~ CITY, the performance thereof shall continue to be a condition precedent to the CITY's granting of such benefit and performance of such covenant hereunder. 4. Notice of Default to Mortqaqee: Ri,qht of Modqa.qee to Cure. If a Mortgagee files with the City Clerk, a written notice requesting a copy of any Notice of Default given Property Owners under this Development Agreement and specifying the address for delivery thereof, the CITY shall deliver to such Mortgagee, concurrently with delivery thereof to Property Owners, any notice given to Property Owners with respect to any claim of the CITY that Property Owners have not complied with the terms of this Development Agreement or is otherwise in Default under this Development Agreement. Each such Mortgagee shall have the right (but not the obligation) for a period of thirty (30) days after the expiration of any cure pedod given to Properly Owners with respect to such Default, to cure such default; provided, however, that if any such Default cannot, with diligence, be remedied or cured within such thirty (30) day period, then such Mortgagee shall have such additional time as may be necessary to remedy or cure such Default, if such Mortgagee commences to remedy or cure within such thirty (30) day period, and thereafter diligently pursues and completes such remedy or cure. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the Default is of a nature which can only be cured by Mortgagee by obtaining possession, such Mortgagee shall be deemed to have remedied or cured such Default if such Mortgagee shall, within such thirty (30) day period, commences efforts to obtain possession and carry the same forward with diligence and continuity through implementation of foreclosure, appointment of a receiver or otherwise, and shall thereafter remedy or cure or commence to remedy or cure the Default within the cure period specified in Section 3E above. 5. Bankruptcy. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 5D4 above, if a Mortgagee is prohibited from commencing or prosecuting foreclosure or other appropriate proceedings in the nature thereof to obtain possession of the Project Site by any process or injunction issued by any court or by any reason of any action by any court having jurisdiction of any bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding involving Property Owners, Mortgagee shall for the purposes of this Development Agreement be deemed to be proceeding with diligence and continuity to obtain possession of the Property during the period of such prohibition if Mortgagee is proceeding diligently to terminate such prohibition. 6. Amendment to Development Agreement. The CITY and Properly Owners agree not to modify this Development Agreement or to allow this Development Agreement to be modified or amended in any way, or cancel this Development Agreement, without the prior written consent of each Mortgagee, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Notwithstanding anything stated above to the contrary, the CITY and Property Owners shall cooperate in including in this Development Agreement, by suitable implementing agreement from time to time, any provision which may reasonably be requested by a proposed Mortgagee for the purpose of implementing the modgagee-protection provisions contained in this Development Agreement and allowing such Mortgagee reasonable means to protect or preserve the lien of the Modgage on the occurrence of a default under the terms of this Development Agreement. The CITY and Property Owners each agree to execute and deliver (acknowledge, if necessary for recording purposes) any implementing agreement necessary to effect such request; provided, however, that any such implementing agreement shall not in any material respect adversely effect any rights of the CITY under this Development Agreement or be materially inconsistent with the substantive Development Agreement 19 Richland Communities, Inc. provisions of this Development Agreement, the Project Entitlements and the Existing Laws. E. Consent Where the consent or approval of any of the Parties is required in or necessary under this Development Agreement, unless the context otherwise indicates, such consent or approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. F. Entire A,qreement This Development Agreement and the documents attached to and referred to in this Development Agreement constitute the entire agreement between Parties with respect to the subject matter of this Development Agreement. G. Further Actions and Entitlements Each of the Parties shall cooperate with and provide reasonable assistance to the other to the extent contemplated under this Development Agreement in the performance of all obligations under this Development Agreement and the satisfaction of the conditions of this Development Agreement. H. Governin,q Law This Development Agreement including, without limitation, its existence, validity, construction and operation, and the rights of each of the Parties shall be determined in accordance with the laws of the State of California. I. Recording The City Clerk shall cause a copy of this Development Agreement to be recorded in the office of the Recorder of the County of San Bemardino no later than ten (10) days following the effective date of this Development Agreement. Once any lot or parcel in the Project has been improved with a structure pursuant to this Development Agreement for which the CITY has issued a Certificate of Occupancy, this Development Agreement shall be deemed terminated with respect to such lot or parcel. While Parties intend for such termination to be effective without further documentation, the CITY agrees to execute such documentation as a Title Company shall reasonably require to evidence such termination t the public record. J. Time Tim~ is of the essence in this Development Agreement and of each and every term and condition of this Development Agreement. K. Waiver The fa~ure of any of the Parties at any time to seek redress for any violation of this Development Agreement or any applicable law or regulation or to insist upon the strict performance of any term or condition shall not prevent any subsequent act or omission of the same or similar nature which would have originally constituted a breach of or default under this Development Agreement from having all the force and effect of an original breach or default, and such subsequent act or omission may be proceeded against to the fullest extent provided by this Development Agreement. No provision of this Development Agreement shall be deemed to have been waived by a party unless the waiver is in writing and signed by any of the Parties. Development Agreement 20 Richland Communities, Inc. / ?/ L. Partial Invalidity If any term, covenant, condition or provision of this Development Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remainder of the provisions of this Development Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be affected, impaired or invalidated thereby. M. Notices All notices between the CITY and Property Owners and any transferee under this Development Agreement, shall be in writing and shall be given by personal delivery, mail or facsimile. Notice by personal delivery or facsimile shall be deemed effective upon delivery of such notice to the party for which it is intended at the address set forth below {or, in the case of a transferee in a wdtten notice to the CITY). Notice by mail shall be deemed effective upon receipt or rejection of the addressee. The Parties' current address are as follows: To CITY: Mr. Jack Lam, AICP City Manager City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga CA 91730 With Copies to: Mr. James Markman City Attorney Richards, Watson, & Gershon One Civic Center Circle Brea CA 92821 To property Owners: Mr. John Schafer Hill Country S.A. Ltd./Richland Tracy, Ltd. 4100 Newport Place, Suite 800 Newport Beach CA 92660-1403 With CopJes to: Either Parties may change its mailing address or the person to whom notices are to be sent at any time by giving written notice of such change to the other Parties in the manner provided above. N. Indemnification Property Owners hereby agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the CITY and its Council members, representatives, agents, officers, attorneys, and employees (the "Indemnified Parties") from and against any third party claim, action, or proceeding against the' Indemnified Parties to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Development Agreement, the Land Use Entitlements, or both. Development Agreement 21 Richland Communities, Inc. /¢,,2./ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have duly executed this Development Agreement as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA RICHLAND TRACY, Ltd. a Florida limited partnership By: Richland Ventures Inc., a Florida Corporation, its general partner By: By: Mayor Name/Title Date: Date: ATTESTED TO: HILL COUNTRY, S.A. Ltd., a Texas limited partnership By: Richland Stone Oak, Inc. a Texas Corporation, its general partner By:. City Clerk Name (Pdnt): Date: Title: Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Date: Attorney's for Hill Country S.A., Ltd. Attorneys for Richland Tracy, Ltd. Development Agreement 22 Richland Communities, Inc. / 7~.,~ EXHIBIT "A" DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DRC2002-00156 LEGAL DESCRIPTION REAL PROPERTY IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL NO. 1 (225-083-01) THE SOUTHWEST ¼ OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 , AND THE WEST ~/~ OF THE SOUTHEAST ¼ OF THE SOUTHWEST %, ALL IN SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP I NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERHARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE SOUTH 30 FEET THEREOF. PARCEL NO. 2 (225-083-13) THE NORTHEAST ¼ OF THE SOUTHEAST ¼ OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼ OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN ERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF. PARCEL NO. 3 (225-083-12) THE NORTHEAST % OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼ OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP I NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT OF SAID LANDS. EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL MINERALS, MINERAL INTEREST, OIL, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES, WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO ENTER UPON, PROCESS OR USE ANY PORTION OF THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND ABOVE A DEPTH OF 500 FEET BELOW THE SURFACE, AS RESERVED TO RODERICK STEVENSON, ET AL, BY. DEED RECORDED SEPTEMBER 11, 1981, INSTRUMENT NO. 81-202051, OFFICIAL RECORDS. P_ARCEL NO. 4 (225-083-15) THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH % OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼ OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT OF SAID LAND ON FILE IN THE DISTRICT LAND OFFICE, LYING WEST OF A LINE DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID sOUTH % OF NORTHWEST ¼ OF THE sOUTHWEST ¼, SAID POINT BEING NORTH 89°10'42" EAST, 356.99 FEET, FROM THE NORTHWEST cORNER OF SAID SOUTH % OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼ AND SAID CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF ETIWANDA AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH 15037'04" EAST, 476.71 FEET; THENCE BY A 1000 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT, A DISTANCE OF 213.30 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH % OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼ AND POINT BEING NORTH 89010'35'' EAST, 563.40 FEET, FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SOUTH % OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼, SAID CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF ETIWANDA AVENUE. PARCEL NO. 5 (225-083-16) THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH ~ OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼ OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT, LYING EAST OF A LINE DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH ~ OF THE NORTHVVEST './, OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼, SAID POINT BEING NORTH 89°10'42" EAST, 356.99 FEET FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SOUTH ¼ OF THE NORTHWEST Y, OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼, AND SAID CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF ETIWANDA AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH 15°37'04" EAST, 476.41 FEET; THENCE BY A 1000-FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT, A DISTANCE OF 213.30 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH ~ OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF THE sOUTHWEST ¼, SAID POINT BEING NORTH 89°10'35" EAST, 563.40 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID ½ OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼, SAID CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF ETIWANDA AVENUE. EXCEPTING THEREFROM AN UNDIVIDED ~ INTEREST IN AND TO ALL OIL, GAS, MINERALS AND/OR OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES IN AND UNDER SAID LAND BELOW A DEPTH OF 500 FEET BELOW THE SURFACE THEREOF, BUT WITHOUT ANY RIGHTS TO ENTER UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND OR TO THE TOP 500 FEET OF THE SUBSURFACE THEREOF.. PARCEL NO. 6 THE sOUTHERLY 30 FEET OF THE SOUTH ~ OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE EAST 20 FEET. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT BY DEED RECORDED MARCH 8, 1951, IN BOOK 2730, PAGE 415, OFFICIAL RECORDS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL NO. 7 THE NORTH '~ OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF THE SOUTHWEST ~./, OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT OF SAID LAND APPROVED BY THE SURVEYOR GENERAL, NOVEMBER 13, 1681, AND ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMEN'E. APN: 0225-083-01-0-000 AND 0225-083-12°0-000 AND 0225-083-13-0-000 AND 0225-083o15-0-000 AND 0225-083-20-0-000 AND 0225-083-16-0-000 AND 0225-083-24-0-000. pREPARED UNDER MY SUPERVISION: LICENSE EXPIRES 6-30-2004 ~ m [xp. 6/30/2004 No. 3640 G:'~05''10''L EGALS~'ANN EX'D OC ~ BOUNDARY MAP: s~.c~=.c~. NWl/4 PARCEL 6 N~N 225-083-20 · ' NOT A PART NEll4 SW 1/4 .- .O APN 22,5-083'12 .... APN 225.083-16 APN 2254}83-13 SEtM ~1/4 SWtM ~ ~14 '.. __..: ~TAP~ ~'~ ~ ~o~W M~WA~~ ~SEMENT NOTES: ~A~~~0~ (.~T0~) ~ DEVELOPM~ AGREEMENT ~XHI~I T~CT NO. 160; PROJ~( EXHiBiT "'g"' sr DEVELOPMEN AGREEMENT EXHIBI TRACT NO, t60'] TENTATI~ · .~' TRACT MI EXHIBIT NO, I / LOT SUMMARY "'8OUI'H p~SE' (8~UARE I.~.~ Ir) ~ i DEVELOPMEI~I ~ AGREEMENT EXHIBI TRACT NO. 160'~ TENTATI% EXHIBIT NO. 2 '/7~ TRACT LOT _e~)MMARY "NORTH pHASE"_ (SQU~"~E .-'~ = =_= .-'_~.=- _-F.=_=~ LOT _e:lUU&;y"SOU"rH I~A~E" (~QIJ~ F~ ,,: = ,- ""= = F= : -' = '" - = ' : ?- = DEVELOPMEI~ := ::" ;; ' = - - = "'~ = : '=-- AGREEMENTEXHIBI == " :' ' "'~'- ' - '='- : '"= '= TI~,CT 160'; '"' = - ~-.-- - NO. ;- '-" = '- ,,- ..= = NO 3 EXHIBIT '----'--- LOT SUMWY -)lorn4 PHAJr (HUARE ~ : ,~ ..-. . .: LOT SUMMARY -SOlYrH PHASE' (~UARE FEEN ;~ ~ ~ "' AGREEMENT EXHIBI *2 TUCT NO 1607 M~ EXHIBIT NO. 4 ~[ TUC~ DEVELOPMEN' AGREEMENT EXHIBI' TRACT NO. 1607 CONCEPTUAL GR~DIN, EXHIBIT NO. 5 Pc,.,. ~' ') Sheet 5 of DEVELOPMEN AGREEMENT EXHIBI TRACT NO. t 607 CONCEPTU~ EXHIBIT NO. 6 DEVELOPMEg AGREEMENT EXHIB T~CT NO. CONCEPTU~ EXHIBIT NO. DEVELOPMEFI AGREEMENT EXHIBI TRACT NO. '160'i CONCEPTUJ G~DING P~ EXHIBIT NO. 8 /~ ~.~_~_~ DEVELOPME! AGREEMENT EXHIB TRACT NO. '160' CONCEPTU GRADIN. G.~P~ EXHIBIT NO. 9 DEVELOPMEN AGREEMENT EXHIBI TRACT NO. CONCEPTU,~ EXHIBIT NO. 10 GRADING PLA AGREEMENT EXHIB TRACT NO. 1 CONCEPTU~ GRADING EXHIBIT NO. t I /?~, .... ~_.__~ :~~""~:~"' DEVELOPME! AGREEMENT EXHIB TRACT NO. '160' CONCEPTU, GRADING PI. EXHIBIT NO. t2 CONCEPTU, EXHIBIT NO. t ~ o~o,.o ~u DEVELOPMEN' AGREEMENT EXHIBI' T~CT NO. CONCE~UA EXHIBIT NO. 14 O~DINO P~ s~ ~'~ DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT ",-- ~ SECTIONS SECTIO~N T)-D' SECTION 'E.,.E' DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT TRACT NO. 16072 GRADING I::YLIII::IIT Mn ,I R S~E..C~!O_.~S Sh~et_~_6_o_f_..:L7. ~- '- DEVELOPMEN' · ~ AGREEMENT EXHIBI s~c~*-* . G~DIN .... ~ ..... SECTION EXHIBIT NO. 17 ~,m~ NO. 19 ' '" FOR E/~TAVEN .( ,:.;" SECTION TO EXISllNG *IUPROVEMEN~, SEE EXHIBIT ~ __ NO. 20 FOR WILSON AVENUE SECTION DEVELOPMEH AGREEMENT EXHIBI TRACT NO. 160'] CIRCULATI0 EXHIBIT NO. 18 IMPROVEME.I Sh~"~8~f" l'q'5' ..... ~. 4T (PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS) '] - [: _- -_' ~ [~' . ~).5 t05' 1,4' _._ .~. 4' 4' ':: :':: '-. ~.,~ I /--SLOPE EXIST. TRACT-- ~ ;~, - : · GRADED SLOPES - "~-"-..-' '~."':': ~: EAST AVENUE (NORTH OF WILSON AVENUE) · EAST AVENUE DEDICATION 12' 32' ..... '.-. _~ 36'PROPOSED ~ ,. '!-:}J.~ f::':' ~!~!~:-. ::::' ...... IMPROVEMENTS S..: ::~" " A.C. BER~ ..:,::}: ~:: ..... :. ':":. SLOPE - 1/4t1' 2~ - ' ' .: EAST AVENUE (SOUTH OF WILSON AVENUE TO SUMMIT AVENUE) N.T.& (IMPROVEMENTS EASED ON 'CONDITIONS OF .~=PROVAL' FOR T.T. 16113) DEVELOPME! AGREEMENT EXHIB TRACT NO. '!60' '~tPICAL STRE EXHIBIT NO. t9 SECT,Ol s~TT~, iq - ..... WILSON AVENUE (24TH STREET) ..~ .... ~ ~.....,,.- / ~ ~ t II1..~' ETIWANDA AVENUE DEVELOPMEN' AGREEMENT EXHIBI' TRACT NO. 1607 TYPICAL STREE EXHIBIT NO. 20 S-CT,O- TABLE 6,2 PROJECT FAIR SHARE INTERSECTION TRAFFIC CONTRIBUTION i i YEAR 2020 PROJECT ; WITH TOTAL % OF PROJECT TOTAL EXISTING, PROJECT PROJECT NEW NEW COST iNTERSECT!ON.~SEGMENT COST TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC SHARE EtiwanCa Ave. - West (NS} at: $15.734 · Wilson Ave. ~,EW} $120~000 319 ; 1,402 142 1,083 13.1% Eliwanda Ave.. Ea~ (NS} at: · Wilson Ave. (EW} $120,000 291 i 1.450 160 1,159 13.8% $16.566 ! · SummitA';e. (EW} $120,000 928 i 1,983 112 1,055 10.6% $12.739 · Hiqhland Ave. {EW] $309,000 1,214 2,209 109 995 11.0% $33,850 East Ave. (NS) at: .... , ' $120.000 0 1,305 165 1,305 12.6% $15,172 · WIson Ave. t=vV; 1.656 106 1 140 9.2% , $~,2~2 DEVEI. OPMEN AGREEMENT EXHIBI TRACT NO. 160'~ EXHIBIT NO, 21 REGIONAL TRANSPORTAT,(] COST ESTIMAT! ,~ ~ s~.T~"~: /7~ .......... EXHIBIT 7-A CIRCULATION RECOMMENDATIONS [C~T~UCT ~nW,~ND~ Av.~. FRO~ T~ ~e~r~ ~ SITE r,,,,.,,,.,,~.,,-~:,,,,,,=, ......... g ......... ,~:..:,~ ~ engineering ~ [-.w~ m~::~ <~s ~e=~. ~= ~.. ~ g ro~p~ IRC. AGREEMENT EXHIBI T~CT NO. ~60~ EXHIBIT NO. 22 REGIONAL T~NSPORTATIOIMPROVEMEN1 B~IN DEVELOPMEN' AGREEMENT EXHIBr TINCT NO. t607: INTERIM DETENTIO BASIN ORDINANCE NO. 726 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2003-00750, TO CHANGE THE DISTRICT DESIGNATION FROM VERY LOW RESIDENTIAL (.1-2 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO LOW RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR 63.5 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT THE NORTHERLY END OF WARDMAN BULLOCK ROAD AT THE INTERSECTION OF COLONBERO ROAD; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF-APN: 0225-084-04, 0226-081-09 AND 10, 0226-082-29. A. RECITALS. 1. Henderson Creek Properties, LLC (the ';Applicant") seeks approval of a series of actions related to the annexation of land from unincorporated San Bernardino County into the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the approval of a General Plan Amendment, Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16324, and associated Development Agreement. The actions also include the development of 123 single-family housing units on approximately (55.3 acres and designations of flood control, utility corridor, and open space on approximately 25.1 acres of land. Another 10 acres is also proposed for annexation and is currently used for a utility easement and for flood control purposes. The total area to be annexed is approximately 100.4 acres. The density of the development is approximately 1.9 dwelling units per gross acre. These series of actions and approvals are hereinafter defined in this Ordinance as the "Project." 2. The Applicant has submitted the following applications relating to the Project: Annexation DRC2003-00753, General Plan Land Use Amendment DRC2003- 00749, Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003-00750, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16324, and Development Agreement DRC2003-00751 (collectively the "Project Applications"). These Project Applications, as well as the appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16324, constitute the matters involving the Project, which are submitted to the City Council for decision and action. 3. The Applicant's request for Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003- 00750 is for the amendment to the District Designation for 63.5 acres of land from Very Low Residential (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) to Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre), for that portion of land depicted on Exhibit "A" to this Ordinance. 4. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Flood Control/Utility Corridor and Hillside Residential and is comprised of vacant land, utility corridors, and scattered single-family residences. The property to the west is designated Conservation and Flood Control/Utility Corridor and includes Etiwanda Creek Flood Control basins and conservation area. The property to the east is designated Very Low Residential (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) and includes single-family residential development (Sheridan Estates Tract 13564). The property to the south is designated Flood Control/Utility Corridor, Conservation, and Very Low Residential and is comprised of vacant land, utility corridors, and one single-family dwelling, and is the site of the City's proposed 300 acre (Etiwanda Creek) annexation, which includes a proposed General Plan Amendment from Very Low Residential (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) to Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 80 acres of land. 5. On May 12, 2004, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Project, and after receipt of public testimony, closed the hearing on that date. On May 12, 2004, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 04-59, recommending approval of Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003-00750 along with other associated applications. 6. On June 2, 2004, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Final Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") and the Project, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and to present evidence regarding the Final EIR and the Project. After the receipt of public testimony, the City Council continued the public hearing on the Final EIR and the Project to its regularly scheduled meeting of June 16, 2004. 7. On June 16, 2004, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a continued public hearing on the Final EIR and the Project, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and to present evidence regarding the Final E IR and the Project, and after the receipt of public testimony, closed the hearing. 8. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. B. ORDINANCE. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby find, determine, and ordain as follows: SECTION 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. SECTION 2: Based upon the facts and information contained in the record of this project, the City Council makes the following findings and statements, and takes the following actions, pursuant to the California Environmental QualityAct ("CEQA") (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. seq.): a. The City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, prepared the Draft Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for the Project, including certain technical appendices (the "Appendices") to the Draft EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 2003111057). The Draft EIR was circulated for a 45- day public review and comment period from February 20, 2004, through April 5, 2004. Comments were received during that period and written responses were prepared and sent to all persons and entities submitting comments. Those comments and the responses thereto have been included in the Final EIR, as well as the revisions to the Draft EIR and a copy of the Draft Development Agreement (Appendix K). Those documents, together with the Draft EIR and Appendices, comprise the Final EIR. b. The City Council finds that the Final EIR was completed pursuant to CEQA, and the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA, 14 California Code of Regulations, Section 15000, et. seq. ("the Guidelines"). By Resolution No. 04-207, the City Council has certified the Final EIR as being in compliance with the requirements of CEQA. c. The City Council finds that the Final EIR was presented to the City Council and that the City Council reviewed and considered the information in the Final EIR and has reached its own conclusions with respect to the Project and as to whether and how to approve the various components of the project approvals. d. The City Council finds that the Final EIR represents the independent judgment of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and adequately addresses the impacts of the Project and imposes appropriate mitigation measures for the Project. e. Public Resources Code Section 21081 provides that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been completed which identifies one or more significant environmental effects unless the public agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant effect: i) Changes or alterations have been required in, er incorporated into the project, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects thereof as identified in the completed environmental impact report. ii) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and such changes have been adopted by such agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. iii) Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental impact report. f. The City Council finds, based upon the Initial Study, the Final EIR, public comments, public agency comments, and the entire record before it, that the Proiect may create significant impacts in the areas of Land Use and Planning, Traffic and Circulation, Noise, Geology and Soils, Hydrology and Water Quality, Public Health and Safety, Biological Resources, Air Quality, and Public Services. However, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Project, which will mitigate and in some cases, avoid the significant impacts. The specific changes and alterations required, and a brief explanation of the rationale for the findings with regard to each impact, are contained in the "CEQA Findings" for the Project (Exhibit "F" to the June 16, 2004 City Council Staff Report) and are incorporated herein by reference. In addition to the rationale and explanation contained in the "CEQA Findings", the City Council makes the following additional findings regarding the impacts of the Project on the resources and services listed in this paragraph: i) Land Use and Planninq. The Etiwanda North Specific Plan requires a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet, and the Final EIR indicates that the Project would be inconsistent with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, because some of the proposed residential lots would be less than 20,000 square feet. With the approval of the proposed Specific Plan Amendment that will change the land use district from Very Low Residential (0.1 - 2 dwelling units per acre) to Low Residential (2 - 4 dwelling units per acre) for the 65.3 acre area designated for residential development, the Project would then be consistent with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. As a result, the Project site may be developed with lots less than 20,000 square feet. In addition, in order to address the reduction in lot sizes and the likely effect of lots averaging 18,000 square feet, with a minimum size of 14,025 square feet, on the ability of those property owners to own and maintain horses on those lots, a mitigation measure is being imposed (Mitigation Measure LU-2) to require the developer to pay an in-lieu fee to the City for the development of an equestrian center that would serve residents in the area desiring to own and maintain horses. The Etiwanda North Specific Plan also requires a particular design and development theme that is consistent with the character of Old Etiwanda by having access to trails, provisions for views of the mountains and complying with certain design requirements for landscaping, walls, fencing, lighting and the community's entry points. Mitigation Measure LU-1 is being imposed that requires the project developer to submit a landscape plan that is consistent with the City's neighborhood Theme Plan as contained in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that any inconsistency of the Project with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. ii) Traffic and Circulation. The Final EIR indicates that the proposed Project will increase vehicle trips and impact the level of service along arterial streets and intersections. Specifically, the Final EIR found that Project traffic, together with other anticipated traffic, will likely cause traffic flow to be deficient by experiencing a Level of Service (LOS) of "E" or "F" at the intersections of Wardman-Bullock Road (NS) at Wilson Avenue (EW) and at Etiwanda Avenue (NS) at Banyan Street (EW). Mitigation Measures are imposed to require the developer to construct and widen Wardman-Bullock Road along the Project frontage (Mitigation Measure TC-3), to install a traffic signal at Etiwanda Avenue (NS) and Banyan Street intersection (Mitigation Measure TC-5), to contribute developer fees for other traffic improvements (Mitigation Measures TC-1 and TC-5), and to modify signing and stripping of certain roadways and intersections (Mitigation Measures TC-2 and TC-4). The City's "City-Wide System Fees for Transportation Development" provides for the payment of fees at the time building permits are issued based on a formula adopted by the City Council by resolution. That formula provides for the payment of a fee per dwelling unit of approximately $1,710.03 and a credit against those fees for certain qualifying traffic improvements that mitigate the traffic impacts of the Project. The City is required to use traffic impact fees to fund City-wide and regional roadway and traffic improvements, and as a consequence, the payment of those fees by the project developer will contribute to the mitigation of the Project's impacts to traffic and circulation. Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that traffic at the study intersections will be reduced so that those intersections operate at a LOS "D," and that the impacts of the Project on traffic and circulation will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. iii) Noise. The Final EIR identifies the likelihood of short-term impacts on ambient noise levels during construction of the Project. The primary source of construction noise is heavy equipment associated with construction activities, such as trucks, graders, bulldozers, concrete mixers, cranes and portable generators with high levels of sound generation. Earthmoving equipment is anticipated to create noise ranging between 75 to 90 dB(A) at 50 feet from the source. A mitigation measure has been imposed that will require the construction contractors to adhere to the City's Development Code for hours of construction activity - 6:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, with no construction to take place on Sundays or holidays (Mitigation Measure N-l). Based on this mitigation measure, the City Council finds that the shore term noise impacts from the Project will be reduced to less than significant levels. The Final EIR also identified that noise levels at the facades of homes nearest the Project exit at Wardman-Bullock Road would experience noise near 60 dB CNEL due to vehicular traffic. The Final EIR states that if the property owners of the homes fronting on Wardman- Bullock Road can close their windows and still obtain adequate ventilation, then the goal of reducing the interior noise to a 45 dB(A) CNEL interior noise level would be achieved. A mitigation measure will be imposed to require the developer to install air conditioning units for the residences that front along Wardman-Bullock Road so as to allow window closure during warm days so as to achieve a less than significant interior noise level for those homes with the windows closed (Mitigation Measure N-2). Based on this mitigation measure, the City Council finds that the potential noise impacts of the Project on current and future residents will be mitigated to a less than significant level. iv) GeoloRy and Soils. The Final EIR identifies that development ofthe Project will expose people and structures to risks associated with seismic ground shaking due to regional and local faults located in the area. Mitigation measures are imposed which require the developer to ensure that all grading plans and grading work are done in compliance with the geotechnical report for the Project so that soil and slopes are properly compacted and grading work achieves all seismic requirements (Mitigation Measure GS-1 ), that the developer shall submit building plans which incorporate the recommendations of the geotechnical report for preliminary foundation work, utility trenching, and concrete slabs (Mitigation Measure GS-2), and that all buildings and structures are built to Uniform Building Code and/or Structural Engineers Association of California standards for seismic safety (Mitigation Measure GS-3). Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the effects of seismic shaking on persons and structures will be mitigated to a level that is less than significant. v) HydroloRy and Water Quality. The Final EIR identifies that during storm events, construction activities (particularly vegetation removal, grading and excavation), could affect the amounts of sediments and suspended solid material leaving the site such that water quality downstream of the site could be affected to a level that was potentially significant. Vegetation removal and grading would expose the soil to erosion by wind and rain, and rainfall could carry more sediment off the disturbed areas and adversely affect water quality downstream. In addition, during earthwork and construction activities, pollutants that may be discharged in stormwater include vehicle fluids such as oil, grease and coolants, asphaltic emulsions associated with asphalt-concrete paving, paints and solvents, wood products, and metal and metal plated products. In accordance with the State of California's implementation of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements and the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) requirements imposed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), the Project developer will be required to include Best Management Practices (BMPs)to prevent construction of the Project from polluting surface waters. Compliance with these permitting requirements will require the Project developer and construction crews to comply with a variety of measures, such as limiting clearing and grubbing areas to the limits of the active construction area, using hay bales and sand bags to control erosion during the rainy season, using enclosed storage sheds where possible, utilizing hazardous materials in a manner that avoids contact with the ground, avoiding the application of certain materials during periods of rainfall, washing of equipment or vehicles in a designated place where a sump can be located to collect wash water for proper disposal, and servicing equipment and vehicles off-site. A mitigation measure is imposed to require compliance with these permitting requirements and BMPs (Mitigation Measure HWQ-1 ). The City Council finds that with the imposition of this mitigation measure and after implementation of BMPs set forth in the SWPPP, potentially significant impacts on water quality from construction activity will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. vi) Public Health and Safety. The Final EIR identifies that the frequency of high winds will expose structures and residents to potential damage from extreme wind conditions. In addition, wildfires on adjacent lands, including National Forest land and undeveloped properties, could threaten residential development on the Project site. Specifically, the Final EIR indicates that Santa Ana winds along the front of the mountains can reach hurricane force, with winds in the area of the Project detected at reaching 80 to 100 miles per hour. Damage to roofs, fences, windows and landscaping is possible in these types of conditions. Three mitigation measures are imposed to mitigate the impacts of wind hazard to a less than significant level. Those measures include requirements to utilize optimum building materials and construction techniques as required by the Uniform Building Code, to require disclosure of the potential for high winds in sales documents to prospective homebuyers, and to comply with other mitigation measures for control of particulate matter emissions during grading and construction (Mitigation Measures HS-1, HS-2, HS-3). Compliance with the provisions of the Uniform Building Code has been demonstrated to result in structures that are capable of withstanding winds projected for the Project area without serious damage. With respect to the impacts created by wildfires on adjacent lands, the City Council is particularly familiar with these dsks after the City and surrounding areas recently experienced the Grand Prix fire in October 2003. The City Council also understands that the addition of persons into an area of wildland vegetation increases the number of ignitions (risk), the growth of brush after a fire increases the intensity of new fires in the area (hazard), and the addition of homes and amenities into the same area (value) creates an increased need for fire protection and fuel modification. Design features have already been incorporated into the Project to ensure vegetation areas to the north are separated from residential structures with a trail, a wall and a riprap drainage channel so as to provide approximately 100 feet of distance between chaparral vegetation and the homes. All homes will also be constructed with Class A roofs. Along the western boundary of the site where the wildfire threat is moderate, a six-foot masonry wall and "firewise" landscaping between native vegetation and the homes are to be required. A comprehensive mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure HS-4) requires a detailed landscape plan/fuel modification plan to contain requirements for "firewise" vegetation in specific areas, irrigation plans and specific standards applicable to certain areas of the Project site. In addition, Mitigation Measure HS-5 requires the installation of residential fire sprinklers as a component of the construction. The City Council finds that with the combination of appropriate landscaping, residential fire sprinklers, the introduction of certain new paved surfaces where none currently exist, and implementation of the Fuel Modification Plan will effectively reduce movement of potential fire into the Project area and thereby mitigate impacts to a level of less than significant. vii) Biolo.qical Resources. The proposed Project would result in development of a 65.3 acre area of the site, and the Final EIR indicates that, prior to the Grand Prix fire of October 2003, that area was previously covered with upland sage scrub, disturbed annual grassland and a small area of flat-top buckwheat scrub. Specifically, prior to the Grand Prix fire, the portion of .the site proposed for development had approximately 1.5 acres of disturbed annual grassland, 4.2 acres of disturbed annual grassland dominated by deerweed, 53.5 acres of Upland sage scrub dominated by white sage, and 4.5 acres of flat-top buckwheat scrub. The impacts on the annual grassland areas is not considered significant because of the relatively small area impacted (approximately 1/3 of the total disturbed annual grassland on the site) and because those areas had experienced substantial disturbance from prior weed control measures, and the construction of power line maintenance roads and other roads that cress the property. With respect to upland sage scrub, most of that area was dominated by white sage, which is not considered to be sensitive habitat by the resource agencies that regulate biological resoumes. However, the City Council recognizes that the loss of this plant community for wildlife habitat is important when considering cumulative impacts on this resource. With respect to the fiat-top buckwheat scrub, this is a common species and an indicator of prior disturbance to the land. The Final EIR indicates that no sensitive species of fiat-top buckwheat scrub were found on the site and therefore no impacts were expected to occur. The Final EIR recognizes that much of the vegetation previously found on the site would likely grow back after the fire if no development took place. However, the Biological Assessment not only found no substantial evidence of sensitive plant or wildlife species on the site, but it also found that due to the area already being disturbed by dirt roads for power line maintenance, previous construction activity, commercial harvesting of white sage, and flood control improvements and activities, development of the site would not have a significant impact on biological resources. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Project site is within the boundaries of the North Etiwanda Open Space and Habitat Preservation Program (NEOSHPP), as adopted by the County of San Bernardino. To implement the goals and purposes of that Program, a mitigation measure has been imposed to require the Project developer to acquire and convey to the County, 58 acres of land within or near the NEOSHPP area that support alluvial fan sage scrub and/or upland sage scrub (Mitigation Measure BIO-1 ). This 58 acre area is intended to accomplish a "one to one" mitigation in acreage for the loss of the 53.5 acres of Upland sage scrub and to mitigate the potential loss of habitat for sensitive plants and animal species, and the loss of raptor foraging land. As required by the mitigation measure, the off-site mitigation land shall be equal to or greater in habitat value than that of the Project site. The City Council finds that the conveyance into the NEOSHPP of 58 acres of land by the Project developer would mitigate this impact to a level that is less than significant. viii) Air Quality. The Final EIR identifies that the Project may create significant and unavoidable impacts to Air Quality. Specifically, the Final EIR identifies that emissions from construction related activities are likely to exceed the threshold of significance specified by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). These impacts are considered to be short-term (less than one year) and temporary and can cause nuisance impacts to adjacent land uses in the local area bywayoffugitive dust. One cause ofthese short-term impacts is blowing dust resulting from the grading of the site. In addition, the use of diesel engine equipment during grading and construction along with worker trips is anticipated to create levels of nitrous oxides (NOx) that are also above the SCAQMD's thresholds of significance. Similarly, construction-related emissions, particularly from architectural coatings (painting) and off-road diesel equipment, are anticipated to create significant levels of reactive organic gases (ROG) and nitrous oxides (NO×) that will exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance and result in significant short-term air pollution impacts. A comprehensive mitigation measure is imposed on the Project (Mitigation Measure AQ-1 ) which will require various dust control measures, emission control measures and off-site actions. Included in those measures are requirements to limit the simultaneous disturbance area to as small an area as is possible, terminate soil disturbance and accelerate dust control measures when winds exceed 25 miles per hour, stabilize disturbed areas if construction is de~ayed, require 90-day Iow-NOx tune-ups for off-road equipment, limit idling to 10 minutes for trucks and heavy equipment, encourage carpooling for construction workers, limit lane closures to off~peak travel periods, park construction vehicles off traveled roadways, wet down or cover dirt hauled off-site, wash or sweep access points daily and encourage receipt of construction materials during non-peak traffic hours. The City Council finds that with implementation of the recommended measures, construction emissions will be reduced, and that the Project's contribution to regional emission of criteria pollutants will be minimized. However, the City Council finds that despite the imposition of all these comprehensive mitigation requirements, construction emissions (building phase) will exceed SCAQMD's thresholds for ROG and NOx, and therefore, would remain significant after mitigation. ix) Cumulative Impacts - Air Quality, Noise, and Public Services. The Final EIR provides that this Project, together with the construction of development projects in the vicinity, would likely create cumulative short-term impacts to air quality during construction. This Project would also create a significant cumulative impact to regional air quality because the Project would add incremental pollutants to the South Coast Air Basin in the form of additional vehicle emissions. With respect to noise, the Final EIR indicates that the Project will create shod-term cumulative construction noise impacts and long-term cumulative noise impacts due to increased vehicle trips. With respect to public services (schools), state law (Government Code Section 65995 (h)) provides for the payment of developer fees and deems such payment to be full and complete mitigation of school impacts. Consequently, as a matter of law, the long-term cumulative impacts to schools from this and other projects are deemed to be fully mitigated by the payment of developer fees and the City is precluded, by law, from imposing additional mitigation to address these potential impacts. The City Council finds that noise and air quality impacts associated with increased vehicle trips would remain significant when combined with existing and anticipated construction projects in the vicinity of the Proiect. g. The City Council finds, based on the Final EIR, that after implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the following impacts associated with the proposed Project would remain significant: air quality (short-term impacts and short and long-term cumulative impacts) and noise (short- term and long-term cumulative impacts). h. The Final EIR describes a range of alternatives to the Project that might fulfill basic objectives of the Project. These alternatives include the required "No Project-No Development" alternative, and the "Development Under the Existing Land Use Designation Alternative." Other alternatives that were considered and rejected included the alternative location aitemative and the alternative land use alternative. As set forth below, the alternatives identified in the Final EIR are not feasible because they would not achieve the basic objectives of the Project or would do so only to a much smaller degree and, therefore, leave unaddressed the significant economic, infrastructure, and General Plan goals that the Project is intended to accomplish, and are thus infeasible due to social and economic considerations, and/or they are infeasible because they would not eliminate the adverse environmental impacts of the proposed Project. Accordingly, each of the alternatives is infeasible. In making this finding, the City Council determines as follows: i) The objectives of the Project are: a) To be consistent with, and implement, the established policies and goals of the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, Etiwanda North Specific Plan, City Development Code, and all' other City development guidelines; b) To annex the 90.4 acre Project site and adjacent 10 acre utility easement into the City of Rancho Cucamonga; c) To Integrate the Project with the character of the surrounding neighborhoods and establish a development that results in logical, coordinated growth; d) To establish a Project-wide circulation system that meets regional and local transportation needs and accommodates both vehicles and pedestrians; e) To provide a system of public/community facilities, including trails, open space areas, and landscaping to support the residents of the Project and surrounding area in an efficient and timely manner; f) To provide backbone public infrastructure (i.e., roads, utilities) to serve Project residents and the surrounding community; 2// g) To minimize impacts to, and generate revenues in excess of costs for various public service agencies; and h) To provide quality housing opportunities compatible with existing and planned development that responds to market demands. ii) The "No Project-No Development" Alternative assumes that no new land uses would be constructed on the Project site and that the site would remain vacant and undeveloped. Although this alternative is environmentally superior to the proposed Project, it would not meet the Project objectives. Specifically, it would not meet the Project's objective to provide quality housing that would be compatible with existing and planned development for the area, would not provide a system of public/community facilities, including trails, open space areas, and would not provide landscaping for Project residents and surrounding area residents. Furthermore, as the subject property is under private ownership, the elimination of future development within an area previously approved for residential development would not be legally or financially feasible. Therefore this alternative is rejected. iii) The "Development Under the Existing Land Use Designation Alternative" assumes that the Project site would be developed under the current City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan designation (Very Low Residential). Under this designation, and assuming that the area disturbed by grading is equal to that of the proposed Project, the minimum lot sizes would be 20,000 square feet and the number of lots that could be developed would be approximately 90 rather than the 123 as currently proposed. This reduction in development by approximately 33 dwelling units would result in lower traffic, air quality, and noise impacts than the proposed Project, but would not reduce to less than significance the short-term impacts on air quality from construction-related emissions, cumulative long-term impacts on air quality from Project emissions and cumulative short and long-term noise impacts. In addition, this alternative would not meet the Project objectives to provide quality housing that would be compatible with existing and planned development for the area, would not provide a system of public/community facilities, including trails, open space areas, and would not provide landscaping for Project residents and surrounding area residents. i. Mitigation measures described in the Mitigation Monitoring Program will avoid or substantially lessen the potentially significant environmental effects of the Project. Further, the environmental, physical, social, economic and other benefits of the Project, as set forth in this section and in the "CEQA Findings" for the Project (Exhibit "F" to the June 16, 2004 City Council Staff Report), which is incorporated herein by this reference, outweigh any unavoidable, significant, adverse impacts that may occur as a result of the Project, including short-term impacts on air quality from construction-related emissions and cumulative impacts to air quality and noise. Therefore, due to overriding benefits of the Project and because the alternatives identified in the Final EIR are not feasible, as discussed in paragraph h above, the City Council hereby finds that any unavoidable impacts of the Project, including the mitigated but unavoidable impacts from short-term impacts on air quality from construction-related emissions, and cumulative air quality and noise are acceptable based on the findings contained herein and in the "CEQA Findings" for the Project. This determination shall constitute a statement of overriding considerations within the meaning of CEQA and is based on any one of the following environmental and other benefits of the Project identified in the Final EIR and the record of the City Council's proceedings: i) Provision for the use of land consistent with the established policies and goals of the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, Etiwanda North Specific Plan, City Development Code, and all other City Development guidelines; ii) Annexation of the 90.4-acre Project site and adjacent 10.0-acre utility easement into the City of Rancho Cucamonga; iii) Integration of the Project with the character of the surrounding neighborhoods and establishment of a development that results in logical, coordinated growth; iv) Establishment of a Project-wide circulation system that meets regional and local transportation needs and accommodates both vehicles and pedestrians; v) Provision of a system of public/community facilities, including trails, open space areas, and landscaping to support the residents of the Project and surrounding area in an efficient and timely manner; vi) Provision of backbone public infrastructure (i.e., roads, utilities) to serve Project residents and the surrounding community; vii) Minimization of impacts to, and generation of revenues in excess of costs for, various public service agencies; viii) Provision of quality housing oppodunities compatible with existing and planned development that responds to market demands; ix) The addition of housing units in accomplishment of the City's Housing Element Goals and fulfillment of regional housing needs; x) City control over the developing lands on the City's perimeter; and xi) Advancement of the regional trail system by the links to be completed by the Project. j. The mitigation measures in the Final EiR that correspond to the environmental impacts which may result from the Project are hereby adopted and made a condition of approval of, or incorporated into, the Project. The City Council also hereby adopts the "Mitigation Monitoring Plan" attached as Exhibit "G" to the June 16, 2004 City Council Staff Report for this Project. The Mitigation Monitoring Plan will be used to monitor compliance with the mitigation measures and conditions that have been adopted or made a condition of Project approval as set fodh in this Section of this Ordinance and in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan. k. Pursuant to provisions of the California Public Resources Code Section 21089(b), the findings contained in this Ordinance shall not be operative, vested or final until all required filing fees assessed pursuant to California Fish and Game Code Section 711.4, together with any required handling charges, are paid to the County Clerk of the County of San Bernardino. SECTION 3: Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public hearings on June 2, 2004 and June 16, 2004, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The proposed change in density of residential development allowed on the Project site is consistent with neighboring properties, including the City's proposed 300 acre (Etiwanda Creek) annexation, and is consistent with General Plan Policy 2.5.2.2 which expresses an intention to apply the Low Density designation to portions of Etiwanda and into the City's Sphere of Influence where the level of services, including roads, shopping and recreational opportunities, are not sufficient to justify higher densities. b. The proposed change in land use designation will promote housing opportunities and help achieve the City's regional share of housing needs. c. The amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties because the land uses and intensities of residential uses allowed are consistent and compatible with the type of housing and open space conservation areas abutting the proposed development. d. The proposed change in designations are also consistent with the provisions of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan which encourages retention of open space and the extension of the image of Old Etiwanda into this area, with relatively large lots and opportunities for an equestrian lifestyle. SECTION 4: Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Sections 1, 2 and 3 above, this Council hereby approves Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003-00750 to establish a Low Residential District on that portion of land described in this Ordinance and depicted on Exhibit "A" to this Ordinance. SECTION 5: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this Ordinance is, for any reason, deemed or held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, or preempted by legislative enactment, such decision or legislation shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or words thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, clauses, phrases, or words might subsequently be declared invalid or unconstitutional or preempted by subsequent legislation. SECTION 6: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published within 15 days after its passage 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. HENDERSON CREEK ANNEXATION DRC2003-00750 (ENSPA) CITY BOUNDARY HENDERSON CREEK ANNEXATION ~ PROPOSED LOW EXISTING ENSP ~ FO EXHIBIT A ORDINANCE NO. 727 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DRC2003-0075'1, A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND HENDERSON CREEK PROPERTIES LLC., FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING AN APPROXIMATE 65.3 ACRE SITE WITH UP TO 123 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, FOR PROPERTIES GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHERLY END OF WARDMAN BULLOCK ROAD AT THE INTERSECTION OF COLONBERO ROAD - APN: 0225-084-04, 0226-081-09 AND 10, AND 0226- 082-29. A. RECITALS. 1. California Government Code Section 65864 provides, in pertinent part, as follows: "The Legislature finds and declares that: (a) The lack of certainty in the approval of development projects can result in a waste of resources, escalate the cost of housing and other development to the consumer, and discourage investment in and commitment to comprehensive planning, which would make maximum efficient utilization of resources at the least economic cost to the public. (b) Assurance to the applicant for a development project that upon approval of the project, the applicant may proceed with the project in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations, and subject to conditions of approval, will strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning, and reduce the economic costs of development." 2. California Government Code Section 65865 provides, in pertinent part, as follows: "(a) Any city...may enter into a development agreement with any person having a legal or equitable interest in real property for the development of the property as provided in this article..." 3. California Government Code Section 65865.2 provides, in part, as follows: "A development agreement shall specify the duration of the agreement, the permitted uses of the property, the density or intensity of use, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes. The development agreement may include conditions, terms, restrictions, and requirements for subsequent discretionary actions, provided that such conditions, terms, restrictions, and requirements for discretionary actions shall not prevent development of the land for the uses and to the density or intensity of development set forth in the agreement..." 4. Attached to this Ordinance, marked as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference, is proposed Development Agreement DRC2003-00751, concerning that property generally located at the northerly end of Wardman Bullock Road at the intersection with Colonbero Road and legally described in the attached Development Agreement. Hereinafter in this Ordinance, the Development Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is referred to as the "Development Agreement." 5. On May 12, 2004, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held a duly noticed public hearing concerning the Development Agreement and concluded said hearing on that date and recommended approval through adoption of its Resolution No. 04-61. 6. On June 2, 2004 and continued to June 16, 2004, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing regarding the Development Agreement. 7. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. B. ORDINANCE. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby find, determine, and ordain as follows: SECTION 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. SECTION 2: Based upon the facts and information contained in the record of this project, the City Council makes the following findings and statements, and takes the following actions, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. seq.): a. Henderson Creek Properties, LLC (the "Applicant") seeks approval of a series of actions related to the annexation of land from unincorporated San Bernardino County into the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the approval of a General Plan Amendment, Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16324, and associated Development Agreement. The actions also include the development of 123 single-family housing units on approximately 65.3 acres and designations of flood control, utility corridor, and open space on approximately 25.1 acres of land. Another 10 acres is also proposed for annexation and is currently used for a utility easement and for flood control purposes. The total area to be annexed is approximately 100.4 acres. The density of the development is approximately 1.9 dwelling units per gross acre. These series of actions and approvals are hereinafter defined in this Ordinance as the "Project." b. The Applicant has submitted the following applications relating to the Project: Annexation DRC2003-00753, General Plan Land Use Amendment DRC2003-00749, Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003-00750, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16324, and Development Agreement DRC2003-00751 (collectively the "Project Applications"). These Project Applications, as well as the appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16324, constitute the matters involving the Project, which are submitted to the City Council for decision and action. ¢. The City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, prepared the Draft Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for the Project, including certain technical appendices (the "Appendices") to the Draft EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 2003111057). The Draft EIR was circulated for a 45-day public review and comment period from February 20, 2004, through April 5, 2004. Comments were received during that period and written responses were prepared and sent to all persons and entities submitting comments. Those comments and the responses thereto have been included in the Final EIR, as well as the revisions to the Draft EIR and a copy of the Draft Development Agreement (Appendix K). Those documents, together with the Draft EIR and Appendices, comprise the Final EIR. d. The City Council finds that the Final EIR was completed pursuant to CEQA, and the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA, 14 California Code of Regulations, Section 15000, et. seq. ("the Guidelines"). By Resolution No. 04-60, the City Council has certified the Final EIR as being in compliance with the requirements of CEQA. e. The City Council finds that the Final EIR was presented to the City Council and that the City Council reviewed and considered the information in the Final EIR and has reached its own conclusions with respect to the Project and as to whether and how to approve the various components of the project approvals. f. The City Council finds that the Final EIR represents the independent judgment of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and adequately addresses the impacts of the Project and imposes appropriate mitigation measures for the Project. g. Public Resources Code Section 21081 provides that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been completed which identifies one or more significant environmental effects unless the public agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant effect: i. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects thereof as identified in the completed environmental impact repod. ii. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and such changes have been adopted by such agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. iii. Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental impact report. h. The City Council finds, based upon the Initial Study, the Final EIR, public comments, public agency comments, and the entire record before it, that the Project may create significant impacts in the areas of Land Use and Planning, Traffic and Circulation, Noise, Geology and Soils, Hydrology and Water Quality, Public Health and Safety, Biological Resources, Air Quality, and Public Services. However, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Project, which will mitigate and in some cases, avoid the significant impacts. The specific changes and alterations required, and a brief explanation of the rationale for the findings with regard to each impact, are contained in the "CEQA Findings" for the Project (Exhibit "F" to the June 16, 2004 City Council Staff Report) and are incorporated herein by reference. In addition to the rationale and explanation contained in the "CEQA Findings", the City Council makes the following additional findings regarding the impacts of the Project on the resources and services listed in this paragraph: i. Land Use and Plannin.q. The Etiwanda North Specific Plan requires a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet, and the Final EIR indicates that the Project would be inconsistent with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, because some of the proposed residential lots would be less than 20,000 square feet. With the approval of the proposed Specific Plan Amendment that will change the land use district from Very Low Residential (0.1 - 2 dwelling units per acre) to Low Residential (2 - 4 dwelling units per acre) for the 65.3 acre area designated for residential development, the Project would then be consistent with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. As a result, the Project site may be developed with lots less than 20,000 square feet. In addition, in order to address the reduction in lot sizes and the likely effect of lots averaging 18,000 square feet, with a minimum size of 14,025 square feet, on the ability of those property owners to own and maintain horses on those lots, a mitigation measure is being imposed (Mitigation Measure LU-2) to require the developer to pay an in-lieu fee to the City for the development of an equestrian center that would serve residents in the area desiring to own and maintain horses. The Etiwanda North Specific Plan also requires a particular design and development theme that is consistent with the character of Old Etiwanda by having access to trails, provisions for views of the mountains and complying with certain design requirements for landscaping, walls, fencing, lighting and the community's entry points. Mitigation Measure LU-1 is being imposed that requires the project developer to submit a landscape plan that is consistent with the City's neighborhood Theme Plan as contained in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that any inconsistency of the Project with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. ii. Traffic and Circulation. The Final EIR indicates that the proposed Project will increase vehicle trips and impact the level of service along arterial streets and intersections. Specifically, the Final EIR found that Project traffic, together with other anticipated traffic, will likely cause traffic flow to be deficient by experiencing a Level of Service (LOS) of "E" or "F" at the intersections of Wardman-Bullock Road (NS) at Wilson Avenue (EW) and at Etiwanda Avenue (NS) at Banyan Street (EW). Mitigation Measures are imposed to require the developer to construct and widen Wardman-Bullock Road along the Project frontage (Mitigation Measure TC-3), to install a traffic signal at Etiwanda Avenue (NS) and Banyan Street intersection (Mitigation Measure TC-5), to contribute developer fees for other traffic improvements (Mitigation Measures TC-1 and TC-5), and to modify signing and stripping of certain roadways and intersections (Mitigation Measures TC-2 and TC-4). The City's "City-Wide System Fees for Transportation Development" provides for the payment of fees at the time building permits are issued based on a formula adopted by the City Council by resolution. That formula provides for the payment of a fee per dwelling unit of approximately $1,710.03 and a credit against those fees for certain qualifying traffic improvements that mitigate the traffic impacts of the Project. The City is required to use traffic impact fees to fund City-wide and regional roadway and traffic improvements, and as a consequence, the payment of those fees by the project developer will contribute to the mitigation of the Project's impacts to traffic and circulation. Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that traffic at the study intersections will be reduced so that those intersections operate at a LOS "D," and that the impacts of the Project on traffic and circulation will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. iii. Noise. The Final EIR identifies the likelihood of short-term impacts on ambient noise levels during construction of the Project. The primary source of construction noise is heavy equipment associated with construction activities, such as trucks, graders, bulldozers, concrete mixers, cranes and portable generators with high levels of sound generation. Earthmoving equipment is anticipated to create noise ranging between 75 to 90 dB(A) at 50 feet from the source. A mitigation measure has been imposed that will require the construction contractors to adhere to the City's Development Code for hours of construction activity - 6:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, with no construction to take place on Sundays or holidays (Mitigation Measure N-l). Based on this mitigation measure, the City Council finds that the shore term noise impacts from the Project will be reduced to less than significant levels. The Final EIR also identified that noise levels at the facades of homes nearest the Project exit at Wardman-Bullock Road would experience noise near 60 dB CNEL due to vehicular traffic. The Final EIR states that if the property owners of the homes fronting on Wardman-Bullock Road can close their windows and still obtain adequate ventilation, then the goal of reducing the interior noise to a 45 dB(A) CNEL interior noise level would be achieved. A mitigation measure will be imposed to require the developer to install air conditioning units for the residences that front along Wardman-Bullock Road so as to allow window closure during warm days so as to achieve a less than significant interior noise level for those homes with the windows closed (Mitigation Measure N-2). Based on this mitigation measure, the City Council finds that the potential noise impacts of the Project on current and future residents will be mitigated to a less than significant level. iv. Geolo.cl¥ and Soils. The Final EIR identifies that development of the Project will expose people and structures to risks associated with seismic ground shaking due to regional and local faults located in the area. Mitigation measures are imposed which require the developer to ensure that all grading plans and grading work are done in compliance with the geotechnical report for the Project so that soil and slopes are properly compacted and grading work achieves all seismic requirements (Mitigation Measure GS-1), that the developer shall submit building plans which incorporate the recommendations of the geotechnical report for preliminary foundation work, utility trenching, and concrete slabs (Mitigation Measure GS-2), and that all buildings and structures are built to Uniform Building Code and/or Structural Engineers Association of California standards for seismic safety (Mitigation Measure GS-3). Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the effects of seismic shaking on persons and structures will be mitigated to a level that is less than significant. v. Hydrolo.qy and Water Quality. The Final EIR identifies that during storm events, construction activities (particularly vegetation removal, grading and excavation), could affect the amounts of sediments and suspended solid material leaving the site such that water quality downstream of the site could be affected to a tevel that was potentially significant. Vegetation removal and grading would expose the soil to erosion by wind and rain, and rainfall could carry more sediment off the disturbed areas and adversely affect water quality downstream. In addition, during earthwork and construction activities, pollutants that may be discharged in stormwater include vehicle fluids such as oil, grease and coolants, asphaltic emulsions associated with asphalt-concrete paving, paints and so~vents, wood products, and metal and metal plated products, in accordance with the State of California's implementation of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements and the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) requirements imposed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), the Project developer will be required to include Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent construction of the Project from polluting surface waters. Compliance with these permitting requirements will require the Project developer and construction crews to comply with a variety of measures, such as limiting clearing and grubbing areas to the limits of the active construction area, using hay bales and sand bags to control erosion during the rainy season, using enclosed storage sheds where possible, utilizing hazardous materials in a manner that avoids contact with the ground, avoiding the application of certain materials during periods of rainfall, washing of equipment or vehicles in a designated place where a sump can be located to collect wash water for proper disposal, and servicing equipment and vehicles off-site. A mitigation measure is imposed to require compliance with these permitting requirements and BMPs (Mitigation Measure HWQ-1). The City Council finds that with the imposition of this mitigation measure and after implementation of BMPs set forth in the SWPPP, potentially significant impacts on water quality from construction activity will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. vi. Public Health and Safety. The Final EIR identifies that the frequency of high winds will expose structures and residents to potential damage from extreme wind conditions. In addition, wildfires on adjacent lands, including National Forest land and undeveloped properties, could threaten residential development on the Project site. Specifically, the Final EIR indicates that Santa Ana winds along the front of the mountains can reach hurricane force, with winds in the area of the Project detected at reaching 80 .223 to 100 miles per hour. Damage to roofs, fences, windows and landscaping is possible in these types of conditions. Three mitigation measures are imposed to mitigate the impacts of wind hazard to a less than significant level. Those measures include requirements to utilize optimum building materials and construction techniques as required by the Uniform Building Code, to require disclosure of the potential for high winds in sales documents to prospective homebuyers, and to comply with other mitigation measures for control of particulate matter emissions during grading and construction (Mitigation Measures HS-1, HS-2, HS-3). Compliance with the provisions of the Uniform Building Code has been demonstrated to result in structures that are capable of withstanding winds projected for the Project area without serious damage. With respect to the impacts created by wildfires on adjacent lands, the City Council is particularly familiar with these risks after the City and surrounding areas recently experienced the Grand Prix fire in October 2003. The City Council also understands that the addition of persons into an area of wildland vegetation increases the number of ignitions (risk), the growth of brush after a fire increases the intensity of new fires in the area (hazard), and the addition of homes and amenities into the same area (value) creates an increased need for fire protection and fuel modification. Design features have already been incorporated into the Proiect to ensure vegetation areas to the north are separated from residential structures with a trail, a wall and a riprap drainage channel so as to provide approximately 100 feet of distance between chaparral vegetation and the homes. All homes will also be constructed with Class A roofs. Along the western boundary of the site where the wildfire threat is moderate, a six-foot masonry wall and "firewise" landscaping between native vegetation and the homes are to be required. A comprehensive mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure HS-4) requires a detailed landscape plan/fuel modification plan to contain requirements for "firewise" vegetation in specific areas, irrigation plans and specific standards applicable to certain areas of the Project site. In addition, Mitigation Measure HS-5 requires the installation of residential fire sprinklers as a component of the construction. The City Council finds that with the combination of appropriate landscaping, residential fire sprinklers, the introduction of certain new paved surfaces where none currently exist, and implementation of the Fuel Modification Plan will effectively reduce movement of potential fire into the Project area and thereby mitigate impacts to a level of less than significant. vii. Bioloqical Resources. The proposed Project would result in development of a 65.3 acre area of the site, and the Final EIR indicates that, prior to the Grand Prix fire of October 2003, that Z2 area was previously covered with upland sage scrub, disturbed annual grassland and a small area of fiat-top buckwheat scrub. Specifically, prior to the Grand Prix fire, the portion of the site proposed for development had approximately 1.5 acres of disturbed annual grassland, 4.2 acres of disturbed annual grassland dominated by deerweed, 53.5 acres of Upland sage scrub dominated by white sage, and 4.5 acres of fiat-top buckwheat scrub. The impacts on the annual grassland areas is not considered significant because of the relatively small area impacted (approximately 1/3 of the total disturbed annual grassland on the site) and because those areas had experienced substantial disturbance from prior weed control measures, and the construction of power line maintenance roads and other roads that cross the property. With respect to upland sage scrub, most of that area was dominated by white sage, which is not considered to be sensitive habitat by the resource agencies that regulate biological resources. However, the City Council recognizes that the loss of this plant community for wildlife habitat is important when considering cumulative impacts on this resource. With respect to the fiat-top buckwheat scrub, this is a common species and an indicator of prior disturbance to the land. The Final EIR indicates that no sensitive species of fiat-top buckwheat scrub were found on the site and therefore no impacts were expected to occur. The Final EIR recognizes that much of the vegetation previously found on the site would likely grow back after the fire if no development took place. However, the Biological Assessment not only found no substantial evidence of sensitive plant or wildlife species on the site, but it also found that due to the area already being disturbed by dirt roads for power line maintenance, previous construction activity, commercial harvesting of white sage, and flood control improvements and activities, development of the site would not have a significant impact on biological resources. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Project site is within the boundaries of the North Etiwanda Open Space and Habitat Preservation Program (NEOSHPP), as adopted by the County of San Bemardino. To implement the goals and purposes of that Program, a mitigation measure has been imposed to require the Project developer to acquire and convey to the County, 58 acres of land within or near the NEOSHPP area that support alluvial fan sage scrub and/or upland sage scrub (Mitigation Measure BIO-l). This 58 acre area is intended to accomplish a "one to one" mitigation in acreage for the loss of the 53.5 acres of Upland sage scrub and to mitigate the potential loss of habitat for sensitive plants and animal species, and the loss of raptor foraging land. As required by the mitigation measure, the off-site mitigation land shall be equal to or greater in habitat value than that of the Project site. The City Council finds that the conveyance into the NEOSHPP of 58 acres of land by the Project developer would mitigate this impact to a level that is less than significant. viii. Air Quality. The Final EIR identifies that the Project may create significant and unavoidable impacts to Air Quality. Specifically, the Final EIR identifies that emissions from construction related activities are likely to exceed the threshold of significance specified by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). These impacts aro considered to be shod-term (less than one year) and temporary and can cause nuisance impacts to adjacent land uses in the local area by way of fugitive dust. One cause of these shod-term impacts is blowing dust resulting from the grading of the site. In addition, the use of diesel engine equipment during grading and construction along with worker trips is anticipated to create levels of nitrous oxides (NOx) that are also above the SCAQMD's thresholds of significance. Similarly, construction-related emissions, particularly from architectural coatings (painting) and off-road diesel equipment, are anticipated to create significant levels of reactive organic gases (ROG) and nitrous oxides (NO×) that will exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance and result in significant shod-term air pollution impacts. A comprehensive mitigation measure is imposed on the Project (Mitigation Measure AQ-1) which will require various dust control measures, emission control measures and off-site actions. Included in those measures are requirements to limit the simultaneous disturbance area to as small an area as is possible, terminate soil disturbance and accelerate dust control measures when winds exceed 25 miles per hour, stabilize disturbed areas if construction is delayed, require 90-day Iow-NOx tune-ups for off- road equipment, limit idling to 10 minutes for trucks and heavy equipment, encourage carpooling for construction workers, limit lane closures to off-peak travel periods, park construction vehicles off traveled roadways, wet down or cover did hauled off-site, wash or sweep access points daily and encourage receipt of construction materials during non-peak traffic hours. The City Council finds that with implementation of the recommended measures, construction emissions will be reduced, and that the Project's contribution to regional emission of criteria pollutants will be minimized. However, the City Council finds that despite the imposition of all these comprehensive mitigation requirements, construction emissions (building phase) will exceed SCAQMD's thresholds for ROG and NOx, and therefore, would remain significant after mitigation. ix. Cumulative Impacts - Air Quality, Noise and Public Services. The Final EIR provides that this Project, together with the construction of development projects in the vicinity, would likely create cumulative shod-term impacts to air quality during construction. This Project would also create a significant cumulative impact to regional air quality because the Project would add incremental pollutants to the South Coast Air Basin in the form of additional vehicle emissions. With respect to noise, the Final EIR indicates that the Project will create short-term cumulative construction noise impacts and long-term cumulative noise impacts due to increased vehicle trips. With respect to public services (schools), state law (Government Code Section 65995 (h)) provides for the payment of developer fees and deems such payment to be full and complete mitigation of school impacts. Consequently, as a matter of law, the long-term cumulative impacts to schools from this and other projects are deemed to be fully mitigated by the payment of developer fees and the City is precluded, by law, from imposing additional mitigation to address these potential impacts. The City Council finds that noise and air quality impacts associated with increased vehicle trips would remain significant when combined with existing and anticipated construction projects in the vicinity of the Project. i. The City Council finds, based on the Final EIR, that after implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the following impacts associated with the proposed Project would remain significant: air quality (short-term impacts and short and long-term cumulative impacts) and noise (short-term and long-term cumulative impacts). j. The Final EIR describes a range of alternatives to the Project that might fulfill basic objectives of the Project. These alternatives include the required "No Project-No Development" alternative, and the "Development Under the Existing Land Use Designation Alternative." Other alternatives that were considered and rejected included the alternative location alternative and the alternative land use alternative. As set forth below, the alternatives identified in the Final EIR are not feasible because they would not achieve the basic objectives of the Project or would do so only to a much smaller degree and, therefore, leave unaddressed the significant economic, infrastructure, and General Plan goals that the Project is intended to accomplish, and are thus infeasible due to social and economic considerations, and/or they are infeasible because they would not eliminate the adverse environmental impacts of the proposed Project. Accordingly, each of the alternatives is infeasible. In making this finding, the City Council determines as follows: i) The objectives of the Project are: a) To be consistent with, and implement, the established policies and goals of the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, Etiwanda North Specific Plan, City Development Code, and all other City development guidelines; b) To annex the 90.4 acre Project site and adjacent 10 acre utility easement into the City of Rancho Cucamonga; c) To Integrate the Project with the character of the surrounding neighborhoods and establish a development that results in logical, coordinated growth; d) To establish a Project-wide circulation system that meets regional and local transportation needs and accommodates both vehicles and pedestrians; e) To provide a system of public/community facilities, including trails, open space areas, and landscaping to support the residents of the Project and surrounding area in an efficient and timely manner; f) To provide backbone public infrastructure (i.e., roads, utilities) to serve Project residents and the surrounding community; g) To minimize impacts to, and generate revenues in excess of costs for various public service agencies; and h) To provide quality housing opportunities compatible with existing and planned development that responds to market demands. ii) The "No Project-No Development" Alternative assumes that no new land uses would be constructed on the Project site and that the site would remain vacant and undeveloped. Although this alternative is environmentally superior to the proposed Project, it would not meet the Project objectives. Specifically, it would not meet the Project's objective to provide quality housing that would be compatible with existing and planned development for the area, would not provide a system of public/community facilities, including trails, open space areas, and would not provide landscaping for Project residents and surrounding area residents. Furthermore, as the subject property is under private ownership, the elimination of future development within an area previously approved for residential development would not be legally or financially feasible. Therefore this alternative is rejected. iii) The "Development Under the Existing Land Use Designation Alternative" assumes that the Project site would be developed under the current City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan designation (Very Low Residential). Under this designation, and assuming that the area disturbed by grading is equal to that of the proposed Project, the minimum lot sizes would be 20,000 square feet and the number of lots that could be developed would be approximately 90 rather than the 123 as currently proposed. This reduction in development by approximately 33 dwelling units would result in lower traffic, air quality, and noise impacts than the 229 proposed Project, but would not reduce to less than significance the shod-term impacts on air quality from construction-related emissions, cumulative long-term impacts on air quality from Project emissions and cumulative shod and long-term noise impacts. In addition, this alternative would not meet the Project objectives to provide quality housing that would be compatible with existing and planned development for the area, would not provide a system of public/community facilities, including trails, open space areas, and would not provide landscaping for Project residents and surrounding area residents. k. Mitigation measures described in the Mitigation Monitoring Program will avoid or substantially lessen the potentially significant environmental effects of the Project. Fudher, the environmental, physical, social, economic and other benefits of the Project, as set fodh in this section and in the "CEQA Findings" for the Project (Exhibit "F" to the June 16, 2004 City Council Staff Repod), which is incorporated herein by this reference, outweigh any unavoidable, significant, adverse impacts that may occur as a result of the Project, including shod-term impacts on air quality from construction-related emissions and cumulative impacts to air quality and noise. Therefore, due to overriding benefits of the Project and because the alternatives identified in the Final EIR are not feasible, as discussed in paragraph j above, the City Council hereby finds that any unavoidable impacts of the Project, including the mitigated but unavoidable impacts from shod-term impacts on air quality from construction-related emissions, and cumulative air quality and noise are acceptable based on the findings contained herein and in the "CEQA Findings" for the Project. This determination shall constitute a statement of overriding considerations within the meaning of CEQA and is based on any one of the following environmental and other benefits of the Project identified in the Final EIR and the record of the City Council's proceedings: i) Provision for the use of land consistent with the established policies and goals of the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, Etiwanda Nodh Specific Plan, City Development Code, and all other City Development guidelines; ii) Annexation of the 90.4-acre Project site and adjacent 10.0-acre utility easement into the City of Rancho Cucamonga; iii) Integration of the Project with th~ character of the surrounding neighborhoods and establishment of a development that results in logical, coordinated growth; iv) Establishment of a Project-wide circulation system that meets regional and local transpodation needs and accommodates both vehicles and pedestrians; v) Provision of a system of public/community facilities, including trails, open space areas, and landscaping to support the residents of the Project and surrounding area in an efficient and timely manner; vi) Provision of backbone public infrastructure (i.e., roads, utilities) to serve Project residents and the surrounding community; vii) Minimization of impacts to, and generation of revenues in excess of costs for, various public service agencies; and viii) Provision of quality housing opportunities compatible with existing and planned development that responds to market demands. ix) The addition of housing units in accomplishment of the City's Housing Element Goals and fulfillment of regional housing needs. x) City control over the developing lands on the City's perimeter. xi) Advancement of the regional trail system by the links to be completed by the Project. I. The mitigation measures in the Final EIR that correspond to the environmental impacts which may result from the Project are hereby adopted and made a condition of approval of, or incorporated into, the Project. The City Council also hereby adopts the "Mitigation Monitoring Plan" attached as Exhibit "G" to the June 16, 2004 City Council Staff Report for this Project. The Mitigation Monitoring Plan will be used to monitor compliance with the mitigation measures and conditions that have been adopted or made a condition of Project approval as set forth in this Section of this Ordinance and in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan. m. Pursuant to provisions of the California Public Resources Code Section 21089(b), the findings contained in this Ordinance shall not be operative, vested or final until all required filing fees assessed pursuant to California Fish and Game Code Section 711.4, together with any required handling charges, are paid to the County Clerk of the County of San Bernardino. SECTION 3: The City Council finds that the Development Agreement does comply with the requirements of California Government Code Sections 65865 through 65869.5 in that the Development Agreement does specify in detail and contains the following: a. Provisions are included in Section 3(A) of the Development Agreement requiring periodic review of the Agreement at least every twelve months, at which time the applicant shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the Agreement (California Government Code Section 65865.1). b. The duration of the Development Agreement is specified in Section I(B) of the Agreement as being for ten (10) years (Government Code Section 65865.2). c. The permitted uses of the property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height and size of the proposed structures, and other required provisions are referred to in Section 2(A) of the Development Agreement (Government Code Section 65865.2). d. The Development Agreement includes conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements for subsequent discretionary actions in Section 2(B) of the Agreement (Government Code Section 65865.2). e. The Development Agreement includes terms and conditions in Section 2 that require the developer to improve portions of public streets around the perimeter of the property and provide for and improve streets inside the development (Government Code Section 65865.2). f. The Development Agreement specifies that the Project is to be constructed in coordination with the construction of certain public infrastructure improvements as specified in Section 2 of the Agreement. (Government Code Section 65865.2). SECTION 4: Based upon substantial evidence presented during the above- referenced public hearing on June 2, 2004 and June 16, 2004, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds that upon the adoption of General Plan Amendment DRC2003-00749, the Development Agreement will provide for development which is consistent with the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. The City Council bases its findings of consistency with the General Plan on the fact that the project entitlements specified in the Development Agreement provide for the extension of the Iow density image of Old Etiwanda into the area as provided in General Plan Policy 2.4.4.5, the fact that the proposed uses set forth in this Development Agreement are compatible with the character of existing development in the vicinity, and that the Development Agreement is consistent with the General Plan's intent to keep substantial portions of the Etiwanda Nodh Specific Plan area as open space. SECTION 5: Based on substantial evidence presented during the above- referenced public hearing on June 2, 2004 and June 16, 2004, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds that upon the adoption of Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003- 00750, the Development Agreement will provide for development which is consistent with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. The City Council bases its findings of consistency with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan on the facts that the proposed Project will contain relatively large minimum residential lot sizes (minimum size of 14,025 square feet and an average lot size of 18,000 square feet), which are larger lots than in many other portions of the City and consistent with the goals of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan to provide for larger lots and equestrian lots. In addition, development of lots less than 20,000 square feet will require the developer to contribute an in-lieu fee of $1,000 per lot for the development of an off-site Equestrian Center. The Project is also designed to contain a trails system, provide for views of the mountains, and with the imposition of Mitigation Measure LU-2, will comply with the Specific Plan's requirements for landscape treatments and required walls, fencing, lighting and community entry that is consistent with the design scheme specified in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. SECTION 6: This Council hereby approves Development Agreement DRC2003-00751, attached hereto as Exhibit "A," subject to the condition that the Development Agreement shall not become effective unless and until General Plan Amendment DRC2003- 00749 and the Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003-00750 have been reviewed and approved by the City Council and have taken effect. SECTION 7: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within 15 days after its passage 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. Upon the effective date of this Ordinance and satisfaction of the provisions contained in Section 6 of this Ordinance, the Mayor shall execute the Development Agreement on behalf of the City and the City Clerk shall cause the Agreement to be recorded in the offices of the County Recorder for the County of San Bernardino. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DRC2003-00751 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND HENDERSON CREEK PROPERTIES, LLC CONCERNING PROPOSED TENTATIVE TRACT 16324 This Agreement (the ~Development Agreement") is made and entered into this day of , 2004, by and between Henderson Creek Properties, LLC, a California limited liability company, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga, a municipal corporation (the ~ClTY") pursuant to the authority of Section 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code. Henderson Creek Properties, LLC, and its successors and assigns, if any, are referred to collectively hereinafter as the "Property Owner". The CITY and Henderson Creek Properties, LLC are collectively referred to herein as the ~Parties". RECITALS: A. To provide more certainty in the approval of development projects, to encourage pdvate participation in comprehensive planning, and to reduce the economic risk of development, the Legislature of the State of California has adopted Sections 65864, et seq. of the California Government Code, thus authorizing the CITY to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property, in order to establish development rights with respect thereto. B. Section 65865(b) of the California Government Code authorizes the CITY to enter into a binding development agreement with respect to mai property which is in unincorporated territory but also within the CITY's sphere of influence, provided that the effectiveness of the development agreement is conditioned upon the annexation of such real property to the CITY within the period of time for annexation as specified in the Development Agreement. C. Property Owner owns fee title to approximately 90.4 acres of real property located entirely within the County of San Bemardino (the "County") and more particularly described in Exhibit A and depicted on Exhibit B attached hereto (the "Project Site"). D. On July 28, 2003, the City received an application for a Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT16324), a General Plan Amendment (DRC2003-00749), an Etiwanda Nodh Specific Plan Amendment (DRC2003-00750), along with this Development Agreement (DRC2003- 00751) and a request for Annexation of the proposed Project. An Environmental Impact Report has been prepared to address the potential environment impacts of the proposed project and all discretionary actions anticipated by the CITY and the Local Agency Formation Commission. E. As set forth in Ordinance No. __ adopted by the City Council on __ (the "Enacting Ordinance"), the execution of this Development Agreement and performance of and compliance with the terms and conditions set forth herein by the Parties hereto: (i) is in the best interest of the CITY; (ii) will promote the public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practices in the CITY; (iii) will promote preservation of land values; (iv) will encourage the development of the Project by providing a level of certainty to the Property Owner; and (v) will provide for orderly growth and development of the CITY consistent with the CITY's General Plan. Exhibit "A" Development Agreement 1 Henderson Creek Properties, LLC AGREEMENT: NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals, and the mutual promises and covenants of the Parties, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which us hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows: Section 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS A. Effectiveness of Development Aqreement Notwithstanding the effective date of the Enacting Ordinance, this Development Agreement shall only become operative and the rights and obligations of the Parties shall only arise upon the annexation of the Project Site to the City, provided the annexation is final as to any and all administrative actions and is not then subject to judicial challenge, and further provided that such annexation shall occur on or before February 28, 2005. B. Term The term of this Development Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall extend for a period of 10 years thereafter, unless this Development Agreement is terminated, modified or extended by circumstances set forth in this Development Agreement, including, without limitation, the extensions provided below and any extensions attributable to "force majeure" circumstances described in Section 2.D.4 hereof or by mutual written consent of the Parties. Following the expiration of the Term, this Development Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of no further force and effect; provided, however, that such termination shall not affect any right or duty arising from the project entitlements granted prior to, concurrently with, or subsequent to the approval of this Development Agreement and the structures that are developed in accordance with this Development Agreement and the use of those structures shall continue to be governed by this Development Agreement for purposes of ensuring, for land use purposes, that those structures continue to be legal conforming structures and that those uses continue to be legal conforming uses. C. Assiqnment Subject to the terms of this Development Agreement, Property Owner shall have the right to convey, assign, sell, lease, sublease, encumber, hypothecate or otherwise transfer (for purposes of this Development Agreement, "Transfer~) the Project Site, in whole or in part, to any person, partnership, joint venture, firm or corporation or other entity at any time during the term of this Development Agreement, and to the extent of each such Transfer, the transferor shall be relieved of its legal duty to perform such obligations under this Development Agreement at the time of the Transfer, except to the extent Property Owner is in default, as defined in Section 3.C hereof, of any of the terms of this Development Agreement when the Transfer occurs. If all or a portion of the Project Site is Transferred and there is noncompliance by the transferee owner with respect to any term and condition of this Development Agreement, or by the transferor with respect to any portion of the Project Site not sold or Transferred, such noncompliance shall be deemed a breach of this Agreement by that transferee or transferor, as applicable, but shall not be deemed to be a breach hereunder against other persons then owning or holding any interest in any portion of the Project Site and not themselves in breach Development Agreement 2 Henderson Creek Properties, LLC under this Development Agreement. Any alleged breach shall be governed by the provisions of Section 3.C hereof. In no event shall the reservation or dedication of a podion of the Project Site to a public agency cause a transfer of duties and obligations unless specifically stated to be the case in this Development Agreement, any of the exhibits attached to this Development Agreement, the instrument of conveyance used for such reservation or dedication, or other form of agreement with such public agency. Property owner shall notify the CITY not less than 30 days before any such transfer, and such notice shall contain all material information regarding the contemplated Transfer, including but not limited to the identity of the transferee, and the material terms of such contemplated Transfer including an Assignment and Assumption of Development Agreement as to the Transfer property ("Assumption") to be executed by Transferee and delivered to City upon Transfer. Upon City notification as described above, delivered by Property Owner, subject to delivery at closing of the Assumptions, without any additional governmental review or action. D. Amendment of Agreement This Development Agreement may be amended from time to time by mutual consent of the Padies in accordance with the provisions of Govemment Code Sections 65867 and 65868. Notwithstanding anything stated to the contrary in this Development Agreement, the parties may enter into one or more implementing agreements, as set forth below, to clarify the intended application or interpretation of this Development Agreement, without amending this Development Agreement. Property Owner and the CITY acknowledge that the provisions of this Development Agreement require a close degree of cooperation between Property Owner and the CITY and that, in the course of the development of the Project Site, it may be necessary to supplement this Development Agreement to address the details of the Parties' respective performance and obligations, and to otherwise effectuate the purposes of this Development Agreement and the intent of the Parties. If and when, from time to time, the Parties find that it is necessary or appropriate to clarify the application or interpretation of this Development Agreement, the Parties may do so through one or more implementing agreements (the "Implementing Agreement"), which shall be executed by the City Planner and by an authorized representative of Property Owner. After execution, each Implementing Agreement shall be attached as an addendum and become a part of this Development Agreement, and may be further changed or supplemented from time to time as necessary. Such Implementing Agreement shall not require the approval of the City Council of the CITY and shall only be executed by the City Planner (on Behalf of the CITY), if the City Planner has determined that such implementing agreements are not materially inconsistent with this Development Agreement, and applicable ordinances, rules, regulations and official policies of the CITY in effect at the time of execution of this Development Agreement. Any changes to this Development Agreement which would impose additional obligations on the CITY beyond those which would be deemed to arise under a reasonable interpretation of this Development Agreement, or which would purport to change land use designations applicable to the Project Site under the applicable Project Entitlements, shall be considered "material" and shall require amendment of this Agreement in accordance with the provisions of California Government Code Sections 65867 and 65868. Development Agreement 3 Henderson Creek Properties, LLC Section 2. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT A. Land Use and Project Entitlements The Project Entitlements are depicted on the Tentative Tract Map, Conceptual Grading Plan, and Conceptual Landscape Plan, attached hereto as Exhibits C - E. Project Entitlements refers to the following material related to the approval of the Development Agreement (DRC2003-00751) and the Tentative Tract Map (SUB'I-]'16324): all plans that constitute the approved project, all Planning Commission and City Council Resolutions of Approval including the associated conditions of approval, and all mitigation measures included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan and the Environmental Impact Report. The Parties acknowledge that, without being obligated to do so, Property Owner plans to develop the Project Site in substantial conformity with the Project Entitlements as approved by this Development Agreement. During the Term of this agreement, the permitted uses for the Project, or any portion thereof, the density and intensity of use, zoning, maximum height and size of proposed buildings, building and yard setback requirements, provisions for the reservation or dedication of land, design and performance standards and other terms and conditions of development of the Project constitute the Entitlements as approved by this Development Agreement. The specific terms of this Development Agreement shall supersede and be controlling over any conflict and/or inconsistency with the Project Entitlements. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the total number of lots in the approved tract(s) total 123 lots. The City agrees that partial final maps may be recorded for portions of the Project Site in accordance with Government Code Section 66456.1. Other Certain specific modifications of the Project Entitlements to which the Parties agree are set forth below. All exhibits attached hereto constitute matedal provisions of the Development Agreement, and are incbrporated herein. B. Rules and Requlations Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65856 and except as otherwise explicitly provided in this Development Agreement, the ordinance, rules and regulations and official policies governing permitted uses of the Project Site, the density and intensity of such uses, and design, improvement, and construction standards and specifications applicable to development of the Project, shall be the Project Entitlements and those ordinances of the CITY, as implemented by this Development Agreement, rules, regulations and official policies, but only to the extent that they are consistent with the Project Entitlements, as modified and/or amended by this Development Agreement (the "Existing Laws"), except that the CITY's street improvement, lighting, storm drain, and the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") standards shall be followed, and the landscape standards applicable shall be those specified in this Development Agreement, and/or the CITY's standards. IN the event of any conflict between the CITY's ordinances, rules, regulations and official policies and the Existing Laws, then the Existing Laws shall control. The CITY shall not be prevented in subsequent actions applicable to the Project, from applying new ordinances, rules regulations, and policies in effect ("Future Policies") to the extent that they do not conflict with the Existing Laws. Such conflict shall be deemed to occur if, without limitation, such Future Policies: 1. Modify the permitted types of land uses, the density or intensity of use, the maximum height or size of proposed buildings on the property, building and yard setback requirements, or impose requirements for the construction or provisions of on-site or offsite improvements or the reservation or dedication of land for public use, or the payment of fees or Development Agreement 4 Henderson Creek Properties, LLC the imposition of extractions, other than as are in each case specifically provided for in this Development Agreement; 2. prevent the Property Owner from obtaining all necessary approvals, permits, certificates or other entitlements at such dates and under such circumstances as the Property Owner would otherwise be entitled under this Development Agreement; 3. render any conforming use of the Project Site a non-conforming use or any structure on the Project Site a non-conforming structure. C. Desiqn and Infrastructure Issues 1. Street Sections (i) The CITY desires that Wardman-Bullock Road be designed in accordance with CITY Collector Street standards, as depicted in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan Exhibit 13(E). (ii) The CITY desires that Colonbero Road be designed in accordance with CITY Local Street standards, as depicted in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan Exhibit 13(F). 2. Dry Utilities The Project Entitlements do not require that Burd vaults be installed and the CITY and Property Owner agree that no Burd vaults will be required throughout the Project Site. 3. GradinR The Grading Plan, included in the Project Entitlements, shall conform to the Design Guidelines of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. However, with an average slope across the site of less than 7%, the Project is exempt from the CITY Hillside Development Regulations of the Development Code. 4. Circulation Issues and Fees a. Transportation Fee/Traffic Impact Analysis The Property Owner shall construct circulation improvements as depicted on Exhibit F. In addition, the Property Owner shall comply with Transportation Development Fees in accordance with CITY ordinance. The Property Owner shall receive credit against, or reimbursement of costs, in excess of the Transportation Development Fee for the "backbone" improvements as described herein, inc conformance with CITY policy. b. Other Circulation Improvements The Properly Owner shall design and construct the following improvements: (i). Wardman-Bullock Road along the project frontage at its ultimate half section width (66 foot right-of-way). Development Agreement 5 Henderson Creek Properties, LLC (ii) The west side of Wardman-Bullock Road from Wilson Avenue to the south project boundary. Improvements shall include curb and gutter, A.C. pavement and 5800 Lumens HPSV street lights. ADDRESSED BELOW in SECTION 2.1.2. d. Reimbursement Agreement The City agrees that the construction of the Wardman-Bullock Road improvements will benefit other property owners and developers in the vicinity of the Project Site. The City agrees to use its best efforts to condition benefited projects or otherwise seek to obtain fair share contributions from surrounding property owners and developers for the construction of Wardman-Bullock Road and agrees to reimburse the Property Owner to the extent fair share contributions are collected from other property owners for the cost of construction of Wardman-Bullock Road in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.1, below. The obligations hereunder shall survive the termination of this Agreement and shall continue until such time as the Property Owner has received payment in full for the cost of the construction of Wardman-Bullock Road; provided, however, that the City's obligation shall be limited to the extent the City can collect such funds. 5. Storm Drains (i) Improvements to the Henderson Creek Levee are being completed under the direction of the San Bernardino County Flood Control District. These improvements must be completed pdor to occupancy of homes in the affected area. (ii) The site is located within Area 13 of the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Drainage Plan; applicable fees and construction requirements shall apply. 6. Park Fee/Equestrian Fee/Beautification Fee The Property Owner shall pay the following fees: a. Property Owner will pay CITY a sum totaling $95,000.000 (based upon $1,000 per unit for the ninety-five lots which do not conform to equestrian standards) for equestrian purposes. The sum will be paid from CFD formation and funding, prior to recording of the first final map and shall be reserved by the City for the construction and subsequent capital maintenance costs associated with the development of an equestrian enclosed arena complex in the Etiwanda North area. b. The Property shall pay the CITY a sum totaling $ 811,800 for park purposes (based upon a value of $ 6,600 per dwelling unit). The sum shall be paid from CFD formation and funding, prior to recording of the first final map. c. In exchange for the construction of the landscaping improvements on the east side of Wardman-Bullock Road, adjacent to the Henderson Creek Channel improvements, the Property Owners shall not be required to pay CITY Beautification Fee of $0.20 per square foot for residential construction. Development Agreement 6 Henderson Creek Properties, LLC 7. Development Standards a. The project shall be developed in accordance with the CITY's Low- Density Residential District of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. b. The project entitlements include 123 housing units. 8. Design Review Process The Project, and all subsequent applications for residential development, shall be subject to the CITY Development/Design Review process. 9. Architectural Guidelines The Project, and all subsequent applications for residential development, shall be subject to the Architectural Guidelines of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. 10. Open Space Transfer Plan The Property Owner shall transfer to the County of San Bemardino Special Districts OS-1 or other qualified conservation entity approved by the City, in fee, a minimum of 54-acres of off-site land for permanent open space and habitat preservation; along with funding in an amount to be mutually agreed upon by the Property Owner and the conservation entity, to provide for long-term maintenance of said land. The preferred location of the off-site land is in the environment surrounding the North Etiwanda Preserve in the CITY Sphere of Influence, other properties may be considered based the review of appropriate Biological Habitat Assessments and concurrence of the CITY Planner. The transfer and funding shall occur prior to recording of the first final map of the Project. D. Timin,q of Development and Fees 1. Development of the Perimeter Landscapin,q and the Etiwanda North Specific Plan Neiqhborhood Monumentation All required perimeter landscaping shall be completed prior to the release of occupancy of the 75th dwelling within the project. 2. Development of the Remainder of the Site Neither the property owner nor CITY can presently predict when or the rate at which phases of the project shall be developed, since such decisions depend on numerous factors which are not within the control of the Property Owner including, without limitation, market orientation and demand, interest rates, absorption, competition and other factors. The parties acknowledge and agree that Property Owner retains flexibility under this Development Agreement to develop the Project in such order and at such rate and times as are appropriate within the exercise of the Property Owner's business judgment. The CITY further acknowledges that Property Owner may desire to market, sell, or otherwise arrange for disposition of some or all of the Project Site, prior to development, and that the rate at which the Project develops will likely depend upon the business judgment of subsequent owners of the Project Site. Development Agreement 7 Henderson Creek Properties, LLC 3. CITY's Cooperation CITY shall use good faith, diligent efforts to promptly process and take final action on any applications for permits or approvals filed by Property Owner with respect to the Project. Such cooperation shall include, without limitation, (a) using good faith, diligent efforts to process subsequent Development/Design Review in accordance with state regulations; and (b) promptly processing all ministerial permits in accordance with Section 2.H. below. Without limiting the effect of any other provision of this Development Agreement, any future regulation, whether adopted by initiative or otherwise, limiting the rate or timing of development of the Project Site or the extent thereof, shall be deemed to conflict with Property Owner's vested rights to develop the Project under this Development Agreement and shall, to that extent, not apply to the development of the Project. Processing and review of development proposals shall be subject to established procedures in effect in the entire CITY, including Development and Design Review, as specified in the Existing Laws. However, the criteria used in the evaluation of each development proposal shall be based on the objectives, policies and specific development standards specified herein. 4. Fome Majeure Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Development Agreement, Property Owner and CITY shall be excused from performance of their obligations under this Development Agreement during any pedod of delay caused by acts of God or civil commotion, riots, strikes, picketing, or other labor disputes, shortage of materials or supplies, or damage to or prevention of work by reason of tire, floods~ earthquake, or other casualties, litigation, acts or neglect of the Property Owner, as applicable. The time of performance of such obligations as well as the term of this Development agreement shall automatically be extended by the period of such delay hereunder. E. Future Entitlements With respect to any entitlements that Property Owner may require in the future, including, without limitation, tentative tract and parcel map approvals, conditional use permits, and Development/Design Review, the CITY shall retain its discretionary review authority and the CITY's applicable ordinances, rules, regulations and official policies. However, any such discretionary review shall be expressly subject to the provisions of this Development Agreement and the CITY may only impose conditions upon such discretionary entitlements which are consistent with the Project Entitlements as approved by this Development Agreement, except as otherwise specifically required by state or federal law. F. Environmental Review Other than the mitigation measures and conditions of approval set forth in the EIR and the Project Entitlements (and any additional future mitigation programs contemplated therein), no other mitigation measures for environmental impacts created by the Project, as presently approved and as evaluated in the EIR, shall be required. In connection with the CiTY's issuance of any further entitlement (as contemplated in Section 2.E above), which is subject to CEQA, the CITY shall promptly commence and diligently process any and all initial studies and assessments required by CEQA, and to the extent permitted by CEQA, the CITY shall use the EIR and other existing environmental reports and studies as adequately addressing the environmental impacts of such matter or matters, without requiring new or supplemental Development Agreement 8 Henderson Creek Properties, LLC environmental documentation. In the event CEQA requires any additional environmental review, the CITY may impose additional feasible measures (or conditions) to mitigate, as required by CEQA, the adverse environmental impacts of such future entitlements, which were not considered, and could not have been considered, at the time of approval of the Project. G. CITY Fees and Mandates by State and Federal Laws The Parties acknowledge and agree that the fees and impositions which may potentially be imposed by the CITY on the Project and Property Owner (collectively "fees") fall within on of three categories: (a) fees for processing land use and construction permit applications which are not otherwise governed by the provisions of Section 66000 of the Government Code (but which are subject to the limitations set forth in Sections 66013, 66014, and 66016-66018.5 of the Government Code) (collectively, the "Processing Fees"); (b) fees or other monetary exactions which are contemplated under ordinances or resolutions in effect as of the date of this Development Agreement and which purport to defray all or a portion of the cost of impacts to certain public facilities, improvements and other amenities from the development projects, including any fees described in Government Code Sections 66000 et seq. (collectively, the "Existing Fee Categories") (the Existing Fee Categories include any increases, decreases, or other modifications to existing fees, so long as such modified fees relate to the same category of impacts identified in the Existing Fee Categories); and (c) fees or other monetary exactions which may be imposed in the future by the CITY for purposes of defraying all or a portion of the cost of public facilities, improvements, or amenities related to development projects, but excluding the Existing Fee Categories ("Other Fees"). The Property Owner's obligation to pay Fees shall be specifically governed by the following provisions: 1. Processinq Fees. The CITY may charge Planning and Engineering Plan Check and Permit Fees and Building Permit Fees which are in force and effect on a CITY-wide basis at the time of Property Owner's application for a land use entitlement or a construction permit. The amount of any Processing Fees shall be determined by the CITY in accordance with all applicable laws, including, without limitation, Government Code Sections 66013, 66014, and 66017-66018.5 (or any successor laws, as applicable). Unless otherwise agreed by Property Owner and the CITY, the Processing Fees assessed Property Owner shall be the same as those imposed upon other development projects throughout the jurisdictional limits of the CITY. 2. Existinq Fees. In consideration of the development of the Project Site as set forth in this Development Agreement, and the positive fiscal impact of the Project on the City, the City agrees that neither the Property Owner, nor the Project shall be subject to any increase in the Existing Fees or to any additional City imposed fees, impositions or monetary exactions with respect to the Existing Fee categories for a period of five (5) years following the effective date of this Development Agreement. 3. Other Fees. In consideration of the Property Owner's Agreement to modify the Project Entitlements as specifically set forth in this Development Agreement and implement the timing of development in accordance with the terms set forth above, no Other Fees shall be imposed upon the Property Owner or the Project during the applicable Fee Limitation Period, except as may be specifically required to carry out any state or federal law or mandate enacted after the effective date of this Development Agreement, as necessary to mitigate environmental impacts of the project in accordance with 2.G above. Development Agreement 9 Henderson Creek Properties, LLC 4. Fiscal Impact Analysis. CITY does not require Property Owners or the Project to complete a fiscal impact analysis for application or issuance of any approvals or permits that CITY might issue under this Development Agreement. H. Non-discretionary Permits The Parties acknowledge that in the course of implementing the Project, Property Owner will, from time to time, apply to the CITY for various ministerial permits, licenses, consents, certificates, and approvals, including, without limitation, non-discretionary subdivision approvals, grading permits, construction permits, certificates of occupancy and permits required to connect the Project to utility systems under the CITY's jurisdiction (collectively the "Non-Discretionary Permits"). Property Owner shall have the right to apply for any such Non-Discretionary Permits in accordance with the Existing Laws (and any applicable Future Policies under Section 2.B, above). The CITY shall issue to Property Owner, upon such applications, all required Non- Discretionary Permits, subject only to compliance with the terms of this Development Agreement, the CITY's usual and customary fees and charges for such applications and Non- Discretionary Permits (subject to the provisions of Section 2.G above) and the terms and conditions of the applicable permit application. The CITY further agrees that upon its approval of any plans, specifications, design drawings, maps, or other submittals of Property Owner in conjunction with such Non-Discretionary Permits (the "Approved Plans"), all further entitlements, approvals and consents required from the CITY to implement the Project which are consistent with and further implement such Approved Plans, shall be processed and approved by the CITY in accordance with this Development Agreement. I. Cooperation 1. Cooperation with Other Public Aqencies. The CITY acknowledges that the Property Owner may apply from time to time for permits and approvals as may be required by other governmental or quasi-governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the Project, in conjunction with the development of or provision of services to the Project, including, without limitation, approvals in connection with the developing and implementing a tertiary water system, potential transportation improvements and other on-site and off-site infrastructure. The CITY shall cooperate with Property Owner in its efforts to obtain such permits and approvals from such agencies (including without limitation, the Cucamonga Valley Water District, and the Inland Empire Utilities Agency), and shall provide any documents or certificates reasonably required to process and obtain such permits and approvals. 2. Construction of Off-Site Improvements. To the extent that Property Owner is required to construct any off-site improvements as a condition of developing the Project, the Property Owner shall make good faith efforts to acquire any off-site property interests required to construct such public improvements. If Property Owner fails to do so, Property Owner shall, at least 120 days prior to submittal of the first final subdivision map for approval, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements under Government Code Section 66462 and 66462.5 at such time as the CITY decides to acquire the property interests required for the public improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by Property Owner of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security for a portion of those costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount stated in an appraisal report obtained at Property Owner's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the CITY prior to commencement of the appraisal. To the extent that such off-site improvements, or the construction of any substantial infrastructure on-site, substantially benefit other property owners or other portions of the jurisdiction of limits of the Development Agreement 10 Henderson Creek Properties, LLC CITY, the CITY agrees to assist Property Owner to the fullest extent possible in obtaining reimbursement or other fair share contribution by such other benefited properly owners. Such assistance may include, without limitation, conditioning the approval of development projects proposed by such benefited property owners upon such owners' contribution, on a fair share, pro-rata basis, to the construction cost of such improvements. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the CITY agrees with respect to the infrastructure improvements which are adjacent to and benefit other properties (whether such properties are undeveloped or developed), any further discretionary approvals sought by such property owners shall be conditioned to require fair share reimbursement to Property Owner or City, as the case may be, for construction and related costs incurred in providing such improvements to the extent legally permissible. 3. Public Financinq. The Parties hereby acknowledge that substantial public improvements must be funded in order to contribute to the Park Fee and Equestrian and School Fees and the remainder of the Project Site and that public financing of a substantial portion of these improvements will be critical to the economic viability of the Project. Subject to CITY's ability to make all findings required by applicable law and complying with all applicable legal procedures and requirements, the CITY agrees to cooperate with and assist Property Owner to the fullest extent possible in developing and implementing a public financing plan for the construction of the public infrastructure improvements. The implementation of such plan may include, without limitation, the formation of one or more assessment districts, or Mello-Roos community facilities districts, or the issuance of bonds, certificates of participation, or other debt securities necessary to implement such plan. J. Creation of the Landscape and Street Li.qhtin.q Maintenance District The CITY agrees to promptly annex the Project Site to an existing Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District (LMD) or form the necessary LMD pursuant to Califomia Streets and Highways Code Sections 22500 et seq (the "Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972") for the Project development to encompass the Project Site as well as the area being annexed by the CITY. In addition, the Property shall annex to the existing Street Lighting Districts. The Property Owner shall pay for the annexation or formation of the LMDs. The Parties agree that annexation to the LMD or the formation of a new LMDs must be accomplished no later than recordation of the final tract map and that the CITY may create LMDs, which allow annexation of other areas. In addition, if outside agencies, upon their review and approval of various components of the project, impose any non-standard improvements that require extraordinary maintenance responsibilities of the CITY, the CITY may impose the creation of additional maintenance districts upon the proposed development. Upon formation of the LMD, and acceptance of the improvements by the City Council, the CITY (through the LMD) shall assume full responsibility for the maintenance, repair, and replacement of the improvements to be maintained by the LMD pursuant to the LMD's governing documents. The Parties also acknowledge that assessments for the LMDs are collected annually in June, and to the extent that assessments are collected through the LMD for the period ending June 2006, the City may request, and the Property Owner agrees to provide, a reasonable cash deposit to fund the LMD. The CITY shall promptly upon receipt of assessments the following June, reimburse Property Owner for any such cash advances to fund the LMDs. Development Agreement 11 Henderson Creek Properties, LLC Section 3. ANNUAL REVIEW A. Good Faith Compliance Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65866.1, the CITY shall once every twelve (12) months during the term of this Development Agreement, review the extent of good faith substantial compliance by Property Owner with the terms of this Development Agreement; provided, however, that it is intended that this review shall apply to the Project Site as a whole, as opposed to each individual property owner who may own a parcel comprising the Project Site. In connection with such annual review, Property Owner shall provide such information as may reasonably be requested by the CITY in order to determine whether any provisions of this Agreement have been breached by Property Owner. If at any time prior to the review period there is an issue concerning a Property Owner's compliance with the terms of this Development Agreement, the provisions of this Section 3 shall apply. B. Certificate of Compliance If Property Owner is found to be in compliance with this Development Agreement after annual review, the City Planner shall, upon written request by Property Owner, issue a certificate of compliance ("Certificate of Compliance") to Property Owner stating that, based upon information known to the CITY, the Development Agreement remains in effect and Property Owner is not in default. The Certificate of Compliance shall be in recordable form and shall contain such information as shall impart constructive record of notice of compliance. Property Owner may record the Certificate of Compliance in the Official Records of the County of San Bemardino. C. Findinq of Default If, upon completion of the annual review, the City Planner intends to find that Property Owner has not complied in good faith with the material terms of this Agreement (a "Default"), he shall first give wdtten notice of such effect to the Property Owner. The notice shall be accompanied by copies of all staff reports, staff recommendations and other information conceming Property Owner's compliance with the terms of this Development Agreement as the CITY may possess and which is relevant to determining Property Owner's performance under this Development Agreement. The notice shall specify in detail the grounds and all facts allegedly demonstrating such noncompliance, so Property Owner may address the issues raised on a point-by-point basis. Property Owner shall have twenty (20) days after its receipt of such notice to file a written response with the City Planner. Within 10 days after the expiration of such 20-day response period, the City Planner shall notify Property Owner whether he has determined that Property Owner is in Default under this Development Agreement ("Notice of Default"). Such Notice of Default shall specify the instances in which the Property Owner has allegedly failed to comply with this Development Agreement and the terms under which compliance can be obtained. The Notice of Default shall also specify a reasonable time for Property Owner to meet the terms of compliance, which time shall not be less than thirty (30) days from the date of the Notice of Default, and which shall be reasonably related to the time necessary to bring Property Owner's performance into good faith compliance. D. Riqht to Appeal Upon receipt of the Notice of Default, the Property Owner may appeal the City Planner's decision directly to the City Council. Such appeal shall be initiated by filing a written notice of Development Agreement 12 Henderson Creek Properties, LLC appeal with the City Clerk within the (10) calendar days following the Property Owner's receipt of the Notice of Default. The hearing on such appeal shall be scheduled in accordance with Section 17.02.080 of the CITY Development Code. At the hearing, Property Owner shall be entitled to submit evidence and to address all the issues raised by the Notice of Default. If, after considering all the evidence presented at the hearing, the City Council finds and determines on the basis of substantial evidence the Property Owner is in Default, then the City Council shall specify in writing to Property Owner the instances in which the Property Owner has failed to comply and the terms under which compliance can be obtained, and shall also specify a reasonable time for Property Owner to meet the terms of compliance, which time shall not be less than thirty (30) days from the date of such writing from the City Council and which shall be reasonably related to the time necessary to bring Property Owner's performance into good faith compliance. E. Property Owner's Cure Riqhts If Property Owner is in Default under this Development Agreement, it shall have a reasonable period of time to cure such Default before action is taken by the CITY to terminate this Development Agreement or to otherwise amend or limit Property Owner's rights under this Development Agreement or to otherwise amend or limit Properly Owner's rights under this Development Agreement. In no event shall such cure period be less than the time set forth in the finding of Default made under Sections 3.C or 3.D above (as applicable) or less than the time reasonably necessary to cure such Default. Any such cure period shall be extended by force majeure circumstances described in Section 2.D.5 above. Section 4. ENFORCEMENT A. Enforcement by Either Party Subject to all requirements mandated by applicable state or federal or other law, this Development Agreement shall be enforceable by any of the parties. B. Cumulative Remedies In addition to any other rights or remedies, any of the Parties may institute legal action to cure, correct or remedy any Default (to the extent otherwise permitted herein and in Government Code Section 65864 et seq. or any successor laws and regulations), to enforce any covenant or agreement herein in this Development Agreement or to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation, including suits for declaratory relief, specific performance, and relief in the nature of mandamus. All of the remedies described above shall be cumulative and not exclusive of one another, and the exercise of any one or more of the remedies shall not constitute a waiver or election with respect to any other available remedy. The provisions of this Section 4.B are not intended to modify other provisions of the Development Agreement and are not intended to provide additional remedies not otherwise permitted by law. C. Attorney's Fees In any legal proceedings brought by either party to enforce any covenant or any of the Parties' rights or remedies under this Development Agreement including, without limitation, any action for declaratory or equitable relief, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and all reasonable costs, expenses and disbursements in connection with such action. Any such attorneys' fees and other expenses incurred by either of the Parties Development Agreement 13 Henderson Creek Properties, LLC in enforcing a judgment in its favor under this Development Agreement, shall be recoverable separately from and in addition to any other amount included in this judgment, and such attorneys' fees obligation is intended to be severable from the other provisions of this Development Agreement and to survive and not be merged into any such judgment. Section 5. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS A. Successors and Assi,qns Subject to the provisions of Section 1.C above, the terms of this Development Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties, and their successors and assigns. Insofar as this Development Agreement refers to Property Owner, as defined herein, if the rights under this Development Agreement are assigned, the term "Property Owner~ shall refer to any such successor or assign. B. Project as a Private Undertakinq It is specifically understood and agreed by and between the Parties that the Project is a private development, that neither party is acting as the agent of the other in any respect under this Development Agreement, and that each of the Parties is an independent contracting entity with respect to the terms, covenants and conditions contained in this Development Agreement. No partnership, joint venture or other association of any kind is formed by this Development Agreement. The only relationship between the CITY and Property Owner is that of a government entity regulating the development of private property and the owner of such private property. C. Captions The captions of this Development Agreement are for convenience and reference only and shall in no way define, explain, modify, construe, limit, amplify or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of any of the provisions of this Development Agreement. D. Mort,qaqe Protection 1. Discretion to Encumber. This Development Agreement shall not prevent or limit Property Owner, in any manner, at Property Owner's sole discretion, from encumbering the Project or any portion of the Project or any improvements on the Project, by any mortgage, deed of trust or other security device securing financing with respect to all or any part of the Project or any improvements thereon (a "Mortgage"). 2. Effect of Default. This Development Agreement shall be superior and senior to any mortgage subsequently placed upon the property, or any portion thereof, or any improvement thereon, including the lien. of any mortgage or deed of trust. Despite the foregoing, breach of any provision of this Development Agreement shall not defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith for value. 3. Mortgaqee Not Obliqated. Notwithstanding anything in this Development Agreement to the contrary, (a) any holder of the beneficial interest under a Mortgage ('"Mortgagee") may acquire to or possession of all or any 'portion of the Project or any improvement thereon pursuant to the remedies provided by its Mortgage, whether by judicial or non-judicial foreclosure, deed in lieu of foreclosure, or otherwise, and such Mortgagee shall not Development Agreement 14 Henderson Creek Properties, LLC have any obligation under this Development Agreement to construct, fund or otherwise perform any affirmative obligation or affirmative covenant of Property Owner hereunder or to guarantee such performance, and Mortgagee may, after acquiring title to all or any portion of the Project as aforesaid, assign or otherwise transfer the Project or any such portion thereof to any person or entity, and upon the giving of notice of such assignment or transfer to the CITY and the assumption by the assignee or transferee of the obligations of the Property Owner with respect to the Property Owner or portion thereof so acquired which arise or accrue from and after the date of assignment or transfer, Mortgagee shall be relieved and discharged of and from any and all further obligations or liabilities under this Development Agreement with respect to the Project or portion thereof so assigned or transferreci; and (b) the consent of CITY shall not be required for the acquisition of all or any portion of the Project by any purchaser at a foreclosure sale conducted pursuant to the terms of any Mortgage, and such purchaser shall, by virtue of acquiring title to the Project or such portion thereof, be deemed to have assumed all obligations of Property Owner with respect to the Project or portion thereof so acquired which adse or accrue subsequent to the purchase date, but such purchaser shall not be responsible for any prior defaults of Property Owner; provided, however, that in either of the instances referred to in clauses (a) or (b) above, to the extent any obligation or covenant to be performed by Properly Owner is a condition to granting of a specific benefit or to the performance of a specific covenant by CITY, the performance thereof shall continue to be a condition precedent to the CITY's granting of such benefit and performance of such covenant hereunder. 4. Notice of Default to Mort,qa,qee: Ri(Iht of Mortqaqee to Cure. If a Mortgagee files with the CITY Clerk, a written notice 'requesting a copy of any Notice of Default given Property Owner under this Development Agreement and specifying the address for delivery thereof, the CITY shall deliver to such Mortgagee, concurrently with delivery thereof to Property Owner, any notice given to Property Owner with respect to any claim of the CITY that Property Owner has not complied with the terms of this Development Agreement or is otherwise in Default under this Development Agreement. Each such Mortgagee shall have the right (but not the obligation) for a period of thirty (30) days after the expiration of any cure pedod given to Property Owner with respect to such Default, to cure such default; provided, however, that if any such Default cannot, with diligence, be remedied or cured within such thirty (30) day period, then such Mortgagee shall have such additional time as may be necessary to remedy or cure such Default, if such Mortgagee commences to remedy or cure within such thirty (30) day period, and thereafter diligently pursues and completes such remedy or cure. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the Default is of a nature which can only be cured by Mortgagee by obtaining possession, such Mortgagee shall be deemed to have remedied or cured such Default such Mortgagee shall, within such thirty (30) day period, commences efforts to obtain possession and carry the same forward with diligence and continuity through implementation of foreclosure, appointment of a receiver or otherwise, and shall thereafter remedy or cure or commence to remedy or cure the Default within the cure period specified in Section 3.E above. 5. Bankruptcy. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 5.D.4 above, if a Mortgagee is prohibited from commencing or prosecuting foreclosure or other appropriate proceedings Jn the nature thereof to obtain possession of the Project Site by any process or injunction issued by any court or by any reason of any action by any court having jurisdiction of any bankruptcy or insolvency proceedJng involving Property Owner, Mortgagee shall for the purposes of this Development Agreement be deemed to be proceeding with diligence and continuity to obtain possession of the Property during the period of such prohibition of Mortgagee is proceeding diligently to terminate such prohibition. Development Agreement 15 Henderson Creek Properties, LLC 6. Amendment to Development Aqreement. The CITY and Property Owner agree not to modify this Development Agreement or to allow this Development Agreement to be modified or amended in any way, or cancel this Development Agreement, without the prior written consent of each Mortgagee, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Notwithstanding anything stated above to the contrary, the CITY and Property Owner shall cooperate in including in this Development Agreement, by suitable implementing agreement from time to time, any provision which may reasonably be requested by a proposed Mortgagee for the purpose of implementing the mortgagee-protection provisions contained in this Development Agreement and allowing such Mortgagee reasonable means to protect or preserve the lien of the Mortgage on the occurrence of a default under the terms of this Development Agreement. The CITY and Property Owner each agree to execute and deliver (acknowledge, if necessary for recording purposes) any implementing agreement necessary to effect such request; provided, however, that any such implementing agreement shall not in any material respect adversely effect any rights of the CITY under this Development Agreement or be materially inconsistent with the substantive provisions of this Development Agreement, the Project Entitlements and the Existing Laws. E. Consent Where the conseni or approval of any of the Parties is required in or necessary under this Development Agreement, unless the context otherwise indicates, such consent or approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. F. Entire Aqreement This Development Agreement and the documents attached to and referred to in this Development Agreement constitute the entire agreement between Parties with respect to the subject matter of this Development Agreement. G. Further Actions and Entitlements Each of the Parties shall cooperate with and provide reasonable assistance to the other to the extent contemplated under this Development Agreement in the performance of all obligations under this Development Agreement and the satisfaction of the conditions of this Development Agreement. H. Governing Law This Development Agreement including, without limitation, its existence, validity, construction and operation, and the rights of each of the Parties shall be determined in accordance with the laws of the State of California. I. Recording The CITY Clerk shall cause a copy of this Development Agreement to be recorded in the office of the Recorder of the County of San Bernardino no later than ten (10) days following the effective date of this Development Agreement. Development Agreement 16 Henderson Creek Properties, LLC J. Time Time is of the essence in this Development AGreement and of each and every term and condition of this Development A§reement. K. Waiver The failure of any of the Parties at any time to seek redress for any violation of this Development A§reement or any applicable law or regulation or to insist upon the strict performance of any term or condition shall not prevent any subsequent act or omission of the same or similar nature which would have originally constituted a breach of or default under this Development AGreement from havinG all the force and effect of an original breach or default, and such subsequent ac~ or omission may be proceeded against to the fullest extent provided by this Development AGreement. No provision of this Development AGreement shall be deemed to have been waived by a pady unless the waiver is in wdtinG and signed by any of the Parties. L. Partial Invalidity If any term, covenant, condition or provision of this Development A§reement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remainder of the provisions of this Development AGreement shall remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be affected, impaired or invalidated thereby. M. Notices All notices between the CITY and Property Owner and any transferee under this Development AGreement, shall be in writinG and shall be Given by personal delivery, mail or facsimile. Notice by personal delivery or facsimile shall be deemed effective upon delivery, of such notice to the pady for which it is intended at the address set forth below (or, in the case of a transferee in a written notice to the CITY). Notice by mail shall be deemed effective upon receipt or rejection of the addressee. The Parties' current address are as follows: To CITY: Mr. Jack Lam, ^ICP City Manager City of Rancho CucamonGa 10500 Civic Center Ddve Rancho CucamonGa CA 91730 With Copies to: Mr. James Markman City Attorney Richards, Watson, & Gershon One Civic Center Circle Brea CA 92821 To Property Owner: Henderson Creek Properties, LLC 16337 Shadbush Street Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Development Agreement 17 Henderson Creek Properties, LLC With Copies to: Manatt, Phelps & Phillips 650 Town Center; Suite 1250 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Attn: Roger A. Grable Either Party may change its mailing address or the person to whom notices are to be sent at any time by giving written notice of such change to the other Parties in the manner provided above. N. Indemnification Property Owner hereby agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the CITY and its Council members, representatives, agents, officers, attorneys, and employees (the "Indemnified Parties") from and against any third party claim, action, or proceeding against the Indemnified Parties to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Development Agreement, the Project Entitlements or both. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have duly executed this Development Agreement as of the day and year first above wdtten. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PROPERTY OWNER By:. By:. Mayor NAME TITLE A'I-rESTED TO: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Attorney's for Property Owner Development Agreement 18 Henderson Creek Properties, LLC EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION LAFCO NO. THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 21, AND A PORTION OF THE WEST HALF OF SECTION 22 TOWNSH1]P 1 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 22; THENCE NORTH 89°40'08'' EAST ALONG THE NORTH LII',rE OF SA~D SECTION 22, A DISTANCE OF 1325.05 FEET TO THE NORTH1~AST CORNER OF TI-iE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTiON 22; THENCE SOUTH 00°00'03" WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF TH~ NCJRTHWEST QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 1319.87 FEET TO THE SoLrrHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE $oLrrI-I 00°00'03" WEST ALONG ~ EAST LINE OF THE SOUTItWEST QUARI~K OF THE NOR'ItaWCEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 22, A DISTANCE OF 659.93 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89°34'15" WEST A DISTANCE OF 1325.86 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 22; · TI-IENCE NORTH 00°01'26" EAST ALONG SAID WEST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 660.87 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE SOUTH 89°15'44'' WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LI]NE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 1324.87 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE NORTH 00°00'53" EAST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF TH]E NORTHEAST QUARTER, A DISTANCE 1320,82 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF TH~ NORTHEAST QUARTER; TItENCE' NORTH 89°14'46" EAST ALO~NG THE NORTH LI2,rE OF SAID SECTION 21, A DISTANCE OF 1325.09 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINTNO IN 100.45 ACRES MORE OR LESS ALL AS SI~OWN ON E)G:I~BIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO AND BY TI-HS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF. THIS LEGAL DESCREPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION. WILLIAM H. ADDINGTON, P.L.S. 3821 DATE LICENSE EXPIRES 06/30/04 EXHIBIT A 2 $/ THE NW COR., OF THE NE 1/4, SHEET 1 OF ~OF THE NE 1/4, OF SECTION 21 ~ WARDMAN BULLOCK ~ oF THE NW ROAD A.P.N. 0226-081-28 OF THE NW 1//4, FONTANA " ,~ WARDMAN BULLOCK HIGH~,NO AVE. ROAD VICINITY MAP A,P.N. 0226-081-29 AREA: 100.45 AC. ~..~' P.O.B, -- POINT OF BEGINNING ~1~' ( ) - INDICATES RECORD DATA PER ~.~' ~ COLONBERO /.J ~ R.$. 49/6 ,-~ ,.~ · 11HE SE COR.. ~*- ~ .[ ] - INDICATES RECORD DATA ~0' OF THE NE 1/4, --'/~"/ /' I op RS 1,0/3g-40 PER ~.~'~' OF THE NE 1/4, ~ ~.( ( / ~ ' ' ' ' ECTiO. -- ...... THE SE CO. O~ ~E NE ~/4. Or SEC~O. 2~ ' ' I - RO~ ~ ~1 / ~o0 0 ~0 ~0o ~oo ~G,~,N~ EXHIBIT B ~o~.~ ~ .... TENTATiV~ MAP - TRACT NO. 16324 TRACT 16324- CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS TRACT WARD~AN BULLOCK ROAD TRACT 15565 TRACT 13564 I c~cu~no~ ~P~OV~,rs I~ :,;,: I AEI' CASC ENGINEERING EXHIBIT F ORDINANCE NO. 728 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2003-01163, A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE LAND DESIGNATION FROM VERY LOW RESIDENTIAL (.1-2 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO LOW RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR APPROXIMATELY 80 ACRES AND FROM VERY LOW RESIDENTIAL (.1-2 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO FLOOD CONTROL/RESOURCE CONSERVATION FOR APPROXIMATELY 45 ACRES OF LAND, GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF WILSON AVENUE BETWEEN EAST AVENUE AND WARDMAN BULLOCK ROAD; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF APN: 0225-084-08 (PORTION) AND 09 AND 0226-081-05, 06, 07, 08, 11, 12 AND 13. A. RECITALS. 1. The City of Rancho Cucamonga seeks approval of a series of actions related to the annexation of approximately 300 acres of land from unincorporated San Bernardino County into the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the approval of a General Plan Amendment and Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment. The changes in General Plan designation and in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan will reduce the acreage permitted for development by 45 acres by changing the General Plan designation for a 45-acre portion of the property from Very Low Residential (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) to Conservation and changing that portion of the project site in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan from Very Low Residential (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) to Flood Control/Resoume Conservation. At the same time, a change is proposed to allow a change in residential density on 80 acres of the property from a General Plan designation of Very Low Residential (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) to Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) and a change for that 80-acre portion of the property in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan from Very Low Residential (. 1-2 dwelling units per acre) to Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre). These changes in designation for the 80 acres of the site proposed for development will increase the allowable number of dwelling units on the property from 168 to 218 (an increase in 50 dwelling units). The requested actions do not include approval of a specific development proposal or the subdivision of the property. These series of actions and approvals are hereinafter defined in this Ordinance as the "Project." 2. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has submitted the following applications relating to the Project: Annexation DRC2003-01164, General Plan Land Use Amendment DRC2003-01162, and Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003-01163 (collectively the "Project Applications"). 3. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Very Low Residential (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) and Flood Control/Utility Corridor and is comprised of vacant land, flood control, and utility corridors, and is the proposed site of Tentative Tract Map 16324, also referred to as the Henderson Creek property, for which a General Plan amendment has been filed to change the land use designation from Very Low Residential (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) to Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre). The property to the south is designated Conservation/Flood Control, Mixed Use, and Very Low Residential (. 1-2 dwelling units per acre) and includes Etiwanda Creek, Fire Station No. 176, and vacant land. The property to the east is designated Very Low Residential (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) and includes Sheddan Estates and Brentwood Estates. The property to the west is vacant and is designated Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) and Very Low Residential (. 1-2 dwelling units per acre) and is the proposed site of Tentative Tract Map 16072, also referred to as the Richland Pinehurst property. 4. On May 26, 2004, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application, concluded said hearing on that date, and recommended approval by way of Resolution No. 04- 68. 5. On June 16, 2004, 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. 6. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. 7. The City Council has reviewed and considered the associated Initial Study and Negative Declaration prepared for said project. B, ORDINANCE. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby find, determine, and ordain as follows: SECTION 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. SECTION 2: Based upon the facts and information contained in the record of this project, the City Council makes the following findings and statements, and takes the following actions, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Public Resoumes Code Section 21000 et. seq.): a. Pursuant to CEQA and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the Project. b. Based upon the findings contained in the Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there was no substantial evidence that the Project would have a significant effect on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, City staff provided public notice of the public comment pedod (commencing on April 21,2004 and ending on May 26, 2004) and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. ¢. The City Council has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received prior to and at the June 16, 2004 public hearing and, based on the whole record before it, finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was presented to the City Council for consideration and that it was prepared in compliance with CEQA. d. The City Council finds, based on the whole record, including the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, comments to the Mitigated Negative Declaration, staff report, and staff and public testimony received at the Planning Commission and City Council hearings, that there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on aesthetics, agricultural resources, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation and traffic, and utilities and service systems. The conclusions for these findings are contained in the analysis of potential impact to these resources that is contained after the listing of each resource in the Initial Study. e. The City Council finds, based on the whole record, including the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, comments to the Mitigated Negative Declaration, staff report, and staff and public testimony received at the Planning Commission and City Council hearings, that the impacts to the resources and services listed in this paragraph will be reduced to less than significant levels with mitigation measures: i. Air Quality. The eventual development of the Project site with homes will result in short-term construction related air quality impacts from on-site stationary sources, construction vehicles, construction worker vehicles and energy use. Eleven mitigation measures will be imposed that include, but are not limited to, requiring the proper maintenance of equipment, utilization of Iow-emission mobile construction equipment where feasible, use of paints and coatings that meet SCAQMD standards, implementation of measures designed to reduce fugitive dust such as landscaping, phased grading, street sweeping and the suspension of grading operations during high wind periods, the use of water and soil-stabilizing agents, and other measures designed to reduce project emissions, including the use of electric or clean alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible, the incorporation of Iow polluting mechanical equipment for residential structures, and the use of thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. With these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the Project's impacts to air quality will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. ii. Bioloqical Resources. This Project does not include the approval of any development of the site and reduces the portion of the site authorized for development by 45 acres. However, to address impacts from potential development of the site, mitigation measures have been imposed to require developers who propose development within the Project site to prepare a Biological Resoume Habitat Assessment for the area of the proposed development and to acquire and convey to the County of San Bernardino, or some other qualified conservation entity as approved by the City, land that supports Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS) habitat at a ratio of one acre for each acre of RAFSS disturbed by the proposed project. With these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the impacts to biological resources will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. iii. Cultural Resources. Although this Project does not involve the approval of any specific development project for the site, there is the potential that when developed, Native American archeological resources could be discovered. Mitigation measures have been imposed to require the use of a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, and to have a qualified paleontologist conduct a pre-construction survey of the site and to follow specified protocols for the salvage of any important resources. With these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the impacts to cultural resoumes are mitigated to a level of less than significant. iv. Geoloqy and Soils. The Etiwanda Avenue Scarp segment of the Red Hill Fault Zone traverses a portion of the Project site. In accordance with the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Act, any future development of the site within the Etiwanda Avenue Scarp segment must be accompanied by a geotechnical analysis to determine site-specific mitigation measures. In order to control dust and erosion, four mitigation measures are imposed that include, stabilization of the soil to reduce particulate emissions, requiring the sweeping of area streets, suspending grading operations in high wind conditions, and the use of chemical soil stabilizers. With these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the impacts to geology and soils will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. v. Hazards and Waste Materials. The Project site faces on-going threats of wind-driven rites and is within a hazardous fire area. The Project site was burned during the October 2003 Grand Prix tire, and after the vegetation returns, the area is likely to face additional wind- driven fire risks in the future. To protect against these threats, mitigation measures are imposed that require the development of the site to comply with standards imposed by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the preparation and implementation of a Fuel Modification Plan. During site planning of any development of the site, fire protection landscaping, design features and planning will be made a part of that development proposal. With these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the risks of wind-driven fire will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. vi. Noise. Although no development project is approved with this Project, during future construction of the site, on-site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, and construction equipment, is anticipated to generate noise exceeding City standards. Mitigation measures have been imposed to regulate the hours of construction operations, to require the developer to hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring, and to impose additional measures if construction noise exceeds City standards. With these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the short- term noise impacts from the development of the site will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. f. The City Council finds, based on the whole record, including the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, comments to the Mitigated Negative Declaration, staff report, and staff and public testimony received at the Planning Commission and City Council hearings, that the Project has the potential for contributing to the cumulative impacts identified in the Program EIR for the 2001 City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Upon approval of that General Plan, the City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations of significant adverse environmental effects to aggregate resources, prime farmland, air quality, the acoustical environment, library services, aesthetics and visual resources. Mitigation measures were imposed; however, they did not reduce impacts to less than significant levels. The City Council found that the benefits of the General Plan, including less overall traffic volumes as a result of pedestrian-friendly mixed use development and conservation of valuable open space, outweighed the unavoidable impacts from the General Plan. This Project is within the scope of the General Plan EIR and the City Council finds that by clustering the development into a smaller area, that the changes proposed by this Project are consistent with the General Plan's intent to reduce traffic volumes and preserve open space. g. The City Council finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council. Based on all of the findings contained in this Ordinance, and the evidence in the record, the City Council hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project. h. The mitigation measures in the Mitigated Negative Declaration that correspond to the environmental impacts which may result from the Project are hereby adopted and made a condition of approval of, or incorporated into, the Project. i. The City Council has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The City Council hereby adopts the "Mitigation Monitoring Plan" attached as Exhibit "F" to the June 16, 2004 City Council staff report for this Project. The Mitigation Monitoring Plan shall be used to monitor compliance with the mitigation measures and conditions that have been adopted or made a condition of Project approval as set forth in this Section of this Ordinance and in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan. j. The City Council designates the custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council's decision is based to be the office of the City Planner of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. SECTION 3: Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council dudng the above-referenced public hearing on June 16, 2004, including written and oral staff repods, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The proposed changes in land use designation for the site will provide for a greater podion of the annexed area to be designated for conservation and open space. This change is consistent with Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Policy 2.4.4.5, which seeks to have the City preserve a significant portion of the North Etiwanda Area for open space and conservation. b. The proposed change in density of residential development allowed on the Project site is consistent with neighboring properties, including the proposed Henderson Creek development and the proposed Richland Pinehurst development, and is consistent with General Plan Policy 2.5.2.2, which expresses an intention to apply the Low Density designation to portions of Etiwanda and into the City's Sphere of Influence where the level of services, including roads, shopping and recreational opportunities, are not sufficient to justify higher densities. c. The proposed change in land use designation will promote housing opportunities and help achieve the City's regional share of housing needs. d. The amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties because the land uses and intensities of residential uses allowed are consistent and compatible with the type of housing and open space conservation areas abutting the proposed development. e. The proposed change in designations are also consistent with the provisions of the North Etiwanda Specific Plan which encourages retention of open space and the extension of the image of Old Etiwanda into this area, with relatively large lots and opportunities for an equestrian lifestyle. SECTION 4: Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Sections 1, 2 and 3 above, this Council hereby approves Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003-01163 to change the land use designation from Very Low Residential (.1 -2 dwelling units per acre) to Low Residential (2 - 4 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 80 acres and from Very Low Residential (.1 - 1 dwelling units per acre) to Flood Control/Resource Conservation for approximately 45 acres of land, as shown on Exhibit "A" to this Ordinance. SECTION 5: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this Ordinance is, for any reason, deemed or held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, or preempted by legislative enactment, such decision or legislation shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or words thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, clauses, phrases, or words might subsequently be declared invalid or unconstitutional or preempted by subsequent legislation. SECTION 6: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published within 15 days after its passage 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. ETIWANDA CREEK ANNEXATION DRC2003-01163 (ENSPA) ENSP AMENDMENT ETIWANDA CREEK ANNEXATION ~ PROPOSED LOW (2-4) ~/) PROPOSED RESOURCE CONSERVATION''-~ VERY LOW <2 (NO CHANGE) ~QAN CH 0 C U CAN ON GA Staff Report DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Larry Henderson, Acting City Planner BY: Alan Warren, AICP, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00961 - LYNN AND RENEE MASSEY - The appeal of the Planning Commission decision to approve a single-family residence in the Low Residential District, located at 8045 Camino Predera, Lot 12 of Tract 10035, as proposed by Mike and Wendy Stachowiak - APN: 0207-631-02. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council deny the appeal filed in opposition to the project, thus upholding the Planning Commission approval of Hillside Design Review DRC2003-00961. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: The purpose of this public hearing is to consider the specific request of the appellants, which is for the City Council to deny the Planning Commission approval for a two story single-family house on Lot 12, Tract 10035 along Camino Predera. The Planning Commission, by its approval on May 26, 2004, determined that the single-family house proposed under DRC2003-00961 satisfied all requirements of the Hillside Development Standards. Two neighboring residents spoke in opposition to the application at the Planning Commission meeting (see Exhibit "C"). The subject appeal was submitted on June 7, 2004. While the approved design is well within the City Hillside standards, the appellants are requesting that the house, and others as may be proposed, be provided with a "lower profile" than is presently approved (Exhibit "A"). The assumed reason for the lower building profile is to preserve views from their house on the north side of the street. In a meeting with the Mayor and staff, the appellants stated that their desire is that the house be lowered so that only the roof is visible above street grade. Staff analysis of the proposed hillside design is contained in the attached Planning Commission report of May 26, 2004. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DRC2003-00961 - APPEAL/MASSEY July 7, 2004 Page 2 CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the project site. CONCLUSION: If the City Council concurs with the findings and conclusions of the Planning Commission, it would be appropriate to deny the subject appeal by the adoption of the attached resolution. Respectfully submitted, Acting City Planner LH:AW:Is Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Letter of Appeal, dated June 7, 2004 Exhibit "B" - Planning Commission Staff Report, May 26, 2004 Exhibit "C"- Planning Commission Minutes, May 26, 2004 Draft Resolution to Deny Appeal for Hillside Design Review DRC2003-00961 APPEAL 'OF-G:~~-~7'i~.'~ REQUEST FORM i. Jack Lam, City Marlager (S091 477-2750 Case File No. ~)*jD.,~_. ~,~_~0'~ - (~C~ ~ Project: '~ ~ ~ ~+~[~}< " Appellant: ~?~ '~ ~ Phone: ~q-~J-~g~ Fax: E-mail Address: ~ ~~ ~ ~ st% ,0.~~ acknowledge the f/ling of this appeal and cetlify that all of the above infor~,ation is true and correct. print Name and T~tle RECEIVED Date/rime Received Received By Fees Received Receipt No. Fire Receipt No. JUN 0 7 t(~4 , i:\Final~Forms\Counter~Appeal Request FOFT) 04/0:3/08 ~ITY OF RN~GHO ~ c~ CL~ A cc Reason for appealing City Planner's decision: To request the council recognize and agree to the importance of a lower profile than has currently been approved for this project. This is necessary in order to set the standard of future projects along Camino Predera, and to protect the integrity of the Red Hill Community. A Tentative Map was previously approved approximately two years ago on these very lots (a Concordia Homes project) which included a number of requirements and Conditions of Approval that served to reduce the profile of future residential along this hillside and was supported by neighbors and City Council following an almost four year collective effort. These lots will now be developed one by one and because of the strict hillside standards, all future projects will have an impact on what is left of the Red Hill area, a unique and beautiful community. Therefore, it is very important that the Stachowiak project be a model for those to come. THE CITY OF I~AN C H 0 C U CAM 0 N GA Staff Report DATE: May 26, 2004 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Alan Warren, AICP, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00961 MIKE AND WENDY STACHOWIAK - A request to develop a single-family residence in the Low Residential District at 8045 Camino Predera, Lot 12 of Tract 10035, APN: 0207-631-02. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Site Characteristics: The site is vacant with native shrubs and grasses with a line of mature Silk Oaks along the south property line. The grades are approximately 24 percent over most of the lot with significant steeper grades near the south portion. ANALYSIS: A. General: The site is a single-family residential lot that had previously been approved for a new tract development along the south side of Camino Predera on Red Hill facing Foothill Boulevard. The proposed house complies with the zoning and Hillside Development Regulations. The design is a true split-level with the first floor entry floor becoming the second floor on the down slope portion of the lot. Because of the plus 5- foot cut to accommodate the down slope "first" floor, and near 7-foot cut of the front mound for the driveway, the Hillside Development Regulations (Section 17.24.020B.2) require Planning Commission review and approval. Refer to the Design Review Committee (DRC) action comments of April 6, 2004, regarding the cut issues. B. Design Review Committee: The proposal was reviewed and recommended for approval by the Design Review Committee (McPhail, Stewart, Fong), as submitted on April 6, 2004. At the meeting, the Committee and the applicant were advised of a neighboring resident's concern regarding the obstruction of existing views to the south. Since the design complies with the present City standards the Committee approved the project. The Design Review Committee did request that the applicant investigate the potential of reducing the roof pitch and moving the footprint a little further down the slope in order to lower the height of the house. The applicant has chosen to not make any changes to the plans submitted to the Committee, and has not submitted any information on the Committee's request to investigate reducing the height of the home. This is a design /./ policy issue and should be discussed by the Planning Commission. The project design PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2003-00961 - STACHOWIAK May 26, 2004 Page 2 does comply with City standards, but it is possible to redesign the project and further reduce the height of the home. The Committee offered to review, on its consent calendar, any changes the applicant may wish to consider regarding the neighboring resident's concerns. C. Environmental Assessment: The application is categorically exempt from CEQA review. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends after reviewing the height and design of the home, approval of DRC2004-00961 as submitted or with modified conditions, by the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval. City Planner BB:AW:Is Attachments: Exhibit "A"- Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "C"- Grading Plan Exhibit "D"- Sections Exhibit "E" - Roof Plan/Main Floorplan Exhibit "F" - Lower Floorplan Exhibit "G"- Elevations Exhibit "H"- Design Review Committee Action Minutes April 6, 2004 Exhibit "1" - Letter from Chuck Buquet dated April 5, 2004 Draft Resolution of Approval for DRC2003-00961 Vicinity Map DRC2003-00961 Foothill Blvd. DRG2003-00~O~ Exhibit "A" .~:~' - ~ ',~ /~'*~ ~ 2~/' Ih i~ " r e , ~ '~ '~ VICINITY MAP ~ ~' 1/23/04 ,~ SITE PLAN PROJECT INFORMATION STACHOWIAK RESIDENCE APN ~ -- 0207-651-02-0000 ~ enBlneerinB - planning- ~u~eulng LOT 12 TRACT 10055 "~"~ ~~, 8045 CAMINO PREDERA LOT COVERAGE --- 1954 SF ~'~ ~"~"~ RANCHO CUCAMONGA CA 91730 ~.SS~L ~. ~.*~ r DRC 2005-00961 / I ........................... ',~ EARTHWORK ~ CU'[ = 346 CY BENCHMARK ,,X~'~ I OENTERLINE INtERSECTiON OF CAM~NO PREDERA AND PREDERA COURT ELEVATION - 151405 SCALE 1' = 10' INTERVALS · GRADING PLAN STACHOWlAK RESIDENCE planning *surging LOT 12 TRACT 10035 "~* ~~, 8045 CAMINO PREDERA ~'~'~'~ RANCHO CUCAMONGA CA 91730 DRC 2003-00961 SECTION A-A ..... ._ ~.=..~ :~z.~ ..... SECTION F-F ~~~ _ ....... - ....... SECTION D-D SECTION B-B .... .=~:.~ ~X~I~=5,~F~~ .... .... ~ EX S BERM SECTION E E / ~11 ~-~ VIEW AT CURB HEIGHT 'T~ ...... X-SECTIONS SECTION C-C .......... -,~' .-- STACHOWlAK RESIDENCE ~nglnaarinD- pl~nnln~-su~e~ln~ LOT 17 TRACT 10055 ,~, ~~, 8045 CAMINO PREDERA ~" ~'~'~ RANCHO CUCAMONGA CA 91730 ,~t,. t ~,,~, r DRC 2003-00961 MAIN FLOOR PLAN ,ii, LOLUE~ FLOOR PLaN ~NT NO. 2 MAIN FLR 18®1 UPPER FLR BT 8ART ~U~5iDE DEC ~3 LEFT ELEVATION SPqT NO ~ DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:10 p.m. Alan Warren April 6, 2004 HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW DRC2003-00961 - MIKE & WENDY STACHOWlAK - A request to develop a single-family residence in the Low Residential Distdct at 8045 Camino Predera Street, Lot 12 of Tract 10035 - APN: 0207-631-02. Design Parameters: The site is a single-family residential lot that had previously been approved for a new tract development along the south side of Camino Predera Street above Foothill Boulevard. The previous design review application proposed a private street along the lower portions of the lots that fronted on Camino Predera Street. Vehicle access to many of the lots was to be from the south (downhill side of lots) off the pdvate street. The subject lot was to be part of the access to the pdvate street that was to be attained with a lot line adjustment and deletion of one of the 21 lots. The recent development approval for the area included a private drive access along the south portions of each lot. In order to keep this option open for future development consideration, staff recommends that an access easement be provided for the benefit of the lot to the east. Further, staff recommends that a similar easement be provided on the remaining lots that were to gain vehicle access along the south portion of the lots. The project proponent has decided to develop only a few of the lots and to sell most of the original lots to individual developers. The previous project had a controversial process with residents on the north side of Camino Predera Street in opposition to the potential blocking of views south across the site. The grades are around 24 percent over most of the lot with significant steeper grades near the south portion. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: 1. The major issue for any house product proposed on the south side of the street is the concern of residents on the north side regarding potential view obstructions to the south. The proposed house is a true split level design that exhibits a single-story facing the street. This entry level becomes the second floor as the structure continues down the slope. The two- story portion faces south down the slope. The house fits within the building envelope as required by the Hillside Development provisions. 2. Due to the lowering of the house in relation to the existing street level, grading cuts in excess of 5 feet (up to 9 feet) are proposed. As a result, the project will need to be approved by the Planning Commission as required by the Hillside Development standards. The cut was needed to lower the house in relation to the existing street grade. Staff believes that the amount of vertical cut is justified in this case to lower the house to single-story level with the street grade 3. As part of'the grading design, a significant mound (remnant feature of the Camino Predera roadway cut) is proposed to be removed from the front yard area. The isolated mound does not appear to be a significant land feature and, therefore, staff does not believe its retention is I I I,~l~ imp°rtant t° the intent °f the hillside standards'/- ,2. ' /(--~' Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. There is an existing line of mature trees (Silk Oaks) along the south portion of the site. The grading for the rear yard does not appear to affect the trees retention. Staff recommends that the trees be protected in an appropriate manner during construction. 2. City residential standards require a 15-foot level backyard area immediately behind the rear wall of houses. The level area behind the rear wall is less than this amount. Staff recommends that a 15-foot level area be provided with a deck or stepped retaining walls below the proposed retaining walls just behind and below the rearofthe house. Staff believes such a feature will satisfy the intent of the rear backyard requirement. 3. Front yard and rear slope landscaping should be provided in pursuant to City standards. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: 1. Round off and contour all graded slopes to blend with the existing terrain, and present a more natural appearance. 2. Establish proper soil management techniques to reduce the adverse effects (i.e., erosion) of grading. 3. Select plant materials for their suitability to the environment and compatibility with Xeriscape principles (i.e., water conservation). Include existing mature trees worthy of preservation in the landscape concept. 4. Select fast growing vegetative ground covers for fill/cut slope areas to retard soil erosion. 5. Significant landscaping is required for down slope elevations. Slopes that required landscaping shall be planted with informal clusters of trees and shrubs to soften and vary the slope plane. Jute netting is required. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee forward the application to the Planning Commission with a favorable recommendation subject to the above listed conditions. Desi.cln Review Committee Action: Members Present: McPhail, Stewart, Fong Staff Planner: Alan Warren The Committee received and reviewed written comments from neighboring residents requesting alternative designs be considered. The Committee approved the project, with a Conceptual Planting Plan, as submitted and with the above listed conditions except as noted: 1. The Committee requested that the applicant investigate the potential of reducing the roof pitch and moving the footprint a little further down the slope in order to lower the height of the house. The modification should come back to the DRC on the Consent Calendar. 2. The rear 15-foot level area required in the backyard maybe attained with an expanded deck area at the rear of the house. ? 3. The specific pool area design is not required at this time, but it should be returned to the DRC as a MDR application when the pool plans have reached a more detailed concept. April 5, 2004 Brad Buller, City Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729-0807 Re: Hillside Design Review DRC2003-00768 - Lot 17 of Tract 10035 - APN: 0207-631-07 Hillside Design Review DRC2003-00961 - Lot 12 of Tracl 10035 - APN: 0207-631-02 Dear Brad: This is as a follow-up to a number of meetings and discussions concerning development of the hillside area located on the East Side of Camino Predera over the past several years. As you will recall, the referenced lots are within a tract that was the subject of a tentative tract map that involved considerable review and input from the City and property owners along this street. The approved tentative map was abandoned when the developer determined that the measures collectively arrived on by the City, the developer and adjacent property owners were not cost-effective for timely development of this property. The developer has since developed three lots at the north end of this tract and is apparently selling this tract off for individual lot development of what was originally intended as a custom lot subdivision. This correspondence is to register my continuing concern with what has been proposed and approved along one of the last remaining vestiges of the Red Hill area over the past several months. This correspondence is to formally request that careful study be given to impacts of the referenced and future development of this particular hillside area prior to any Design Review Approvals by either City staff or the Planning Commission. The Red Hill area is one of the only areas within the southwestern portion of the City that allows a unique opportunity for residential development that can capitalize on the natural hill contours and still allow for views of the valley that can be shared by all with proper development of this area. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has a reputation of challenging builders to design projects that go well beyond "meeting the requirements" as I have experienced first hand with some"of the projects that I have been a part of over many years. I believe that the result has, or in this case, will be development that compliments the area that will be embraced by existing and new residents in each case. While development interests do not often appreciate this approach, ti ti the result can be a superior byproduct of the additional attention to detail that occurs with such a process. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has hillside development standards that are intended to provide direction to encourage development that is sensitive to the unique characteristics common to hillside properties. During the tentative tract map review and approval process, the Planning Commission gave direction to the developer to reduce the profile of the residential product through a combination of split level design and exploration of driveway alternatives that could serve to reduce the overall residential profiles along this hillside slope. A unique driveway access design proposed by the developer and approved by the Planning Commission reduced the need to have a row effect of driveways, garages and houses along the eastern edge of Camino Predera. The three homes nearing completion on the northern three lots, while generally attractive, have resulted in an imposing street massing and height that does not seem appropriate for a hillside area. The sideyard setback areas between these large houses are very similar to a normal tract configuration and in essence, block out any view of the valley from the existing custom homes built some years ago across the street on the West Side of Camino Predera. The City's minimum architectural standards included within the hillside development requirements states that buildings on hillsides should be terraced to follow the slope so the building correctly fits into the ground and minimizes the effect on the hillside. Further guidance is given in these standards to not allow rigid vertical elements on the downhill side of the residence. Specifically, "The design of the structure shall give consideration to the lot's size and configuration in order to avoid the appearance of overbuilding or crowding and to minimize the blocking of views. For example, within a development, the majority of the units should not be designed with minimum setback to minimum setback." The three houses, when viewed both from Camino Predera and at the east elevation when viewed from Vineyard, appear overbuilt for the hillside area constructed. The referenced development proposed for Lot 17 and Lot 12 also appear to have a large building mass and profile in relation to the hillside condition, based upon my last review of plans filed with the City for these lots. Both appear to be designed to create as high a finished floor grade as may be possible in order to maximize "view capture" for future residents. They appear to have the lower floor grade that is also a substantial height above the proposed rear yard grade, which makes the rear vertical element more pronounced than one would expect when seeking to reduce the appearance of overbuilding when viewed from the east. We are a bit perplexed as to why Lot 17 is on the Design Review Committee agenda, even as a consent agenda item. It was our understanding during a meeting with you and our concerned neighbor some weeks ago that this design was already the subject of a City Planner Approval in December 2003. He was advised that he had no recourse as to design review input or reconsideration of the pad elevation that was approved at that time. As you are probably well aware, this lot now has what appears to be a precise grade pad that was completed a few weeks ago, and the lot between this lot and the three nearly constructed houses has been mass graded by the builder. The City's hillside development standards also provide that "Any significant public vista or view corridor as seen from a secondary, collector or major arterial should be protected." On this same page of the materials under the "This" illustrative exhibit, it states "Siting the new dwelling downhill and changing the '. massing will allow better views for the uphill house." Under the "Not This" illustrative exhibit, it states "Siting the new building uphill near the existing dwelling will obstruct most of the view for the uphill house." This view corddor text continues "Projects should incorporate clustering, variable setbacks, multiple orientations, and other site planning techniques to preserve open spaces, protect natural features, and offer views to residents." Gang driveways as also illustrated within the City's hillside development standards document, and proposed with the tentative tract map that was abandoned by the developer, also could serve to reduce profile along the street edge of this hillside area. This would allow for a housing product that was garage loaded from the base, and allow for more flexibility with the overall residential pad grade, rather than creating a need to have a fixed number of driveways and garages along' the existing streetscape. The existing homeowners and property owners along the West Side of Camino Predera do not expect to have a completely unobstructed view of the valley as they currently have with this property being vacant. They also do not believe it unreasonable to expect to be able to enjoy some preservation of view sharing opportunity with any new development that may be contemplated for these vacant lots. Based upon the foregoing, we are requesting that the referenced design review consideration be continued until the issues presented with this correspondence can be evaluated within the context of the City's hillside development standards, as well as within the context of the City's Checklist for Hillside Design Review. We believe that a master plan approach should be undertaken to determine what would be reasonable and prudent residential product along the entire hillside slope area, and not just on a case by case basis as currently being provided under the individual lot development strategy being followed by the builder. We also believe that this existing hillside area needs to be developed in a manner provided in the City's hillside guidelines, which states "Design of building sites should be sensitive to the natural terrain" and should also respect the sensitivity of the existing properties on both sides of the street. This hillside is too important a resource to allow it to continue to be developed in a case by case piecemeal approach. We have taken the liberty of enclosing various documents and materials for your ease in review as pertains to the references and attributed text in the foregoing correspondence. We truly hope that you and the Design Review Committee will seriously consider our request as being timely with what we believe will be development that we expect will continue to be otherwise individually presented along this entire hillside area. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter of considerable importance to our neighborhood. Please feel free to contact me at your earliest opportunity should you have any questions or need of additional information or assistance with all the foregoing. Sincerely, Chuck and Suzanne Buquet 8725 Predera Court Enclosures Cc: Planning Commission Mayor and City Council 4 17.24.070 Development standards. Within the framework of previous design guidelines, the following standards have been prepared to give more specific direction. These are minimum standards and shall apply to any use, development, or alteration of land as specified in Section 1724.020. D. Architecture. 1. The building envelope for all structures shall be as follows: 'a, Downhill Lot - An overall maximum height of 30 feet is permitted, as measured from finished grade, from the minimum front setback extending towards the rear of the lot. The maximum height at the side setbacks shall be 15 feet extending up towards the center of the lot at a 45 degree angle to a maximum height of 30 feet as measured from finished grade. BUILDING ENVELOPE FOR DOWNHILL LOT D~h~l Section . ; J Minimum side S~eet b. Uphill Lot - A maximum height of 15 feet is permitted at the minimum front setback and shall extend up and toward the rear of the lot at a 45 degree angle to a maximum overall height of 30 feet as measured from finished grade. A maximum height at the side setbacks shall be 15 feet extending up toward the center of the lot at a 45 degree angle to a maximum height of 30 feet as measured from finished grade, BUILDING ENVELOPE FOR UPHILL LOT !30 ~----~iMinlm&am side setback ~ Street Elevation Uphill Section c. Cross Slope lots - A maximum overall height of 30 feet is permitted, as measured from finished grade, from the minimum front setback extending toward the rear of the lot. The maximum height at the side setbacks shall be 15 feet extending up toward the center of the lot at a 45 degree angle to a maximum of 30 feet as measured from finished grade. d. The foregoing provisions are intended to apply to the main bulk and overall mass of the building. Architectural enrichments and variations in roof massing are encouraged. Projections above the height limits for architectural features may be considered subject to the provisions contained in Section 17.04.050-B-1-f. 2. Terrace the building to follow the slope. Where possible, use roofs on lower levels for the deck open spaces of upper levels. Where decks are provided, they shall be a minimum of 6 feet in width to provide adequate usable area and to effectively break-up the mass. THIS ...... NOT THIS 3. Provide architectural treatment to all sides of a structure. Elements of the architectural treatment used on the front facade shall be repeated on all sides of a structure with additional emphasis on those elevations visible from adjacent properties or public rights-of- way NOT THIS 2. Preserve views of significant visual features as seen from both within and outside a hillside development. When designing lots and plotting homes, the following provisions should be taken into consideration: a. Homes should be oriented to allow view opportunities, although such views may be limited; however, residential privacy should not be unreasonably sacrificed. b. Any significant public vista or view corridor as seen from a secondary, collector or major arterial should be protected. 3. Projects should incorporate clustering, vadable setbacks, multiple orientations, and other site planning techniques to preserve open spaces, protect natural features, and offer views to residents. 4. Whenever possible, as based on the overall parcel configuration and orientation, homes should be designed to front onto eastJ~vest streets or should be plotted to follow the natural contours rather than fronting onto north/south streets. 5. Where possible, graded areas should be designed with manufactured slopes located on the uphill side of structures, thereby, hiding the slope behind the structure. THIS NOT THIS 6. Clustering of development through transfer of dwelling unit allocations should be encouraged in environmentally sensitive areas in order to reduce the potential for fire hazard and spread, erosion and excess runoff and to preserve existing natural features and open space. B. Driveways and Roadways. 1. Driveways which serve more than one parcel are encouraged as a method of reducing unnecessary grading, paving and site disturbance. 2. Roadways should conform to the natural landform. They should not greatly alter the physical and visual character of a hillside by creating large notches in ridgelines or by defining wide straight alignments. Reduced road sections, split sections, and parking bays should be considered in the lay-out of hillside streets to reduce grading. NOT THIS 2. The design of the structure shall give consideration to the lot's size and configuration in order to avoid the appearance of overbuilding or crowding and to minimize the blocking of views. For example, within a development, the majority of the units should not be designed with minimum setback to minimum setback. 3. Avoid large expanses of a single matedal on walls, roofs, or paving areas. Create interesting, small scale patterns by breaking-up building mass, varying building materials, and through design and placement of windows and doom. 'I'H]S NOT THIS 4. Building materials and color schemes should blend with the natural landscape. Treated wood or materials of a wood-like appearance, having the necessary fire retardant characteristics, are encouraged for extedor surfaces. Where extedor stucco is used, it should have a final coat of integrated color in a muted earth tone. Contrasting color accents should be kept to a minimum, particularly on the view side. Use of other natural materials, such as dyer rock, is encouraged. D. Walls and Fences. 1. Walls and fences can be used to define a sense of place and create an attractive appearance. However, walls should not dominate a view, and their height should be limited adjacent to a street or trail or within a rear yard. Terracing and extensive landscaping can reduce the effective bulk. In addition, street front walls should incorporate varying design and natural materials. The use of open view fencing is encouraged, so long as adequate public safety and residential privacy are maintained. ? ' ~ ' Retaining w~ll~ - top end fooling elevation." ~ Sha~ pa~nt a~ ~ 3:1 or~ee~ ~ / ' ~ Lo~on, eleva~,~S=eofp~se~bu~gpad~ · . Stme~ - exlst~g and ~m~ed ~ss~s, im~m~n~, ~gh~-o~.waY, e~. ~ cen~ m~i a~ ~y ef ~e ~llo~ng ~ ~y ~e mqulm~ ~as~ up~ ~er m~w el ~ d~vel~m~t ap~l~. ~e ~ ~ ~e ~s am d~=n~ed in o~er ha,d~, S~ R~u~fi~,.or ~e C~s O~lnsn~: .. ~ . -- 'Slope Analysi~ Map: For ~e pu~ose of defe~/ni~g the amount and/oaa~on of land, es ~ exits in ~s natu~l state, 'by a range ofs/o~ gmdien~. . · ' ....... ~ U~mphlcalm~pm~dbya . . . '~. · Om~ ~ a s~le or,of.Iaaa ~e~ t tach ~ .I~ ~ e~ a ~r ~e~a~ ~ as Gmdi~ ~' ' pe~nt.~ ~ ~, >20 pe~t up = 25 pe~n~ >25 pe=;nt up ~ 30 ~e~ ;~ >30 ~ . (~u~ s~u~e of de~ ~ s~le ofda~ u~ In ;1~ enely~s e~ ~ pmfi~. " ...... ~ ~ ~ne~, - · . . f7,24.~ ~ ~ . ~lope Pmfll~; A miflim~m of thme ~lope p~file~ sh~ll: " Hil~ide DR Filing - 1t~ ' ' ' Page 6 ~ its residents will not have to live with what the County dictates. He felt annexation is a better for the City. McPhail concurred. She said that in a perfect world there would be no more but that is not reality. She felt that if development occurs under County standards, the City would rced to accept something the City does not want. She believed having the area under City lows certain safeguards that are important for the future. Commissioner the action is similar to what the Commission acted upon several weeks ago. She s are always very challenging. She noted that the City could deal with specific uire mitigation measures when,a specific project comes before the City in the future. She the area is a positive step because she believed any development would have a higher density and less open space and the City would have less control over She thought the City has a higher standard of development than the County. includes considerably more conservation land and open space than under ; and she felt that is a positive outcome. She noted environmental issues would still be e. Based upon what was before the Commission tonight, she felt the project She again noted that equestrian issues could be addressed when a development I Commissioner McNiel stated that when the first prepared, the Sphere of Influence was addressed because the land was ultimately of the City, particularly with respect to Police and Fire services. He said that at same time the City was planning the Sphere, the County was also planning the sphere and unty's document contained some frightening aspects. He indicated one such idea wag transfers where a 100-acre site with only 10 buildable acres could take the yield of the 10(: put it on the 10 acres, which could result in condominiums. He observed the City plan does not a that prospect. He said the City has made every possible effort to draw the Sphere projects ~ so that the City would have better control, resulting in less density and a better fit with ~ image. He moved approval of the resolutions. Chairman Macias agreed with the Commissioners' comments. He wa., process, given the public testimony, would allow the City to better address any sigl cts that occur as a result of future development at the site. He was encouraged by the be built and the increase in conservation land. He felt the project is the c of a very straightforward planning effort that will stand the test of any legal challenge. Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Fletcher, to adopt the resolutions recommending of Annexation DRC2003-00961, General Plan Amendment DRC2003-01162, and Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003-01163. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, MAClAS, McNIEL, McPHAIL, STEWART NOES: NONE .~J HILLSIDE DES GN REVIEW DRC2003-00961 - MIKE AND WENDY STACHOWIAK- A request - ~ to develop a single-family residence in the Low Residential District, located at 8045 Camino I - Predera, Lot 12 of Tract 10035 - APN: 0207-631-02. Alan Warren, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Macias invited public comments. ti ) Planning Commission Minutes -9- May 26, 2004 Mike Schneider, Cornerstone Group, 1485 Spruce Street, Riverside, stated he represented Mike and Wendy Stachowiak. He said they worked with staff about eight months. He reported they looked at possibility of moving the house 5 feet down the hill and it only reduced the total height I foot twhheile increasing the slope on the ddveway to an unacceptable level. He commented that Mr. Buquet voiced concemS about the view, but stated that Mr. Buquet's house is several houses down the street. He said they looked at the possibility of using a hip roof over the garage but it reduced the amount of storage that they want to put there. He indicated it would be possible to change the roofline. Wendy Stachowiak, 8045 Camino Predera, Rancho Cucamonga stated they spoke to most of the homeowners on the street and they only received opposition from one. Mike Stachowiak, 8045 Camino Predera, Rancho Cucamonga, commented that the Hillside regulations state that houses cannot exceed 30 feet and pointed out that their house is only 22 feet. He said the cC&Rs dictate a height no higher than 20 feet above the curb at the midpoint of the lot and their house is 4 feet below that maximum. He maintained they have done a lot to be within limits. Mrs. Stachowiak indicated they originally wanted a 2-story house with the first story at ground level and the second story above, but they changed it to put the second story below street level. She felt they have done everything to make everyone else happy and still get what they want. Mr. Schneider noted that the excessive cut, which requires Commission review, will occur inside the house and will not be seen from the outside. Mr. Stachowiak said that when Camino Predera Street was constructed, excess dirt was placed on their lot. He stated they would not have excess cut if that had not happened. Renee Messey, 8088 Camino Predera, stated the read actually cut through the natural hill and no excess fill was placed on the lot. She said that several years ago Concordia Homes planned a tract at this location and the neighbors spent a lot of time with staff and the developer to design an acceptable project; however it never was built. She said that plan celled for the three homes just finished to the east, two homes at street level, and the remaining homes below street level with another street to the south for access. She commented that the lots are now being sold separately. She said she spoke with Mr. Warren and Brad Buller about this difficult hillside area that will be built house by house. She felt it is important that this house set the standard because it is in the middle of the houses yet to be built. She believed the area is unique and said Rancho Cucamonga shouldn't look like recent development in Upland where the houses are right next to each other and square. She thought such development feels like it is closing in on the area. She favored staff's suggestion to consider moving the house toward the back end of the property because she thought it would set the standard for open space that was planned for in the Concordia tract. She said the house across the street will be huge and she will be affected by what is built there. She asked the Commission to look at the recommendations of the Design Review Committee and direct the applicant to look at it further. Chuck Buquet, 725 Predera Court, Rancho Cucamonga, stated the project is one lot cattycomer from where he lives. He said his objection is not about his view. He commented that Concordia originally wanted to construct cookie-cutter 2-story houses and they were told to drop the homes. He said concordia got an approval and then decided to sell off the lots in what he felt was a "bait-and- switch" action. He felt it is regrettable that Planning's policy is that a single lot development is treated as one man's castle. He believed the three houses to the north are not castles. He said the proposed house is on the best of the remaining lots to be developed. He acknowledged the lot would be developed but said he wants to make sure it is a good plan. He wanted the house reduced to a single-story profile with the house set behind the garage. He noted the house is set back27 feet from the curb face and believed it world be better to reduce the roofline and reduce the garage Planning Commission Minutes -10- May 26,~,0~ profile to a single story. He wanted the house to be dropped so it would not stick out. He commented the house is 3,600 square feet, which he felt is large for the lot. He said the neighbors do not want a corridor effect. He felt the Design Review Committee had good suggestions to reduce the roof profile and slide the house downhill. He indicated they chatted with the Stachowiaks when they visited and his objections are not about his view but that he wants a house that is sensitive to the hillside and the neighbors. He asked that the Commission direct the applicant to go back and respond to the points raised by the Design Review Committee. He suggested future homes be built with gang driveways and garage loaded access. Mr. Buquet believed that whatever is approved here will set the tone for development on all the other lots. He said this is the first house and it is on a prime lot and will set the tone for future development. There were no further public comments on this item. Commissioner Fletcher noted that the Design Review Committee requested the applicant investigate other options and the applicant chose not to make any changes or submit any additional information. He was bothered that there was no response from the applicant. He felt the comment with respect to this house setting the tone for future development was appropriate.. He thought more work could be done on the application and it may be a better project as a result. He agreed it is a unique area. He did not believe view is a big issue and he thought the uphill residents just have to accept the fact that views will be impacted. He felt it is appropriate to build special homes in this area. Conversely, he acknowledged this is a personal home for the applicant and they spent time and effort on how they wanted it designed. He thought a little more work could be done and the application could return to the Design Review Committee. Commissioner McPhail stated she was on the Design Review Committee. She pointed out the project fits within the Hillside standards and said Jhat was why the Committee did not mandate that the roof be dropped. She said they asked the applicant to look at the idea for the sake of the neighbors. She also noted the applicant indicated they designed the garage to have storage above so that they wouldn't fill the garage with things and have to park their care in the driveway. Commissioner Stewart indicated she would like to ask the applicant a question regarding the 1-foot reduction. Chairman Macias invited additional public comment. Mr. Schneider said the berm is 25 feet at the middle of the lot and closer to 27 or 28 feet at the back. He noted that moving the house back 5 feet only lowered the house profile 1 foot but the driveway becomes steeper. He also said that would move the backyard into a steeper area of the lot. He commented the applicants have three children. He stated the house appears to be a single story from Camino predera and noted it is below the maximum height allowable. Commissioner Stewart asked if changes could be made to the roof. Mr. Schneider stated the roof pitch could be lowered to make the roof level with the roof over the main part of the house, He said they tried a hip or hip and partial gable design and it destroyed the design of the house. He reported this was the third design in 8 months. He said they looked at what the Design Review Committee requested, but his clients did not like it. He commented that lots range from 10 to 30 feet below the street level and said that the houses currently built ara two-story houses above the street, which this is not. Mrs. Stachowiak observed their house gives the appearance of a single-story house, not a 2-story house from Camino Predera. She did not feel it would give a corridor effect. She stated they are homeowners, not developers. She noted there is a small area beyond the deck that will give her a small backyard for her children to play. She did not want to push the house back on the lot and force her children to play in the front yard. She said she would like to enter on the first floor with her Planning Commission Minutes -11- May 26, 2004 bedrooms above, but she will have to have the bedrooms below instead. She observed their first step would be level with the sidewalk. She felt the neighbors are comparing her Iow-profile house to three 2-story houses down the street. She said they did not submit the changes requested by the Design Review Committee because they were not acceptable to them. Commissioner Stewart agreed their house us not like the others. She asked if they would be agreeable to the change to the roofline. Mr. Schneider stated the gable pitch could be changed to be in line with the mst of the roof. Mrs. Stachowiak said she was not happy about such a change but was willing to do it to get her house built. Mrs. Messey stated that when the original 21-1ot project was approved, the Commission set a standard and did not want 2-story houses. Brad Buller, City Planner, commented theirs were two projects even before Concordia Homes. He said it had always been staff's position that the design should start with a single story massing from the street and have the second story drop down the hill. He indicated staff does not feel it is necessary to allow things above the garage, as the garage is the most predominant part of the house from the street level. He remarked staff feels the storage could be in a variety of other places or it could be scaled down a little to lower the view from the street. He noted that was a policy matter for the Commission to decide. He acknowledged the house as proposed complies with the technical envelope of the Hillside Ordinance. Commissioner McNiel felt it was interesting that a custom lot subdivision is opposed as being piecemeal development. He said previous developers told the City it was crazy to require compliance with the Hillside Ordinance. He stated Concordia worked out a beautiful design but it was obviously not financially feasible. He observed they own the lots and have the right to sell them off for individual development. He agreed the standards need to be set now. He did not remember the first three houses being processed. He felt this was an acceptable house. He noted the applicant said they could drop the pitch on the garage roof to meet the balance of the roofline. He supported the project and recommended the roofline be dropped. Commissioner McPhail felt' it would be good to drop the roof pitch. Commissioner Fletcher stated he had been bothered that the applicant was not willing to come back to the Design Review Committee. He said the Committee works with developers in a give-and-take fashion to come up with better projects, not to merely throw up roadblocks. Commissioner Stewart felt the applicants were cooperative with the Design Review committee. She they have to live in it. She felt they listened to the Committee but said this is their dream house and . appreciated their willingness to lower the roof over the garage and felt it is a nice compromise. Chairman Macias felt the Design Review Committee gave a mixed message by approving the project but asking the applicant to investigate other options. He appreciated that the applicant looked atthe other options and thanked them for making the compromise. Mr. Buller marked the desired height of the revised gable roof pitch to be sure staff knew what the Commission and applicant were thinking. The Commission and applicant agreed. oved b McPhail seconded by McNiel, to adopt the resolution approving Hillside Design Motion: D1~C2003~00961 with modification to require that the garage roof pitch be reduced to lower Review the peak to the same height as the peak over the main portion of the house. Motion carried by the following vote:. Planning Commission Minutes -12- May ~,' ~10~ AYES: FLETCHER, MACIAS, McNIEL, McPHAIL, STEWART NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE - carded DIRECTOR'S REPORTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004/05 Jerry Dyer, Senior Civil Engineer presented the staff report and indicated Item 18 should because it is the same as Item 10. Commissioner McNiel noted that Item 23 calls for installing field lighting at Los School. He questioned why the City is installing lights at the school. Mr. Dyer responded there is a Joint Use Agreement. Commissioner McNiel asked about the removal of the Route 66 Mr. Dyer responded the plans call for removal of the old of a pedestrian bddge. Commissioner Fletcher asked about work on the Mr. Dyer responded Phase I is in the EIR phase, lase II is currently in design. Commissioner Fletcher noted that items 56 and 58 are for installation of traffic signals at three different intersections. He asked the cdteria for installation. Mr. Dyer replied traffic warrants on street volume. Dan James, Senior Civil the number of accidents is also considered. Chairman Macias was. see Item 5 calling for designing and constructing landscaping north of the Metrolink tracks. ~d it is very dusty there. Mr. Dyer stated the received a grant for a portion of this project. r who owns the land. Mr. Dyer re that the land is leased by the City from BNSF Railroad and Metrolink. invited public comments but there were none. Moved by McNiel, seconded by Stewart, to find the Capital Improvement Program in with the General Plan. Motion carded by the following vote: ~'ES: FLETCHER, MACIAS, McNIEL, McPHAIL, STEWART ~IOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE - carded Planning Commission Minutes -13- May 26, 2004 17.24.030 Application filing requirements. A. A natural features map, which shall identify all existing slope banks, ddgelines, canyons, natural drainage courses, federally recognized blue line streams, rock outcroppings, and existing vegetation. Also depicted shall be landslides and other existing geologic hazards; B. A conceptual grading plan, which shall include the following items in addition to those required by Section 19.04.060 or as part of the submittal requirement checklist: 1. A legend with appropriate symbols which should include, but not be limited to, the following items: top of wall, top of curb, high point, Iow point, elevation of significant trees, spot elevations, pad and finished floor elevations, and change in direction of drainage. 2. A separate map with proposed fill areas colored in green and cut areas colored in red, with areas where cut and fill exceed depths established in the hillside development guidelines and standards cleedy shown. Additionally, the areas of cut and fill, calculated as a percentage of the total site area, shall be included on the plan. 3. Contours shall be shown for existing and natural land conditions and proposed work. Existing contours shall be depicted with a dashed line with every fifth contour darker, and proposed contours shall be depicted as above except with a solid line. Contours shall be shown according to the following schedule: Maximum I~tural Interval Slope Feet 2% or less 2 to 19.9% 20%+ 5 C. A conceptual drainage and flood control facilities map describing planned drainage improvements; D. A slope analysis map for the purpose of determining the amount and location of land as it exists in its natural state falling into each slope category as specified below. For the slope map, the applicant shall use a base topographical map of the subject site, prepared and signed by a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor, which shall have a scale of not less than one inch to one hundred feet and a contour interval of not more than two feet; provided, that the contour interval may be five feet when the slope is more than twenty percent. This base topographical map shall include all adjoining properties within one hundred fifty feet of the site boundaries. Delineate slope bands in the range of zero up to five percent, five up to ten percent, ten up to fifteen percent, fifteen up to twenty percent, twenty up to twenty-five percent, twenty-five up to thirty percent, and thirty percent or greater. Also included shall be a tabulation of the land area in each slope category specified in acres. The exact method for computing the percent slope and area of each slope category should be sufficiently described and presented so that a review can be readily made. Also, a heavy, solid line indicating the eight percent grade differential shall be clearly marked on the plan, and an additional copy of the map shall be submitted with the slope percentage categories depicted in contrasting colors; E. Provide a sufficient number of slope profiles to clearly illustrate the extent of the proposed grading. A minimum of three slope profiles shall be included with the slope analysis. The slope profiles shall: 1. Be drawn at the same scale and indexed, or keyed, to the slope analysis map, grading plan, and project site map, 2. Show existing and proposed topography, structures and infrastructures. Proposed topography, structures and infrastructures shall be drawn with a solid, heavy line. Existing topography and features shall be drawn with a thin or dashed line, 3. The slope profile shall extend far enough from the project site boundary to clearly show impact on adjacent property, at least one hundred fifty feet, 4. The profiles shall be drawn along those locations of the project site where: a. The greatest alteration of existing topography is proposed, and b. The most intense or bulky development is proposed, and c. The site is most visible from surrounding land uses, and d. At all site boundaries illustrating maximum and minimum conditions, 5. At least two of the slope profiles shall be roughly parallel to each other and roughly perpendicular to existing contour lines. At least one other slope profile shall be roughly at a forty-five degree angle to the other slope profiles and existing contour lines; F. Both the slope analysis and slope profiles shall be stamped and signed by either a registered landscape architect, civil engineer or land surveyor Indicating the datum, source and scale of topographic data used in the slope analysis and slope profiles, and attesting to the fact that the slope analysis and slope profiles have been accurately calculated and identified consistent with provisions contained in subsections (D) and (E) of this section; G. A geologic and soils report, prepared by an approved soils engineering firm and in sufficient detail to substantiate and support the design concepts presented in the application as submitted. Additional environmental studies and investigations, such as, but not limited to, hydrologic, seismic, access/circulation, and biota research may also be required in order to help in the determination of the buildable area of a site; H. A statement of conditions for ultimate ownership and maintenance of all parts of the development including streets, structures and open spaces; I. In the event that no grading is proposed, i.e., custom lot subdivision, a statement to that effect shall be filed with a plan which shows possible future house plotting, lot grading, Hill ide What Is The Hillside Devel. opment Ordinance? As the City of Rancho Cucamonga continues to grow and available land becomes more scarce, members of the development community will begin to look toward the foothills for future growth. In order to ensure the appropriate development of these sensitive hillside areas, the. City has developed a comprehensive set of guidelines and standards, in the form of the Hillside Development Ordinance, which has Development Code. The basic purpose of the Hillside Development Ordinance is to implement the City's General Plan, to minimize the adverse effects of grading, " to avoid grading in environmentally sensitive What Does It Require? areas, and to provide for the safety and welfare of the community while allowing for the Grading has historically become a concern in reasonable development of the land. areas with slopes of 8 percent grade or greater. When mass grading techniques were used in What Does "Hillside" Mean? these areas, it has often resulted in significant alteration to the natural landform and an The term 'hillside" refers to any parcel of land, unattractive appearance. In order to avoid or definable portion thereof, with an average these adverse effects, the Hillside Development dse or fall of 8 percent or greater. The Ordinance will require projects in "hillside" areas topography of the City is that of a gentlysloping, to use alternative grading and structural design inclined plane projecting from the base of the techniques. Generally speaking, grading the San Gabdal Mountains in a southerly direction entire lot to create a flat pad is considered with natural slopes of 8 percent or greater, inappropriate. Stepped foundations, raised typically occurring in the northern third of the floodng systems, contour grading, height City and sphere areas. Slopes exceeding 8 limitations, and vadous architectural and percentalsooccurneartheRedHillarea, south landscape treatments are examples of the of Base Line Road and east of Vineyard special design techniques that will be required. Avenue. Additional filing requirements for projects subject to the Hillside Development Ordinance may include, but are not limited to, a natural Revised 2/28/02- I:finaJ/forms/counter/HillsideOrd.doc Paae 1 features map, an expanded conceptual grading the use of: plan, a slope analysis map, expanded slope ), Slope development standards - which profiles, and building envelope illustrations. A require increasingly more restrictive grading and · detailed explanation of these requirements can structural design techniques as the percentage be found in the Ordinance. of slope increases. ;> A slope/density formula - which limits Who Does It Affect? the maximum possible density allowed based upon slope gradient. ~ Building envelopes - which limit the As a general rule of thumb, if your property is maximum height to 30 feet, as measured from Iocated north of Banyan Avenue or in the vicinity finished grade, and further limits heights of Red Hill (see map on page 1), you will need adjacent to minimum required front and side to verify the existing natural grade to determine setbacks, as shown below. whether there is a "hillside" condition and subject to the provisions of the Hillside Development Ordinance. However, there may THIS ~,~- be properties located outside of these general ..,.,, ,~, areas that can be considered "hillside" as well. The services of a land surveyor or civil engineer may be needed to verify the natural grade of ~~~ ...,.-- ,.,~, ,,.,, your property. .~~~ ~..~ Are There Any ,Exceptions? The provisions of the Hillside Development Ordinance shall apply to al._Jl residential development applications on natural slopes of 8 The Ordinance contains basic guidelines and percent grade or greater with the exception of related minimum development standards. The the following: design guidelines provide direction and ~ All residential development applications encourage innovative and altemafive which included elevations, that were approved development solutions. The development through the design review process p~ior to the standards provide more specific direction and March 8, 1990, effective date of this Ordinance; set minimum acceptable criteria. and, > All residential projects of 4 or fewer How Does It Work? lots/units, that were submitted and accepted as complete for building plan check on or before All projects in hillside areas shall be subject to the March 8, 1990, effective date; and, Grading Committee review with approval by the All new submittals, including but not limited to, City Planner or Planning Commission. An pamel maps and building construction or exception to the requirement for Grading grading plan checks, received pdor to the March Committee review may be permitted for minor 8, 1990, effective date.' additions (250 square feet or less), and projects involving limited regarding of yard areas. What Is The Scope Of The Ordinance? 5 Or More Lots The Hillside Development Ordinance is a The basic review process will remain the same comprehensive document which addresses all for residential development applications facets of hillside development. These include, involving 5 or more lots/units, including site design, driveway and roadway design, Tentative Tract Maps, Design Review architecture, landscaping, fencing, grading, and applications, and Conditional Use Permits. · drainage, as well as density. The most However, additional information and plans are significant provisions of the Ordinance involve required. Projects will continue to be reviewed Page 2 by the Grading, Design Review, and Technical Review Committees with approval by the Planning Commission. 4 or Fewer Lots The most significant change in the review process will affect residential projects with 4 or fewer lots/units, including custom single-family S~ed ,,~,,, fo..~.tlo. homes. The new process requires that a ~ Design Review application, filing fees, and all necessary plans and information be submitted to the Planning Division for review. The application requires approval by the City Pole foundBtlon Planner or Planning Commission pdor to .~ ........ ~ submitting plans to the Building and Safety Division for plan check. ~_ . Planning Commission review will be required .~/.;.~~~ under any of the following cimumstances: Natural slopes are 15 pement or greater on all or part of the property, or )~ Cut or fill is 5 feet or greater, or stringer Iom~datloa )' Combined but and fill is 1,500 cubic yards or greater, or Cut or fill encroaches onto or alters a natural drainage channel or watemouree, or As deemed necessary by the Grading Committee or City Planner. Where Can I Get More NOTES: Information? (Space provided below for your project notes) If you believe that your proposed project may be subject to the Hillside Development Ordinance or you are not sure, please call or visit the Planning Division at (909) 477-2750. Copies of the Ordinance are available at City Hall at the Planning Division public counter, located at 10500 Civic Center Dr~ve (on Haven Avenue, one block south of Foothill Boulevard). Page 3 How Do I Determine Slope? The Hillside Development Ordinance defines slope as "an inclined ground surface, the inclination of which is expressed as a ratio of the vertical distance (dse), or change in elevation, to the horizontal distance (run)." The percent of any given slope is determined by dividing the rise by the mn, multiplied by 100. RISE $1~ SLOPE FORMU~.A Av~'rags Cro~$ SJope - Slope 'A' 51100' = .05 = 5% - Slope "C' 8¥30' = .2 = 20% Page 4 Concordla's Alta Vista Tr 10035, DR 00-47 Prepared by John Snell with assistance from Joe Long of Boyle Engineer.~ Rancho Cucamonga and Kent Wu, Architect 1/16/01 Maximum House Height Finish Floor measured from Over/Under Curb at Approximate Maximum Roof Line Elevation at Garage Garage Roof Line Maximum .ot Numbe~ Plan Type Centerline of Lot Elevation Per CCR's Entrance Finished Floor Elevation Hei~lht 4 2R DN 1343,40 1367.40 1340 10 26 08 1366.18 _~(~,.~[ ...... ~.~ 6 3R UP 1335.90 1359 90 1293.50 25.25 1318.75 (41.15) BELOW 9 1 UP 1329.50 135350 1295 O0 28.50 1323.50 {30 00) BELOW .................... 128538 28 50 1313.88 ._~(~.~) 13 3 up 1320.90 1344 90 1284 50 2850 1313 oo ..... 17 2 UP 1306.50 133Q50 129266 29.33 ~321.99 ..... 19' 1 DN 1295.20 1319.20 1293 50 25 58 1319 08 ..... Curb elevation calculated by Boyle Engineers based on existing topographic map. Maximum roof line per CC&R's based on Section 2.04, last sentence which states maximum height of 24 feet above top of curb House height based on current design and amhitect accurately calculating elements. These differ from initial submittal due to a more t~... accurate calculation at this time. - *Lot 19 was lowered 0.50 feet by moving back 5 feet. **Lot 20 was lowered 0.50 feet by increasing the drive slope by 1.67%. Vicinity Map DRC2003-00961 HAY 'E~I Foothill Blvd. N Exhibit "A" ~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE ACTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND APPROVING HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00961, A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 3,628 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE-FAMILY HOME ON LOT 12 OF TRACT 10035 IN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED AT 8045 CAMINO PREDERA; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0207-631-02. A. Recitals. 1. Mike and Wendy Stachowiak filed an application for the approval of Development Review DRC2003-00961, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 26th day of May 2004, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a meeting on the application and concluded said meeting on that date by the adoption of Resolution 04-69. 3. The decision represented by said Planning Commission Resolution was appealed in a timely manner to this Council by Lynn and Renee Massey. 4. On July 7, 2004, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application. 5. 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 the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public hearing on July 7, 2004, including written and oral staff reports, the minutes of the above-referenced Planning Commission meeting, and the contents of Planning Commission Resolution No. 04-69, and together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located at 8045 Camino Predera, with a street frontage of 82 feet and lot depth of 181 feet; and b. The subject property is on the downhill side of Camino Predera, with slope gradient of approximately 20-30 percent, and is approximately 40 feet below street grade at the rear (south) property line; and CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 04-2-2-~/ DRC2003-00961 - STACHOWIAK July 7, 2004 Page 2 c. The application proposes to construct a single-family house with the upper floor level approximately matching the street grade of Camino Predera; and d. The properties to the northeast have been developed with single-family homes. The properties to the north, east, and west are presently vacant; and e. The site is vacant and contains no vegetation other than native shrubs and grasses wiih a row of mature Silk Oaks along the south property line; and f. A 15-foot private drainage and equestrian easement exists along the rear of the site that is shared equally with property owners to the north; and g. The proposed development is consistent with single-family development in the area (Tract 10035); and h. The applicants are proposing to develop a 3628 square foot split level house on a lot that is subject to the City's hillside development regulations. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above- referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and b. The proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and c. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and d. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. The Council hereby finds and determines that the project identified in this Resolution is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Section 15303(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,2, and 3, above, this Council hereby denies the appeal, upholds the action of the Planning Commission, and approves the application and the issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration subject to all conditions of approval contained in the Planning Commission Resolution No. 04-69, attached hereto. 6. This Council hereby provides notice to Lynn and Renee Massey, the appellants, and Mike and Wendy Stachowiak, the applicants, 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. CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 04-22~ DRC2003-00961 - STACHOWIAK July 7, 2004 Page 3 7. 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 Mike and Wendy Stachowiak and to Lynn and Renee Massey. at the addresses identified in City records. RESOLUTION NO 04-69 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00961, A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 3,628 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE-FAMILY HOME ON LOT 12 OF TRACT 10035 IN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED AT 8045 CAMINO PREDERA; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0207-631-02. A. Recitals. 1. Mike and Wendy Stachowiak filed an application for the approval of Development Review DRC2003-00961, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 26th day of May 2004, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. conducted a meeting on the application and concluded said meeting on that date. 3. All legai prerequisites pdor 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 dudng the above- referenced meeting on May 26, 2004, including wdtten and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located at 8045 Camino Predera, with a street frontage of 82 feet and lot depth of 181 feet; and b. The subject property is on the downhill side of Camino Predera, with slope gradient of approximately 20-30 percent, and is approximately 40 feet below street grade at the rear (south) property line; and c. The application proposes to construct a single-family house with the upper floor level approximately matching the street grade of Camino Predere; and d. The properties to the northeast have been developed with single-family homes. The properties to the north, east, and west are presently vacant; and e. The site is vacant and contains no vegetation other than native shrubs and grasses with a row of mature Silk Oaks along the south property line; and f. A 15.foot pdvate drainage and equestrian easement exists al°ng the rear °f the site that is shared equally with property owners to the north; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 04-69 DRC2003-00961 - STACHOWIAK May 26, 2004 Page 2 g. The proposed development is consistent with single-family development in the area (Tract 10035); and h. The applicants are proposing to develop a 3628 square foot split level house on a lot that is subject to the City's hillside development regulations. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and b. The proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the distdct in which the site is located; and c. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable previsions of the Development Code; and d. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. The Commission hereby finds and determines that the project identified in this Resolution is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Section 15303(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines. 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. Plannin.q Division: 1) Approval is for a 3,628 square foot home on Lot 12 of Tract 10035, located at 8045 Camino Predere. 2) In addition to the vegetation required by the Hillside Ordinance, extensive fast growing ground cover plantings will be required on the front and rear slope areas to provide erosion control to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Jute netting is required. 3) Establish proper soil management techniques to reduce the adverse effects (i.e., erosion) of grading. 4)Round off and contour all graded slopes to blend with the existing terrain, and to present a natural appearance. 5) Retaining walls exposed to public view and return walls are to be decorative masonry and compatible with the architectural style. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 04-69 DRC2003-00961 - STACHOWIAK May 26, 2004 Page 3 6) A detailed Planting and Irrigation Plan, including slope planting, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 7) The rear 15-foot level area required in the backyard may be attained with an expanded deck area at the rear of the house. 8) The existing Silk Oak trees shall be preserved in place. 9) The garage roof pitch shall be reduced so as to lower the garage roof peak to the same height as the roof peak over the main portion of the house. En.qineerinq Division: 1 ) Install ddve approach per City standards, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Protect existing improvements and repair/replace all damaged improvements as directed by the City Engineer: a. Revise existing Street Improvement Plans Drawing No. 922 as required by the City Engineer. No street tree installations are required. b. Prior to any work being performed in the 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. 2) Prevent all drainage from crossing over side lot lines and convey all site flows to public street, storm drain or other drainage easement. 3) Provide swales for over flow purposes in case sump area drains become blocked. Provide for surface drainage to pass through/over any proposed walls, fences etc. from rear to side and side to front yards. Adequate provisions shall be made for conveyance and disposal of surface drainage entering and exiting the property. 4) Provide a minimum 1-foot wide earthen bench on-site adjacent to all property lines, then slope at maximum 20 percent to join side yard swale flowline. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF MAY 2004. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Rich Macias, Chairman PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 04-69 DRC2003-00961 - STACHOWIAK May 26, 2004 Page 4 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 May 2004, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: FLETCHER, MAClAS, McNIEL, McPHAIL, STEWART NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJEC'~ #: DRC2003-00961 SUBJECT: Hillside Design Review APPLICANT: Mike and Wendy Stachowiak LOCATION: 8045 Camino Predera, Lot 12, Tract 10035 ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909)477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: Comoletion Date A. General Requirements 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its ~ / agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 04-69, Standard ._._/ / Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s) are for information only to ail parties involved in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Amhitect. B. Time Limits 1. Conditional Use Permit, Variance, or Development/Design Review approval shall expire if /__/ building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval. No extensions are allowed. C, Site Development 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, and the Development Code regulations. SC-1-04 1 i:\planning\final~plngcorn m\drc2003-00961cond5-26.d°c Project No. DRC2003-00961 Completion Date 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions __/ / of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and /.~/ State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 4. 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. 5. 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. 6. 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. 7. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick-up shall be for individual units with /.~../ all receptacles shielded from public view. 8. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be / / located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner. For single- family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. 9. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner / / including proper illumination. 10. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property / / 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. 11. For single family residential development, a 2-inch galvanized pipe shall be attached to each .__/ / support post for all wood fences, with a minimum of two Y2-inch lag bolts, to withstand high winds. Both post and pipe shall be installed in an 18-inch deep concrete footing. Pipe shall extend at least 4 feet, 6 inches above grade. 12. Wood fencing shall be treated with stain, paint, or water sealant. ----/-~/ 13. Slope fencing along side property lines may be wrought iron or black plastic coated chain link to /.~/ maintain an open feeling and enhance views. 14. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneem may be manufactured / /----- products. D, Building Design 1. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or//. projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning Division. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Details shall be included in building plans. i:~pianning\final\forms~plngcom m\drc2003-O0961 cond5-26.doc Project No. DRC2003-00961 Completion Date E. Landscaping 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in / /__ the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape amhitect and submitted for City P~anner review and appreval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. 2. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in / / accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on the grading plans. The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods. 3. ' All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 .__/ / slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required bythis section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 4. All private 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. ff. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 5. For single-family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation 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. 6. Front yard and corner side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the Development /.-.-/ Code and/or Hillside Development Standards. This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting. 7. The final design Df 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. 8. 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. 9. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the / / design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. F. Other Agencies 1. The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location / / of mailboxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for mailboxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mailboxes and the design of the overhead structure shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. SC-1-04 3 i:~lanning\finaAforrns~lngcomm~drc2003*O0961cond5-26-doc ~1~) ~ Project No. DRC2003-00961 Completion Date APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: NOTE: ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW(S) G. General Requirements 1. Submit five complete sets of plans including the following: / / a. Site/Plot Plan; b. Foundation Plan; c. Floor Plan; d. Ceiling and Roof Framing Plan; e. Electrical Plans (2 sets, detached) including the size of the main switch, number and size of service entrance conductors, panel schedules, and single line diagrams; f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics, underground diagrams, water and waste diagram, sewer or septic system location, fixture units, gas piping, and heating and air conditioning; and g. Planning Division Project Number (i.e., SUBTr #, SUBTPM#, DRC #) clearly identified on the outside of all plans. 2. Submit two sets of structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and a soils report. / / Architect's/Engineer's stamp and "wet" signature are required pdor to plan check submittal. 3. Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers' Compensation coverage to / / the City prior to permit issuance. 4. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. / / Site Development 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be / / marked with the project file number (i.e., DRC2001-00001). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted California Codes, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of permit application. Contact the Building and Safety Division for availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential project or major addition, the applicant / / shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but ara not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Transportation Development Fee, Permit and Plan Check Fees, Construction and Demolition Diversion Program deposit and fees and School Fees. Applicant shall provide a copy of the school fees receipt to the Building and Safety Division prior to permit issuance. 3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building and Safety Official after tract/pamel map / / recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday / / through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays. SC-1-04 i:~planning\final~forms\plngcornm\drc2003-00961cond5-26.doc Project No. DRC2003-00961 Completion Date_ I. New Structures 1. Provide compliance with the California Building Code (CBC) for property line clearances / / considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness. 2. Provide compliance with the California Building Code for required occupancy separations. / / 3. Roofing material shall be installed per the manufacturer's "high wind" instructions. ---/ / J. Grading Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with Califomia Building Code, City Grading /-.--/ 1. , Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. 2. A soils Ceport 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, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, ~ /---- submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. In hillside areas, residential developments shall be graded and constructed consistent with the __/.---/ standards contained in the Hillside Development Regulations Section 17.24.070. 6. A separate grading plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for / /--- existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The grading plan shall be prepared, stamped, and signed by a California registered Civil Engineer. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: K. 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. 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 secondary locking devices. /--/ L. 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. M. Building Numbering 1. Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for nighttime/ / visibility. SC-1-04 5 i:~planning\final\forms~lngcom m\drc2003-O09610°nd5'26'd°c ~/f Project No. DRC2003-00961 Completion Date APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DIVISION, FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: SEE AI-i'ACHED SC-1-04 6 RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE DISTRICT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT/FILE #: DRC2003-00961 APPLICANT NAME: Concordia RC PROJECT NAME: Stachowiak OCCUPANCY CLASS: R-3 LOCATION: 8045 Carnino Predera FLOOR AREA: 1954 sq.ft. DATE: 10-20-03 · TYPE CONSTRUCTION: PLAN TYPE: SFR FD REVIEW BY: Moises Eskenazi ,PLANNER: Alan Warren Non-High Fire Hazard ALL OF THE FOLLOWING STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE DISTRICT- STANDARD CONDITIONS & REQUIREMENTS. FSC-1 Prior to building permit issuance complete the following: 1. The required fire flow for this project is 1000 gallons per minute at a minimum residual pressure of 20 pounds per square inch. This requirement is made in accordance with Fire Code Appendix Ill-A, as amended. Contact CCWD for a fire flow test. Please allow 10 working days for test results. Submit the fire flow letter from CCWD to FCS (909) 477-2713. 2. Illustrate the location of the closest fire hydrants to the property on the site plan to be submitted. FCS- 2 Prior to occupancy final or final complete the following: 1. Address Single-family: New single-family dwellings shall post the address with minimum 4-inch numbers on a contrasting background. The numbers shall be internally or extemally illuminated during periods of darkness. The numbers shall be visible from the street. When building setback from the public roadway exceeds 100 feet, additional 4-inch numbers shall be displayed at the property entry. de Enfor~ First Grant Funded Neighb~Orhood Clean-U~U~Day ~~flr~~~rted by · $193,000 in grant funds received this year through the State of California, Department of Housing and Community Development · With further funding left to aid in an additional two neighborhood clean-up's per year for the next three years Saturday, June 19, 2004 Four large bins were placed at Buckthorn north of Hillside .... 0 = c,,,~o.~. 0 : 0 B I~1 ~',~.~s^~. 0 TS o :~h c~' °~-~ .......... .................. ?...-.~ .......................... ~,,: ,~oVer-~h-i-rty-five volunteers and staff i members... I Gathered all their reSources ,~/Vorked together ..... In promoting an ~ attractive community 3 With helping hands ..... Reaching out to approximately 140 residents in the area ~Made it possible to re,hove 19 tons ~ of debris ..... And vegetation .... From the area's private trail system ~ In addition, · The clean up allowed residents to remove extra unwanted items that were located within their property The City's goal .... To provide beautiful trails ~ for people to enjoy. Both private and public trails benefit the community by providing equestrian trails and bicycle trails for fun and exercise. ~ethis all of those participants and supporters, Alta Loma Riding Club Fire Safe Council Citizen's Patrol Burrtec Waste Industries Equestrian Patrol CVWD Sheriff Explorer Scouts Fire District Public Works Code Enforcement hank you for a suc~cc ssful event In Code Enforceme~nt's First Neigh borhood~Crean-Up! City of Rancho Cucamonga'$ Code Enforcement Division (909) 477-2712 7 R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A CO~MIJN1T¥ ~ I~ l~Vl C F,& StaffRel rt DATE: July 7, 2004 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF THE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AND CITY COUNCIL COMMUNITY SERVICES SUBCOMMITTEE'S RECOM- MENDATION TO APPROVE ONE NEW APPOINTMENT TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDATION: To approve the recommendation of the Community Foundation and City Council Community Services Subcommittee to appoint Darren Vilardo to the Community Foundation Board of Directors. BACKGROUND: The Community Foundation Board of Directors is in the midst of its Board expansion and restructuring process. As a result of their on-going recruitment efforts, Darren Vilardo who brings with him years of financial planning experience, has expressed an interest in working with the Board on their fundraising gods. In accordance with their appointment process, the Board discussed the selection of Mr. Vilardo at their June meeting and are recommending the City Council consider appointing him to their Board of Directors. In addition, the City Council Community Services Subcommittee met recently concerning the appointment and their recommendation will be presented at the July 7th meeting. Commun~'ty Services Director